Dr Peter McCullough on Early Treatment vs Vaccination

Dr Peter McCullough on Early Treatment vs Vaccination

The following is a Transcript of the Dr. Peter McCullough Interview Sept 2, 2021:

Dr. Peter McCullough Speaking:

I (Dr. Peter McCullough) am Professor of Medicine at Texas A and M College of Medicine for about 10 years.  I am on the Baylor Dallas campus. I am in a private practice. and I maintain my board certification in Internal Medicine and Cardiology. I also lead a research team in downtown Dallas. When Covid-19 hit, I redirected all of my focus towards the pandemic. I recognized this was going to be a giant challenge for us. We have actually very few infectious disease doctors in the US, completely subscribe in the hospital.  I am more of an outpatient oriented doctor. I poured all my efforts into scholarship on Covid 19 in the last year.  In a sense I’ve done a self directed fellowship on infectious disease.

I have published the first treatment guidance on how to treat COVID 19 as an outpatient. These are the most widely utilized publications in all of COVID 19 in the world for outpatient treatment. I’ve been relied upon by the US Senate ti testify in the Senate, and to render my opinion.

I have been blessed to a regular contributor on FOX news almost every week now over the last several months. What kind of authority do I have to give any opinions about COVID 19 ? Before COVID, I was the most published person in my field in world history.  My field is the interface between heart and kidney disease. How do these organs communicate with each other.

I am the editor in chief of CadioRenal Medicine. I am the editor in chief of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine.  I have 600 peer reviews publications in the National Library of Medicine. I have lectured all over the world, the New York Academy of Sciences, NIH, FDA,

I am on the calling card of someone who has a position of authority in medicine.

I have over 45 publications on COVID 19.

I published the two sets of treatment guidance when no-one else would step up.

I have had the illness myself, and I have had serious cases in my family including fatalities.

I think as a single person, I probably have the most authority to give my opinion on what is going on in this pandemic, than any one in the world..

And I can tell you the problem with what Americans are seeing on TV right now is they are not seeing doctors like me working in teams of doctors and advising the country.

We are down to one or two people that are government officials, that people see on TV who by the way are not board certified, they don’t have qualifications for doing what they are doing right now. And as singular people, they are issuing, not recommendations, not guidance, they are issuing directives. and we are seeing these things come down over time. So we can tackle them one by one.

First off we should tackle five really important points.

When this first hit, no one knew what this virus was about, including myself. But we do have a year and three months later, we have a framework of understanding.

The first important point: The virus spreads from a sick person to a well person, period.

The virus does not spread from asymptomatic person to asymptomatic person. It took months to get these data.  These are the two studies showing no asymptomatic spread, published in the best journals   :

Cao, Shiyi, et al. “Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China.Nature communications 11.1 (2020): 1-7.

Madewell, Zachary J., et al. “Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” JAMA network open 3.12 (2020): e2031756-e2031756.

Madewell, Zachary J., et al. “Factors Associated With Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” JAMA Network Open 4.8 (2021): e2122240-e2122240.

Cheng, Hao-Yuan, et al. “Contact tracing assessment of COVID-19 transmission dynamics in Taiwan and risk at different exposure periods before and after symptom onset.” JAMA internal medicine 180.9 (2020): 1156-1163.

Zhang, Weiwei, et al. “Secondary transmission of coronavirus disease from presymptomatic persons, China.” Emerging infectious diseases 26.8 (2020): 1924.

Has the Evidence of Asymptomatic Spread of COVID-19 been Significantly Overstated?19 December 2020 / Updated 7 March 2021by Dr Clare Craig FRCPath and Jonathan Engler MBChB LLB

Gao, Ming, et al. “A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers.Respiratory medicine 169 (2020): 106026.

Is there asymptomatic spread of COVID-19?  Posted on August 7, 2021 by State of the Nation

The virus does not spread asymptomatically.  If anybody in this room has the virus right now, but they have no symptoms, they cannot spread it to us, in fact they are forming their own immunity.  Asymptomatic spread must be less than 1% of all spread.

(Note from Jeffrey Dach MD regarding asymptomatic transmission of COVID: Dr McCullough is quite correct in this.  However, one must distinguish between the asymptomatic patient with a false positive COVID test who does not carry the virus and can not transmit to another vs. Pre-symptomatic transmission which is perhaps the most common mode of viral transmission from one person to the next.  This is viral transmission from a pre-symptomatic person to another.  In this case, for a brief period of time, a day or two prior to onset of viral symptoms, a carrier person may harbor a viral infection in the nasal passages which, although producing no symptoms in the carrier,  can be transmissible to others.  Symptoms will then start shortly, one to two days later.  If the suspected pre-symptomatic carrier remains asymptomatic for the next week or so, then there never was any risk of transmitting the disease, and the person was not a carrier after all. End Added Note by jeffrey dach md ) (8-9)

Asymptomatic Testing Was Useless

OK because of that, that means that asymptomatic testing was completely useless.  In the US we have had 35 million cases of COVID , we have actually burned 400 million COVID tests right now.  Even the World Health Organization says June 25, Stop the Asymptomatic Testing. (CDC Aug 26: Asymptomatic People no longer require test)

All this nasal and oral testing was never approved for routine screening, it was never approved for people to get on airplanes, or any thing else, that was just an over reach.

Point number one: No Asymptomatic Spread.

Point number Two: Asymptomatic Testing is a complete waste of time. It is not FDA approved. It is not even advised by the WHO.

Point Three: Natural Immunity, once somebody has had the virus , is robust complete and durable. You can not get the virus twice.(1-3)

When grandmother had it last year , she is not going to get it again.
We have seen it sweep through the nursing homes. It is done. It is a one and done.  There is this narrative, that people keep getting COVID over and over again. But when you ask people, they say: “No, I have had it and I am done”.  One and DONE.

Cleveland Clinic Study

There has even been challenges where Cleveland Clinic published a study where people had recovered. (1) They went right back and worked with COVID right in their face . You can’t get it (the COVID virus ) again . So this idea its ONE and DONE, Natural Immunity is robust, complete and durable. This is very important.  So if you have workers in your business who have had Covid, they don’t have to worry, they are not going to get it again.

There is incredible continuing fear, there are legal demands into the CDC to recognize Natural Immunity. Even Gov Abbott here in Texas, by Executive Order in April, has an EO, Natural Immunity, we recognize it in TEXAS by executive order.

The governor said his reason behind not issuing another mask mandate is due to people having “immunity to COVID through the vaccination or through their own exposure and recovery from it.(Natural Immunity)” 7/20/21 interview on KPRC 2 News at 5 Click2Houston.com

And (these naturally immune) people ask, “Do I have to take the Vaccine ?”   Of course you don’t. You can not get it (COVID) a second time. That is the third point.

The fourth point is : The Covid-19 virus is treatable. That was our work. So we know now that we have an approach. People over 50 who have additional medical problems have a greater than one per cent chance of being hospitalized or dying. That is enough to treat. And we have treatment protocols that involve FDA approved (EUA approved) antibodies. I can make a phone call. Patients can go right down here to Baylor, get an antibody infusion free of charge. It is wonderful. The US government bought 500 million doses of these monoclonal antibodies, but there is no word of them. You don’t see them on TV , there is no 1-800 numbers. When people get their COVID test result, they are not told how to access these. (Access Your Free Monoclonal Antibody Infusion Here)

Your businesses and viewers should demand answers about antibody infusions. Call your hospital and say, listen, my grandmother is sick with COVID 19, and I want an antibody infusion. Now is the time to get activated because your government agencies are not helping you on early treatment.

We are busting the myth that COVID is not treatable. I am here to tell you it is treatable. The two key publications, I am the first author, American Journal of Medicine 2020, and the second article is Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020, these are the most cited and utilized , and relied upon papers for Early Treatment for COVID -19 in the world,

Patients over age 50 with multiple medical problems, that is the only group that really needs treatment. The younger person who presents with severe symptoms, they are a younger person with some problems like cyctic fibrosis sure, they could require treatment. But in general it is 25% of adults. Seniors ought to demand these monoclonal antibody infusions . President Trump got it.

After that, the drugs that work are used in combination and sequence, and they are based on a signal of benefit and acceptable safety. It is so early in the disease process, we don’t have proven efficacy and safety, we don’t. It is a signal of benefit and acceptable safety.

So what can be used (for Early Treatment of COvid-19) ?

Hydroxychloroquine use is supported by 200 studies. Countries like the US appropriately stockpiled it for a reason.

Ivermectin has 60 Supportive studies. We combine it with Doxycycline or Azithromycin.

Everybody can use an inhaler, Budesonide inhaler (Pulmocort). Richard Bartlett was the first to discover this in Texas. This was Proven in the UK in the STOIC TRIAL.

We can use oral prednisone on day 5 of pulmonary symptoms,  much like an asthmatic would use it. Or someone with an allergic reaction condition would use it.

We use a Gout medication, for 30 days in high risk patients called Colchicine, one pill a day. This was proven in a large randomized trial from Montreal Heart Institute called Co-Corona Trial 4,000 pts.

Tardif, Jean-Claude, et al. “Colchicine for community-treated patients with COVID-19 (COLCORONA): a phase 3, randomised, double-blinded, adaptive, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.” The Lancet Respiratory Medicine (2021).

We use Aspirin 325 mg per day because this virus is unique, it causes blood clots. It is the only viral infection we have ever seen that causes blood clotting, and that is what actually kills patients. So we use Aspirin as a blood thinner.  It is a full adult dose. Higher risk patients we actually use Lovonox injections, like someone would get for the treatment of a clood clot.

Thats what is called sequenced multi-drug therapy. It is all done at home. Supported by the Association of the American Physicians and Surgeons. AAPSonline.org

Download the home AAPS Home Treatment Guide !!!! Be Ready. Click Here : AAPS Home Covid Patient Treatment Guide

It is also supported by another group in the United States.
The Front Line Critical Care Consortium (FLCCC). They have a little different set of protocols, but the principles are the same.

Now these are well in advance of the CDC, NIH or the FDA or the Infectious Disease Society of America that have yet to publish any outpatient treatment guidelines.

Why is that ?  They have been focusing on in-patients (in the hospital). So one of the reasons I wanted to fill this void is: ” How many years are we going to wait and have Americans Suffer before they get any treatment at home (as outpatients)?

We can even order OXYGEN concentrators at home with a simple phone call. Because under the emergency use authorization, we can actually get them out to the home, and get people supplemental oxygen.

We have been so successful with this Early Treatment Protocol, we have an 85% reduction in risk of hospitalization and death. I have treated patients well into their 90’s and we have avoided the panic and fear, isolation of the hospital,

The contemporary mortality rate in the hospital right now if someone needs the ICU in the US, 38%, and that’s published by the STOP COVID Collaboration out of Harvard.

So point number four is: Covid is treatable, it takes about 4-6 drugs.
ADULTS WITH MILD CASES- 5 days
Average person our age, about 10 days.
Seniors, it could be about 30 days, a longer illness.

What about people under 50. They breeze through COVID.
A Neutraceutical bundle which is recommended for everybody, which is reasonable includes:
Zinc
Vitamin C
Vitamin D
Quercetin

If a Younger person develops symptoms, they can move into treatment. But only 25% of people who get COVID need early treatment. It helps them avoid the hospital or death. And younger people breeze through this.

COVID Vaccines

Point number 5 is the contentious issue of the vaccine, and I have rendered my opinion on this multiple times.  The vaccines are brand new. In the US we have Pfizer, Moderna, and J and J.  They are a brand new technology. They are nothing like a flu shot.  They actually transfer genetic material inside our cells, and they cause our cells to make the spike protein.  So , there is the ball, the nucleocapsid, and the little spines or spikes on the outside of the ball (the spike protein).  The vaccines trick our body into making the spike protein, and then we form an immune reaction to it.

The short discussion on the vaccines is this: while half of Americans have taken them, for some individuals the vaccines have not worked out too well, in terms of being sufficiently safe for human use.  Obviously, many tens of millions of Americans took it , they had a sore arm, they got through it just fine. People in my family took it. It is not a big deal if there are no complications. But for those who are getting complications, we are currently at as of today, CDC has told us, we are at 12,000 Americans that have died after the vaccine. 86% of the time independent reviewers have determined the vaccine caused the death. 50% of the deaths occur within 48 hours of the vaccine. 80% of the deaths occur within a week of the vaccine. And it is a modern day tragedy.

We have never had any medical product ever in the history of mankind result in 12,000 American deaths. We have 400,000 certified vaccines injuries right now due to the vaccine along the lines of neurological, cardiac, immunologic or hematologic abnormalities. That’s about the size of a medium sized city right now of people who have had vaccine injuries. So there is great concern as we move forward that the vaccines look like they don’t have a safety profile to be the solution to the problem.

What we know is that the number of deaths has exceeded the cumulative total reported into the data system for all time.

Just to give you an Idea, we have 70 (?) vaccines on the market, roughly 500 million shots . This year I had Shingles and Flu shots. Everyone gets vaccines.  500 million shots, 70 vaccines. The average annual deaths reported to the database was about 150 or so. On Jan 22, we were already at 186 for COVID 19 deaths, and we have already raced up to 12,000 deaths, an astronomical number.

Almost everybody knows somebody who either died or been injured with the vaccines now. People are talking, and Americans are worried that our federal officials have not come clean on safety. We have not had a press briefing on overall vaccine safety. Can you imagine that? We should be having probably weekly briefings or at least monthly briefings, because we want to make sure the program is safer. There may be certain people who shouldn’t get the vaccine. For instance: the COVID recovered. You can’t get COVID a second time. If they took the vaccine and they have already been revved up from the first infection, are they the people who are getting the complications? We don’t know because our agencies have not fairly disclosed this. Is it among diabetics ? Is it among patients with prior neurological disorders or cardiac disease? No one knows because our agencies, and this is a terrible word to say on the air, the correct word is “malfeasance”, it is wrongdoing by those in a position of authority. And so that is what we are having right now. Just like the the “Trusted News Service” is pre-stated censorship. We now have malfeasance by our government agencies on safety.

The second update on the vaccines is that while half of Americans have taken them, and we wish every single person well, we have deeply concerning reports now, out of the United Kingdom, and out of Israel that the vaccines are failing.  And what I man by that, is the virus has mutated, and the current version is called Delta. That is our most recent version in the United States is now the predominant version. And the mutations are occurring because we are vaccinating.

There is a paper from the Mayo Clinic in Boston by Niessen and colleagues that have shown when we get to 25% of the population vaccinated, the virus starts to mutate, and escape the effect of the vaccine.

Niesen, Michiel, et al. “COVID-19 vaccines dampen genomic diversity of SARS-CoV-2: Unvaccinated patients exhibit more antigenic mutational variance.” medRxiv (2021).

So now the Delta variant has escaped the effect of , for sure, the Pfizer vaccine, because we know in Israel now, 80% of people who have had COVID in Israel right now have been fully vaccinated with Pfizer .

When the case is well defined, you have had COVID, you had the characteristic signs and symptoms, you had a positive PCR or antigen test, and the case is well defined, there has actually never been reported so far in the world, a second case,

Now, the difficulty is when the first case was not well defined. You didn’t get a test, or you are not really sure, there is a a lot of uncertainty, in an analysis by (?) Virtue and colleagues has done a meta-analysis of 11 studies, 615 thousand individuals, Even with the ill defined case in a population, and looked at a year later what happened, the risk of COVID was 0.2%

So what i am telling you is infinitesimally low , it is so low, that in my view, one doesn’t need to be worried about COVID 19.

I have had it myself. I don’t go through my day in fear. I could encounter a patient with COVID 19 and I know I cant get the virus. I know the vaccine can not benefit me. In fact the FDA, CDC, Moderna and J and J excluded people like you and me (recovered from previous COVID) from the clinical trials. They knew we couldn’t get COVID 19.

The registration for clinical trial had exclusion criteria: COVID recovered, suspected COVID recovered, pregnant women, women of child bearing potential, even people with positive antibodies . They were excluded because the FDA knew we could not benefit, and we would only be harmed by the vaccine . In fact, they were right. COVID recovered patients, in THREE STUDIES, Methudias, Rah and Kamer, have shown us that COVID recovered patients, when they take the vaccine, which they don’t need, they actually have higher side effects, including ending up with something serious ending up in the hospital. So, I have told America, a prior COVID infection is a contra-indication to get the vaccine. You should not get the vaccine. And it is sad to say, that right now in America, in the world, about 25 to 30% of people taking the vaccine have already had COVID, so the vaccine can not help them at all, and can only hurt them.

Mask Question

Unfortunately , ,, our public health response for months was absolutely focused unnecessarily so, on masking. I think if we would have taken the focus off masks, and actually focused on treatment, treating sick people, we would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

Having masks morning noon and night on TV commentary, our federal officials, they probably had innumerable press briefings on the mask. Can you imagine we haven’t had a single press briefing on vaccine safety, and we are asking people to take these vaccines, yet we have had a million press briefing on the mask.

Well here is a couple of points:

1) The virus is about one micron in size. The mask filters out three microns, even the really good ones. So the virus moves in and out of the mask very easily ,

2) there have been 12 randomized trials, that is our gold standard, including most recently the Dan Mask trial, showing public masking has no benefit.

In Dallas we have had a natural experiment. We had our Dallas Independent School district shut down, parochial schools didn’t, we never had any school outbreaks here or across the United States.

There has never been a credible case of a student giving the virus to a teacher.  It has never happened. Pulling the kids out of school, and making the kids wear masks, retrospectively, was a complete and total waste of time.

Those of you who have college students, and I had a college student in my office the other day, and he was being seen for a cardiac problem. and I asked him how was college Univ of Texas?

End of Transcript of Interview with Dr. Peter McCullough

22:00

========================== =================

Update Sept 14, 2021: Dr Peter Breggin Interview with Dr Peter McCullough on Brighteon

————————— ———————–

TPC #559: Dr. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH (The Medical Super Bowl) Tommy’s Podcast Published September 7, 2021

Articles with Related Interest:

Rochelle Wolensky Warns of ADE Antibody Dependent Enhancement

Covid Vaccines Are Safe and Effective ?

Ivermectin and the Failure of American Medicine

Ivermectin Antiparasitic Anticancer Miracle Drug

Jeffrey Dach MD
7450 Griffin Road Suite 180/190
Davie, Fl 33314
954-792-4663
www.jeffreydachmd.com

header image courtesy of: Dare to Seek truth

References

1) (Cleveland Clnic Study)
Shrestha NK. 2021. Necessity of COVID-19 Vaccination in Previously Infected Individuals: A Retrospective Cohort Study. medRxiv.

study only looked at individuals over a five-month period

The study concludes, “individuals who have laboratory-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before.”

Importantly, not a single incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed in previously infected participants with or without vaccination.

(LA)

2) Kojima, Noah, et al. “Incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 infection among previously infected or vaccinated employees.” medRxiv (2021).

Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 were
associated with decreased risk for infection or re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 in a routinely screened workforce. The was no difference in the infection incidence between vaccinated individuals and individuals with previous infection.

(Israel)
3) Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections by Sivan Gazit, MD MA1,2*; Roei Shlezinger, BA1; Galit Perez, MN MA2; Roni Lotan, PhD2; Asaf Peretz, MD1,3; Amir Ben-Tov, MD1,4; Dani Cohen, PhD4; Khitam Muhsen, PhD4; Gabriel Chodick, PhD MHA2,4; Tal Patalon, MD1,

This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. end quote

4) O Murchu, Eamon, et al. “Quantifying the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 reinfection over time.” Reviews in medical virology (2021): e2260.

Only one study estimated the population‐level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients; the estimated risk was low (0.1% [95% CI: 0.08–0.11%]) with no evidence of waning immunity for up to 7 months following primary infection. These data suggest that naturally acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post‐infection.

4A) Goldberg, Yair, et al. “Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel.” medRxiv (2021).

Vaccination was highly effective with overall estimated efficacy for documented infection of 92·8% (CI:[92·6, 93·0]); hospitalization 94·2% (CI:[93·6, 94·7]); severe illness 94·4% (CI:[93·6, 95·0]); and death 93·7% (CI:[92·5, 94·7]). Similarly, the overall estimated level of protection from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for documented infection is 94·8% (CI:[94·4, 95·1]); hospitalization 94·1% (CI:[91·9, 95·7]); and severe illness 96·4% (CI:[92·5, 98·3]). Our results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals.

5) Pilz, Stefan, et al. “SARS‐CoV‐2 re‐infection risk in Austria.” European Journal of Clinical Investigation 51.4 (2021): e13520.

We observed a relatively low re- infection rate of SARS- CoV- 2 in Austria. Protection against SARS- CoV- 2 after natural infection is comparable with the highest available estimates on vaccine efficacies.

6) Sheehan, Megan M., Anita J. Reddy, and Michael B. Rothberg. “Reinfection rates among patients who previously tested positive for COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.” medRxiv (2021).
Conclusions Prior infection in patients with COVID-19 was highly protective against reinfection and symptomatic disease. Protective effectiveness increased over time, suggesting that viral shedding or ongoing immune response may persist beyond 90 days and may not represent true reinfection. As vaccine supply is a limited resource around the world, patients with known history of COVID-19 could delay early vaccination to allow for the most vulnerable to access the vaccine and slow transmission.

Asymptomatic vs Presymptomatic Transmission

8) Bender, Jennifer K., et al. “Analysis of asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission in SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, Germany, 2020.” Emerging infectious diseases 27.4 (2021): 1159.

We determined secondary attack rates (SAR) among close contacts of 59 asymptomatic and symptomatic coronavirus disease case-patients by presymptomatic and symptomatic exposure. We observed no transmission from asymptomatic case-patients and highest SAR through presymptomatic exposure. Rapid quarantine of close contacts with or without symptoms is needed to prevent presymptomatic transmission.

Presymptomatic transmission accounted for >75% of all transmissions to OCs in the cohort (Appendix).

In conclusion, our study suggests that asymptomatic cases are unlikely to contribute substantially to the spread of SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 cases should be detected and managed early to quarantine close contacts immediately and prevent presymptomatic transmissions.

9) Jung, Jiwon, et al. “Frequent Occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission among Non-close Contacts Exposed to COVID-19 Patients.” Journal of Korean medical science 36.33 (2021).

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission among non-close contacts is not infrequent. We evaluated the proportion and circumstances of individuals to whom SARS-CoV-2 was transmitted without close contact with the index patient in a nosocomial outbreak in a tertiary care hospital in Korea. From March 2020 to March 2021, there were 36 secondary cases from 14 SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. Of the 36 secondary cases, 26 (72%) had been classified as close contact and the remaining 10 (28%) were classified as non-close contact. Of the 10 non-close contact, 4 had short conversations with both individuals masked, 4 shared a space without any conversation with both masked, and the remaining 2 entered the space after the index had left. At least one quarter of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions occurred among non-close contacts. The definition of close contact for SARS-CoV-2 exposure based on the mode of droplet transmission should be revised to reflect the airborne nature of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

 

Physician List & Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment

Dr. Peter McCullough Update on Vaccine for COVID Pod Cast
UncoverDC Published August 13, 2021

Yahi, Nouara, Henri Chahinian, and Jacques Fantini.Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccinationJournal of Infection (2021).

•Infection-enhancing antibodies have been detected in symptomatic Covid-19
•Antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) is a potential concern for vaccines
•Enhancing antibodies recognize both the Wuhan strain and Delta variants
•ADE of Delta variants is a potential risk for current vaccines
•Vaccine formulations lacking ADE epitope are suggested

Antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection is a safety concern for vaccine strategies. In a recent publication, Li et al. (Cell 184 :1-17, 2021) have reported that infection-enhancing antibodies directed against the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein facilitate virus infection in vitro, but not in vivo. However, this study was performed with the original Wuhan/D614G strain. Since the Covid-19 pandemic is now dominated with Delta variants, we analyzed the interaction of facilitating antibodies with the NTD of these variants. Using molecular modelling approaches, we show that enhancing antibodies have a higher affinity for Delta variants than for Wuhan/D614G NTDs. We show that enhancing antibodies reinforce the binding of the spike trimer to the host cell membrane by clamping the NTD to lipid raft microdomains. This stabilizing mechanism may facilitate the conformational change that induces the demasking of the receptor binding domain. As the NTD is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies, our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favor of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain. However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors). Under these circumstances, second generation vaccines with spike protein formulations lacking structurally-conserved ADE-related epitopes should be considered.

======================== = ==================

On Friday 20th – 21st August, the Village SDA Church will host a COVID, Coercion, and Conscience weekend. National speakers such as Dr. Peter McCullough, Professor Bruce Cameron, and Dr. Lela Lewis,

Rebuttal to Peter Mccoullough Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories Sean Pitman 2 weeks ago Dr Pitman quotes Dr Gorski (?)

================== =============== =============

Pandemic Perspectives Channel on Bitchute

This Interview Could Save Your Life” | A Conversation with Dr. McCullough, Part #1
Renowned physician and professor of medicine Dr. Peter McCullough describes early treatment protocols for COVID-19 that have saved countless lives… and the forces that have aligned themselves against their widespread adoption.

“This Interview Could Save Your Life” Part Two: The Dangers of the Injections | Episode #20 Dr. Peter McCullough offers the most lucid and meticulous analysis to date of the mass injection program now ravaging the world.

McCullough, Peter A., et al. “Multifaceted highly targeted sequential multidrug treatment of early ambulatory high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19).” Reviews in cardiovascular medicine 21.4 (2020) Multifaceted-highly-targeted-sequential-multidrug-treatment-of-early-ambulatory-high-risk-SARS-CoV-2-Infection

McCullough, Peter A., et al. “Pathophysiological basis and rationale for early outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection.” The American journal of medicine 134.1 (2021): 16-22.

McCullough, Peter A. “Regarding:“Hydroxychloroquine: a comprehensive review and its controversial role in coronavirus disease 2019”.” Annals of Medicine 53.1 (2021): 286-286.

A grim warning from Israel: Vaccination blunts, but does not defeat Delta
With early vaccination and outstanding data, country is the world’s real-life COVID-19 lab 16 Aug 2021 By Meredith Wadman Science Magazine

Coronavirus in Israel: What do we know about the 143 hospitalized people?  Jersualem Post  Of the 143 hospitalized patients, 58% were vaccinated, 39% were not at all, and 3% were partially vaccinated.
By MAAYAN JAFFE-HOFFMAN JULY 21, 2021 ….Fifteen of the 20 people who died this month were fully vaccinated.

Latest UK Data: Vaccinated People 3-times More Likely To Die From Delta Variant Than Unvaccinated  By News Rescue – June 27, 2021 by Kelen McBreen

A report published Friday by the UK government agency Public Health England reveals individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine are more than three times more likely to die from the Delta variant than unvaccinated people.

Out of 117 total deaths occurring within 28 days of infection, 44 of them were unvaccinated individuals.

In total, 70 out of the 27,192 vaccinated individuals in the study died, which is a 0.26% mortality rate.

Meanwhile, 44 out of the 53,822 unvaccinated people in the paper died, resulting in a 0.08% mortality.

The Vaccines Do Not Stop Severe Covid or Death
By Vasko Kohlmayer September 11, 2021

Jeffrey Dach MD
7450 Griffin Road, Suite 190
Davie, Fl 33314
954-792-4663
www.jeffreydachmd.com
www.drdach.com
Heart Book by Jeffrey Dach
www.naturalmedicine101.com
www.bioidenticalhormones101.com
www.truemedmd.com

Click Here for: Dr Dach’s Online Store for Pure Encapsulations Supplements
Click Here for: Dr Dach’s Online Store for Nature’s Sunshine Supplements

Web Site and Discussion Board Links:

jdach1.typepad.com/blog/
disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244066.html
disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244067.html
http://sci.med.narkive.com/covV2Qo2/jeffrey-dach-book-announcment-natural-medicine-101

Disclaimer

The reader is advised to discuss the comments on these pages with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon the advice of his/her personal physician. Also note that concerning an answer which appears as an electronically posted question, I am NOT creating a physician — patient relationship. Although identities will remain confidential as much as possible, as I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any breaches of confidentiality that may occur.

Link to this Article

Copyright (c) 2021 Jeffrey Dach MD All Rights Reserved. This article may be reproduced on the internet without permission, provided there is a link to this page and proper credit is given. See Repost Guidelines.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues of significance. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Serving Areas of: Hollywood, Aventura, Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Pembroke Pines, Miramar, Davie, Coral Springs, Cooper City, Sunshine Ranches, Hallandale, Surfside, Miami Beach, Sunny Isles, Normandy Isles, Coral Gables, Hialeah, Golden Beach ,Kendall,sunrise, coral springs, parkland,pompano, boca raton, palm beach, weston, dania beach, tamarac, oakland park, boynton beach, delray,lake worth,wellington,plantation

 

Last updated on by Jeffrey Dach MD

2 thoughts on “Dr Peter McCullough on Early Treatment vs Vaccination

Leave a Reply