Meet Dr. Geert Vanden Bosshe, a world-renowned expert on vaccines.
According to his website:
Geert Vanden Bossche received his DVM from the University of Ghent, Belgium, and his PhD degree in Virology from the University of Hohenheim, Germany. He held adjunct faculty appointments at universities in Belgium and Germany. After his career in Academia, Geert joined several vaccine companies (GSK Biologicals, Novartis Vaccines, Solvay Biologicals) to serve various roles in vaccine R&D as well as in late vaccine development. Geert then moved on to join the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Global Health Discovery team in Seattle (USA) as Senior Program Officer; he then worked with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) in Geneva as Senior Ebola Program Manager. At GAVI he tracked efforts to develop an Ebola vaccine. He also represented GAVI in fora with other partners, including WHO, to review progress on the fight against Ebola and to build plans for global pandemic preparedness. Back in 2015, Geert scrutinized and questioned the safety of the Ebola vaccine that was used in ring vaccination trials conducted by WHO in Guinea. His critical scientific analysis and report on the data published by WHO in the Lancet in 2015 was sent to all international health and regulatory authorities involved in the Ebola vaccination program. After working for GAVI, Geert joined the German Center for Infection Research in Cologne as Head of the Vaccine Development Office. He is at present primarily serving as a Biotech/ Vaccine consultant while also conducting his own research on Natural Killer cell-based vaccines.
Seems like a guy we should listen to, right?
Well, he’s sounding the alarm of the huge dangers of a “mismanaged” COVID-19 rollout that poses massive danger to everyone who gets it.
Here is a portion of his urgent warning about the COVID-19 “Vaccine” as posted on his website (read the entire article here):
Immediate cancellation of all ongoing Covid-19 mass vaccination campaigns should now become THE most acute health emergency of international concern
updated March 17, 2021
So far, nobody has provided any kind of scientific evidence or rationale that massive human intervention (i.e., global implementation of infection prevention measures and mass vaccination) in the Covid-19 pandemic will lead to a decrease in mortality and morbidity rates in the human population. These large scale human interventions have been initiated without paying any attention to the population dynamics of a natural pandemic as caused by acute (self-limiting) viral infections. The best example of such a natural pandemic is probably the H1N1 Influenza pandemic that occurred during world war one (see fig 1). The natural course of this Influenza pandemic was not distorted by wide-spread implementation of infection prevention measures or mass vaccination programs. The pandemic was characterized by 3 waves before the virus became endemic.
How can we even consider intervening into a natural pandemic without any basic understanding of the evolutionary–shaped interplay between the virus and the population’s immune status? Uninformed hygiene/ containment and immune interventions are at risk of disturbing the natural dynamics of a pandemic and hence, to prevent the virus and the population’s immune defense from making a compromise that is ‘viable’ for both the virus and the immune system, and that naturally follows the 3 waves of mortality and morbidity. When the virus ultimately comes to terms with the immune system, herd immunity will prevent the virus from causing a further sequence of morbidity and mortality waves while being ‘leaky’ enough to not eradicate the virus. Any intervention that increases the population’s immune pressure on the virus without eradicating the virus will inevitably lead to selective viral immune escape (see below).
Selective viral immune escape is, for example, known to occur when the neutralizing capacity of Ag (antigen-)specific serum antibodies (Abs) does not suffice to fully eliminate highly mutable viruses (e.g., Coronavirus; CoV) for lack of concentration or affinity. Due to large-scale infection prevention measures implemented as of the beginning of the pandemic, viral replication and spread have increasingly occurred on a background of high immune pressure and have, therefore, led to viral immune escape. The infectious variants that started to emerge end 2020 are a direct consequence of measures taken to prevent the virus from spreading.
Natural course of a pandemic caused by acute viral infection
The first wave of disease (1) (and mortality) primarily affects elderly people (or, more generally, subjects with weak innate immunity). Increasing viral spread causes this wave to transition into a more severe, second wave in younger age groups. Subsequently, declining Ab titers in seropositive subjects (i.e., those who recovered from disease contracted during the first wave) and increasing infectious pressure will trigger a third wave affecting both age groups. This third wave of disease (and mortality) comes to an end when those who are recovering from the disease will mount functional Abs against the circulating viral strain. The virus has, indeed, no chance to provoke an additional wave of morbidity and mortality in previously infected people whose Ab titers have meanwhile started to wane. Because of immunologic memory, seroconversion in this population segment will now occur very fast whereas those with sufficient innate immunity continue to resist the disease. This is to say that following the 3rd wave of a natural pandemic, viral spread will dramatically diminish as a result of strong herd immunity consisting of both, adaptive and innate immunity. It is interesting to note that during a natural pandemic (i.e., without human intervention), there is no need for the virus to select mutations that render it more infectious.
It is reasonable to assume that CoV can persist in the population despite herd immunity. Previously symptomatically infected subjects may spread the virus upon re-infection when their seroneutralizing Ab titers are no longer high enough to curtail viral replication at the mucosal portal of entry. Likewise, asymptomatically infected subjects (2) (i.e., the vast majority of young and middle-aged people) may also transmit virus upon (re-)infection. So, after the pandemic has come to an end, the virus continues to spread in the population, thereby causing endemic infection. However, as long as the majority of the population disposes of sufficiently high S-specific Ab titers or natural Abs (i.e., herd immunity!), waves of mortality and morbidity will no longer occur.
CoV infection in asymptomatic carriers is abrogated after a short period of viral shedding. Viral clearance in these subjects is likely to occur through activation of NK cells. The latter are capable of recognizing CoV-associated, Ag-nonspecific patterns on the surface of CoV-infected epithelial target cells. As killing by NK cells is not Ag-specific, this immune mechanism is not susceptible to selective immune escape (cfr. below).
Selective immune pressure and immune escape as a result of large-scale human intervention in the pandemic
Any intervention in the pandemic that directly (e.g., through mass immunization campaigns) or indirectly (i.e., through infection prevention measures) exerts significant pressure on viral infectiousness (and hence, exerts selective pressure on the spike [S] protein) will enable the virus to escape whenever it gets exposed to S-specific Abs that are suboptimal, either in concentration or affinity. This will inevitably allow the virus to rapidly unfold more infectious, immune escape variants. Mass vaccination campaigns conducted after a prolonged period of infection prevention measures will dramatically increase pressure on viral infectiousness because of broad selective immune pressure on S protein (due to S-specific Abs). Such additional immune selection pressure, especially when exerted during the second wave of a CoV pandemic, is likely to precipitate and amplify viral immune escape. It is reasonable to assume that the cumulative selective pressure on viral infectiousness may cause the second and third wave of the pandemic to dramatically increase and to merge into an even much bigger wave of disease and death that is ultimately going to affect all layers of the population (possibly, with the exception of small children).