More than a year ago, Anthony Fauci co-authored a paper that admitted the covid vaccines didn’t work as claimed. A fact that was previously dismissed as misinformation.
…
Anthony Fauci served as the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (“NIAID”) from 1984 to 2022 and was the chief medical advisor to the President from 2021 to 2022. Britannica succinctly summarizes the key role Fauci played during the covid era.
In 2021 Joe Biden was sworn in as president and Fauci became his chief medical adviser. At Fauci’s first press briefing, he alluded to his difficulties with President Donald Trump, noting that it was “liberating” to be able to talk freely about science. Fauci subsequently helped develop the Biden administration’s plan for the nationwide rollout of the vaccine and made numerous public appearances to dispel any safety concerns about the medicine. In 2022 Fauci retired as Biden’s chief medical adviser and as director of the NIAID.
In August 2022, Fauci announced he would be stepping down from the positions of Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and Chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, as well as the position of Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden and would be leaving these positions in December 2022.
On 11 January 2023, a paper titled ‘Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses’ was published in the journal Cell Host & Microbe. Fauci was one of its three authors.
The following month, the Health Recovery & Advisory Team (“HART”) highlighted some points made in the paper which show Fauci admitting that covid “vaccines” could never have worked as claimed. Although the HART Group’s article is more than a year old, it is worth reminding ourselves of Fauci’s confession.
Facts previously dismissed as misinformation now admitted.
By HART Group, published on 15 February 2023
Fauci is generally regarded as one of the key architects of the USA’s – and therefore the world’s – response to the pandemic, including pushing for the emergency authorization and rollout of the covid vaccines, and the formulation of policies which exerted huge pressure on citizens in nearly all countries to be injected with these products or else face sanctions, ranging from social ostracisation via the use of “vaccine passport” schemes, through to job losses, and even fines merely for being unvaccinated.
Fauci made some bold claims about the covid vaccines in order to justify such coercive policies, including that they would prevent infections and limit transmission of the virus to others. These claims were then picked up by political leaders worldwide and used to justify their own policies, even when – from early data – it became obvious that the vaccines did not prevent infections or reduce the viral load of those infected.
This latest article [published in Cell Host & Microbe], [of which Fauci is co-author] therefore, has quite rightly raised some eyebrows because of the astonishing concessions it contains, amongst which are the following:
1. Of the influenza vaccines, the authors note:
As of 2022, after more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been noted. As pointed out decades ago, and still true today, the rates of effectiveness of our best approved influenza vaccines would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine-preventable diseases.
The authors then draw parallels between the vaccines for covid and those for influenza:
The vaccines for these two very different viruses [covid-19 and influenza] have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity.
2. They propose that the reason why vaccines against covid and influenza are ineffective compared to those against mumps, measles, rubella and smallpox and varicella zoster (chickenpox) is that the former replicate predominantly in local mucosal tissue, without causing viremia.
They posit that the finding by PCR testing of the circulation of viral SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the bloodstream, is an “RNAemia” (as is seen with most mucosal respiratory virus infections), as distinct from viremia, in which infectious viruses can be cultured from the blood.
This statement is rather glossed over, but it actually has huge significance, in that it is essentially saying that the finding by PCR testing of tissues in people with mucosal respiratory virus infections like covid may simply represent the presence of RNA, not culturable whole virus.
However, much has been made of these PCR findings, leading to statements that covid is “highly unusual, attacking all tissues” and “covid isn’t just a respiratory disease but a circulatory one,” notions which the authors of this paper seem not to share, the tone of the article being very much that SARS-CoV-2 sits within the broad category of mucosal respiratory viruses.
(Having said that, one point the authors did not make is that even in the absence of circulating whole virus, it could be that circulating spike protein leads to the clots and other vascular pathology seen both in infection and after vaccination, although this seems a likely potential mechanism only in more severe disease.)
3. They then state that antigenic drift is the reason why we can expect people to be infected multiply both with influenza and SARS-CoV-2.
4. Tying these all together, they conclude that:
It is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses [of which influenza and SARS-Cov-2 are examples] have ever been effectively controlled by vaccines.
They then write that:
This observation raises a question of fundamental importance: if natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines, to do so?
How indeed? This is one of the points that those who questioned the design of the covid vaccines have been making repeatedly.
