CoVID-19 - Silence Before the Tsunami?

Serious warnings by geert Vanden Bossche

Since the advent of Omicron there has been a succession of increasingly infectious CoVID-19 variants. The assumption has been that these variants will continue to become progressively less virulent (less dangerous), increasingly resembling the common cold.

However, this is not the expected outcome according to Geert Vanden Bossche, PhD virologist and prominent vaccinologist who has managed global vaccine projects for international organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Global Vaccine Alliance (GAVI), consultant to vaccine development companies and many more international vaccine projects.

According to Vanden Bossche, the series of changes in viral characteristics and shifting immunological developments all signal an imminent and highly dangerous change in the course of the pandemic. He predicts that heavily vaccinated populations will face a highly virulent coronavirus which is likely to cause rapidly progressive severe disease and a catastrophic number of deaths, far in excess of what has previously been observed during the pandemic.

These are startling and frankly unbelievable conclusions, but to his credit, GVB has almost unerringly predicted the great majority of the developments in the pandemic based on his detailed analysis of the interplay of the virus and population immune factors.

Although it is not possible to determine if his conclusions are correct, the serious nature of his predictions coupled with his obvious in-depth knowledge of this subject area means that it’s worth taking the time to understand and assess if this is plausible.

The following information is an attempt to summarize the points that he has raised. This is in no way an attack on those who diligently responded and were vaccinated but rather a plea to understand what the consequences may be so we can do our best to prepare should this unfold as predicted:

PART 1: What was the Real Cause of Viral Immune Escape?

Mass Vaccination as a driver of immune escape?

The fundamental concern raised by Vanden Bossche relates to mass vaccination (across all age groups) in the midst of a pandemic caused by a rapidly mutating type of virus.

Vanden Bossche acknowledges that there was an impressive response to the vaccine for a number of months after the initial vaccine roll out. At this point the vaccine-induced antibodies exactly matched the spike protein of the original Wuhan strain and the virus was rapidly neutralized.

However he points out that the challenge of conducting mass vaccination during a pandemic when there are high levels of circulating virus is that persons who were recently vaccinated had a high chance of encountering the virus BEFORE they had mounted a mature and effective antibody response.

Vanden Bossche compares this scenario to soldiers entering the battlefield before loading their guns. This occurred particularly after the first vaccine dose, as it takes a number of weeks and another nudge (second dose) for the antibody response to mature and become fully “battle ready”.

He further points out that there is good reason vaccines are administered well before likely exposure, for example before traveling to parts of the world where certain infections are more prevalent. This enables the immune system to be ready to respond with full force and precision,

In the case of mass vaccination during an active pandemic, immature vaccine induced antibodies can put immune pressure on the virus (clearing the weaker strains) but may be unable to clear it completely. As the virus is constantly mutating as it multiplies, any strain with a mutation that makes it more infectious and able to overcome the immature antibody response, has a significant advantage over other strains and are more likely to survive and be transmitted.

He argues that the above scenario was amplified by millions of people being vaccinated at the same time while the virus was circulating at high levels, resulting in a series of more and more infectious variants. This is referred to as viral immune escape and is a recognized challenge posed by vaccination. Although mutations result from random errors of replication, chance mutations which allow the virus to overcome the point of greatest pressure (referred to as selective pressure) from the immune system are the ones that can lead to a new dominant variant.

In contrast to Vanden Bossche’s views, it has been claimed that the staggering rate of immune escape variants was largely due to failure to clear the virus by non-vaccinated and immunocompromised persons. However Vanden Bossche explains that this is inconsistent with established immunological principles and historical data.

The Natural Response to Infection

He explains that in the context of a natural infection with a novel virus, the first line of defense is the innate immune system as opposed to highly specific antibodies referred to as the adaptive immune response. The broad, non-selective response of the innate system would not be expected to lead to the succession of highly selective mutations causing changes specifically in the spike protein which have been observed.

Although highly specific antibodies are mounted after natural infection as well, these antibodies only start to develop AFTER the acute infection phase when the virus has already been cleared. As these antibodies are not maturing during active infection, they are unlikely to play a role in immune escape. In fact in the case of a healthy, powerful innate response the virus is easily mopped up and the adaptive antibody response may hardly be called upon. This is why it was unwise to determine immunity solely on the basis of adaptive antibody levels!

Furthermore, natural antibodies are mounted against a multitude of viral structures, as opposed to a single focus like the vaccine, thus presenting a much higher hurdle for any new strains to overcome. In other words, the broader natural immune response is like an insurance policy against viral immune escape.

Immune Compromise

With respect to immunocompromised individuals, Vanden Bossche explains that although viral escape can occur in in this context, this effect would not be large enough to outweigh the rest of the population.

Vanden Bossche also points out that population data is consistent with his conclusions. Countries which had very low vaccination rates (Papua New Guinea, many African countries) had far fewer CoVID-19 surges and had very low CoVID-19 death rates - including those with high HIV incidence (compromised immunity) and far less medical resources.

Inconsistent Timeline?

It has been argued that vaccination could not have driven the successive waves of variants which have appeared as some of these variants appeared BEFORE the mass vaccination was commenced.

This is certainly true but Vanden Bossche argues that the appearance of these variants likely arose due to the immune pressure placed on the transmission of the virus by the strict lockdowns and other stringent infection control measures, which would have given more infectious strains a competitive advantage.

Historical Data

Looking at historical data, Vanden Bossche points out that previous pandemics started and ended with virtually the same dominant strain and at most 2-3 successive waves before the population gained herd immunity. This occurred without vaccination and despite the presence of immunocompromised individuals in these populations.

PART 2: The Omicron Era

The original Omicron variant suddenly appeared with over 30 mutations located predominantly within a specific area of the viral spike protein called the receptor binding domain (which allows it to gain entry into the cell).

This resulted in a significant mismatch between the vaccine induced antibodies and the Omicron receptor binding structure. The result was very poor neutralization of the virus (failure to stop it entering the cells) by vaccine induced antibodies and a massive number of vaccine break through infections which occurred at that time.

After some months the explosion in covid cases reduced in number and this was interpreted as development of herd immunity. However Vanden Bossche strongly disputes this as he explains that herd immunity is typically accompanied by an almost complete halt in viral transmission, which is far from what actually occurred. He points out that the rapid succession of new variants is evidence that the virus was still being widely transmitted because the high level of mutations would not occur if the virus wasn’t replicating on a massive level.

He further explains that the developments observed during the Omicron phase are due to three successive but overlapping responses by the immune system:

1. Polyreactive non-neutralizing antibodies (PNNABs)

2. Stearic Immune Re-focusing (SIR)

3. Non-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (N-CTLs)

Of these 3 developments, the most important to understand is the PNNABs.

Stearic immune re-focusing slowed the progression of the changes predicted by Vanden Bossche and may partly explain the increases in autoimmune and cancer observed.

Vanden Bissche explained that the non-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes are responsible for the marked reduction in symptoms despite continued transmission - the so-called silent phase of the CoVID-19 pandemic

For those who don’t want to delve too deeply into the technical details just read the section on PNNABs below then skip to Part 4.

PNNABs

According to Vanden Bossche development of PNNABs (poly-reactive non neutralizing antibodies) occurred at the outset of the Omicron phase and their effects continue to today, even though many viral and immune changes have occurred since their development.

He explains that the PNNABs developed as a direct consequence of the high levels of very weakly binding vaccine antibodies to the Omicron virus. This resulted in development of antibodies directed at a part of the spike protein called the N-terminal domain. The N-terminal domain is separate to the receptor binding domain so antibodies attaching to this part of the spike protein do not block viral entry into the cells (hence the term non-neutralizing). The N-terminal domain has been conserved (remained constant) which means that the PNNABs have remained active despite the appearance of a huge number of new Omicron variants (i.e., poly-reactive).

PNNABs have two important and opposing effects which have been described by other scientists:

1. PNNABs actually increase the infectivity of the virus (so called antibody dependent enhancement of infection) by locking the spike protein in an open configuration that increases binding to the ACE2 receptor and viral entry into cells! Enhanced infection due to vaccines is not a new concept. It has been observed in the context of vaccination against other coronaviruses and dengue virus. It may partly explain the Cleveland Clinic published findings that the number of CoVID-19 infections were much higher with more vaccine doses.

2. Despite facilitating infection, PNNABs paradoxically have a critically important protective function in that they can also reduce severe disease and death. Vanden Bossche and other scientists have explained that a fraction of CoVID-19 viruses attach to the surface of dendritic (roaming immune cells) which transport them beyond the upper airways. If the virus is transferred from the surface of the dendritic cells to the cells in the lower lungs and other organs they can trigger the formation of dangerous syncytia (fusing the cells together). This phenomenon is what caused the low oxygen and severe disease observed with the Delta variant. Fortunately, PNNABs can block the transfer of viruses from the dendritic cells into susceptible cells in the lower lungs and elsewhere in the body, thereby preventing this dangerous development.

Unfortunately Vanden Bossche believes this means of protection is not sustainable long term. He predicts that progressive mutations will lead to the virus overcoming the protective hurdle offered by the PNNABs. On the other hand he expects that the infection enhancing characteristic is very likely to remain in place (because any mutation that removes this ability would render that strain unable to compete and become dominant).

In this case the result will not only be antibody enhancement of infecion (which is already occurring) but in that case there would be antibody enhancement of severe disease. In his opinion the results of such a progression would potentially be catastrophic: rapid deterioration and possibly even death within a few days of infection.

Stearic Immune Refocusing (SIR)

Vanden Bossche explains that although immune refocusing has been attempted as a way to enhance effectiveness of vaccines, it has not previously been described as a natural phenomenon. As a result, he hadn’t anticipated this phenomenon and only subsequently recognized that this was occurring in the context of an unprecedented mass vaccination program. According to him the SIR phenomenon significantly delayed the initial timeline of developments that he had anticipated.

The factors that led to SIR are explained below:

Despite the rapid succession of new, highly mutated variants, the predominant vaccine antibody response remained directed at the spike protein of the original Wuhan strain. This well recognized phenomenon is called original antigenic sin or immune imprinting.

Due to this mismatch, the vaccine induced antibodies could no longer bind strongly to the receptor binding domain and immediately neutralize the virus as they did initially. However they could still weakly bind and actually shield or effectively hide this part of the spike protein from the immune response. As a result there was a progressive shifting or re-focusing of the immune response to conserved (less likely to mutate) parts of the spike protein which usually don’t trigger responses (less immunogenic). This is what Vanden Bossche calls stearic immune refocusing (SIR).

The antibody response to these sites did provide some protection but this protection was weaker and transient. Again, this weaker response led to more immune escape by favoring more infectious strains that could overcome the newly developed antibodies.

During this phase there were a large number of recurrent vaccine breakthrough infections in close succession as each new variant overcame the successive immune hurdles.

Vanden Bossche also points out that the newly targeted sites are less immunogenic by design because they resemble some of the protein structures on our cells (molecular mimicry). So while they provided transient protection against infection, an unfortunate consequence is that they could potentially provoke auto-immune reactions (targeting and destruction of our cells by the immune system) and even cancer (via a complex mechanism he described whereby the antibodies shield the cancer cells from the natural killer immune cells which usually clear them out). He explains that this phenomenon at least partially explains the rise in these conditions in highly vaccinated countries.

According to Vanden Bossche the progressively weaker antibodies also effectively ushered in the next phase of immune response described below.

Of note Vanden Bossche explains that original antigenic sin can also occur in the context of natural infection. However, the broader antibody response beyond the changing spike protein would be sufficient to eradicate the virus along with an active innate response

Non-Specific Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes

The mechanism that induces the non-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (N-CTLs) was explained as below:

Weakly binding SIR antibodies are unable to attach to individual viruses and instead result in large virus-antibody complexes. These larger viral immune complexes are taken in by special processing immune cells called antigen presenting cells (APCs) and leads to strong stimulation of N-CTLs. The N-CTLs are stimulated by the expression of a universal peptide on the APCs that have internalized the viruses. This universal peptide is present in all coronaviruses and even other types of viruses.

Vanden Bossche explains that transition to the N-CTL response brought about a dramatic drop in the number of symptomatic Covid infections for several months. This gave the impression that the pandemic was effectively over.

However although these lymphocytes efficiently kill virus infected cells, they don’t block infection like antibodies can. They can only respond after the virus has infected the cell and commenced replication, thereby leaving the door open for transmission of these highly infectious variants to continue.

Furthermore, Vanden Bossche explains that the N-CTLs are very different to the sophisticated and specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes which respond to antigens (viral components) of specific variants and have a memory function so they quickly pounce on these antigens with repeat exposure. In contrast, the N-CTLs have no memory function so they effectively start from scratch with subsequent infections and therefore have a more delayed effect.

Furthermore, Vanden Bossche explained that the N-CTL response is also unsustainable based on changing viral characteristics which will lead to a decline in their levels (explained below).

PART 3: Are we in the Final Phase?

According to Vanden Bossche the appearance of the JN1 variant near the end of 2023 represented a significant shift in the immune landscape. In contrast to previous variants, JN1 has over a hundred mutations including many mutations outside the spike protein. Vanden Bossche indicates that this may be in response to the broader immune pressure exerted by the N-CTLs and is reflective of their increased role in the immune response. However, paradoxically, the physiological changes brought about by the JN-1 clan may result in a shift away from N-CTLs.

Vanden Bossche postulates that the increased inflammation triggered by the JN1 variants may result in more viruses docking onto the outside of dendritic cells and being transported beyond the upper airways instead of being internalized by APCs. This would have several consequences:

1. If more viruses dock onto the outside of dendritic cells instead of being internalized and expressing the universal peptide, fewer N-CTLs would be stimulated and there will be a rise in symptomatic covid cases.

2. A greater concentration of PNNABs will be needed to block entry to the critical air exchange cells at the lower lungs and cells in other organs in order to prevent severe disease and death.

3. These changes would result in immune pressure which is specifically targeted at the ability of viruses to overcome the protective barrier exerted by the PNNABs. In other words,  it is likely that a chance mutation will occur which would allow a virus to jump this barrier. According to Vanden Bossche it’s only a matter of time. He postulates that this may involve a change in the glycosylation (sugar structure on the outer viral coat).

He further explained that a change in glycosylation can block the protective PNNAB effect which is preventing entry of docked viruses into cells in the the lower lungs and elsewhere, without blocking the PNNAB enhancement of infection by free floating viruses. This combination of factors would lead to antibody enhancement of severe disease.

PART 4: Who is at Risk?

Vanden Bossche advises that the risk of severe illness depends on many factors including age, general health, whether exposed to the virus prior to vaccination and number of vaccine doses received. He outlines the following risk profiles:

The most at risk group are those who were vaccinated prior to exposure - particularly the elderly who may be more vulnerable in any event. He explains that in this case the innate immune system would have been constantly overpowered by the sustained high adaptive antibody response to constantly circulating viruses. As a result the innate system would not have been “trained” (constantly updated) over the course of the pandemic. This effect is compounded by multiple booster doses, which further elevate the antibody response.

However, for individuals who have not received the CoVID-19 vaccine, or were infected with CoVID-19 prior to the first vaccine dose AND are in good health, the risk may be far less. According to Vanden Bossche this is based on the fact that over the course of the pandemic, the innate immune system would have had an opportunity to be trained to cope with increasingly more infectious variants. That is, as long as the immune system was constantly updated by exposure to new variants as opposed to isolating and a healthy lifestyle was adopted (see Covid/Viral Defense).

Part 5: RECOMMENDATIONS

It seems ridiculous to discuss preparation for a highly dangerous viral surge when current conditions appear mostly calm. However this is what Vanden Bossche has referred to as the “Silence Before the Tsunami”.

At the very least it is important to be aware of these conclusions. Beyond that, it is worth considering what measures should be in place should this occur.

Vanden Bossche warns that the chaos that is likely to ensue if his predictions are correct means that it may be difficult to access the necessary treatments in a timely manner at that point.

He therefore recommends that any individual who is potentially at risk should have a stock of antivirals on hand and take steps to boost the capacity of the innate immune system. He advises that if there is any sign of these developments anywhere in the world, antiviral prophylaxis should be commenced immediately. The rationale is that once infection with this rapidly progressive, virulent coronavirus has already commenced, even early treatment may be too late.

Although we don’t know enough to determine if there are any missing factors in Vanden Bossche’s analysis (such as the unanticipated SIR phenomenon), what we do understand appears very convincing. It is with great reluctance that this information is shared during a time when we have finally enjoyed some relief from the throes of the CoVID-19 pandemic. And while it is our sincere hope that these tragic developments will not occur, it seems prudent to prepare.

Luminnova Health has therefore developed a Covid/Viral Defense program which can be utilized by persons who are currently experiencing frequent infections, lingering symptoms after infection or in preparation of a possible surge. Having deployed these pro-active measures with success to date, we are hopeful that this would be a useful approach going forward.

One encouraging observation made by Vanden Bossche is that the mutations responsible for this huge jump in virulence is likely to cause some reduction in the massive level of infectiousness of the current strains. As we have frequently observed a protective effect for those directly exposed to infection to date, it is hoped that this protective hurdle will hold going forward.

The following is a summary of our Covid Defense protocols which are constantly being reviewed and updated based on our experience: