RSV ‘vaccines’ revealed
Does the ‘danger’ of the disease justify applying untested technologies on the most vulnerable: pregnant mothers, newborns, and the elderly ?
Countless concerned parents have asked the WCH about the new RSV vaccines. In this post, we look at what they are, as well as the virus itself, with the aim of helping readers make their own informed decisions. The post is in two parts: first, a summary of the most salient points. Then, a more academic paper into the context and science for health professionals and others looking to gain a deeper perspective.
Part 1: The ‘TLDR’ summary
RSV symptoms are mild and mimic the common cold. Most babies have been infected with RSV by their second birthday. In the EU, more than 90% of hospitalized adult RSV patients are over 65 years old.
It is easily treated with nebulizer therapy. Urgent care and hospitalization can occur for serious cases and if treated early, infant mortality should not be a concern. Among the 22.4 million children under 5 years old in the US, the annual risk of RSV hospitalization is well under 1%.
RSV ‘vaccines’ only reduce the risk of hospitalization from RSV by 1%.
So-called RSV ‘vaccines’ fall into three categories: monoclonal antibodies, a protein-based ‘vaccine’, and mRNA technology.
The monoclonal antibody treatment is called nirsevimab and is given in a single dose. There are serious safety concerns around nirsevimab. The clinical trials had limitations and there is little to no long-term safety data. Ambiguity around its classification also complicates safety monitoring and accountability.
Some reports link nirsevimab to infant deaths. Many treated infants still end up in hospital, and resistant strains of the virus are emerging. Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) is also a concern.
Recent vaccines developed by GSK and Pfizer for pregnant women have shown a 2% increase in premature births and higher rates of neonatal deaths in trials.
Moderna’s mResvia mRNA vaccine is recommended by the European Medicines Agency for the over sixties, yet with no data showing it’s either safe or effective. The same safety concerns exist for mResvia as for any other mRNA vaccine, namely myocarditis, auto-immunity, genomic integration and cancer.
There are alternatives. Studies show a clear inverse relationship of severity of RSV symptoms and Vitamin D levels. Better vitamin D levels may lower the incidence of RSV-associated bronchiolitis in infants, and vitamin D helps enhance immune response, reduce inflammation and helps stop RSV getting into cells. Quercetin and zinc are also worth consideration as part of a treatment protocol.
If you’d like to discuss these points with your doctor or other health professional, consider sharing the following detailed paper with them. It includes aspects many vaccinating doctors have not been informed about so please discuss it with them before potential injections.
Part 2: A deep-dive into RSV and the novel injections now recommended as treatment
Introduction: where did RSV even come from, anyway?
In the mid-1950s, research was underway to mass-produce the polio vaccine, which involved growing viruses in monkey kidney cells, leading to the shipment of hundreds of thousands of monkeys to the U.S. In late 1955, a troop of chimpanzees at the Walter Reed Army Institute developed respiratory illness, and researchers isolated the causative agent, naming it Chimpanzee Coryza Agent Virus (CCA). This virus was later linked to a respiratory infection in a human worker, prompting a name change to Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), which became the preferred term in medical literature.
Further studies showed that inoculating susceptible chimpanzees with CCA resulted in illness, and by 1957, researchers identified a virus related to CCA in infants with respiratory illnesses. This virus was found in children suffering from pneumonia and bronchiolitis in the Maryland-District of Columbia area. By 1961, additional specimens resembling CCA were isolated. Before 1960, influenza and parainfluenza viruses were the primary causes of respiratory infections in infants. However, by July 1961, there was a significant increase in cases of bronchiolitis and bronchitis, particularly among infants under 12 months. Research suggested that the initial chimpanzee virus likely originated from a human infection (Morris, 1965; Chanock, 1957).
In 2005, the mainstream German paper Die Welt reported that doctors suspected a connection between the introduction of the measles vaccination (in Germany since 1973), which a large proportion of mothers were given at the time, and the increased susceptibility of their children to the RS virus. This assumption was supported by the fact that both the measles virus and the RS virus belong to the same family of paramyxoviruses. It also appears, the doctors write, that in countries with low measles vaccination rates, susceptibility to severe childhood respiratory infections requiring hospitalisation is lower (Welt, 2005).
Within five years of the virus's discovery, hospitalizations for RSV-related illnesses surpassed those for influenza in children.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to World Council for Health to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.