COVID-19

The pandemic has affected the life of all of us in very dramatic ways. While dealing with that crisis, we have seen much of conflicting advice, changes in polices, questionable statements, and a counterreaction in the population leading to a widespread distrust and all kinds of conspiracy theories. What are the facts? What are the myths? How can we know?

Although it will be difficult to get a final answer to all the questions raised, we want to give a critical look at the evidences and try to discern a little bit on what might be going on behind the scenes.

Is the pandemic already over?

Since mask mandates were lifted for the most part, the impression may arise that the pandemic is coming to an end. Although some countries have seen a significant reduction of infections and deaths, the pandemic is far from being over. On a worldwide scale we are still seeing about 850,000 new infections and 1,500 deaths registered daily. Furthermore, reduced testing is kind of skewing our statistics of real cases. And even in the US, there are still about 100,000 registered cases every day, which is close to the average we have seen during the entire year of 2021. Daily deaths have though declined quite a bit.((Statistics: Worldometers
USA: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Worldwide: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/))

How is the Pandemic going to end?

This is a question that has been on everyone’s mind since the COVID-19 pandemic started. The good news is that it seems to be slowly ending. The bad news is that we don’t really know how it will end. There are several possible scenarios for how the pandemic will end.

At the moment, new variants tended to be more infectious, but less dangerous. If a large number of the population gets infected, it is probable that a large enough number reaches some kind of immunity, the number of new infections decreases and we reach endemic levels. In this scenario, the number of new infections decreases until it reaches a point where there are just enough new cases to sustain the disease. It’s possible that this could happen, but it’s also possible that a new wave will appear after an unexpected new mutation of the virus.

What is complicating the situation is, that constant mutations and dwindling antibodies make it quite unlikely that herd immunity will stop the spread of the virus. We probably have to coexist with this virus for a while, but most likely it is going to be less of a problem as time goes on.

What are the treatments for COVID-19?

A WHO study done pretty early in the pandemic was testing a few promising treatment options in hospital settings, including hydroxychloroquine. Patient in intensive care did not get any improvement from any drug applied, including Remdesvir, an antiviral drug widely applied during the pandemic. This created a widespread belief that hydroxychloroquine is not efficient for COVID-19 treatment. Interestingly Remdesvir was continued to be applied, even showing its inefficiency in intensive care setting.((WHO Solidarity Trial))

In early treatment, the situation is completely different. For Ivermectin, several independent meta-analyses showed benefits for prevention and treatment alike.((Hill A et.al. Meta-analysis of randomized trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-148845/v1
Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 49 studies. https://ivmmeta.com/
Lawrie T. Ivermectin reduces the risk of death from COVID-19 – A rapid review and meta-analysis in support of the recommendation of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. https://www.e-bmc.co.uk/)) But still, Ivermectin continues to be the most praised and most criticized drug of the pandemic and there is still lots of controversy how efficient it really is. Hydroxychloroquine had a similar fate. Even though I am not aware of any solid meta-analysis, some studies showed some slight benefits of its use. It is known that it helps the transport of zinc into the cell, which is essential for immune function, but no study was attempted to test hydroxychoroquine in combination with zinc. It seems that political motives are having a strong influence on science. One motive to downplay those treatment option was probably, that an emergency authorization of vaccines and drugs would not have been possible, if effective treatment options were available.

Going away from drugs, we have studies showing efficiency of Propolis even in hospital settings.((Duarte Silveira M A et. al. Efficacy of propolis as an adjunct treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Doi https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.08.20248932)) We know that Vitamin D is highly effective in preventing and treating a COVID-19 infection, and many other supplements and herbs could be just as effective, even no studies are available to prove this. We have an article on COVID-19 treatment going more into details on many of those points.

Are vaccines really protecting against COVID-19?

Well, that is a tricky question, involving many different parameters. First trials of the Pfizer vaccine showed an efficacy of 90% to protect from infections. However, a study from Israel suggests that protection for infection is reduced to 75% after 3 months and it dwindled to 16% after 6 months.((Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022)).

How do we explain this difference? We know that antibodies against COVID-19 are dwindling with time. That means, a vaccine will prevent you fairly well from infection in the first 3 months, but after 6 months, the protection against catching the virus is minimal. However, as antibodies are dwindling, memory B Cells are still keeping a memory of the virus, and can quickly produce antibodies during a subsequent infection. For this reason, protection against hospitalization is still around 80% to 90% and will probably stay so for years to come, until the virus mutates too much, turning current vaccines inefficient.(( Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022
Craig E. Pfizer’s Covid vaccine efficacy against infection plunges to just 20% after six months – but protection against severe illness barely dips, study concludes. Daily Mail, October 6, 2020))

Do I need a booster shot to be protected?

We basically answered the question by looking on how immunity works. Even if you get a booster shot every 6 months, for half of the time you are still pretty much unprotected against catching the virus. However, the intensity of the infection will be less because of memory B cells kicking in. That will be true with or without a booster shot.

Some studies suggest that booster shots are increasing the protection against variants like Omicron. Looking closer at the data you will see that a booster shot with the Pfizer vaccine gives only 2% improvement in immunity compared to somebody who got the 2 dose vaccine recently. Boosting a Pfizer vaccine with a Moderna shot gave an improvement of 8%. For a completed 2 dose Moderna vaccine, protection for Omicrom was at 74.1% the first 2 weeks after completing the 2 dose regime. After the booster shot it was only 66.3% 2 weeks after the booster. In practical terms, the booster shot can just refresh your antibodies, which are again dwindling over time. Besides that, it does not really provide better protection for the Omicron variant.((Andrews N et. Al. Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant. N Engl J Med 2022; 386:1532-1546 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2119451)) Protection against severe disease should be valid again without any booster shot. In Germany, the vaccination commission does not recommend a second booster shot, because it is not going to improve your long term protection.((„Impfung bietet keinen längerfristigen Schutz vor Infektion“, betont Stiko-Chef welt.de, 24.10.2022))

If I was infected from COVID-19, do I still need to be vaccinated?

In some countries, being infected is considered to have equal rights as getting the vaccine, for the first 3 to 12 months after the infection. Similar to the vaccine, antibodies will diminish over this time, but memory B cells will give a long-lasting immunity, protecting against severe disease outcome. The immunity aquired by an infection is therefore very much comparable to a vaccine.((Turner, J.S., Kim, W., Kalaidina, E. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature 595, 421–425 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03647-4
Rodda LB, et.al. Functional SARS-CoV-2-specific immune memory persists after mild COVID-19. Res Sq [Preprint]. 2020 Aug 13:rs.3.rs-57112. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-57112/v1.))

Some studies suggest that an infected person can increase the immunity still more by getting the vaccine, concluding that a combination of acquired immunity from the disease and vaccination will give the best form of protection. Nevertheless, the infection by itself is already giving the same immunity then the vaccine by itself, some studies showing even stronger protection than the vaccine. Having been infected will make a vaccination unnecessary. A recommendation to get vaccinated after being infected is based more on politics then on scientific evidence.((Dra. Sheena Meredith. Covid-19: Por que estamos ignorando a imunidade adquirida com a infecção? Medscape, July 14, 2022))

What are the risks of COVID-19 vaccines?

Some vaccines like CoronaVac or Covaxin are using the inactivated virus to create an immune response. The technology involved is not much different than any other vaccine we used during the last few decades. This kind of vaccines should be fairly safe in relation to side effects. CoronaVac was though criticized quite a bit because of limited efficacy to prevent against disease and hospitalization.

At the other hand, mRNA vaccines like Pfizer and Moderna and viral vector vaccines like the AstraZeneca and Johnson&Johnson vaccine are new technologies that include gene-manipulated substances that are instructing body cells to replicate the spike protein. These are technologies that never have been deployed in large scale to the public, since technological problems were still manifold. During the need of the pandemic, approval of this new technologies has been fast-tracked in order to help to resolve the crisis. There is much that is still unknown about long-term side effects of those technologies, and anybody who is concerned about putting GMO foods into their stomach, will be probably concerned about injecting a gene-manipulated substance into the bloodstream as well.

There was much discussion whether those technologies will manipulate the DNA of the human body. For the mRNA vaccines this is quite unlikely, since they are replicating the spike protein through channeling a RNA structure into some of your body cells, and instructing them to replicate the virus. In this technology the substance is not entering the DNA at all. The viral vector vaccines are different, since they are really entering the DNA and instructing that way the cell to produce the spike protein, very similar than many viruses will do. This would be potentially the riskiest among those vaccine technologies involved.

While those questions of the unknown may be a concern for many, let’s focus on something we know to be a problem, and that are the spike proteins. Studies have shown that this spike protein is able to damage cells independently of the virus itself.((Lei Y et.al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circulation Research. 2021;128:1323–1326 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902))

Another study showed that spike proteins are able to influence cell signaling and could lead to PAH, a serious lung disease, blood clotting, coronary artery disease, hypertension and stroke.((Suzuki Y et. al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Elicits Cell Signaling in Human Host Cells: Implications for Possible Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccines. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jan; 9(1): 36. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9010036)) The spike protein can also damage the blood brain barrier and cause unpredictable brain damage, that shows up in several symptoms, for the disease and the vaccine alike.((Buzhdygan TP et.al. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood-brain barrier. Neurobiol Dis. 2020 Dec;146:105131. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2020.105131))

With an inactivated virus, like used in CoronaVac, the exposure to the spike protein will be quite limited. The newer vaccine technologies instruct though the body cells to produce spike proteins, and literally inundate the entire body with this damage causing substance.

It is important to note that the spike protein of vaccines was modified in order to cleave to cells and not enter into them, so not all findings of the studies may apply equally for the spike protein of the vaccines. It would be interesting to make some studies with both spike proteins to have a clear comparation between the two, but as far as I know this was not done so far.

Now what do we have on real world statistical data? There is a reporting system, that collects potential side effects of any vaccine applied or produced in the US, called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System). In normal years there are reported around 150 deaths for all 70 registered vaccines combined. Now for the COVID-19 vaccines we have already close to 16,000 deaths reported in the US alone, during the 1 ½ years that the vaccines were applied.((Original VAERS dataset: https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/saved/D8/D173F192)) Data from other countries who have a reporting system in place is not much different.

Of course, we know that a reported incident in the system does not prove that it was really caused by the vaccine. There may be some deaths reported, that were randomly happening after the vaccination, but were not directly caused by the event. At the other hand, the reporting system is completely voluntary, and only a small percentage of all incidents are getting really reported. Some estimates will go that the real number would be about 5 times higher. Even though it is very hard to come up with any exact numbers, we can deduce that the COVID-19 vaccines are not quite as safe as your common flu shot.

In order to be fair, we need to put this numbers into perspective. Even if we estimate somewhere around 100,000 deaths by the vaccine, we need to contrast that to about one million deaths by the virus in the US territory. Going with the assumption that the vaccine helped to control the spread of the virus, the vaccine still helped to save lives.

At the other hand, the statistics of side effects and deaths are high enough to be of a serious concern, and should cause a constructive discussion in scientific circles. This discussion though is not happening. In the media, any mention of serious vaccine side effects is actively suppressed. On Facebook, groups reporting vaccine side effects are getting deleted. The government did a simplified reporting system called V-Safe, where anybody could report side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines from their cell phone, but the data is not made publicly available. Censorship prevails at every corner. And it seems that even scientific studies are tweaked in order to support the politically correct narrative. If there is any discussion at all about vaccine safety, it is most likely to be emotionally loaded, with everybody defending their position and no constructive dialogue involved.

Robert Malone is a scientist that was involved in the invention of the mRNA technology. He made on a LinkedIn post the following statement about the current COVID-19 vaccines:

Once again I feel it necessary to make a clear and unambiguous statement. The data strongly indicate that the experimental genetic vaccines, including the mRNA and recombinant adenoviral vaccines, have saved lives. Many lives.

But it is also increasingly clear that there are some risks associated with these vaccines. Various governments have attempted to deny that this is the case. But they are wrong. Vaccination-associated coagulation is a risk. Cardiotoxicity is a risk. Those are proven, and discussed in official USG communications, as well as communications from a variety of other governments.

Based on what I have seen, I believe that other toxicity risks will become more apparent. These include menstrual irregularities, development of thrombocytopenia, cerebrovascular effects, and reactivation of latent viruses such as clinical shingles.

But we do not know how prevalent these are, and the spectrum of severity is unknown and possibly unknowable because the V-Safe database is not being shared outside of CDC, the VAERS systems is deeply flawed, and we just do not have the comprehensive safety data necessary to accurately evaluate risk/benefit for the various cohorts – elderly, healthy normal adults, immunocompromised, pregnancy, adolescents, children, and infants. Particularly the long term safety data necessary to evaluate risks such as autoimmune complications that may manifest months or years post-vaccination. That is just a sciencefact.

Robert Malone

This is just one example of many thinkers in scientific circles who call for an unbiased scientific discussion of vaccine safety, especially in some more vulnerable subgroups.

Are COVID-19 vaccines safe for pregnant women?

There are several studies who tried to evaluate exactly this question. While there is some adequate data for vaccine safety in the second and third trimester, it gets more complicated in the first trimester of pregnancy, which is exactly the most critical phase.

One study assessing the safety of the vaccine during pregnancy concluded that the abortion rate of women vaccinated in the first trimester would be 12.6% and the published rate for the normal population 10-26%. Looking at this data, they concluded the vaccine was totally safe, even in the first trimester of pregnancy.((The results are in table 4 of this study:
Shimabukuro TT, Kim SY, Myers TR, et al. Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(24):2273-2282. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2104983
Find the data of the uncorrected chart in this note:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMx210016))

A reader of the journal found some faults with that and commented the following:

In table 4, the authors report a rate of spontaneous abortions <20 weeks of 12.5% (104 abortions/827 completed pregnancies). However, this rate should be based on the number of women who were at risk of a spontaneous abortion due to vaccine receipt and should exclude the 700 women who were vaccinated in their third-trimester (104/127 = 82%). We acknowledge this rate will likely decrease as the pregnancies of women who were vaccinated <20 weeks complete, but believe the rate will be higher than 12.5%. However, given the importance of these findings we feel it important to report these rates accurately. Additionally, the authors indicate that the rate of spontaneous abortions in the published literature is between 10% and 26%. However, the upper cited rate includes clinically-unrecognized pregnancies, which does not reflect the clinically-recognized pregnancies of this cohort and should be removed.

Let us analyze this comment a bit closer. The study came up with a 12.5% risk of abortion by dividing the 104 abortions in the first trimester with 827 completed pregnancies. Just the completed pregnancies included women that were vaccinated in the second and third trimester. This is obviously not statistically correct. Like the reader pointed out, only 127 women that were vaccinated in the first trimester completed the pregnancy, since the rest was still pregnant and their outcome was still unknown. The reader concluded that the real rate would be somewhat higher than 12.5%, but definitely below the 82% she was mentioning in this note.

Now the manipulation of the reference values is critical. The study mentioned a first trimester abortion rate of 10% to 26% in the normal population. Just the 26% rate is including clinically unrecognized pregnancies, who aborted without the pregnant women ever realizing that they were pregnant. Obviously, the vaccinated women in the study knew that they were pregnant in order to be included into the study. The correct rate to be applied would be therefore 10%, thus showing an increased risk of abortion even with the statistically wrong calculation of 12.5% risk. That smells very much like deliberate manipulation! This note was sent to the journal but was not getting published.

The story continues. The anti-vaccination defender Steve Kirsch got news about this letter and published in his article that the study has proven an 82% abortion rate within the first trimester.((Steve Kirsch. Should you get vaccinated? Trialsitenews, December 15, 2021)) This is obviously not what the reader said and equally wrong. It is sad to see that distortion of the facts are applied by both parties alike. I wonder when we can come to the point of defending the truth instead of bending it for political reasons, in order to make our viewpoint look better.

The critique had though some effect. Finally, the paper published a correction of the study and removed any definite statistics about first trimester pregnancies. It took them though from June till September to publish this correction, and probably only to avoid the criticism received by the opposition. Interestingly, until today I am not aware of any study that really settles vaccine safety during the first trimester of pregnancy.

Shall I get vaccinated after all?

This is a very individual question that nobody can answer for somebody else. We have seen that there are risks at both sides. You may be inclined to recommend a vaccine to a person in the at-risk group, like the elderly, diabetics, obese, immunocompromised etc. At the other hand, this is exactly the same group that will be more vulnerable for vaccine side effects. I would be very hesitant to recommend a vaccine to a 98-year-old grandma, being diabetic and so weak that she spends most of time in her bed. She may not be able to resist the side effects of the vaccination, and it may be safer to simply protect her from exposure to the virus.

Lets look at another criteria to help in this decision, which is probability of exposure. If you a salesperson that sees so many persons every day, and you do not take good care of your lifestyle in order to strengthen your immunity, then vaccination could be of interest for you. If you are living on a farm, way out in the country, you visit town only once a week and you take good care of your immunity, then you may get by very well without vaccination.

We already said that if you were infected from COVID-19 you already created sufficient immunity and you can safely go without vaccine. As a fact, getting vaccinated within 1-2 month after being infected, can even increase your risk for vaccine side effects. If you want to get vaccinated, you should definitely wait if you got infected recently.

Vaccination of mostly healthy children is something that probably will bring more harm than benefits as well. Some do argue, that children should be vaccinated in order to protect adults, but we have shown already, that protection from infection is not very effective, even with booster shots every 6 months. Nobody protects somebody else by getting vaccinated. Hospitalization and deaths from the virus are quite rare amongst healthy children, and there is no need to expose them to the vaccine.

Booster shots are another thing that is probably causing more harm than benefit. Even without a booster shot, you have adequate protection against hospitalization and death, and every booster is going to expose you anew to a load of spike protein, causing potential damage to your body.

At the end of the day, you should be well informed about the pros and cons and make an informed decision for yourself. Those who are vaccinated do not need to be afraid of the unvaccinated, because the vaccine is protecting yourself, and not the other person. We have clearly stated that a vaccine does not adequately limit the spread of the virus. And whoever is refusing vaccination, should be sure about his decision and not criticizing those who think differently. I hope the day of throwing stones can come to an end and we can simply live out the convictions we have about the subject. And hopefully, one day we can start a constructive discussion of risks and benefits of the vaccine.

What else can I do to be protected?

As a preventive measure, all efforts should be made to strengthen your immune system. A study conducted in Madrid, found that people who did at least 2 times per week a 30-minute exercise session had an 8 times higher COVID-19 survival rate compared to the inactive group.((Salgado-Aranda R et.al. Influence of Baseline Physical Activity as a Modifying Factor on COVID-19 Mortality: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study. Infect Dis Ther (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00418-6))

Nutrition has an equal importance. A study of healthcare workers in 6 countries found, that those who were on a plant-based diet had a 3.7 times better protection against moderate to severe COVID-19 infections. Interestingly, those who were on a low carb diet had a 1.5 times higher risk.(( Kim H, et. al. Plant-based diets, pescatarian diets and COVID-19 severity: a population-based case-control study in six countries. BMJ Nutr Prev Health. 2021 Jun 7;4(1):257-266. doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2021-000272.))

Even though there are no studies around in relation to COVID-19, there are benefits of good sleep, proper hydration and other healthy habits as well. We know quite a bit of the importance of proper Vitamin D levels for immunity. A study showed that vitamin D deficient individuals had twice as much a risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 compared to normal levels.(( E Merzon et.al. Low plasma 25(OH) vitamin D level is associated with increased risk of COVID-19 infection: an Israeli population-based study. FEBS J. 2020 Sep;287(17):3693-3702. DOI: 10.1111/febs.15495))

If you just practice those 3 lifestyle factors, your immunity is already better than any vaccine can offer for you. And we did not talk yet about reduction of sugar, proper vitamin status and several other things we are able to do as a preventive measure.

I think it is time to think seriously about our lifestyle. If we do the right thing, we are not only so much better protected against COVID-19, but as well against heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other lifestyle diseases that cost many more lives than COVID-19 at this point in time. If you want to learn how to strengthen your immunity with a sensible lifestyle, follow the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge on our website. So stop arguing, and decide to do the right thing!

We have a special opportunity just for you. If you want to receive practical and up to date advice on how to implement an immunity-boosting lifestyle, simply join the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge and prepare yourself to face the pandemic with a bullet-proof immune system.

Sign Up Now

Coronavirus Immunity Challenge

On December 2 the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency of the United Kingdom gave temporary authorization for the application of the Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine. Between 8 and 15 of December the first dose of the vaccine was applied to 137,897 people in the country.((Covid vaccine: More than 130,000 vaccinated in UK in first week. BBC News, December 16, 2020)) The United States followed soon after, approving the Pfizer vaccine on December 11 and the Moderna vaccine on December 18. In the meantime, 14 different vaccines were approved in a number of different countries.

The rapid pace of the development of those vaccines has made a number of critiques to raise their voices and speak up. Some are vehemently against any vaccination, others are very concerned about the speed of the approval process, and some have even assumed that the vaccines would be able to permanently modify the DNA of the human body. The discussion is very emotional on both sides.

There are some concerns that are for real. But how can we separate the fads from facts? And not all vaccines are made alike. In order to understand what is happening, we need to understand a bit deeper, how vaccines were made traditionally and which new technologies were applied for the COVID-19 vaccines.

Different Vaccine Approaches

Inactivated Vaccines

This approach is multiplying the virus on a cell culture and killing it afterwards with heat, radiation or chemicals. The entire dead virus or fractions of it are then injected into the human body in order to be presented to the immune system, which is able to create antibodies against the virus. Since the dead virus does not replicate and exposure is therefore limited, more than one dose is needed to create the desired effect. The efficiency of the vaccine often decreases over time, and a repeated vaccination may be necessary every few years. This category of vaccines is though the safest option available in relation to side effects, and is used for many years for Hepatitis, polio, influenza and rabies vaccines among others.

Inactivated vaccines for coronavirus are developed in India under the brand name Covaxin. In Brazil, Turkey and Indonesia CoronaVac was tested and approved. An alum adjuvant is supposed to increase the immune response in this candidate. The efficacy of 50,38% is not the best, but even those who get infected are normally not needing hospitalization. In China was developed the BBIBP-CorV vaccine, and with an efficacy of 80% it is the most effective candidate in this category that far. Another vaccine candidate in this category is being developed in Wuhan, China, which was named WIBP-CorV. In Russia the vaccine CoviVac was developed.((COVID-19 vaccine tracker on raps.org)) Since this technology is used for many years in the development of vaccines, it can be potentially just as safe as any other vaccine in use today. We will see later why they are still not as save as your flu shot.

mRNA Vaccines

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were the first two vaccine candidates being approved in the US, and both are in the category of mRNA vaccines. What does that mean?

A virus normally uses spike proteins on their surface to dock onto a human cell and release a messenger RNA sequence into the cell. This mRNA sequence hijacks the human cell and gives instructions to replicate the virus and multiply itself. This process is repeating itself until the immune system starts to recognize the virus and can do an efficient combat. If that process takes too long, the virus can make you pretty sick until the immune system is finally strong enough to win the battle.

In case of the mRNA vaccine, it is mimicking the replication mechanism of a virus in order to produce a part of the virus that the immune system is supposed to recognize. An RNA sequence is synthesized in the laboratory that instructs the human cell to produce just the spike proteins of the virus, which are released into the bloodstream. The immune system is that way exposed to the spike proteins and can therefore create antibodies against the virus.

In order to prevent the immune system from attacking the mRNA before entering the cell, it is encapsulated into a fat membrane, similar to a cell membrane. This allows also for a merging with the cell membrane that will release the mRNA substance directly into the cell. The difference to a real virus is that the resulting proteins are not capable to replicate themselves.

According to preliminary test results, the Pfizer vaccination showed a 90% effectivity to prevent from infection compared to placebo, while the Moderna vaccine showed 94.5% effectivity.((Moderna vs. Pfizer COVID 19 Vaccine. Medcram Episode 117)) Compared to the flu vaccines that were never reaching more than a 50% effective rate, this is pretty promising. But there is not enough statistical data available to determine how efficient the vaccine works in elderly people or other vulnerable groups.

The phase III studies of those two vaccines did do a COVID-19 test only on the candidates that developed symptoms. It remains unclear, whether those who are vaccinated are only symptom-free and contribute to an asymptomatic infection of the virus. “In the worst-case scenario, you have people walking around feeling fine, but shedding virus everywhere,” says virologist Stephen Griffin at the University of Leeds, UK.((The UK has approved a COVID vaccine — here’s what scientists now want to know. Nature, December 3, 2020))

The advantage of this technology is that the vaccine can be produced on a large scale within the laboratory, while conventional vaccines depend on the reproduction of the virus in cell culture, which can be a little bit more time-consuming. The problem is just that this technology is for the first time being applied in human vaccines, and similar to genetically modified foods, the potential long-term side effects of this new technology are still not known. According to the Phase III trials those vaccines are supposed to be safe, but follow-up data is available only for a few weeks of the study period. So we know very little about potential long-term complications related to that technology. We know though that the genetic code of the mRNA for producing the spike protein needs to undergo several alterations in order to work efficiently, and the side effects of all those alterations are not fully known yet.((Seneff S, Nigh G. Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research Vol.2 No.1(2021)))

Under normal circumstances, a RNA structure does not influence in any way the human DNA, and will not cause any genetic modifications of your body. However, in the presence of retroviruses like the HIV virus, it could happen that a RNA structure of the vaccine gets transcribed into the DNA of a cell. But even if this happens, the infected cell would be modified to produce spike proteins, but would not replicate to alter the DNA of other cells. A contamination of the human DNA from mRNA vaccines is though highly unlikely.

One problem arises with the fact that the mRNA structure needs to be packed into liponanoparticles. They are associated with a number of allergic reactions. A study in mice found also strong inflammatory responses from those nanoparticles.((Ndeupen S. et.al. The mRNA-LNP platform’s lipid nanoparticle component used in preclinical vaccine studies is highly inflammatory. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.04.430128))

This problem came up after the Pfizer vaccine was released to the public. Within the first 2 weeks of vaccination, there were already 8 cases of anaphylactic shock reported. Suspicion arises, that the chemical compound polyethylene glycol may be the culprit. This substance is part of the Pfizer as well as the Moderna vaccine, and has never been applied in a vaccine before.((Jop de Vrieze. Suspicions grow that nanoparticles in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trigger rare allergic reactions. Science Magazine, December 21, 2020
COVID-19 Vaccines for People with Allergies. CDC, Updated Mar. 25, 2021)) A study found the rate of anaphylactic reactions to be at 2.47 cases per 10,000 vaccinations applied, and equally distributed between the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. They also found that 2.1% of the subjects reported acute allergic reactions.((Blumenthal KG, Robinson LB, Camargo CA, et al. Acute Allergic Reactions to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines. JAMA. 2021;325(15):1562–1565. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.3976))

Another challenge is the distribution of the vaccine. The Pfizer vaccine needs to be stored at -70°C, which is -94°F. After being thawed, it needs to be used in a short time, because it is not very stable at room temperature. The Moderna vaccine is a bit easier at this point, allowing storage at 25°F (-4°C) for a month.((Moderna vs. Pfizer COVID 19 Vaccine. Medcram Episode 117))

Recombinant Viral Vector Vaccines

In this technology, a virus, normally being an adenosine virus causing the common cold, is being genetically modified in order to lose the ability to replicate inside of humans. Instead of the replication genes, a modified DNA structure is inserted. The modified virus is still capable to attack a human cell and deliver its own DNA structure inside the nucleus of the cell. Similar to the mRNA vaccines, the modified DNA is submitting Messenger RNA structures to the cytoplasm of the cell with instructions to produce the spike proteins of the coronavirus. This again triggers the desired immune system response, so that antibodies are formed and are able to protect from future infections.

The AZD1222 vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca is the best-known candidate of this vaccine. It is based on a modified chimpanzee adenosine virus, that is shuttling the DNA into the host cell. Here a video explaining the mechanism of the vaccine in detail:

According to the developers, the DNA is modified only on the few infected cells, that are used to replicate the virus, and it will not alter the human genome. But it obviously makes use of genetically modified viruses, and a technology that was never tested on a wide scale on humans. And some scientist do not exclude the potential risk of introducing exogenous DNA in the human genome by this technology.((C Zhang. et.al. Advances in mRNA Vaccines for Infectious Diseases. Front. Immunol., 27 March 2019 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2019.00594))

Another problem could arise from the response of the immune system to the vector virus itself. If the immune system starts to attack the vector virus, it will be impaired to deliver its message to the host cells. Using the same vector in both vaccine doses could limit immune response to a certain degree, and in case that the immune system was exposed to the adenosine virus strain before, it could neutralize the efficiency of the vaccine. Using a vector virus that had limited exposure to humans avoids this problem, but brings also unforeseeable risks. And exposure to viruses vary greatly between countries, which means that efficiency could vary greatly between countries.

The vaccine was in the news since the clinical trials were put on hold two times after two participants were facing neurological adverse effects during the trial, something that showed up later on in real world application as well.((AstraZeneca’s quick Covid-19 vaccine trial restart splits experts. Clinical Trials. October 12, 2020)) The vaccine is know for its side effects. Some adverse side effects like pain, tenderness, fatigue, fever and headaches were reported by participants for about 60% for each of those symptoms on the day after the vaccine, although most of the symptoms subsided after a 7 day period.((Pedro M. Folegati et. al. Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: a preliminary report of a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, Volume 396, ISSUE 10249, P467-478, August 15, 2020)) Critiques mention that the placebo group received a meningitis vaccine, which is known for its adverse side effects, and even so the adverse reactions of the AZD1222 vaccine were quite higher.((Heated Vaccine Debate – Kennedy Jr. vs Dershowitz. Youtube, July 23, 2020)) In some study sites, antiinflammatory medications were applied together with the vaccine, which did not happen in real world applications of the vaccine.

More concerns were arising recently after it was discovered that the vaccine can cause in some cases blood clots and low platelet count within a 2 week period after vaccination. Denmark decided as a result to stop the administration of the vaccine, since they observer about 1 incidence in 40.000 persons vaccinated. Soon after Germany, Italy, France, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Latvia and The Netherlands followed with at least temporary suspension, among others.((Which countries have stopped using AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine? Aljazeera, 15 Mar 2021
AstraZeneca vaccine: Denmark stops rollout completely. BBC News, April 14, 2021)) A German Scientist was able to pinpoint the mechanism how those blood clots are formed. He discovered that the adenovirus vector can cause a reaction of the platelets, which in turn can trigger a chain reaction that brings the entire immune system out of control, very similar to an autoimmune disease. He concluded that this reaction most likely applies to other viral vector vaccines as well.((Scientists Find How AstraZeneca Vaccine Causes Clots. WebMD, April 22, 2021))

Based on the negotiations with the Oxford University, the vaccine producer AstraZeneca promised to forgo initial profits in order to provide the vaccine at a near cost price. And since the vaccine does not require expensive refrigeration, it is likely to get popular in third world countries.

Another candidate in this category is the Sputnik V vaccine developed by Russia. It supposedly delivers a 91% efficiency rate due to the fact that a different adenosine virus is applied at each of the two doses as the vector virus. The vaccine has its own scandals. President Vladimir Putin has issued emergency authorization in August, when it had been tested only on a dozen of people. Vaccination was made available to the public for free, before the phase III trials were completed. But the public reacted with skepticism, and some vaccination sites had to throw away doses after defrosting, since not sufficient volunteers showed up for vaccination. And technical problems are making the production schedule lagging behind.((Coronavirus: Sputnik V vaccine rushed out to wary Russians. BBC News, December 8, 2020))

Meanwhile, the official site of Sputnik V is trying hard to sell the safety of their technology.((Adenoviral vaccines. Sputnik V website)) They claim that adenovirus-based drugs are widely used for more than 50 years, just this does not apply to the use of the adenovirus as a viral vector with all the genetic manipulation involved. The first experiments with DNA vaccines were not made until 1989.((The True Story of How mRNA Vaccination was Invented. R. W. Mallone)) They list a number of 254 clinical trials authorized in the US that were performed with adenovirus viral vectors. The first one was done in 1993, trying to treat cystic fibrosis, a rare respiratory disease caused by defective genes. No outcome is reported in the database, leading to the assumption that it was not completed successfully. The first larger study was done in 2004, where 1500 participants received a HIV vaccine to be tested. They cite also a cancer drug using this technology, which was used in China since 2004 in more than 30,000 patients. This was the very first time for this technology being applied on a larger scale, even though it was not in a vaccine setting.

The Sputnik V vaccine was rejected by the Brazilian authorities, since there exists a possibility that the messenger adenovirus starts to replicate inside the body and the vaccine causing an infection inside the body.((URGENTE: Anvisa reprova importação e aplicação da Sputnik V. Terra Brasil Notícias, 26 de Abril 2021)) Furthermore they identified flaws in the production process, in the conducted studies and even the final product. The European Union found also several documentary problems in their study and production process and rejected so far the approval of the vaccine.((Rose M. et.al. EXCLUSIVE European efforts to assess Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine stymied by data gaps. Reuters. July 14, 2021.))

Another vaccine candidate called EpiVacCorona was also authorized by Putin, without having yet entered Phase III trials. This shows how national pride is often a motive to override concerns for safety, and that not only in Russia. There is little data about this vaccine available so far, but it seems to be based on synthetically produced protein structures. But even being authorized, it will still take a while until being publicly available. Technically speaking, the production of synthetical proteins can be tricky, so the Russians may end up with two candidates falling behind in the production schedule.

A third candidate of a viral vector vaccine is developed by Johnson & Johnson which concluded in the meantime Phase III trials. The company had developed already an Ebola vaccine using the same technology. A safety trial in 2015 was temporarily suspended after two serious neurological adverse events were reported, one of which was considered as possibly related to vaccination.((Andrew J Pollard. et.al. Safety and immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in adults in Europe (EBOVAC2): a randomized, observer-blind, participant-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. The Lancet, November 17 2020)) The Astrazeneca trials were obviously not the first time that those complications arouse with viral vector vaccines. In 2019 they finally launched the Phase III trial, where they planned to enroll 500,000 candidates, but were able to vaccinate only about 60,000 candidates that far. In July 2020 they finally got an emergency authorization from the EU to market the ebola vaccine.((Johnson & Johnson Announces European Commission Approval for Janssen’s Preventive Ebola Vaccine, 1 July 2020))

On April 13 the US paused the application of their COVID-19 vaccine, after 6 cases of blood clots in the brain were reported just few days after applying the vaccine. All six cases occurred among women aged 18–48 years. In this age group it seems to appear at a rate of about 7 cases per 1 million vaccines applied.((Cases of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia after Receipt of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine. CDC, April 13, 2021
CDC Recommends Use of Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine Resume. CDC, April 25, 2021)) The EU and South Africa followed the US in pausing the program, while Denmark decided to stop its use altogether. They said that its risks do not outweigh its benefits, declaring therefore that there are safer vaccine candidates available.((Johnson & Johnson vaccine paused over rare blood clots. BBC News, April 13,2021
Denmark ditches J&J COVID-19 shots from vaccination programme. Reuters, May 3, 2021))

There seems to be a common thread among viral vector vaccines, with all of them sharing similar side effects. Cases of anaphylactic shock were also reported in a similar rate like in the mRNA vaccines. There is also the potential for the viral vector to mutate inside the human body and become infectious. This is something that happened with other viral vector vaccines in the past.((Stöhr K. Impfstoffe gegen COVID-19 – Stand März 2021)) Another concern is the use of genetically modified human cells to replicate the virus of the vaccine, which obviously cannot replicate on its own. This creates the potential of human DNA contamination as well as other possible contaminants.((Seneff S, Nigh G. Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research Vol.2 No.1(2021)))Considering all the facts, viral vectors seems to be the most complicated and questionable technologies applied amongst the COVID-19 vaccines.

Vaccine Critiques

Initial data suggested, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines can give at least 90% protection against the virus. But we do not have enough statistical data to tell whether the protection is that good for elderly people, black and hispanic ethnicities who are disproportionally affected by the pandemic, as well as people with diabetes and other lifestyle diseases. That means, for the groups that are most vulnerable, we have not sufficient statistical data for vaccine efficacy available. Also we do not know how long this immunity will last, since we just started to apply them. A study from Israel suggests that protection for infection is reduced to 75% after 3 months and it dwindled to 16% after 6 months. However, it still showed a 91% efficacy to protect serious illness.((Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022)) Similar data comes from Quatar where efficacy was at 80% after one month of vaccination and dropped to 20% after six months. Protection against severe illness was again around 90%((Craig E. Pfizer’s Covid vaccine efficacy against infection plunges to just 20% after six months – but protection against severe illness barely dips, study concludes. Daily Mail, October 6, 2020)) Seems that antibody protection is waning over time, while beta cells are giving a more long lasting immune protection. That means that serious illness is still prevented by beta cells, but infection is possible due to waning antibodies. In clear language, a vaccine can prevent you from becoming seriously ill, but after some time does not prevent you from getting a light infection or spreading the disease. Pfizer has declared that efficacy of the vaccine is already reduced after 6 months and a booster shot will be needed.((Pfizer says it’s time for a Covid booster; FDA and CDC say not so fast. CNN, July 9, 2021))

Another concern is that most vaccines are exposing the immune system to only the spike proteins of the virus. If the virus mutates, it could change the shape of the spike protein and render most of the vaccines ineffective.

At the beginning, scientists were confident that mutations would not be significant enough to cause any problem. In the meantime, two-third of epidemiologist believe that our current vaccines will be rendered ineffective within a year or less.((Two-thirds of epidemiologists warn mutations could render current COVID vaccines ineffective in a year or less. Oxfam International. March 30, 2021)) It was shown already that the Astrazeneca vaccine has limited efficacy against the South African mutation of the virus, and the country has stopped applying this vaccine.((Jonathan Smith. Can Covid-19 Vaccines Keep up with an Evolving Virus? Labiotech.eu 11/02/2021)) A study in Israel suggests that the Pfizer vaccine is less effective against the South African Strand as well.((Kustin T et.al. Evidence for increased breakthrough rates of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in BNT162b2 mRNA vaccinated individuals. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.06.21254882)) And other vaccines also showed a reduced efficacy.((Will SARS Cov-2 Become Resistant to Current Vaccines – Implications | Penny Moore, PhD, YouTube, March 9, 2021))

In the meantime the Delta variant is spreading, and being the dominant strain in Israel, it reduced the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine to 39%, while serious illness was still prevented by 91%.((Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022)) We do not know though how much of this is due to limited efficacy of the vaccine, and how much due to the waning efficacy over time. Things seems to be worse in the UK where the AstraZeneca vaccine is more prevalent. An analysis of the data in the UK suggests that the effectiveness to protect against death during the spread of the Delta variant was reduced to 68.1%, which is quite lower than other statistics claim.((Jones W. Why is the ONS Claiming Just 1% of Covid Deaths Are in the Vaccinated When PHE Data Shows the True Figure For August was 70%? The Daily Sceptic, 14 September 2021)) Considering that the Delta variant is spreading around the world, we can already predict that the vaccine alone will not be sufficient to suppress the next wave of the coronavirus.

And we have not seen such a virus yet under selective pressure. When vaccinations are applied on a larger scale, if any significant mutations occur, the ones that are resistant to vaccines and going to spread.((The UK has approved a COVID vaccine — here’s what scientists now want to know. Nature, December 3, 2020)) The French firm Osivax as well as a few other companies are exploring vaccine candidates that will target more than just the spike proteins.((Jonathan Smith. Can Covid-19 Vaccines Keep up with an Evolving Virus? Labiotech.eu 11/02/2021)) All vaccines based on an inactivated virus as a whole will be quite a bit more reliable in this aspect as well.

When a virus is mutating, chances increase that antibody-dependent disease enhancement is taking place, where antibodies are wrongly attached to the virus, and are even enhancing the infection. This far this phenomenon was not observed with SARS-Cov2, but it was observed in several studies with the SARS-Cov virus.((Wikipedia: COVID-19 vaccine
Iwasaki A, Yang Y (21 April 2020). “The potential danger of suboptimal antibody responses in COVID-19”. Nature Reviews Immunology. 20 (6): 339–41. doi:10.1038/s41577-020-0321-6
W S Lee et. al. Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies. Nature Microbiology volume 5, pages1185–1191(2020) DOI: 10.1038/s41564-020-00789-5
Eroshenko, N., Gill, T., Keaveney, M.K. et al. Implications of antibody-dependent enhancement of infection for SARS-CoV-2 countermeasures. Nat Biotechnol 38, 789–791 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0577-1)) This reaction may be more common in elderly people and other classes with an impaired immune system response. Future mutations of the virus could make all vaccinated persons more vulnerable for this phenomenon, especially if booster shots are involved.

The Danish Scientist Geert Vanden Bossche even theorized that our vaccines are not the right tool to use in the midst of a pandemic. He thinks that the suboptimal immune response after the first dose of the vaccine gives the virus the perfect breeding ground to form mutations while feeling the pressure of the vaccine, but still having enough possibility to replicate. He concludes that similar to bacteria that are antibiotic-resistant, the virus will form mutations that are vaccine resistant as well. He wrote an open letter to the WHO to have a scientific debate about the implications of mass vaccination during the pandemic.((https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/)) Critiques admit that in theory such a reaction is possible, but in practice our vaccines supposedly show a strong enough immune response already after the first dose.((Jarry J. The Doomsday Prophecy of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, McGill University, 24 Mar 2021)) They also argue that by reducing the number of infected people, which most governments try to achieve with vaccines, you will reduce the number of mutations. While the truth probably lies in the middle, it shows the need of an open scientific discussion about the global impact of vaccination programs.

Liability Questions

One big question will be the long-term safety of those vaccines. Phase III trials normally take several years, but were short-tracked to a few months. The technologies used for most of the vaccines are fairly new and we do not have much safety data except those short trials. Time will tell how safe they are in relation to long term adverse events as a result to the vaccines. And none of the vaccine manufacturer is willing to take the liability for that.

In the US the liability question was already clearly settled in favor of the producers. A swine flu in 1976 caused some fear that a pandemic similar to the 1918 flu would repeat itself and caused the CDC to issue the development of a nationwide emergency vaccination. Producers agreed to make the vaccine with the condition to be freed from liability. The vaccine was produced and administered within record time to 45 million Americans, but for some unexplainable reasons, the virus did not reappear the following winter. However, about 1 in 100,000 of the vaccinated population developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, and the State had to take care of liability compensation for those cases.((Liability for the Production and Sale of Vaccines. in Vaccine Supply and Innovation)) Due to increased pressure from the industry, since October 1988 all vaccine manufacturers are exempt from liability for any vaccine applied in the US. And during this recent crisis, in order to give an incentive, the Secretary of Health and Human Services has given a blanket immunity to all activities related to combatting the COVID-19 virus.((Legal Immunity: A Reward for Innovators Combatting COVID-19. JDSUPRA March 18, 2020
COVID-19 and PREP Act Immunity. The National Law Review. Volume X, Number 358.))

During the cold war, the vaccine department of the FDA included military officials in order to facilitate emergency preparation for biological weapons, and until today officials report in uniform. In this context, procedures for emergency authorization of vaccines were approved. Critiques mention also that the regulating authorities in the US are widely undermined by the vaccine production lobby, and that independent studies from universities showing the real side effects of vaccinations are deliberately suppressed. In this context of widespread distrust, it is no wonder that the anti-vaccine movement gained force especially within the United States.((Heated Vaccine Debate – Kennedy Jr. vs Dershowitz, Youtube, Jul 23, 2020))

Other countries have more stringent liability laws in relation to vaccines, but in the case of COVID-19 vaccines, no producer is willing to assume liabilities, and no-liability clauses are included in the contracts that are signed with governments. There are now debates going on, how recompensation should be managed for those who develop adverse events as result to the vaccine, especially in poorer countries that are unable to offer such recompensation.((Sam Halabi et.al. No-Fault Compensation for Vaccine Injury — The Other Side of Equitable Access to Covid-19 Vaccines. N Engl J Med 2020; 383:e125))

Safety Concerns

Those new technologies are a real concern. We have Genetically Modified Foods in use since 1994, and until today there are still studies being done on what kind of side effects this technology is causing on our health. If mankind is trying to improve the plants that God has created perfectly, something is always getting out of balance. Now humanity is going a step further and produces genetically modified viruses to be injected into our bloodstream. If that is going to be a blessing or a curse is still going to be seen. Certainly, we can expect a number of allergic reactions to occur, similar to the ones we see with genetically modified foods. What else they will bring, nobody is able to tell so far. For me, the inactivated vaccine candidates seem to be quite a bit more prudent.

Another problem consists that all studies are done on healthy people and carefully exclude people who show allergic reactions or other adverse health conditions. We have therefore no safety data on how vulnerable people groups react to the vaccine. The anaphylactic shocks happening after the application of the Pfizer vaccines appeared just after wider application, since vulnerable groups were excluded in the trials. An Israeli study found an incidence of 1.2% of cases of shingles appearing in a rheumatic study group after the application of the Pfizer vaccine.((Furer V et.al. Herpes zoster following BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a case series. Rheumatology, keab345, https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keab345)) And we have seen more frequently frail and elderly people dying as a response to the vaccine, so those risks should be carefully considered. Side effects that healthy people handle with ease, like fever, nausea and diarrhea can be contributing to a fatal outcome in frail patients.((Norway investigates 23 deaths in frail elderly patients after vaccination. BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n149))

It is interesting to note that in the Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System there are normally reported around 150 deaths per year for all 70 registered vaccines combined. Now for the COVID-19 vaccines we have already close to 6,000 deaths reported in the system, while about half of the American population was getting vaccinated.((Original VAERS dataset: https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/saved/D8/D173F192)) According to data of May 2021 this translates to 3.4 deaths for every 100,000 vaccinations applied,((Rose J. A Report on the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) of the COVID-19 Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Biologicals. Science, Public Health Policy, and The Law Volume 2:59–80 May, 2021)) and the number was probably rising slightly in the meantime. There is no proof that all those cases were necessarily caused by the vaccine, but with about 80% of all adverse effects reported happening within the first 24 hours, the likelihood that they are caused by the vaccine is pretty high. And it is also a known fact that not all adverse effects are getting reported, and some people estimate that the real numbers could be five times higher. Exact numbers we probably will never know, but we can affirm that the COVID-19 vaccines are not as save as your common flu shot.

Because of the known limitations of the Adverse Effect Reporting System, the government has developed an app that allows an easy channel for vaccinated candidates to self report adverse events in a convenient fashion. The resulting data is stored in the V-Safe database. Just this data is not publicly available. Only a select group of the CDC and a few authorized researchers have access to this data. If you have an adverse event after taking the vaccine, you should definitely report it to the VAERS system as well under this link:
https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

Robert Malone is a scientist that was involved in the development of the mRNA technology. He made on a LinkedIn post the following statement about the current COVID-19 vaccines:

Once again I feel it necessary to make a clear and unambiguous statement. The data strongly indicate that the experimental genetic vaccines, including the mRNA and recombinant adenoviral vaccines, have saved lives. Many lives.

But it is also increasingly clear that there are some risks associated with these vaccines. Various governments have attempted to deny that this is the case. But they are wrong. Vaccination-associated coagulation is a risk. Cardiotoxicity is a risk. Those are proven, and discussed in official USG communications, as well as communications from a variety of other governments.

Based on what I have seen, I believe that other toxicity risks will become more apparent. These include menstrual irregularities, development of thrombocytopenia, cerebrovascular effects, and reactivation of latent viruses such as clinical shingles.

But we do not know how prevalent these are, and the spectrum of severity is unknown and possibly unknowable because the V-Safe database is not being shared outside of CDC, the VAERS systems is deeply flawed, and we just do not have the comprehensive safety data necessary to accurately evaluate risk/benefit for the various cohorts – elderly, healthy normal adults, immunocompromised, pregnancy, adolescents, children, and infants. Particularly the long term safety data necessary to evaluate risks such as autoimmune complications that may manifest months or years post-vaccination. That is just a sciencefact.((LinkedIn Post, https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6812703149678243841/))

Robert Malone

According to Robert Malone, the main problem consists in the large quantity of spike proteins circulating in the body after the vaccine. A study has shown that the spike protein of the virus causes cell damage, independently of the action of the virus itself to attack cells to replicate.((Lei Y et.al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circulation Research. 2021;128:1323–1326 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902)) Another study showed that spike proteins are able to influence cell signalling and could lead to PAH, a serious lung disease, blood clotting, coronary artery disease, hypertension and stroke.((Suzuki Y et. al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Elicits Cell Signaling in Human Host Cells: Implications for Possible Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccines. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jan; 9(1): 36. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9010036)) The spike protein can also damage the blood brain barrier and cause unpredictable brain damage, that shows up in several symptoms for the disease and the vaccine alike.((Buzhdygan TP et.al. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood-brain barrier. Neurobiol Dis. 2020 Dec;146:105131. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2020.105131)) The mRNA and viral vector vaccines are inundating the body with a considerate amount of spike proteins, that seem to be causing in some susceptible people symptoms that are varied in nature and in some ways similar to the disease itself. It is interesting to note that 1/4 of the regular dose of the Moderna vaccine showed a sufficient immune response, indicating the the applied doses may be higher than necessary.((Mateus J et.al. Low dose mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine generates durable T cell memory and antibodies enhanced by pre-existing crossreactive T cell memory. doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.30.21259787))

A study analyzed the adverse effects recorded within the European Union. They found out that in Poland there were only 16 adverse events recorded for every 100,000 vaccines applied, while in Netherlands this number reached 706 events. They concluded that this extreme difference is due to different reporting standards. They also calculated that according to the the Dutch reporting data there were registered 4,15 deaths and 16,7 severe side effects for 100,000 vaccines applied. Comparing this data with some Israeli vaccination studies, they concluded that we are probably causing 2 deaths from the vaccine to avoid 3 deaths from COVID-19 infections.((Walach H. et. al. The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy. Vaccines, 2020, 9(7) 693. DOI:10.3390/vaccines9070693))

The study caused quite a bit of turmoil, being attacked from many sides. The journal finally decided to retract the paper.((Retraction: Walach et al. The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy. Vaccines 2021, 9, 693. Vaccines2021, 9(7), 729; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9070729)) The main reason mentioned was, that it is not proven that all events recorded in the system were really caused by the vaccine. This is true and we have mentioned this already for the VAERS database. On the other hand, we cannot safely say, how much of under-reporting was happening, which means we are pretty much in the blind to confirm whether things are better or worse than depicted in this study.

We should fairly say that the number of saved lives from vaccinations is also proportional to the degree that a certain country is being hit by the pandemic. If we calculate the number of saved lives for Peru for example, the vaccine will show more benefit than in Israel, that had ten times less deaths during the entire pandemic. Even so there are many variables defining the benefit/risk ratio, we need to discuss more openly the question on how to protect vulnerable groups from possible vaccine side effects.

Analyzing the available data of the VAERS database, it can be seen that adverse effects of the immune system are the most common ones observed.((Rose J. A Report on the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) of the COVID-19 Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Biologicals. Science, Public Health Policy, and The Law Volume 2:59–80
May, 2021)) That raises concerns about the safety of the vaccines for people with compromised immunity, and we can expect to see autoimmune diseases to be on the rise. This can be possibly caused by the spike protein, from the disease or the vaccine alike.((Seneff S, Nigh G. Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research Vol.2 No.1(2021))) Even the CDC admits that we have not sufficient safety data of COVID-19 vaccines for people with autoimmune conditions.((Vaccine Considerations for People with Underlying Medical Conditions. CDC, Updated Apr. 23, 2021)) And an article from 2018 makes the following statement about mRNA vaccines:

A possible concern could be that some mRNA-based vaccine platforms induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity. Thus, identification of individuals at an increased risk of autoimmune reactions before mRNA vaccination may allow reasonable precautions to be taken.((Pardi N. et.al. mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology. Nat Rev Drug Discov 17, 261–279 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd.2017.243))

In Israel was established that the Pfizer vaccine caused a risk of myocarditis in young men that was up to 25 times higher than normal.((Israel reports link between rare cases of heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccination in young men. Science, Jun. 1, 2021)) Recently a study from the University of Ottawa Heart Institute found out that in an average 1 in 1000 vaccinated persons in all age groups developed myocarditis.((Kafil T. mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Development of CMR-confirmed Myopericarditis. doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182)) There are also questions about safety of the vaccine during pregnancy, especially during the first trimester.((A study concluded that the abortion rate in the first trimester would be 12.6% and the normal published rate 10-26%. The results are in table 4 of this study:
Shimabukuro TT, Kim SY, Myers TR, et al. Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(24):2273-2282. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2104983
A reader of the journal found an error and commented the following:
In table 4, the authors report a rate of spontaneous abortions <20 weeks (SA) of 12.5% (104 abortions/827 completed pregnancies). However, this rate should be based on the number of women who were at risk of an SA due to vaccine receipt and should exclude the 700 women who were vaccinated in their third-trimester (104/127 = 82%). We acknowledge this rate will likely decrease as the pregnancies of women who were vaccinated <20 weeks complete but believe the rate will be higher than 12.5%. However, given the importance of these findings we feel it important to report these rates accurately. Additionally, the authors indicate that the rate of SAs in the published literature is between 10% and 26%. However, the upper cited rate includes clinically-unrecognized pregnancies, which does not reflect the clinically-recognized pregnancies of this cohort and should be removed.)) And some people have raised concerns that the vaccines could cause infertility,((Mowrey B. What Happened in Singapore? Unglossed, June 23, 20221)) which is a question that can be statistically proven only in a few years from now.

Conclusion

At the end the decision to vaccinate or not needs to be a personal choice. You need to decide whether you want to take the risk of taking the vaccine or whether you want to take the risk of getting the disease. Which of the risks is more prevalent surely depends on many factors that are individual for each person. People who are in at-risk groups for COVID-19 may tend to be inclined to get vaccinated, but at the other hand, they will be exactly the kind of people who are more vulnerable for adverse effects of the vaccines. For children, we can conclude that the risks outweigh the benefits, since they are rarely getting a severe form of COVID-19. In accordance to that, the vaccination commitee in Germany is speaking that far against a general vaccination of the 12 to 17 years age group.((COVID-19 und Impfen: Antworten auf häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ) Robert Koch Institut, 5.08.2021
Sollten Eltern ihre Kinder nun impfen lassen? Deuschlandfunk 3.08.2021))

It is interesting to mention that a study has found that people who already were previously infected by the virus, showed a similar protection to somebody who got the vaccine, and this group did not receive any significant benefit from being vaccinated.((Shrestha N. et al. Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176)) Sufficient antibody count was normally found even 9 months after the first positive test.((Dorigatti I. et. al. SARS-CoV-2 antibody dynamics and transmission from community-wide serological testing in the Italian municipality of Vo’. Nat Commun 12, 4383 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24622-7)) And even though that the antibodies are diminishing in quantity within a few months after infection, it was shown that memory B cells can provide a long lasting immune response that should be effective for years to come.((Turner J et. al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03647-4)) In Israel they found immunity from a former infection even more effective than vaccination to protect against the delta variant.((Rosenberg D. Natural infection vs vaccination: Which gives more protection? Israel National News, Jul 13 , 2021)) If you already got infected by COVID-19, you can pass your dose to somebody else.

If you decide to get vaccinated, you should prepare yourself to the vaccination with a strong immune system. Be sure you have no flu, cough or other infection for a week before the vaccine. Studies have shown that sleeping well the night before vaccination improve the immune response to the vaccine and decrease possible adverse events. Besides your sleep, follow all other recommendations in the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge. You can minimize much of the inflammatory response by using a tablespoon of flaxseed oil starting 3 days before the vaccine and continuing for 3 weeks after the vaccine. If you feel necessary, you can use an anti-inflammatory drug. N acetyl cysteine can help you a lot to control spike protein damage as well.

I would recommend doing an antibody blood test before vaccination. If the result is positive, you don’t need to be vaccinated. And if you get a vaccine within 3 months of a COVID-19 infection, it may even aggravate your risk for vaccine side effects.((Noorchasm H. Death Of An Orthopod From COVID-19: Was It The Virus, Was It The Vaccine, Or Was It Both? medium.com Feb. 14 2021)) A study has shown a 3 times increase in adverse events in those who had a prior COVID-19 infection.((Knapton S. Covid vaccine side effects up to three times more common in those who have had virus. Telegraph, March 5 2021))

Looking at this picture of uncertainties, one may wonder why there is not more discussion about vaccine safety in government circles. What it looks like is that the vaccine is widely viewed as the only way to end the pandemic. Coming from this perspective, many safety concerns, that normally are causing a halt of a vaccination program, are received with much hesitancy, and any discussion that is seriously critiquing the safety of the vaccination programs is considered to be a threat to public safety. For these reasons, an open discussion of these questions is rarely taking place, even in scientific circles.

The driving force for this policy is the belief that getting at least 70% of the population vaccinated, will create herd immunity and will bring the pandemic to an end. In fact, there seems to be evidence that in countries like Israel, where a large enough percentage of the population is vaccinated, the pandemic is declining. But we have already shown that this is not the case for mutations, and until we have controlled the pandemic worldwide, mutations will continue to arise. I believe it is on the time to discuss alternative measures to complement vaccination programs, and to have an open scientific discussion about risk and benefit for certain people groups.

With that many questions still needing an answer, one may question why other protective measures are not being taken more seriously. We know for a long time that people with obesity, type II diabetes, heart disease or cancer are more susceptible to the disease.((People with Certain Medical Conditions. CDC)) Why are there no interventions to help those people groups to better control their lifestyle-related diseases? We know that most of those conditions can be prevented or even reversed with a healthier lifestyle. And why are early treatment protocols not being advocated?

There is growing evidence that Vitamin D is playing an important role in improving the immune response against a COVID-19 infection. Studies show that near equator latitudes were affected much less from COVID-19 infections.((Gareth Davis et.al. Evidence Supports a Causal Role for Vitamin D Status in COVID-19 Outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.01.20087965)) Many other studies are available on the correlation between Vitamin D levels and COVID-19 infection rates as well as disease outcome.((Vitamin D and COVID 19: The Evidence for Prevention and Treatment of Coronavirus (SARS CoV 2). Youtube. December 10, 2020)) Experts suggest, that a widespread supplementation with 4,000 UI of Vitamin D would be one of the cheapest and most effective interventions to limit the spread of the disease. But governments are still skeptical to accept this evidence, and most regulating agencies are still publishing RDA requirements that are way too low to combat the widespread deficiency.((Experts send Vitamin D and Covid-19 open letter to world’s governments. Nutraingredients.com December 21, 2020))

Vaccines can reduce your risk for being infected by the virus, but no vaccine can guarantee you a hundred percent protection. There are plenty of cases that persons who were vaccinated got infected and even died of COVID-19. So whether you decide to get vaccinated or not, one of the most important measures you can take to protect yourself is to invest in your immune system. And even for treatment, there is no drug around that can cure the disease. The only thing which will fight off the virus at the end is your immune system.

There are many measures available to strengthen our immune system, and we have it in our own hands to implement them into our lives. For this reason, we have launched the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge on our site. If you have not participated yet, I strongly encourage you to sign up and learn all the insights, so that you can do your part in protecting yourself against this disease.

We have a special opportunity just for you. If you want to receive practical and up to date advice on how to implement an immunity-boosting lifestyle, simply join the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge and prepare yourself to face the pandemic with a bullet-proof immune system.

Sign Up Now

Coronavirus Immunity Challenge

In the beginning of March the Brazilian doctor Luiz Cristiano Maciel Cardoso published a video on Facebook and declared the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Supposedly he had found out that the cancer drug flutamide would be an effective treatment and declared that he has conquered the pandemic with this miraculous treatment option. On March 22 he himself took the video down, but copies of the video are still circulating. The entire thing seems to be not more than a hoax, but mirrors the desire of everyone to find a cure for the pandemic that is affecting the lives of all of us.((Faustino M. É falso que médico tenha curado pacientes com Covid-19 com flutamida. Aos Fatos, March 22, 2021)) Unfortunately there is no silver bullet or magic cure, but a combination of sensible measures will greatly enhance the chance of a positive outcome.

Pathology

Before talking about treatment options, we need to understand more clearly how the disease is developing inside the body.((Parasher A COVID-19: Current understanding of its pathophysiology, clinical presentation and treatment Postgraduate Medical Journal Published Online First: 25 September 2020. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-138577
Azer S. A. COVID-19: pathophysiology, diagnosis, complications and investigational therapeutics)) Transmission is happening normally via respiratory droplets from person to person. For this reason, social distancing, wearing masks and general hygiene measures can help a lot in prevention.

The first site of invasion is normally the respiratory tract. The spike protein on the surface of the virus binds to the cell membrane and is therefore able to inject an RNA sequence inside the cell. This sequence instructs the cell to replicate the virus. The more the virus replicates, the more cells are going to be affected. Normally the nonspecific immune system would detect the invader and start to fight it off. In contrast to the specific immunity that remembers past infections and facilitates their recognition, nonspecific immunity is able to fight the virus even on the first encounter. The problem is that the virus is able to suppress the interferon response, an important part of the nonspecific immunity. For this reason, a person can stay up to 14 days without developing any symptoms, while the virus is freely multiplying itself.

When the disease migrates from the nasal cavity to the upper respiratory tract, it will manifest itself with symptoms like fever, malaise and dry cough. About 80% of all infected persons have an immune system strong enough to fight the virus before it reaches the lung. A strong immune system is essential at this point.

When the disease migrates to the lung, it is getting more dangerous. If the disease continues long enough, a significant amount of cells in the lung will die. Those that are especially affected are the pneumonocytes which are responsible for the air exchange in the alveoli of the lung.

At the same time, the pneumonocytes will release the so-called cytokynes, which are produced to attract immune cells like neutrophils and T cells. Those will get involved in a fierce battle to combat the virus, but will cause in this process inflammation and cell damage. As a result, the air exchange is being limited, oxygen saturation in the blood will be reduced, and oxygen needs to be applied. If the disease gets severe, the use of a ventilator may be needed.

Oxygen shortness can lead to a change of the body’s pH, accumulation of lactic acid, electrolyte changes and further cell damage. In more sever cases the inflammation spreads through the circulatory system, and may cause the formation of thrombosis, inflammation of the heart muscle, arrhythmia and heart failure. Those complications can be potentially deadly. In the digestive system, the disease can cause diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. Headaches, dizziness, seizures and other neurological conditions are reported as well. In some cases, the disease can cause liver or kidney damage or even multiple organ failure.

Prevention

As a preventive measure, all efforts should be made to strengthen your immune system. A study conducted in Madrid, found that people who did at least 2 times per week a 30-minute exercise session had an 8 times higher survival rate compared to the inactive group.((Salgado-Aranda R et.al. Influence of Baseline Physical Activity as a Modifying Factor on COVID-19 Mortality: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study. Infect Dis Ther (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00418-6)) To improve your immunity, other lifestyle factors like for example adequate sleep and healthy nutrition are equally important. Our Coronavirus Immunity Challenge will give you plenty of details on how to keep your Immunity in top performance.

In addition to that, you should consider the following supplementation:

• Vitamin C: 500 mg / day
• Zinc: 20 mg / day
• Magnesium 400 mg / day
• Vitamin D: 4,000 IU / day
• Probiotics: at least 1 billion CFU´s daily. Do not take indefinitely.
• N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC): 500 mg / day. An aminoacid with antioxidant potential.

You should also look at prebiotic foods like banana, onion and garlic. Besides helping your intestinal flora, they will help to fortify your immunity. Look at fruits that are high in vitamin C like orange, grapefruit, papaya and red bell pepper.

Obesity is a risk factor that can increase mortality up to 4 times according to a recent study.((Tartof S. et.al. Obesity and Mortality Among Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19: Results From an Integrated Health Care Organization. Annals of Internal Medicine, November 17, 2020 https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-3742)) In case of obesity extra care should be taken to practice an immune boosting lifestyle. Other diseases like Diabetes, Cancer, Asthma or Heart Disease will need to follow the same measures.

A contrast shower was shown to be beneficial in strengthening your immunity as well. You should start with a hot shower of at least 3 minutes, as hot as you can tolerate. Switch then to cold for 30 to 60 seconds. If you like you can repeat the cycle three times, otherwise get out of the shower and quickly dry yourself with vigorous motion. If you have heart disease, or you are fragile because of age, be milder in the temperature change.

A sauna, be it a Swedish sauna or a steam sauna, can be very effective as well. If you are interested, we have some units of the Portable Steam Sauna available.

Treatment

We have seen already that the progressive development of the disease can lead to a variety of different symptoms. Accordingly, the applied treatment protocol will change according to the phase of the disease. We will be looking at the most adequate options in every disease stage.

At the First Signs of Infection

No matter, whether you are infected by the coronavirus or any kind of flu bug, taking prompt action at the first signs of symptoms will be key to an effective treatment. You should do one of these treatments as soon as possible:

• Contrast Shower: Do 4 to 7 cycles of 3 minutes hot and 30 to 60 seconds of cold. Be vigorous and try to increase your temperature change with every cycle.
• Hot Foot Bath: Wrap yourself into a blanket and put your feet into a bucket of hot water, as hot as you can tolerate it. Add some hot water every 5 minutes and continue the treatment for 20 to 30 minutes. When starting to sweat, put a cold cloth on the forehead, and drink plenty of water.

The next two treatment options are a bit more vigorous. If you have a circulatory disease that impedes you to do jogging, you should avoid those treatments, because they put a strain on your body and make your heart pump faster.

• Steam Sauna: Put yourself inside a sauna tent and expose your body to a steam source. You can do that with a pot of boiling water on a mobile cooking plate, but there are portable steam saunas available as well. Put a cold cloth with ice water on your head and change frequently as you are coming to a sweat. Stay for 20 to 25 minutes and go straight into bed afterward in order to continue sweating for another 30 minutes. Consider using a different mattress, or putting a plastic underneath your sheet, since you will be sweating a lot. Finish then with a shower.
• Hot Bath: Get inside a hot bath, as hot as you can tolerate, and add hot water every 5 minutes. Keep a cold cloth on your forehead and work up a sweat for about 20 minutes. A study found out that raising the body temperature to 39°C (102°F) was leading to a tenfold increase in the interferon response, which is exactly the component that is impaired by the coronavirus in the early course of the disease.((Downing J et.al. Hyperthermia in humans enhances interferon-gamma synthesis and alters the peripheral lymphocyte population. J Interferon Res. 1988 Apr;8(2):143-50 DOI: 10.1089/jir.1988.8.143))

Finish each of those treatments with at least one hour of bed rest afterward. This will multiply the immune boosting effect. Drink plenty of water or teas to stay hydrated.

A good recipe for strengthening the immune system is the so-called Russian Penicillin. The basic recipe is very simple. You take one entire lemon and peel it. Then you take 2-3 cloves of garlic and a pinch of salt. Blend it up in one quart of water (1 liter) and drink it during the day. If you want you can add orange, grapefruit or onions to the recipe, all of those have beneficial properties.

On the immune boosting supplementations, it might be helpful to increase the dose in case of treating the disease:

• Vitamin C: 1,000-2,000 mg / day
• Zinc: 40 – 75 mg / day for up to 1 week((Hemilä H, Petrus EJ, Fitzgerald JT, Prasad A. Zinc acetate lozenges for treating the common cold: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Jul 5. DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13057))
• Vitamin D: up to 60,000 IU / day. If you need to do more than 2-3 weeks of treatment, it shoud be accompanied with adequate blood tests.((A Rastogi et.al. Short term, high-dose vitamin D supplementation for COVID-19 disease: a randomised, placebo-controlled, study (SHADE study). Postgraduate Medical Journal Published Online First: 12 November 2020. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-139065))

We did already an article with the title: Can Vitamin D Prevent COVID-19? We stated that Vitamin D is fundamental in prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and cited several studies that could confirm this findings. Besides the vitamin D supplementation, try to implement a daily sunbath, that will help in many ways in the recuperation process.

Quercetin is a flavonoid with antiviral properties. In vitro studies have shown that it is able to interfere in the replication cycle of the coronavirus. There are no populational studies published in relation to COVID-19, but it shows interesting antiviral properties, especially in combination with vitamin supplementation.((Agrawal P. Quercetin: Antiviral Significance and Possible COVID-19 Integrative Considerations. https://doi.org/10.1177/1934578X20976293))

Diet-wise, you should avoid heavy meals and double up on fruits, especially citrus fruits and other Vitamin C sources. Cut out all sources o sugar, even natural cane sugar, molasses, maple syrup and similar. Honey can be used in moderation.

At the dental office, a 1% hydrogen peroxide solution is used as a mouth rinse, for patients and dentists alike, in order to avoid the spread of the virus. Some have advocated a wider use of this mouth rinse for the general population. In the early stage of the infection, a gargle or mouth rinse can definitely help to reduce the viral load in this region. They advise to rinse no more than 4 times a day, and prolonged use can disrupt the presence of healthy bacteria in the mouth.((Caruso A et.al. Might hydrogen peroxide reduce the hospitalization rate and complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020 Apr 22 : 1–2. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.170
COVID19 and Hydrogen Peroxide – Urgent Health Tips. My Dental Co. Website, accessed May 13, 2021)) If you do not want to apply hydrogen peroxide, you can use salt water, sage or any other substance with antiviral properties.

Herbs

There are several herbs that could be used in a COVID-19 treatment situation. A team was screening the available literature for natural products that proved to have antiviral activities against different types of human coronavirus. They found that extracts of the red spider lily (Lycoris radiata), Japanese gentian (Gentiana scabra Bunge), Chinese yam (Dioscorea batatas Decne), Sickle senna (Cassia tora L.), Mulberry Mistletoe (Taxillus chinensis), golden chicken fern (Cibotium barometz L.) and Echinacea purpurea L. showed a promising effect, and clinical trials should be done to prove their efficiency for COVID-19.((Khalifa S. et.al. Screening for natural and derived bio-active compounds in preclinical and clinical studies: One of the frontlines of fighting the coronaviruses pandemic. Phytomedicine. 2020 Aug 29;153311. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2020.153311.))

Another review study analyzed plants that could be possibly used in treating COVID-19 symptoms. They found 5 plants to be especially promising. Licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) has a soothing effect on the respiratory tract and is indicated in case of a cough or sore throat. Elderberry (Sambucus nigra) showed positive effects in clinical trials treating colds or flu. It has expectorant properties and is indicated in various respiratory conditions, fever and headaches. The common ivy (Hedera helix) has been show effective in the treatment of bronchitis and the common cold. It has expectorant properties and should be used in case of a persistent cough. Marsh mallow (Althaea officinalis) is indicated to treat a persistent dry cough. Myrrh (Commiphora molmol or Commiphora myrrha) has an anti-inflammatory effect and is indicated in a variety of respiratory conditions. They found also potentially promising results for a list of 12 more plants including garlic, Echinacea, Eucalyptus and others.((Silveira D et.al. COVID-19: Is There Evidence for the Use of Herbal Medicines as Adjuvant Symptomatic Therapy? Front Pharmacol. 2020 Sep 23;11:581840. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.581840))

The herb Dysphania ambrosioides, commonly known as Mexican Tea, was studied by Brazilian scientists, and they found that it contains substances that are able to inhibit the Sars-CoV-2 virus.((Silva F. et.al. Flavonoid glycosides and their putative human metabolites as potential inhibitors of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. Vol. 115, September 2020. DOI: 10.1590/0074-02760200207)) Populational studies are needed to certify the effectiveness in COVID-19 treatments. The plant has several different medicinal applications, among others it is known for its anti-inflammatory and immune stimulating properties. You can use it in form of a tea, putting one tablespoon of the dried leafs in one cup of boiling water and let it steep for 10 minutes. Use 2-3 cups per day. The plant should not be applied for prolonged usage, since it could manifest a toxic effect in long term use.

In Pakistan a randomized controlled trial was done on hospital patients applying the combination of honey with black seed (Nigella sativa). Patients treated with this combination cleared the virus 4 days earlier than the control group. Recuperation and hospital discharge was happening much earlier, and in severe cases mortality rate was fourfold lower.((Ashraf S et.al. Honey and Nigella sativa against COVID-19 in Pakistan (HNS-COVID-PK): A multi-center placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.30.20217364))

Propolis is another promising remedy for prevention and treatment of COVID-19. In a Brazilian study, patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were put either on standard care alone, or received 400mg/day of a propolis extract in the second group, or 800mg/day in the third group. Patients with standard care alone needed an average stay of 12 days in the hospital. That was reduced to 7 days with the supplementation of 400mg/day of propolis, and to 6 days with 800mg/day. Cases for acute kidney injury were reduced as well.((Duarte Silveira M A et. al. Efficacy of propolis as an adjunct treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. doi https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.08.20248932)) Considering that most drugs proved to be inefficient in hospitalized patients, those findings are pretty impressive.

Those are the herbs that were specifically studied in relation to COVID-19. There are numerous other herbs, that may be just as effective, but no study is available to prove its efficacy. The lifestyle center Uchee Pines Institute is recommending the following list of herbs:((Adeogun O, Sandoval, M. COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019). Uchee Pines Website))

• American Ginseng – avoid in pregnancy, 200-400mg twice daily
• Siberian Ginseng – insufficient evidence to recommend for children or pregnancy, don’t take for longer than 2 months, 400mg 3 times daily
• Panax Ginseng – (Asian Ginseng), don’t use more than 6 months, avoid in children and pregnancy, 200mg daily
• Andrographis – (Indian Echinacea), avoid in pregnancy, 200mg daily
• Thuja – (cedar leaf oil), avoid in pregnancy and lactation, 18-36mg 3 time daily, for 2 weeks
• Echinacea – 800mg 3 times daily for prevention, up to 5 times daily with symptoms
• Elderberry – only use the ripe fruit, dosage not specified.
• Umckaloabo – (African geranium), insufficient info for pregnancy/lactation, dose not specified

Early Treatment

It is a good idea to take a COVID-19 PCR test if available for you. If confirmed positive, or you have strong reasons to believe to be infected, you should take immediate measures for stronger treatment. Besides fever, cough, fatigue and headache, a loss of smell and taste is a very typical symptom for COVID-19 infection. Studies have shown that early treatment greatly increases the chance for recuperation.

One of the drugs that seems to be effective in early stage is nitazoxanide, also known under the brand name alinia. It is mainly used to treat certain parasites like giardia, but has reportedly a broad-spectrum antiviral activity. Furthermore, nitazoxanide displays the potential to boost the innate immune system and reduce the cytokine storm.((Lokhande A, Devajaran P. A review on possible mechanistic insights of Nitazoxanide for repurposing in COVID-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2020.173748)) A study showed that viral load was reduced in 48% of patients treated after a 7 day period, compared to 15% in the placebo group.((Silva M et.al. Efficacy of Nitazoxanide in reducing the viral load in COVID-19 patients. Randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blinded, parallel group, pilot study. doi https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.03.21252509)) Further studies are in development to confirm these findings.

Hydroxychloroquine has been hotly debated for a long time, but we want to look at the available evidence. Studies on hospitalized patients did not show any efficiency, like many other drugs as well. But a review found 29 studies of early treatment of COVID-19, and all of them showing favorable results, although only 13 were statistically significant.((HCQ is effective for COVID-19 when used early: real-time meta analysis of 229 studies. https://hcqmeta.com/)) Another meta-analysis was not able to determine any benefit, probably because early treatment and late treatment studies were mixed together, a large number of studies was excluded, and no pooling of data was attempted in order to gain a better statistical significance.((Singh B et.al. Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 (Review). DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013587.pub2.)) It is interesting to state that chloroquine is allowing zinc to enter the cell and inhibit viral replication.((Xue J et.al. Chloroquine Is a Zinc Ionophore. PLoS ONE 9(10): e109180. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0109180)) We can conclude that chloroquine will develop its full capacity only if administered in combination with Zinc, just there are very few studies available using this combination.

Another interesting option seems to be ivermectin, a drug widely available for the treatment of parasites. Being used at a large scale in many developing countries around the world, it has an excellent safety profile. The drug can help in impeding the binding of the virus to the cells. A meta analysis of 6 early treatment studies showed a 75% average reduction in mortality.((Hill A et.al. Meta-analysis of randomized trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-148845/v1
Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 49 studies. https://ivmmeta.com/
Lawrie T. Ivermectin reduces the risk of death from COVID-19 – A rapid review and meta-analysis in support of the recommendation of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. https://www.e-bmc.co.uk/)) Some studies seem to show limited benefits, that do not justify its use.((López-Medina E et. al. Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.3071)) Besides that, critiques are saying that sample sizes of the available studies are small, and the study design sometimes flawed, having though not sufficient scientific evidence to promote their use. Several others prefer to use the limited evidence available in a responsible way to save lives.

Despite of limited scientific evidence at that time, ivermectin was approved as a COVID-19 treatment since May 2020 in Peru and Bolivia, and a few other countries have followed in the meantime. In Brazil, a factory with 12,000 workers adopted a weekly preventive dose of ivermectin. The responsible doctor states in an interview, that they had very few cases of infection, and no cases of hospitalization or death.((Medico de GTFoods em Maringa. Facebook, March 12, 2020))

The dose of the drug depends on the weight of the person. It is important to note that ivermectin preparations for animals are improper for human use, since the dosage for horses and cows is completely different than for humans.

Another case study comes from the town of São Lorenço in the Brazilian State of Minas Gerais. They adopted an early treatment protocol using ivermectin, azithromycin, dexamethasone, zinc and vitamin D. For almost a month they had not a single case in the intensive care units, and almost no hospitalizations for COVID-19. With the recent surge all over Brazil, there were recorded 4 cases in intensive care by the end of March. It is difficult to tell, which component of the protocol was responsible for the result, but it shows that early treatment can significantly increase the chance for success.((Piva A. Cidade mineira não tem um único doente internado por covid-19. Revista Oeste, March 15, 2021
Dourado C. Prefeito defende tratamento precoce, mas São Lourenço entra na onda roxa. Estado de Minas, March 16, 2021
Statistics on the Facebook page of the town hospital))

Monoclonal antibodies are another treatment option that proved to be effective as an early treatment option, and there are two options that have received FDA approval. Bamlanivimab and the combination of casirivimab/imdevimab are available and you may consult your hospital whether they are eligible to recieve this treatment. They work in blocking the spike proteins of the virus and reducing its infectivity.((An EUA for Bamlanivimab—A Monoclonal Antibody for COVID-19. JAMA. 2021;325(9):880-881. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.24415
Chen P et.al. SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody LY-CoV555 in Outpatients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med 2021; 384:229-237 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029849))

If Symptoms Persist

One of the common symptoms is fever. Many people will try to lower the fever with ibuprofen, paracetamol or another antipyretic drug. This is actually the worst thing you can do. Fever actually stimulates the immune system to fight the infection. If you cut the fever, you may feel better at the moment, but you reduce the activity of the immune system to fight the infection.

It is important to state again that the most effective treatment of COVID-19 is a well-functioning immune system. Even for the common flu, there are only a handful of antiviral drugs available with very limited efficiency. The deciding factor that will eventually fight off the virus is the immune system, and strengthening the immune response will be the most important treatment to follow.

In case of fever, strict bed rest is the best course to follow. We have seen already the importance to feed the fever with bed rest. On top of that, sleep is essential for the functioning of the immune system. During the Spanish flu, the early initiation of total bed rest was part of a successful treatment protocol. The bed rest needs to be continued for 2 to 3 days after the fever subsides, in order to avoid the development of pneumonia or other types of secondary complications.((Elliott LE. The Value of Sanitarium Treatment in Respiratory Diseases. Life & Health. 1919 May 1; 34(5):103-4.)) In case of COVID-19, we have seen many cases with marked improvements, followed by a sudden return of the disease, or one of its complications. If symptoms improve, continue your treatment protocol for several days, until you obtain a negative PCR test or you are completely sure of your total recovery. Even though you may feel better, you need to continue treatment for as many days as you had a fever.

Give plenty of water or teas throughout the treatment period. The patient will most likely be sweating a lot, and needs to be hydrated. On top of that, extra water can flush out a number of substances through the urine and clean out the body. Hot teas can help to induce sweating and fever.

In case of cough, an onion poultice can help. Blend ½ of a medium-sized onion in a blender with just enough water to make a paste. Spread it on a paper towel like the onion is the sandwich filler and the paper towel is the bread, so you have paper towel on the outside with the onion on the inside. Place it on the chest and then wrap it with plastic food wrap and secure it in place. Cover with a tight t-shirt and then a flannel or thick sweater and leave on overnight. Remove and wash off in the morning.((Adeogun O, Sandoval, M. COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019). Uchee Pines Website))

Hot and cold fomentations on the chest are an excellent treatment for coughing. Considering the lung damage in advanced COVID-19, it is certainly a treatment that is highly indicated. During the Spanish Flu pandemic, this treatment was part of a successful treatment regimen.((Elliott LE. The Value of Sanitarium Treatment in Respiratory Diseases. Life & Health. 1919 May 1; 34(5):103-4.)) Place a hot fomentation for 3 minutes, followed by a towel that was immersed in ice water for a minute. Repeat 5-7 times. To increase the effect, put a hot fomenation or heating pad on the back, and the feet in a basin of hot water during the treatment, taking care to add hot water every 5 minutes. Finish the treatment by rubbing the body with a cold cloth and drying immediately. Repeat 2-3 times daily if needed.

Steam Inhalation is another interesting treatment to improve mucus elimination and clear up the lungs. There are commercial steam inhalators available, or you can just put a sheet over a pot with boiling water. Add a few drops of peppermint or eucalyptus oil if you want. To treat the cough, you can also mix a few drops of eucalyptus oil in honey. Use about one drop for every tablespoon. You may find even raw eucalyptus honey, that contains all the beneficial properties of the pollen from the eucalyptus trees.

If the patient is still strong enough, you can continue to apply a hot foot bath 2-3 times a day. Just if fever persists for a long time, the patient may become so weak that he is not able to adequately react to the hot stimulus. In this case, fomentations will be the more adequate treatment.

What you should avoid during early treatment are antipyretic and anti-inflammatory drugs (like ibuprofen, parecetamol, diclofenac, loratadine), antibiotics, and corticosteroids, since they weaken the immune system.

If the Disease Aggravates

If you develop shortness of breath, or blue lips it is a sure sign that the disease is affecting the lungs. In this case you need to look out for medical help. In order to facilitate breathing, you may be put on oxygen. That helps to guarantee that oxygen levels do not drop in the blood and cause other complications. If you want a tool to evaluate your situation for yourself, you acquire an oximeter. If your Oxygen saturation in the blood is above 95%, then you are fine, and no lung impairment is taking place. If the saturation drops below 90%, you may be in need of supplemental oxygen. Higher altitudes may lead to slightly lower oxygen saturation.

It is important to state that effective drug treatments are getting extremely scarce when it comes to advanced COVID-19 patients. The WHO organized a rather large study including four of the most promising treatment options, and concluded that none of them, not even the expensive antiviral drug Remdesvir showed statistically significant benefit in hospitalized patients.((WHO Solidarity Trial)) Some preliminary studies show though promising results for proxalutamide((Cadegiani et al., Press Conference (Preprint) The Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial)) and a few other drugs for the late stage treatment of COVID-19.

That far, treatment is entirely focusing on dealing with symptoms. Besides giving oxygen, corticosteroids are normally prescribed in order to reduce the cytokine storm. This is important to limit the damage of the lungs in the acute stage. Please note that corticosteroids are recommended only after the patient has sufficient lung damage to require oxygen, and a significant cytokine storm was setting in.((Therapeutic Management of Adults With COVID-19. NIH, acessed April 7)) Before this point it would only prejudice the immune response without necessity. Even though that corticoids are suppressing the activity of the immune system, efforts should continue to strengthen the immunity, since this is the only mechanism that will fight the virus and promote the real cure of the disease. Especially Vitamin D was proven to show an immunomodulating effect, improving overall immunity while helping to reduce the cytokine storm.

In relation to thrombosis protection, N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC) might be an interesting option. Several studies show that NAC is able to reduce the formation of thrombosis in various situations. Although there are no specific studies that prove its efficiency in case of COVID-19, it is probably safe to conclude, that the mechanisms involved would apply to this disease as well.((Coronavirus Pandemic Update 69: “NAC” Supplementation and COVID-19 (N-Acetylcysteine). Medcram. Youtube, May 11, 2020))

The AdventHealth hospital in Ocala, FL has developed a treatment protocol that they have baptized ICAM. It is an acronym of the 4 different treatment components. I stands for Immunosupport, which was given in form of Vitamin C and Zinc supplementation. C stands for corticosteroids that were used to control inflammation. A stands for anticoagulants to prevent blood clotting, and M for macrolides to help fight infection. In their own hospital, they have proven a 96.4% survival rate with this treatment protocol. Like other protocols, it does little to attack the actual virus, but treats successfully COVID-19 symptoms, giving the immune system extra time to respond. Further studies supposedly showed no benefits compared to standard treatment protocols, but I still would consider it as an interesting protocol for hospitalized patients.((Facebook Post))

Recuperation

Especially if lung damage has occurred, fatigue is a common symptom in the recovery phase. In a study of COVID-19 patients that were hospitalized, more than half reported fatigue even 2 month after recovery.((Carfi A et.al. Persistent Symptoms in Patients After Acute COVID-19. JAMA. 2020;324(6):603-605. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.12603)) Another study found 55% of patients had an abnormal echocardiogram, so you definitely want to check on your heart if you experience fatigue.((Dweck M et.al. Global evaluation of echocardiography in patients with COVID-19. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeaa178))

If you get tired, you need to limit the amount of work you do during this recovery phase. If you go beyond your strength in this phase, you can cause a relapse, some kind of a secondary infection or some other type of complication. In some cases physiotherapy can help in recuperation. In any case, start with some light exercise and build up gradually. Be sure to get to bed early and take good care of your health. You should spend a lot of time outdoors in the fresh air and sunshine. Just be sure to use appropriate clothing for the climate to avoid chilling.

Try to focus on an anti-inflammatory diet. Use plenty of fruits and vegetables. Avoid saturated fats and increase the amount of Omega 3 fatty acids in your diet. Flaxseed and Chia are among the best sources. If you made use of some medication, it is definitely recommended to use some probiotics to improve your intestinal flora.

Supplementation with NAC seems to be helpful in recovering from fatigue. A daily contrast shower can be helpful to strengthen your immunity and increase circulation, which in turn speeds up the healing process. Keeping a cheerful state of mind can do wonders as well. The impact of thoughts and attitudes on our health is greater than we think.

Conclusion

Treatment of COVID-19 definitely varies greatly, depending on the stage of the disease. For the most part it is focusing on treating symptoms and side effects of the disease, and giving the immune system proper time to do its work. In elderly patients, the immune response takes longer to kick in, which will aggravate the disease and prolong the recovery time.

We see as a common thread the importance of a strong immune system in all phases of the disease. At the end, only the immune system is able to fight off the virus and really cure the disease. In order to help you to have a strong immunity and be prepared for the virus, we have prepared the10 day Coronavirus Immunity Challenge for you. Participate now to find out what you can do to have maximum protection against the coronavirus that is circulating around the entire globe.

We have a special opportunity just for you. If you want to receive practical and up to date advice on how to implement an immunity-boosting lifestyle, simply join the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge and prepare yourself to face the pandemic with a bullet-proof immune system.

Sign Up Now

Coronavirus Immunity Challenge