Harvard Doctor Warning If You Have Had Covid

[Lonnie]

He's saying those who have had Covid should have a test for antibody activity before your vaccinated. It could lead to complications.

J&J’s COVID-19 Vaccine Blood Clotting Complications: Did The Adversely Affected Women Have Previous Natural Infections?

Hooman Noorchashm

1 day ago·5 min read

 

 

In my opinion, it’s unlikely that the J&J COVID-19 vaccine is intrinsically defective. It is far more likely that its indiscriminate administration to persons recently or currently infected with SARS-COV-2 is the source of the problem.

Today, 4/13/2021, FDA is halting use of the J&J COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S., because of six severe complications involving blood clots in young women.

Clearly, this halt is problematic for our vaccine effort in the United States and worldwide. However, because of the severe nature of these complications, it is critical for FDA and CDC to undertake a robust and transparent root cause analysis of the problem. Because it is very likely that these reported complications are the tip of a larger iceberg of hazard.

For those who have been following my public advocacy efforts, since January 2021, I’ve been warning our public health leaders at FDA and the leadership of the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers about the possibility of thromboembolic events when indiscriminately vaccinating those recently infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

You may read my original warnings HERE and HERE.

I do not suspect that the clotting complications from the J&J vaccine is specific to that company’s brand. In fact, I am of the opinion that both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are also causing blood clotting problems that are being missed and downplayed by FDA and CDC — specifically because of the lax and passive adverse event detection and reporting systems in place, and because of the critical urgency of achieving herd immunity to the virus.

In other words, I am quite confident that the J&J vaccine is NOT intrinsically defective or dangerous— neither are the Pfizer, Moderna or AstraZeneca versions of these vaccines.

Rather, in my opinion, it is highly likely that inappropriate and indiscriminate administration of these vaccines to persons recently or concurrently infected with the natural SARS-CoV-2 virus is the cause of the clotting complications.

From a scientific and mechanistic perspective, there is almost no question that following a natural infection the antigenic footprint of the SARS-CoV-2 virus remains in the infected tissues of the host for some time. These include the inner lining of arteries and veins, the heart muscle and the nervous system. When the vaccine force re-activates the immune system against Spike protein antigens in a recently infected person, the immune response to the vaccine will target these tissues and cause inflammatory damage. In the case of blood vessels, damage to their inner lining from inflammation, could result in acute formation of blood clots.

So, in my opinion, the most critical aspect of the root-cause-analysis FDA and CDC owe the American people in investigating these clotting complications is to determine if the affected women were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Fortunately, there is a simple blood test that can adjudicate this question with a high degree of precision. That is, the presence of blood SARS-CoV-2 “Nucleocapsid” antibodies in the affected persons. These antibodies will only be present in the blood of previously naturally infected persons.

So, it is going to be critical for FDA and CDC to assess the blood from the persons experiencing any clotting complications for the presence the Nucleocapsid antibodies.

In fact, I am of the opinion that ALL persons experiencing ANY adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination should have their blood evaluated for the presence of Nucleocapsid antibodies to determine if they had been previously infected.

This morning, when news of the J&J COVID-19 vaccine pause became public I immediately sent sent two emails to Drs. Woodcock and Marks at FDA in this regard. I have yet to hear a response from FDA.

Irrespective, given the occurrence of the clotting complications at this time, it is my hope that FDA, CDC, J&J and other vaccine manufacturers will work quickly and methodically to determine if indiscriminate vaccination of the recently infected is a safety problem.

I do suspect that if these public health leaders ignore this question and if these clotting complications continue to occur, even further public mistrust in FDA process and in the vaccine’s safety will be stoked.

Imagine, if the recently infected are at higher risk of vaccine complications, and if our FDA and CDC actually do make this determination and then work robustly to mitigate against harm to such recently infected persons….Imagine, the level of public trust and confidence the United States government agencies will re-earn. I have my doubts, based on past in experience, that FDA or CDC can pull out of their draconian and stifled process to think and act cogently in the best interest of public health.

BUT, even if our public health leaders and their “expert” advisors believe these clotting complications to be unrelated to prior recent infection, because my scientific prognostication is actually cogent, it is critical for the following root-cause-analysis questions to be answered by FDA and CDC with all urgency:

Drs. Marks, Wollensky and Woodcock, were the six young American women who experienced the clotting complications following COVID-19 vaccination recently or previously infected — and, specifically, do they carry anti-SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid antibodies in their blood?

Because if the answer to these questions is “YES”, then the United States and the rest of the world should be EXCEEDINGLY cautious about indiscriminately vaccinating the recently infected — as there is good scientific reason to suspect causality and, thus, harm.

If the answer is “NO”, then due diligence has been exercised — and it is likely that the J&J and AstrZeneca vaccines are intrinsically dangerous in some people, likely based on their Adenovirus delivery mechanism. If this is the case, these brands of the COVID-19 vaccine should be entirely abandoned in favor of the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.

As I stated before, my scientific opinion and immunological prognostication is that the COVID-19 vaccines are NOT intrinsically defective or dangerous, but rather that their indiscriminate administration to recently and previously infected persons is the source of a hazard we can easily mitigate in America and the rest of the world by using #ScreenB4Vaccine.

Now, time will tell.

I write in defense of US public health and in the name of Dr. Amy Josephine Reed of Yardley, PA.

Hooman Noorchashm MD, PhD

https://noorchashm.medium.com/

[Riobard]

I touched on this theme this here in the forum months ago when referring to ADE ... antibody-dependent enhancement of disease, and I had added that the FDA EUA submissions had referenced it ... that it is a consideration about which little is known viz COVID. 

Know your natural immunity status by antibody testing and your CoV infection status by viral testing (as many cases are asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic), at the point of inoculation planning prior to actually pursuing artificial immunity, at least prior to the first (sole) shot of a 2-dose (single-dose) regimen.

What is cray-cray is those jabbing you protecting themselves from transmission because you may be infected and contagious at the time. The meta message being: you are about to be inoculated possibly too late against a disease that you may currently have, but seeing as you are here, roll up your sleeve.

Why would you want the huge payload of immune system stimulation with a compounding of simultaneous virus and a viral facsimile? 

Additionally, some of the limited vaccine stock could be (have been) deployed to those without any protective immunity, saving more lives at a point of product scarcity. The population percentages of those with protective natural immunity can be quite substantial where prevalence has been high. 

This doctor authoring the piece suggests screening for nucleocapsid antibodies after the fact, investigating the clotting, as regular antibody testing would conflate natural and artificial immunity.

For pre-vaxx purposes ... note that I am far from being an expert ... I believe the generic antibody tests are fine. I think they target the antibodies specific to the viral spike protein. My personal go-to has been the Roche CoV antibody assay. Mind you, I tend to get sore throats likely related to allergies so that is one feature that has propelled me at times into getting (free) local viral tests, followed occasionally by the pricey antibody test I have to pay for in Quebec. 

I also checked that I did not have natural infection antibodies prior to receiving my first dose in an all-blind placebo-control RCT. I quarantined assiduously to ensure I would not have been recently or currently infected at the point of inoculation. 

[Riobard]

My Twitter feed reveals case reports about the syndrome, eg one just published in NEJM, that suggests causal factors other than the past/recent CoV infection one. It’s probably too complex an issue to attempt to  unravel in discussion here on the Board. Also, the author Noorchashm does not list an institutional affiliation. Though it would likely be important to follow his simple to execute recommendation.

You could spend days following feeds of high-profile clinician scientists on this ... Eric Topol, Eric Feigl-Ding, Hilda Bastian, loads of others, and get many varied opinions.

[Lonnie]

The frustrating thing is the CDC wants to shut-up this doctor and the few others who question their policies. The "settled science" crowd is really scary. No questions allowed.

Here's a quote from the CDC site:

Getting COVID-19 may offer some protection, known as natural immunity. Current evidence suggests that reinfection with the virus that causes COVID-19 is uncommon in the months after initial infection, but may increase with time. The risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19 far outweighs any benefits of natural immunity. COVID-19 vaccination will help protect you by creating an antibody (immune system) response without having to experience sickness.

[Riobard]

[Delete]

[Riobard]

The Phase3 trials assess for baseline SARS-CoV-2 status and stratify accordingly for analyzing efficacy and vaccination response. Pfizer/BNT had 6.2% with prior infection. J&J had 9.8%. These research subjects are identifiable, and clinical sequelae associated specifically with CoV exposure history are evaluable. However, the rarity of clotting that leads to acute illness may not yield much additional info by going back to that cache of serum samples that is small relative to real-world uptake.

Noorchashm did have a very compellingly persuasive 5 minutes with Tucker Carlson of Fox News. So his concerns are not totally “buried”. He did hold back, though, in pointing out the obvious, that proximal profit margins would depreciate if those recovered from CoV were bypassed for inoculation. 

[Riobard]

On another note, as somebody that pushed for health education literature for the general public that did not exceed, for example, the Flesch-Kincaid 5.0 literacy level, the brief CDC quote above fails.

OK OK, somebody may now take a swipe at me. LOL. But this forum is not representative of average community literacy. 

[Lonnie]

3 hours ago, Riobard said:

Noorchashm did have a very compellingly persuasive 5 minutes

I had no idea he has been on TV...maybe I'm wrong about them trying to shut him up. I'll have to find that interview online. Thanks.

[Riobard]

2 hours ago, Lonnie said:

I had no idea he has been on TV...maybe I'm wrong about them trying to shut him up. I'll have to find that interview online. Thanks.

I found it on Hooman Noorchashm’s recent Twitter feed. 

But the feeds of a few ‘armchair’ yet qualified clinicians and epidemiologists that I and many others respect, as they seem to relentlessly jump on every COVID story that comes out and unpack it objectively, without an apparent personal agenda of their own, make no mention of this one.

——-

Because the thromboembolism factors are quite widespread in COVID itself, and the onset of associated problems occur on a variable timeline, retrospectively testing for nucleocapsid-specific antibodies that confirm previous infection prior to vaccination among those vaccinated presenting with the clotting syndrome won’t necessarily tell you whether the clotting is precipitated by vaccination as opposed to the clotting emerging latently, temporally coincidental to post-vaxx, as an aspect of having had COVID. 

It may be that the rare clotting shows glaringly following vaccination because vaccination is an easily identifiable singular antecedent. In contrast, the same clinical phenomenon, while known, is obscured or buried among many other symptoms or complications requiring primary attention among folks sick with COVID.

So you won’t have had a news cycle that was just sayin’: BTW, you def don’t want COVID cuz apart from the risks of needing intubation you may get antibodies clumping platelets together. 

Also different political animals.

[Riobard]

Addendum: the occurrence of the rare clots of concern is not that common with COVID apparently. So there are clots and there are clots. But 10x greater risk with COVID than vaxx for the worrisome clot types with the long 4-word label , according to Oxford U. 

[spoon]

Over here, all ex-covid patient are required to take antibody test to see their antibody level before getting their vaccine. Based on our own study, those who are asymptomatic only saw their antibody at 20% compared to those with more complication after 8 weeks, while those with mild symptoms at 80-90%. What i heard from someone who shared his experience was that he was required to take antibody test twice within few month apart, and if the level are still high (90% of required level) then he wont need to get the vaccine. I cant find the clear guideline on this yet though.