see study by Kurhade et al. challenging utility of mRNA bivalent booster: "Low neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2.75.2, BQ.1.1, and XBB.1 by parental mRNA vaccine or a BA.5-bivalent booster"

by Paul Alexander

Dr. Harvey Risch & Dr. Oskoui shared; this adds to existing evidence of the failure of the bivalent booster (original antigenic sin, viral immune escape, antibody-enhancement of infection and disease)

First, in as clear a language as possible, the COVID gene injections vaccines especially mRNA, have failed, fully, miserably. And are dangerous.

The bivalent booster is garbage and junk, failed. Do not touch it!

The researchers concluded,

‘Previous infection significantly enhanced the magnitude and breadth of BA.5-bivalent-booster-elicited neutralization. Our data support a vaccine update strategy that future boosters should match newly emerged circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.’

Duh? You would think? Of course original antigenic sin would feature (OAS) and it begs the question, why did they develop this bivalent booster knowing full well that there were sub-variants already pressing and emerging that were already supplanting BA.4 and BA.5 e.g. BQ.1.1. It is almost as if they, CDC, NIH, FDA, Pfizer et al. do everything to fail! It is sheer incompetence. BA.2.75.2-, BQ.1.1-, and XBB.1-spike appear largely resistant to the BA.5 bivalent booster vaccinal antibodies.

Bottom line is if the vaccinal antibodies are a mismatch to the prevailing virus antigen (existing dominating epitopes), then there will not be neutralization and there will be selection pressure on the antigen (to drive selection of more infectious and potentially virulent variants). Recalled antibodies are to the initial strain and the bivalent booster cannot work if the prevailing strain is now BQ.1.1 and BQ.1.


‘The newly emerged SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages, including the BA.2-derived BA.2.75.2 and the BA.5-derived BQ.1.1 and XBB.1, have accumulated additional spike mutations that may affect vaccine effectiveness.’

‘report neutralizing activities of three human serum panels collected from individuals 23–94 days after dose 4 of a parental mRNA vaccine, 14–32 days after a BA.5-bivalent-booster from individuals with 2–4 previous doses of parental mRNA vaccine, or 15–32 days after a BA.5-bivalent-booster from individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and 2–4 doses of parental mRNA vaccine.’

The results showed that a BA.5-bivalent-booster elicited a high neutralizing titer against BA.4/5 measured at 14- to 32-day post-boost; however, the BA.5-bivalent-booster did not produce robust neutralization against the newly emerged BA.2.75.2, BQ.1.1, or XBB.1.’

Look at the wild-type response (neutralizing activity) in all three graphs (extreme left vertical lines).

See the updated Variant Proportions as of today as reported by CDC. We see that BQ.1.1 and BQ.1 account for near 70% of the variants and BA.5 has declined to 11%. XBB is at 4.7%.




Order via this LINK