73 Comments

This is a bad strategy in the current context.

Assume for the sake of this argument that there really is a novel, respiratory virus.

We know from empirical observation that only those with symptoms symptoms are effective at infecting others.

In this setting, it’s pointless ring vaccinating the contacts of a case, especially if the case displays no symptoms, because those contacts are not transmission risks.

Also in this case, “leaky vaccines” do not block transmission. So it will make no difference to the spread of an alleged pathogen.

The entire idea is doomed.

Expand full comment
author

"This is a bad strategy in the current context."

I agree. My goal with this article was a policy-logic discussion, forcing the other side into the appropriate corner. Part of the insanity of the past two years has been the quantum standing wave of claims made by the other side. We need to collapse those wave functions wherever possible.

The vaccines are not sterilizing. But if they are...ring vaccination.

The vaccines don't reduce severe disease, but if they do...just let people choose or encourage it for the highest risk.

But getting closest to reality, coronavirus travels around in a quasi-species swarm, and all we're doing is directing the evolution of that swarm in hard to predict ways. It's like finding out that we have a spell book, opening to random pages, waving a wand around, then reading at random.

"What's this button do?"

Expand full comment

Over the past two years, I have come not only to doubt whether SARS-CoV-2 does any such thing as travel, but also whether HSV-1 does any such thing as travel. And I have come to the firm conclusion that HIV never did any such thing as travel.

Expand full comment

I’m no longer convinced SARS-CoV-2 exists outside a lab computer.

Expand full comment

Do tell!

Expand full comment

A couple interesting studies to consider:

"The RNA code counted in PCR tests, previously attributed to SARS-CoV-2, belongs instead to a respiratory-virus-induced immune system response by human cells that liberate exosomes, and that vitiate PCR test results. PCR tests have zero specificity in vivo due to the exosome RNA. PCR tests exhibit excellent specificity in vitro on pure samples of other respiratory viruses. Low success rate of vaccines is explained by inexact identification of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355972541_The_Lancet_Respiratory_Medicine_Role_of_exosomes_in_false-positive_covid-19_PCR_tests

"It can be observed that at Ct = 25, up to 70% of patients remain positive in culture and that at Ct = 30 this value drops to 20%. At Ct = 35, the value we used to report a positive result for PCR, <3% of cultures are positive."

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/72/11/e921/5912603

Throughout 2020 and 2021, PCR tests for "Covid" were being done at 40+ cycles. According to Fauci himself, this is just "dead nucleotides":

https://files.catbox.moe/s5edh5.mp4

Expand full comment

I'm convinced their genomes exist in a lot of patient samples. Having analyzed raw data on many thousands of samples from different labs around the world, their sequencing reads map pretty well on the SARS-CoV-2 reference genome

Expand full comment

Thank you. That’s my understanding also. But, isn’t it the case that sequencing isn’t of the material of interest, for example, purified in some way from the clinical sample.

Instead, in next generation sequencing, everything in the sample is sequenced & then assembly takes place in silico?

Expand full comment

You're right. Metatranscriptomics (sequencing total RNA of the sample) give us via cDNA route all RNA molecules of virus+host+whatever else is in the sample. Virus sequences are isolated by some standard computational pipelines and taken for assembly - that's what goes into GISAID. It's all in the computer, yes, but based on that metatranscriptomic sequencing.

I don't care about the assembly (as it's less robust) and simply compare the sequencing reads with the known virus genome. Again, yes, purely computationally. But I don't have an issue with that - I've studied biology using this computational way for several decades and often found more than experimentalists.

Regardless, virus genomes are in those nasopharyngeal and saliva samples. Some samples are bad quality but generally they are OK. In humans and in animals. Mutations and VOCs (plus a bunch of well-known stuff from coronavirus biology) are seen there. It's not a charade or a ploy. The viral genomes exist. No question.

Did anyone see the virus - this is another question... But what a genome would be doing without a virus??

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jun 20, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

ring vaccination only works when you have a sterilizing vaccine, i.e. a vaccine that /prevents infection./

there is no evidence that the current inoculations du jour do that in any of the pHarmaCo studies from before or after mass rollouts of the shots. if anything, real world evidence suggests that the shots increase the infection rate, based on case counts of highly "vaccinated" areas vs areas who refused to comply with the push to consume the very profitable products.

none of their study endpoints included prevention of infection, only symptom reduction and antibody counts.

and the CDC had to nerf their definition of vaccine from "prevents infection" to "produces immune response" in 2021 just so people would stop claiming the inoculations du jour weren't vaccines based on the CDC's own vaccination standards.

Expand full comment
author

"ring vaccination only works when you have a sterilizing vaccine, i.e. a vaccine that /prevents infection."

Agreed. I wrote an article to this effect a year ago, trying to force the decision tree analysis.

The other side of the debate fails at the level of logic, which is part of what they need to be confronted with, daily.

Expand full comment
Jun 22, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

If a vaccine does not prevent or increase infection, all strategies are equal.

If a vaccine increases infection, any strategy is worse than no vaccination.

Expand full comment

The same strategy should also apply to the lockdowns. Instead, the narrative has always been: “Eradicate the virus, cost what it may,”

This has never worked, despite the incessant propaganda to the contrary.

Expand full comment

Ring vaccination was said be effective for smallpox because incidence of smallpox disease is physically obvious, needing no lab test, so it could be diagnosed quickly, easily, and inexpensively; because smallpox has a long incubation period, allowing time for vaccine to become effective before clinical disease in the contacts; and because there is no animal reservoir. None of these fit for COVID.

Expand full comment
author

My point was to set up a policy alternative and force the discussions/claims for those who want to support the mass experimental needling program in order to keep the "reality decision tree" from morphing, which is much of the problem with the other side of the debate.

"None of these fit for COVID."

Those without symptoms have R < 0.4, even in 2020, which is to say that without physically obvious symptoms, the virus is at a dead end, already.

The animal reservoir issue may need study, but in all the asserted contact tracing, I never saw a case of suspect animal-to-human transmission. Again, R << 1.

Of course, all of this assumes that vaccination reduces transmission, which it doesn't. If it does reduce severe illness (which I doubt), then let people choose their level of risk and solutions and we're done anyhow.

Expand full comment

After hours scouring the NIAID web site, this turned up.

https://imgflip.com/i/6k9004

Expand full comment
author
Jun 20, 2022·edited Jun 20, 2022Author

Rigorous.

Expand full comment
Jun 20, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

But their quackery doesn’t work unless you partake in their quackery too!

Expand full comment

Virus are NOT contagious. We need more to make this paradigm shift and fast.

www.VIROLIEGY.com

Expand full comment

I keep hearing this, but can't align it with the fact that things like Norovirus, colds or Chickenpox can spread like wildfire, without actual physical contact.

Expand full comment

Norovirus is how they renamed MOTION SICKNESS, everytime I picked up my family from their Cruise sick as dogs from "Norovirus" I never got it from them. its why cruise ships cant and dont ever test people for "norovirus" before the get on ship. remember when Diamond Princess ship was held at port bec so many came down with convid? they renamed Motion Sickness from Norovirus to Covid. I got chickenpox but my 2 siblings did not . radiation appears to be contagious too. Tom Cowan explains it all the best..

Expand full comment
Jun 20, 2022·edited Jun 20, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

With respect, the “no virus” people start with a very strong point, but their argument weakens to collapse after one or two questions.

You are operating on an act of faith at this point.

Then, when questions are asked, and unconvincing answers are given, the questioner decides not to go all the way with you.

At that point, the “no virus” people get angry & accuse the uncertain of “denying the science”.

I simply point out that there remain unanswered questions that are parsimoniously answered by positing an infective principle, which we don’t have to call a virus.

So to recap, I accept that no one has demonstrated the existence of a virus.

That does not equal proof that viruses or other, small, labile, infectious principals don’t exist, ever, anywhere, including in settings in which the experiments referred to previously have not extended.

We then all experience the observation of catching colds from others with symptoms.

The explanations offered for this phenomenon are totally unsatisfactory. They might be true, or not. It’s not possible to be definitive about it.

Additionally, the explanations for the appearance in the immune systems of those who’ve become ill of memory of prior contact with components of the alleged infective agent are similarly unsatisfactory.

In both cases, while there are interesting theories of how these might occur without invoking infective principals, those explanations are highly speculative. In particular, these explanations are not supported by empirical evidence that allows no other explanation than they one claimed by the “no virus” camp. There is genuine uncertainty.

It’s for this reason that earnest people like me, who had shown in writing & verbally that I’m open to the deceit of the virus people, is as a scientist not satisfied by either of the viruses exist or viruses don’t exist narratives. Further, I see no short term method of definitively grounding this matter one way or the other.

It’s for this reason that I mostly stick to different points entirely, points not to do with viruses.

I don’t care if viruses exist or don’t exist. I have no stake in anything other than what can be proven.

I DO care that people are being lied to in a dozen ways that don’t depend on viruses. It’s those lies I expose repeatedly.

Finally, those who follow my argument above & still darned well fight me are, I am forced to conclude are either my enemy, or care more about the existential argument than throwing off a tyrant, which is absurd. That’s pretty much the same thing.

At that point, I wish them good day.

Expand full comment

Or in shorter form, why strain at a gnat, but swallow a camel? Or something like that.

For myself, discovery of and microscopic documentation of viruses long pre-date the politicization of science and medicine. The bald assertion that motion sickness (essentially sequelae to derangement of structures in the inner ear) has simply been renamed "norovirus," a disease process that produces an immune response and which doesn't require any particular motion or inner ear involvement, contributes nothing whatsoever, other than an air of crackpottery, to the discussion of personal and public health discussions regarding 'rona.

Expand full comment

The HIV virus causing AIDS has an alternate explanation. Semen temporarily shuts down the immune system in the female so the female does not kill the sperm before it impregnates the mother. Many gay men were having anal sex with hundreds of partners a year. Each time shutting down the immune system. The difference between a husband and wife shutting down the immune system daily, with a gay man shutting it down was that the sperm remained in the vagina, whereas via anal tears in gay men it entered the blood stream.

Expand full comment
Jun 21, 2022·edited Jun 21, 2022

The most plausible explanation for AIDS is that it is poisoning. They poisoned large numbers of gay people in the US in the late 1970s and early 1980s using hepatitis vaccines. They poisoned hundreds of millions of Africans in the 1980s using smallpox vaccines. They sustain the narrative by poisoning illegal drugs.

It's not the vaccine that poisons. It's an undisclosed additional ingredient. We don't know the nature of this ingredient, but it's not transmissible.

At first, Anthony Fauci - who knows how AIDS is caused - suggested it might be a respiratory virus. They isolated dying AIDS patients in hospices where they were attended by personnel in hazmat suits.

When it became clear it doesn't transmit by air, they fell back to sexual transmission and found HIV, the "AIDS virus". Peter Duesberg was a leading retrovirus researcher and opposed the HIV theory because it had no supporting evidence. It still doesn't. However, they quickly made an example of Duesberg and he lost all his funding.

Duesberg published the book "Inventing the AIDS virus." You can find it as a PDF here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261948355_Inventing_the_AIDS_Virus

Kary Mullis, inventor of PCR, endorsed it:

"We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake. I say this rather strongly as a warning. Duesberg has been saying it for a long time. Read this book."

Expand full comment
author

I wish that I had time to delve deeply into that story in the short term. I'll find time in the longer term, but it's interesting to see how the Matrix of belief gets organized for most everything in every specialist domain.

Expand full comment

Colds though might be caused by a need to cleanse. IOW viruses constantly circulate but can only take hold in a system that ‘needs’ it. The ‘cold’ symptom might be a legitimate need of the immune system which allows a foreign object to come into it to ‘irritate’ it to force a cleansing.

Expand full comment

Last, we talk about colds, HIV, smallpox, etc as of they are the same phenomena with different viruses. They might not be. They might be completely different.

Expand full comment
RemovedJun 20, 2022·edited Jun 20, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Ben,

Very well put, thank you.

Expand full comment

Toni,

I felt a bit bad after my post. While I out just now on one of our long daily walks, this occurred to me: I am not your adversary. I want the best for you, just the same as I want for me.

So please accept that my comments are absolutely not intended to be personal or any kind of attack.

Those who’ve known me a long time know that I NEVER deliberately start arguments & fights. I have been known to work really hard to make conflicts unlikely.

Famously, a friend who knows a very large number of people in Biopharma told me that I’d somehow had a long career yet never made a single real enemy.

Not for what of having attempted controversial activities, but because I think especially hard about those who might consider themselves a loser in some decisions I’d made.

It was exhausting but I found it far preferable compared with accumulating a bunch of people who don’t like me.

Peace to you 🤗

Cheers,

Mike

Expand full comment

Well said.

Though at this point in time, after waking up, I am very happy to accumulate enemies like Fauci, Biden, Hancock, all members of Sage, the odious media parasites etc.

Expand full comment

If, and I’m not saying I totally accept this, but if viruses are ways the body sheds toxins, they can ‘spread’, seemingly, and not be what they think we are. It is possible we all need periodic purification. We all need to mucous up and leak some toxic stuff from us. So a legitimately contagious virus is passing around but only those who need a cleansing accept it in their bodies. Those who don’t, won’t get it.

Expand full comment

Mine just shows Share Hide or Delete.

Expand full comment

PS. I wish I could edit my comment. ‘What we think THEY are’. Not ‘we are’.

Expand full comment

To edit click the 3 dots beside Collapse > edit and save

Expand full comment

Mine doesn’t show that!

Expand full comment

How do you explain AIDS then?

Expand full comment

Seemingly it was spread through ‘injection’ via tears in the anal walls.

Expand full comment

Although I do have an alternate theory that explains it without involving a virus.

Expand full comment

This website is very interesting and, I find, easy to understand. Thanks.

Expand full comment

Current covid strategy amounts to continuing to drink to avoid a hangover.

It's either pay now or pay later.

Yet no one knows what the interest rate is.

Expand full comment

These are not real vaccines. They are spike protein factories that don’t protect anyone.

The smallpox vaccine was deadly and had to be taken off the market.

Expand full comment

This was the original intent of getting these shots out. Elderly, caregivers, those at risk. Then Xiden showed up.

Expand full comment
author
Jun 20, 2022·edited Jun 20, 2022Author

I very much doubt that ring vaccination was ever the actual plan. I do not recall talk on that level, and the drive to vaccinate most anyone (like military) seemed to ramp quickly enough that it was likely already in the works.

Expand full comment

I agree. The only place i heard extensive discussion of ring vaccination was in France. I don’t know if they ever introduced it, though. I found it worrying. They could claim that a contact had confirmed Covid & order vaccination, on pain of being interned. Nasty.

Expand full comment
Jun 20, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

Initially, Bourla in his famous TV interview, brushed off the question about his being vaxxed and when by pointing out he was not in the risk group, and would wait his turn (with a grin on his face). But then the script changed, or pretenses were dropped.

Expand full comment

For my part, I could see that mass jabbing was always the plan. Yes, they started with the elderly & others most at risk, to justify rolling out an inadequately tested procedure on the populace. And little by little, they expanded the rollout, along with the propaganda campaign. But the Aussie government contracted way back to buy several million doses of the stuff, Pfizer and AZ too (I forget the exact number, but it was about 8 times the total population of Australia - people were commenting on it at the time). It was obvious it was not just going to be nursing homes.

Expand full comment

Yes, that was my understanding too.

So when and how did mission creep take place going from those "vulnerable" groups to the whole population??

Expand full comment

More like " Mission Pounce"

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Who is "we"?

Even Mercola admits now that it is unclear what's in the vials, American, Chinese, or Russian, doesn't matter. How could that be analized?

Expand full comment
RemovedJun 20, 2022·edited Jun 20, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Sorry, if I sounded a bit curt and thank you for your understanding.

Expand full comment

Shoot, how do we know that the smallpox vaccine eradicated smallpox? Seeing how the bungled covid vaccine program is cloaked in deceit and fraud, I’d question any historical documentation on the subject.

Expand full comment

About twenty years ago someone buttonholed me and said it didn’t work. This person showed me a graph of smallpox. Basically smallpox’s Farr’s curve. She was convinced it was waning when the vaccine was introduced. From the chart she showed me, if it was correct, it might have had no effect.

Expand full comment

Dissolving Illusions:

"... the original smallpox vaccine was an unusually harmful vaccination that was never tested before being adopted. It increased, rather than decreased smallpox outbreaks. As the danger and inefficacy became known, increasing public protest developed towards vaccination. Yet, as smallpox increased, governments around the world instead adopted more draconian mandatory vaccination policies."

https://pastebin.com/0fuPrA1q

Expand full comment

Hi Mathew,

One objection to this idea. If you are considered part of that ring that must be vaccinated for whatever reason... are you going to be forced vaccinated against your will?

In the same way, if you are considered part of the so called "vulnerable group" for whatever reason... are you going to be forced restricted against your will?

Because that would be madness, as it is madness what they are doing now. It sounds good on paper, but how do you apply it?

Public Health should only give recommendations, that's my point. And no government should be involved in this at all. Their role should be NONE. No mandatory anything, that's a crime.

In any case, you would still need safe and effective vaccines, which we don't have. And Most Important Of All! You would still need an emergency, which never was. So in reality you should not do anything at all beyond normal healthcare for this situation. From the very beginning of it. Nothing should have been done beyond normal healthcare. You don't even need to create any vaccines for this.

Expand full comment

Your reference on “ring vaccination” was written by the CDC in 2019 no less. "Ring Vaccination | Smallpox | CDC". www.cdc.gov. November 29, 2019.

As we all now know, the CDC has been lying an manipulating data for years to fit its agenda. They are one of the MOST corrupt government institutions. If you actually spend a few minutes researching “the history of the small pox vaccination campaign” you will realize it has a very dark history. There is no actual “small pox vaccine” the way we think of a vaccine today. Back it the early 1900s, a “doctor” would cut your arm with a scalpel and rub pus from an infected cow, sheep or human pustule directly into the wound. The hypodermic needle had not been invented yet. Most of the “vaccines” were contaminated with deadly bacteria and made people gravely ill. They literally infected you on purpose directly from an infected pox pustule. If you were not covered in blister lesions within a few days - they cut you again and rubbed infected pus directly into your wound again. More people died from the small pox vaccination campaigns then from the actual disease. Every vaccine mandate campaign was followed by a deadly outbreak of small pox in the community. Like today, when The government realized the vaccine did nothing to control outbreaks, they doubled down and began to force small pox “vaccine” mandates on all people. Many peoples children died from the vaccination campaign yet the government would grant no exemptions to the mandate. If we do not learn history we are doomed to repeat it.

Please read Dr Suzanne Humphreies book “dissolving illusions” on the dark history of “vaccination” in the US. Most of what the CDC tells us is not true.

The CDC is not and has never been on the side of the people.

A little research into the history of the CDC will reveal they hurt far more people then they pretend to help.

Expand full comment

Thinking about actual vaccines, not the current misnamed injections du jour — wouldn’t it still require some time for immunity to even build? I would imagine it likely for someone in close proximity to end up getting infected before a preemptive on the spot vaccination would take effect. Not all that sold on the strategy actually. Only vaccinating the vulnerable (with an actual vaccine) yes, but would have to do that preemptively, not on the spot I would think…

For the EUA beasties it obviously anyway can’t work since even if injected it doesn’t count for 14 days. And a few other reasons.

But then maybe this is a way to give cover to the adverse events experienced by “ring” injected around an infected person… Oh nuts. They must have died because they were infected too quickly…

Expand full comment

I doubt under any circumstances it could work. But maybe with a non airborne virus it might. Old people were locked down tighter than a drum in 2020 and early 2021, but amazingly they kept getting COVID.

Expand full comment

I live on the 16th floor. Downtown. Lots of concrete around me. I get dust blown up into my suite and I have to dust all the time. Virus particles are smaller and lighter and known to travel on dust particles. If you’re breathing air, you’re breathing in dust particles and virus particles.

Expand full comment

Lots of dust are dead skin cells.

Expand full comment

Sheesh. I’m now wiping my dining room table.

Expand full comment

Please, don't give them any ideas. Force-jabbing toxic sludge is still that, whether done in rings or not. And eventually, just about everyone will find himself in one of those "rings".

Expand full comment

But in this case the vaccine didn't stop transmission, nor did it prevent infection and serious outcomes. For example, in New Zealand, the jabbed are being hospitalised and dying at the same rate, or even slightly higher in certain cohorts, than the unjabbed, so no protection is afforded.

Expand full comment