COVID-19 And All the Background it Contains

Opinion

The claim that COVID-19 is new to humans in Wuhan in 2020 and that pharmaceutical companies have developed an mRNA vac­cine against it at lightning speed (Operation Warp Speed) is a fairy tale.

The story of coronaviruses, the spike protein, and COVID-19 in general, is quite different:

i. The first coronavirus was isolated by Beach and Schalm in 1936. The virus caused poultry bronchitis in newborn chickens.

ii. The first human coronavirus 229E was discovered in 1962 by Dorothy Hamre at the University of Chicago when she ex­amined tissue cultures from students with colds.

iii. Two further studies, one published by David Tyrell, the other by Ken McIntosh independently isolated two additional hu­man coronaviruses, B814 and C43. The observation that the surface of these viruses had characteristic spikes like a “solar corona” defi­nitely gave these viruses the name “coronaviruses” in 1968.

iv. In 1966, US researchers brought coronavirus to the UK and infected 26 volunteers to see if this virus could produce an in­fection and what that looked like.

And here the opinions are divided: While some call this virolog­ical research, David E. Martin criticizes the fact that this virus was brought from the USA to Great Britain and thus healthy volunteers were infected for experimental reasons, which is contrary to the Nuremberg Code. The Nuremberg Code is an ethical guideline for the preparation and conduct of medical, psychological, and other experiments on humans and allows medical experiments to devel­op therapies, but not experiments to make healthy people sick. In addition, voluntary consent must have been obtained from the pa­tient beforehand.

Gain-of-function research is research to improve function. In virology, gain-of-function research involves experiments to make viruses more infectious and dangerous. Dual-use research is re­searching whose results can be used for civilian or military pur­poses, i.e., in ways that are beneficial or destructive to humans. A universal vaccine is one that is effective against many different strains of viruses and makes booster vaccinations unnecessary. The search for a universal vaccine, gain-of-function and dual-use research overlaps and may be difficult to distinguish. This type of research has made great strides with the introduction of “genetic engineering” (1976) and “CRISPR technology” (2002). Thanks to these techniques, the genetic material (DNA) of living beings can be selectively manipulated, altered or assembled in any way, enabling novel and effective medical therapies - but which can also be used in the production of bioweapons.

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: General Information

Vaccines are drugs that activate the immune system to protect against infectious diseases. Vaccines are designed to stimulate the body’s immune response against disease [1-3]. The person vac­cinated against COVID-19 should no longer be able to contract COVID-19, and ideally, he should also no longer be able to pass on the virus. The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines do not meet either condi­tion. Our own clinical experience with vaccinated and unvaccinated people suffering from COVID-19, as well as the scientific literature, show that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were able to reduce the probability of becoming severely ill from COVID-19 infection in the 2nd wave [4-7]. The question is at what cost, in which patients, and with what acute and chronic side effects [1,5,8].

Swissmedic’s decision at that time to approve the vaccines was based on a rolling submission that included data from Pfizer’s Phase 3 study showing 9 % vaccine protection (p<0.0001) in sub­jects without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (the study’s first primary objective). Vaccine protection was also achieved in subjects with or without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (second primary objective of the study) [1,4,9,10]. In both cases, vaccine protection was achieved seven days after the second dose. Statistically, this is not tenable because it is the relative risk reduction and not the absolute one, which was only 0.78%! These are common statistical tricks used by the pharmaceutical industry to inflate the risk reduction and the alleged effect of their product. Example: if 9 out of 19’965 vaccinat­ed persons tested positive after two vaccinations, this is 0.045%. In the comparative placebo group, 169 of 20,172 tested positive, i.e., 0.83%. Thus, the Pfizer vaccine reduces the risk of infection (not death or serious illness) by 0.785%. But what Pfizer did: they com­pared 9 infected people in the vaccinated group with 169 in the pla­cebo group and calculated a 95% efficacy [1,10-13]. Relatively seen this is correct, but absolutely calculated on 40 000 test persons it is not [7,8,10,12].

The mRNA vaccines against the spike protein of COVID-19 were not designed, constructed and brought to market in a very short time [6,11,14]. The pharmaceutical companies knew and know that the search for a vaccine against coronaviruses has been unsuccess­ful for decades [14-16]. The fundamental question is whether the production of a universal vaccine that no longer requires booster vaccinations is not a notion born of human hubris, to which the an­swer is probably yes, given the variability of nature [1,2,5]. Was the COVID-19 pandemic deliberately hyped up in order to finally bring the expensive mRNA vaccines and with them the mRNA technolo­gy, even if deliberately flawed, onto the market? Billions had been invested in this research for years - now came the opportunity to collect this money worldwide [4,6,11,17]. The COVID-19 pandem­ic, a welcome “cash cow” for vaccine manufacturers? The massive redistribution of billions of dollars from the middle class to the al­ready billionaire “elite” suggests a clever business model in which politics, the military, and rich corporations or capital pools and foundations are all involved [18-21]. While medicine and the care for the patients, especially the care for the healthy unvaccinated, played a minor role and, moreover, common sense was eliminated (e.g., never before were there asymptomatically ill people, i.e., ill people without symptoms) [15,22,23].

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Side Effects

On September 13, 2023, the European Parliament specifical­ly addressed WHO and the global management of the so-called COVID-19 pandemic. At this session, cardiologist Peter McCullough gave his assessment of mRNA vaccines from. It is worth listening to his dramatic appeal. According to Peter McCullough, there are four main groups of side effects:

i. Cardiovascular disease: Even two years after vaccination was given, cardiac arrests were observed that could not be attribut­ed elsewhere. Furthermore, myocarditis, an accelerated worsening of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular diseases, an increase in myocar­dial infarctions, increased ruptures in the aorta (aortic dissections) and atrial fibrillation were found [2,15,24].

ii. Neurological diseases: Stroke (both ischemic and hem­orrhagic), ascending paralysis that begins in the lower extremities and can affect the entire body and lead to death (Guillain-Barré syndrome), as well as diseases of the small nerves that can cause numbness, pain and tingling (small fiber polyneuropathy), numer­ous different neurological disorders such as fatigue, muscle pain, dizziness, tinnitus and other [24-29].

iii. Formation of blood clots: unusually large and resistant blood clots that cannot be dissolved with conventional drugs and lead to vascular occlusions of arteries and veins with correspond­ing infarctions (cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction) as well as fatal pulmonary embolisms [25,30,24,29,13].

iv. Immunological abnormalities, i.e., pathological reac­tions of the own immune system, which starts to attack the body’s own tissues: so-called auto-immune disorders, which are, among others, a characteristic of the so-called “Long-COVID syndrome” [2,15,31,32,33].

v. If a pseudovirus is surrounded by spike proteins of the COVID-19 virus, the same damage occurs in the lungs and in the blood vessels - right down to the smallest vessels. In other words, it is not the virus itself that initiates heart attacks and brain infarcts, as well as inflammation in blood vessels, but the spike protein itself - regardless of whether it sits on the outer layer of a COVID-19 or is injected alone [15,25,27,28,30]. The spike protein does not need a replicating virus - it damages cells by docking to the ACE receptor and damaging and fragmenting the cells’ mitochondria (the cells’ power plants that produce and provide energy) [6,34,22,23,35,36].

Due to the limited scope of this thesis paper, I cannot go into the broad field of the so-called “long COVID syndrome”, which should be well known due to the broad discussion in the public. However, it should be mentioned that the post-COVID symptoms are associated with the persistence of circulating COVID-19 spike protein, which has been detected in all organs of the body for months, although it should be degraded within 14 days [2,15,17,22,34].

Abortions, Excess Mortality, and Health Problems 2020 to 2022/23

Supposedly, vaccination of pregnant women is safe. Between 2020 and 2022, there were no more abortions (unwanted early ter­minations of pregnancy). So: vaccination is safe. So much for the official claims of the authorities [9,14,26,28,29]. The statements about miscarriages after vaccination seem to be confirmed by a cor­responding publication in the “New England Journal of Medicine”.

However, the Swiss Prof. Konstantin Beck comes to other con­clusions, which can be understood in his presentation. According to Prof. Beck, there was a corona baby boom in 2021 with an in­crease in births of +3%, in 2022, but a baby gap of -8.5%, which varied in different regions of Switzerland - up to -16%. While in 2021 the rate of miscarriages had decreased, in 2022 it increased significantly. In Germany, the number of stillbirths per 1,000 births increased by +20% at the end of 2021. This does not seem surpris­ing, as the Spikevax package insert states the following: “No ade­quate and well-controlled studies have been conducted on the use of Spikewax in pregnant women [37-39]. Available data on the use of Spikewax in pregnant women are insufficient to inform on the risks associated with the vaccine during pregnancy. It is not known whether Spikevax passes into breast milk [5,10,15,13,25,40]. No data are available to assess the effect of Spikevax on the breastfed infant or milk production or secretion. Therefore, the use of Spikev­ax in nursing mothers is not recommended” [41-43].

And: the vaccination is “not recommended for breast feed­ing mothers - but strongly recommended for pregnant women” [5,10,13,15,37,38]. This seems to be a bad joke. It seems to have been “overlooked” that birth precedes breastfeeding. But Swiss­medic accepted this statement! Like so many other things [5,10,37].

The above-mentioned publication of the “New England Journal of Medicine” says that there was no “safety signal” from vaccina­tion in the third trimester of pregnancies [3,5,10,37,38]. However, there are no data on the first and second trimesters of pregnancy, when the risks to the unborn child are high. Furthermore, the jour­nal says, “the most frequently reported pregnancy-related adverse events were spontaneous abortions”[13,23,37,38]. In other words, based on the figures presented, vaccination caused an increase in miscarriages by +73.1%. Based on data in the literature, it must be assumed that one in 10 miscarriages is caused by COVID-19 vacci­nation.

Reportedly, there has been no excess mortality among young people in Switzerland Vaccination for 0-19-year-olds is safe. So much for the official claims of the authorities. This is contradicted by Prof. Beck’s data. Between 1997 and 2016, 19-39-year-olds con­sistently accounted for the smallest share of the increase in health care costs, but from 2021 they accounted for the largest. Hospital­izations of 0-14-year-olds for pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrest as well as cerebral infarctions increased by 125% in 2021 (virus + vaccination) compared to 2020 (virus only). Question: Why do we vaccinate our children? [18,20,44,45].

The official statistics seem to have hidden the excess mortality among young people with statistical tricks by, among other things, summarizing the excess mortality of 0–64-year-olds - and in this the excess mortality of young people is lost [9,12,16,17,44,46]. The fact according to Prof. Beck is that the mortality rate of 20–39-year-olds decreased by 1% in 2021, but increased by 14% in 2022, even though there were no further waves in 2022 with a similarly ag­gressive COVID-19 wave as at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. For 0-19-year-olds, a 14% increase in mortality in 2022 is calculated. Authorities deny excess mortality “thanks to” statistical tricks, while the trend of continued excess mortality is statistically significant, according to Prof. Beck. At the very least, the authori­ties concede that the health problems of young people would have worsened in 2021 and 2022 - when there were no more aggressive virus variants - precisely because of the higher number of unusual events: pulmonary embolisms, cardiac arrest, and cerebral infarc­tions - events that usually occur in older patients [5,15,26,27,30].

Nobody seems to pay serious attention to the documented ex­cess mortality in the post-COVID period in many countries, which in England and Wales, for example, is reported to be +20.9%. It would be time to provide transparent figures and to honestly anal­yse the mechanisms, causes and pathophysiological processes of this excess mortality. Battles between vaccine advocates and crit­ical voices that are blanketly denigrated as conspiracy theorists do not help. “Correlation” is a Canadian non-profit organization that conducts independent research on issues of public interest. The group published an extensive study on September 17, 2023 entitled “COVID-19 vaccine associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere” and calculated 17 million vaccine related deaths out of 13.5 billion injections based on data from 17 countries, i.e., 1 in 470 vaccinated died from vaccination [16,18,32,42,47]. The same group calculated 3.7 million vaccine-related deaths for every 350 million vaccinations in India; a vaccine-related mortality of o.6% for those over 80 in Israel and 1% for those over 85 in Australia. For those under 45 years of age, vaccine-related mortality is <0.01% [5,14,16,42,46]. The conclusion was that it was reckless to prior­itize vaccinating those thought to need the greatest protection [1,10,35,36,41].

Vaccine Companies, Vaccines and Contracts

As mentioned above, the narrative of hastily developed new mRNA vaccines in the face of a new virus is a fairy tale. Based on years of research, it was also clear to pharmaceutical com­panies that there was no effective vaccine against coronavirus­es and that research in this regard had so far been unsuccessful [1,6,8,11,45,46]. The scientific studies on mRNA vaccination in volunteers were either never published, or they turned out to be manipulated [10,22,23,38,48]. Pfizer in particular has had to pay a $2.3 billion fine in the U.S. for fraud in its own drugs that were brought to market - not a good reputation for bringing mRNA vac­cines to market as safe and effective, especially when many billions in sales and profits beckon [1,8,10,13,23].

The spike protein cannot be passed on to the infant with the mother’s milk - but it can. The question of whether spike protein can pass through the placenta and reach the unborn is controver­sial [4,7,8,11,34,41]. However, the spike protein has been identified in the stool of unborn babies. Whether this is protective for the newborn against COVID-19 infection shortly after birth or whether the spike protein causes harm is unclear, especially when one sees the deleterious effects of spike protein in the human hippocampus [1,7,11,34,41,45]. To be sure, the biology of the vaccines and espe­cially of the spike protein is still unclear and so especially the ra­tio of benefit and harm is doubtful, given the fact that the current COVID-19 variants are less aggressive [11,34,41,42,46,48]. If a loud CAVE (!) is already appropriate for a single vaccination, one should certainly be more cautious about recommending repetitive rounds of vaccination. In fact, one should refrain from doing so altogether until more and better data are available [10,13,23,46,49].

The vaccine manufacturer contracts between the vaccine man­ufacturers and the individual countries are a particular source of annoyance. Vaccine manufacturers claim that, given the pace at which they have had to develop vaccines, they cannot take respon­sibility for the negative effects of vaccination [13,22,46,50,51]. One might try to understand this if the acute and rapid development of a vaccine against a new virus were not a fairy tale. On the website of the FOPH one can see the contracts - they are blacked out in large parts - unworthy of a direct democracy. What is there to hide? That the vaccine manufacturers refuse any responsibility for their prod­ucts? That the Swiss taxpayer has to pay a higher price for the vac­cines than the EU citizens? That the vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable in case of damage and that the taxpayer even has to pay all the lawyer and litigation costs? The full price must be paid even if the vaccines are withdrawn for whatever reason? And that these rules also apply to supplies with vaccines that have been ad­justed when a viral mutation occurs?

Latin American countries have accused Pfizer of “high-level bullying” during negotiations over the Covid-19 vaccine, according to a Bureau of Investigative Journalism report released in collab­oration with STAT. Government officials from Argentina and an­other Latin American country, which has signed a confidentiality agreement with Pfizer and therefore cannot be named, have told the Bureau that Pfizer has sought additional compensation for civ­il lawsuits filed by citizens related to the Covid-19 vaccine. Pfizer reportedly asked the governments of Argentina and Brazil to de­posit government assets, including military bases and government bank reserves, as collateral for possible future litigation costs [22,38,39,54,55]. Well, that fits the Department of Defense (DoD) better than the Department of Health. It simply begs the question, what Pfizer’s involvement with the DoD is if these mRNA vaccines are to be used to develop a universal vaccine [22,38,39,44,45]. And why is Pfizer interested in foreign military bases as a compensation asset?

GAVI - The Vaccine Alliance

Anyone expecting transparency as well as political and sci­entific reappraisal three and a half years after the first positive COVID-19 patient in Switzerland will be disappointed [18,19,20]. There are important unanswered questions:

i. For which purpose and for which services did the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donate 600,000 US dollars to Swiss Med­ic, the Swiss regulatory authority for medicinal products and medi­cal devices?

ii. Why did the Federal Council in 2009 give a plot of land in Geneva and 30 million Swiss francs of taxpayers’ money to GAVI, a global vaccine alliance that aims to take care of vaccine programs in developing countries and is also supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation? Why do representatives of vaccine suppliers and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation sit on the board of GAVI?

iii. Why does the Federal Council grant GAVI quasi-exterri­toriality in the agreement? Why do Swiss authorities and the ju­diciary have no access rights to the GAVI premises and building? Furthermore, why does the Federal Council acknowledge that no one may access GAVI’s data? Why does the organization including the foundation board members and GAVI employees receive immu­nity from jurisdiction from the Federal Council, i.e., they can freely dispose of all assets without any control?

So, our Federal Council has given extraterritorial status to a private organization without democratic legitimacy, without dis­cussion and vote in parliament - a private organization that has been financed by various governments since 2011 with a total of 23 billion dollars of taxpayers’ money and is still making more money with this money by hedging, just like the WHO. Isn’t it interesting to see that charitable foundations that donate hundreds of millions of dollars, or even billions at one point, still end up richer than before? [8,16,19,21].

GAVI vaccinates not only against COVID and other diseases, but also against poverty, climate change, for affordable green en­ergy, for gender justice and for peace. GAVI even claims that 14 of the 17 so-called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of Agen­da 2023 are achievable through vaccination. The Vaccine Alliance was officially launched in 2000 at the Davos Economic Forum and began its work at that time with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Also involved are the World Bank, WHO, UNICEF and various vaccine manufacturers. The UN’s Agenda 2023 is of­ten compared to the “Great Reset” promoted by Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum. Fittingly, the UN and WEF agreed to a “Strategic Partnership” in 2019 - just before the pandemic broke out. The 14 globalist goals GAVI miraculously wants to achieve with vaccination can easily be read. The whole thing looks more like an endless propagation of vaccination - the cash cow for various play­ers to keep up at all costs [18-21,52].

Critical Assessment

Generalities

COVID-19 is a fatal, not to say lethal, conflation of medicine, politics, economics, and military [19,21,53]. The actual goals of this pandemic - whether accidental or deliberately launched - are not transparent. Critical comments and contrary opinions need to be discussed. The mRNA vaccines have resulted in far more and more severe side effects than predicted [6,11,48,54]. The question is whether this could have been known, and if so, why these vaccines were nevertheless so widely promoted, marketed, and almost forc­ibly injected. mRNA research is not new and there are numerous research projects in the context of cancer therapies, some of which have been successful [8,7,41,46,55].

The question arises whether the previous research on the ther­apeutic use of mRNA, e.g., in cancer patients, was also as intensively accompanied by the political-military complex as in the context of COVID-19, where the Department of Defense (DoD), the CIA, DAR­PA, various NATO generals and so on were involved [53,20]. And where in Germany, the storage, transportation, and distribution of vaccines were in the hands of the military, and the Biosecurity De­partment in the German Ministry of Health has been in the hands of a Surgeon General since the Corona pandemic. In Switzerland, the contracts with the vaccine manufacturers were signed by the top military officer. But first, let us turn to the critical medical issues [19-21,52].

Medical Aspects

The first question is whether mRNA vaccines are necessary at all. The answer is clear: No, they are not. Thanks to “genetic engi­neering” and biotechnology, individual proteins can be specifical­ly constructed today. A conventional vaccine consists of injecting a toxin, a virus in an attenuated, inactive form, but containing all the proteins of that virus [1,6,34,11,41]. In the late 1980s, howev­er, it became possible to produce proteins in isolation as vaccines (e.g., against hepatitis B). Novavax has chosen this principle for its COVID-19 vaccine, which does not require mRNA. No mRNA would have been needed at all, but the spike protein itself or a protein of the viral envelope could have been used as vaccine [10,20,34,41].

An mRNA vaccine is capable of infecting any cell in the body and forcing it to produce non-human proteins. Any cell that produces protein foreign to the body sends a signal to the immune system: “I have been hijacked”. The cell is recognized as foreign and attacked by its own immune system in the sense of an autoimmune reaction [22,23,39,50,51]. This is one of the reasons that there are various toxic side effects in different organ systems. Another reason is the fact that the mRNA that is taken up into the cell, i.e., into the intra­cellular space, has been chemically modified in such a way that it cannot be degraded quickly - no one knows how long the mRNA remains in the body. There are no studies and no clinical data on this [39,46,50,51].

The mRNA also infects the cells lining the blood vessels: The en­dothelial cells, down to the smallest vessels. The mRNA transforms these endothelial cells into a spike protein factory, where the spike proteins do not belong. These cause inflammation, which activates various defense systems of the body and can lead to occlusion of the small vessels [11,46,50,56]. The consequences are heart attacks or cerebral infarctions, as they have occurred even in patients aged 0-14 years. No one knows how long the mRNA stays in these endo­thelial cells and how long inflammation, acute or low flame chronic, lasts [11,43,46,50]. The issue is twofold: what this inflammation does acutely and what the long-term damage of chronic inflamma­tion does to a degree that is difficult to define clinically. As men­tioned above, the spike protein damages even without sitting on the outer layer of a replicating virus: the spike protein is a substance that per se, independent of the virus causes these side effects and diseases because it can attach to the ACE receptor of all cells and destroy the mitochondria of the cells [11,23,45,50,51].

The world has gone off the rails in several ways. It is obvious that COVID-19 has infected not only people, but also our direct democracy, and one cannot help but feel that the WHO Pandemic Treaty and the supplemented International Health Regulations are not intended to deal it a definitive death blow. The multiple aspects of the “COVID-19 pandemic” are complex, opaque and intertwined. They are unlikely to be clarified/declared in the remaining lifetimes of both authors, because the truth must not come out. But that is no reason to dismantle our direct democracy and destroy our con­stitutional foundations. The consequences are obvious: at the indi­vidual level, societies fragment, basic human relationships suffer, people complain of physical exhaustion, and there is a sense of dis­interest in their work. Fear of failure spreads for systemic rather than individual reasons, and the loss of trust in policy makers in­tensifies. The feeling that political demands are not in line with the moral compass is intensifying. Selfishness, depolitization of citizens and an overwhelming feeling that nothing can be done anyway is spreading.

The last three and a half years of the pandemic should be trans­parently reviewed. A detailed, science-based discussion is expected - what worked, what went wrong, and why? The knowledge gained about COVID-19 over three and a half years should be discussed in an open and transparent manner with an eye to the future. Critical questions about vaccine efficacy, side effects and potential long-term harms must be communicated transparently, especially before new “vaccination rounds” are ordered.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

• Amanat F, Krammer F (2020) SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: Status Report. Immunity 52(4): 583-589.
• Chowdhury A, Sajid M, Jahan N, Adelusi TI, Maitra P, et al. (2021) A secondary approach with conventional medicines and supplements to recuperate current COVID-19 status. Biomed Pharmacother 142: 111956.
• López RMA (2021) COVID-19 vaccination in special gynecological and obstetric groups. Journal of Negative & No Positive Results 6: 434-441.
• Moore JP, Offit PA (2021) SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and the Growing Threat of Viral Variants. JAMA 325(9): 821–822.
• Nomier YA, Rao DS, Suhagi AH, Ahmed RA (2020) Distinctive Therapeutic Strategies against Corona Virus-19 (COVID-19): A Pharmacological Review. Sys Rev Pharm 11: 544-561.
• Abramaczyk H, Brozek Pluska B, Beton K (2022) Decoding COVID-19 mRNA vaccine immunometabolism in central nervous system: human brain normal glial and glioma cells by Raman imaging.
• Yount B, Curtis KM, Fritz EA, Hensley LE, Jahrling PB, et al. (2023) Reverse genetics with a full-length infectious cDNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. 2003 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA.
• WHO (World Health Organization) (2020) Draft landscape of COVID-19 candidate vaccines.
• Horton R (2020) The Covid-19 Catastrophe. Public Studies 159: 205-210.
• Michels CA, Perrier D, Kunadhasan J, Clark E, Gehrett J, et al. (2023) Forensic analysis of the 38 subject deaths in the 6-month interim report of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine clinical trial. I J Vaccine Theory 3: 973-1008.
• Mörz M (2022) A case report: multifocal necrotizing encephalitis and myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination against COVID-19. Vaccines 10(10): 1651.
• Tu W, Zhang P, Roberts A, Allen KS, Williams J, et al. (2023) SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death in vaccinated and infected individuals by age groups in Indiana, 2021-2022. Am J Public Health 113(1): 96-104.
• McCullough PA, Alexander PE, Armstrong R, Arvinte C, Bain AF, et al. (2020) Multifaceted highly targeted sequential multidrug treatment of early ambulatory high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). Rev Cardiovasc Med 21(4): 517-530.
• Dhama K, Khan S, Tiwari R, Sircar S, Bhat S, Malik YS, et al. (2020) Coronavirus Disease 2019-COVID-19. Clin Microbiol Rev 33(4): e00028-20.
• Fang J, Liehua D, Lianging Z, Cai Y, Cheung CW, et al. (2020) Review of the clinical characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). J Gen Inter Med 35(5): 1545-1549.
• Wang BX, Fish EN (2019) Global virus st outbreaks: Interferons as 1 responder. Semin Immunol 43: 101300.
• Sun Z, Thilakavathy KT, Kumar SS, He G, Liu SV (2020) Potential Factors Influencing Repeated SARS Outbreaks in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(5): 1633.
• Vogt PR (2020) A mid-term review or analysis of morals, medical facts, and current and future policy decisions. Interview with Dr. Paul R. Vogt. Vogt, April 09, 2020.
• Vogt RP, del Valle LD, Fimia DR (2023) COVID-19: the complex background of a pandemic. International Journal of Scholarly Research in Biology and Pharmacy (IJSRBP) 03 (01): 018-022.
• Vogt RP, del Valle LD, Osés RR, Fimia DR (2023) COVID-19 and all that this pandemic entails. International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology (IZAB) 6 (6): 000528.
• Vogt RP, Fimia DR (2024) Sifting through the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology (IZAB) 7 (2): 000576 (pp.3).
• McCullough PA, Kelly RJ, Ruocco G, Lerma E, Tumlin J, et al. (2021) Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Infection. Am J Med 134(1): 16-22.
• Pascolo S (2021) Way out of the COVID-19 pandemic thanks to mRNA vaccine. Swiss Medical Forum 21(7-8): 114-120.
• Alexander LK, Small JD, Edwards S, Baric RS (1992) An experimental model for dilated cardiomyopathy after rabbit coronavirus infection. J Infect Dis 166(5): 978-985.
• Brum AC, Glasman P, De Luca MC, Rugilo CA, Handal MI, et al. (2021) Ischemic lesions in the brain of a neonate with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pediatr Infect Dis 40(9): e340-343.
• Beach and Schalm (1936) A Filterable Virus. Distinct from that of Laryngotracheitis, the Cause of a respiratory disease of Chicks. Poultry Science.
• Douaud G, Lee S, Alfaro-Almagro F, Arthofer C, Wang C, at al. (2021) Brain imaging before and after COVID-19 in UK Biobank. medRxiv preprint.
• Bayat AH, Azimi H, Moghaddam MH, Ebrahimi V, Fathi M, et al. (2022) COVID-19 causes neuronal degeneration and reduces neurogenesis in human hippocampus. Apoptosis 27(11-12): 852-868.
• Gerhard A, Raeder V, Pernice HF, Boesl F, Schroeder M, et al. (2022) Neurological symptoms after COVID-19 vaccination: a report on the clinical presentation of the first 50 patients. Journal of Neurol 270(10): 4673-4677.
• K McIntosh, J H Dees, W B Becker, A Z Kapikian, R M Chanock (1967) Recovery in tracheal organ cultures of novel viruses from patients with respiratory disease. PNAS 57(4): 933-940.
• Tyrrell, Bynoe (1967) Cultivation of a Novel Type of Common-cold Virus in Organ Cultures. Br Med J 1(5448): 1467-1470.
• Menachery VD, Yount BL, Debbink K, Agnihothram S, Gralinski LA, et al. (2015) A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence. Nat Med 21(12): 1508-1513.
• Menachery VD, Yount VBL, Sims AC, Debbink K, Agnihothram SS, et al. (2016) SARS-like WIV1-CoV poised for human emergence. PNAS 113(11): 3048-3053.
• Pradhan P, Pandey K, Mishra A, Gupta P, Tripathi PK, et al. (2020) Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-I gpI20 and Gag. bioRxiv preprint.
• Fimia DR (2020) Points of Interest for the New Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Causing COVID-19/Opinion. EC VETERINARY SCIENCE/ECRONICON 5(10): 1-2.
• Fimia DR, Osés RR, de la Fé RPY, Osés LC, Zambrano GMP, et al. (2021) COVID-19: fitting a ROR prediction model for Cuba as vaccination advance. European Journal of Applied Sciences 9(5): 56-65.
• Shimabukuro TT, Kim SY, Myers TR, Moro PL, Oduyebo T, et al. (2021) Preliminary findings of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnant persons. N Engl J Med 384(24): 2273-2282.
• Jin JC, Ananthanarayanan A, Brown JA, Rager SL, Bram Y, et al. (2023) SARS CoV-2 detected in neonatal stool remotely from maternal COVID-19 during pregnancy. Pediatric Research 93(5): 1375-1382.
• Hoffmann M, Kleine WH, Pöhlmann SA (2020) Multibasic cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is essential for infection of human lung cells. Mol Cell 78(4): 779-784.
• Rojas M, Rodriguez Y, Acosta Ampudia Y, Monsalve DM, Zhu Ch, et al. (2022) Autoimmunity is a hallmark of post-COVID-syndrome. J Transl Med 20(1): 129.
• Lei Y, Schiavon CR, He M, Chen L Shen H, Zhang Y, et al. (2021) SARS-CoV-2 spike protein impairs endothelial function via downregulation of ACE2. Circulation Research 128: 1323-1326.
• Swank Z, Senussi Y, Alter G, Walt DR (2022) Persistent circulating SARS-CoV-2 spike is associated with post-acute COVID-19 sequelae.
• Khossoshahi A, Stone JH (2011) A clinical overview of IgG4-related systemic disease. Current Opinion in Rheumatology 23(1): 57-66.
• Bowe B, Xie Y, Al Aly Z (2022) Acute and postacute sequelae associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Nat Med 28(11): 2398-2405.
• Uversky VN, Redwan EM, Makis W, Rubio Casillas A (2023) IgG4 antibodies induced by repeated vaccination may generate immune tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Vaccines 11(5): 985-991.
• Hanna N, De Mejia CM, Heffes Doon A, Lin Xinhua, Botros B, et al. (2023) Biodistribution of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in human brest milk. eBioMedicine 96: 104800.
• Osés RR, Llanes CO, del Valle LD, Vogt RP, Wilford GFM, et al. (2023) Can pandemics be predicted?. I J Sci Research Archive (IJSRA) 10 (1): 686-694.
• Lorentzen CL, Haanen JB, Met Ö, Svane IM (2022) Clinical advances and ongoing trials of mRNA vaccines for cancer treatment. Lancet Oncol 23(10): e450-e458.
• Fimia DR, Osés RR, de la Fé RPY, Osés LC, Wilford GFM, et al. (2021) COVID-19: adjustment of an ROR prediction model for Cuba as a vaccination breakthrough (Preprints). The Lancet 11.
• Zhang L, Richards A, Barrasa MI, Hughes SH, Young RA, et al. (2021) Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 118(21): e2105968118.
• Kazachenka A and Kassiotis G (2021) SARS-CoV-2-host chimeric RNA-sequencing reads do not necessarily signify virus integration into the host DNA. Front Microbiol 12:676693.
• Vogt RP, del Valle LD, Fimia DR (2023) COVID-19 and its possible origin. World Journal of Biological and Pharmaceutical Research (WJBPR) 05 (01): 051-056.
• S. Department of Defense issued a contract for "COVID-19 Research" in Ukraine 3 months before COVID was known even to exist.
• Fimia DR (2020) The Methodology of Regressive Objective Regression According to the New SARS CoV-2 COVID-19 Pandemic in the Municipality of Santa Clara and Cuba (Opinion). I J Zoology Animal Biol 3 (3).
• Calisher C, Carroll D, Colwell R, Corley RB, Daszak P, et al. (2020) Statement in support of the scientist, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19. Lancet 395(10226): e42-e43.
• Rahman S, Rahman MM, Miah M, Begum MN, Sarmin M, et al. (2022) COVID-19 reinfections among naturally infected and vaccinated individual. Sci Rep 12(1): 1438.
• Osés RR, Fimia DR, Osés LC, Zambrano GMP, Santos ZT, et al. (2021) COVID-19 new and deceased cases forecast 105 days ahead in Cuba. Acta Scientific Veterinary Sciences (ASVS) 3 (7): 31-36.