Vaccines Are Not Without Risks, Here’s Why

Vaccines that are forced and massively administered to populations are neither completely harmless nor really effective. Also, their long-term side effects are unknown. Explanations with Jean-Marc Sabatier, research director at the CNRS and doctor in Cellular Biology and Microbiology, affiliated with the Institute of Neuro Physiopathology (INP), at the University of Aix-Marseille.

Jean-Marc Sabatier (DR)
Jean-Marc Sabatier (DR)

After 18 months of compulsory vaccination, the Minister of Health, Olivier Véran, evokes “the vaccine fatigue of the French” so as not to impose a 4ᵉ dose. Can the Covid-19 vaccination be dangerous?

Jean-Marc Sabatier – To answer, you have to know how it happens. The SARS-CoV-2 virus attacks our body and induces Covid-19 diseases. To protect ourselves and defend our body, we must teach our immune system to neutralize the virus through vaccination. To teach our organism to defend itself before being infected by the virus, it must be presented with constituents of this virus, namely one or more of its viral proteins. For this purpose, one or more viral antigens are injected, or the body produces (one or more of) these antigens. In the majority of current vaccines, we target the production, by our body, of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 [c’est la protéine de surface du virus qui reconnaît le récepteur ECA2 des cellules cibles] using mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNtech or Moderna vaccines) or viral vector vaccines expressing this protein (AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines). Novavax’s upcoming “Nuvaxovid” vaccine is directly based on the recombinant spike protein. In reality, these vaccine spike proteins are slightly modified compared to the viral spike protein. In the case of Chinese vaccines (Sinovac and Sinopharm), all of the viral particle is injected, the infectivity of which has been neutralized by prior chemical treatment. The purpose of these vaccines is to stimulate the immune response in order to recognize and neutralize SARS-CoV-2.

That’s the theory. But in fact, do vaccines fulfill their mission?

J.-MS- The vaccines used must meet two criteria: they must be effective against the virus and harmless to our body. To date, it is clear that vaccinated people can be infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants, and transmit the virus to other people. There is therefore a major problem of efficiency.
Similarly, these first-generation vaccines (based on the spike protein of the Wuhan virus, which is a viral strain that has not been circulating for about 18 months) are not without side effects – more or less serious – in vaccinated people. This means that these vaccines are not always harmless according to people, which is also a major problem, because the vaccine safety that should be a requirement for any vaccine does not exist.

Anti-Covid vaccines therefore have side effects. Which ?

J.-MS- Among the so-called “immediate” side effects of vaccination are myocarditis, pericarditis, thromboses, thrombocytopenia, menstruation disorders, and many others. There is also a strong fear of more “late” adverse effects (which may take months or years to appear), such as autoimmune diseases, cancers and neurological pathologies. For all these reasons, I do not recommend compulsory vaccination and massive populations (especially the youngest) against SARS-CoV-2 with current pseudo-vaccines.

What would you recommend: medication?

J.-MS – For my part, it is clear that the objective pursued by the majority of countries in the world is the vaccination of all against SARS-CoV-2. This mass vaccination is unreasonable and often comes at the expense of potential alternative treatments, such as vitamin D, Ivermectin and others. Personally, I think that the mass vaccination of populations does not pursue a purely health objective. It is noteworthy that big pharma has recently offered anti-Covid-19 treatments, including Pfizer with “Paxlovid” (combination of a 3CL protease inhibitor and ritonavir), and Merck with “Molnupiravir” (analog of nucleoside).

What about natural immunity, especially with the less dangerous Omicron variant than the previous ones?

J.-MS- I think the Omicron variant and its BA.2 sub-variant are a great chance to put an early end to a pandemic that has been going on for two years already. Indeed, the characteristics of this variant are favorable to us, because it is extremely contagious – up to more than half a million people infected per day in France – but very little malicious / virulent, with a very low lethality (3 ,2 times lower than that of the Delta variant, according to a recent study in the United Kingdom) which itself has a lethality approximately 4 times lower than that of the historic viral strain from Wuhan.
The successive appearance of the Delta then Omicron variants follows a virological logic, with the appearance of increasingly infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants, but less and less lethal. Thanks to the natural immunity acquired after infection with Omicron (even Delta), in addition to vaccination, we should pass from the pandemic (an epidemic which extends beyond the borders of the countries and which can spread on a continent , a hemisphere or worldwide) to endemic (the usual persistence of an infectious and contagious disease in a given region). The disease then prevails there permanently or latently and affects a large part of the population. We speak of endemic when the presence of the disease is known, reported, but this does not mean that the latter is progressing or that it is spreading.
A very rapid spread of Omicron in the various countries of the world finally appears desirable at this stage, because the appearance of a variant of SARS-CoV-2 that is highly infectious and more virulent/lethal than Omicron cannot be excluded, especially with the strong viral selection pressure exerted by vaccination and mass boosters.

Why then, in your opinion, are the scientists on the TV sets and the authorities of the Scientific Council insisting on compulsory vaccination?

J.-MS – I think the Scientific Council is doing what it can in a particularly difficult context. In my opinion, this advice does not have a free hand and must be obliged to align with the government health policy (also pursued by many countries) which is excessive vaccination and for all. Given the sometimes irrational decisions taken, I cannot imagine that the members of this council really decide on French health policy.
As for the doctors and “specialists” who roam the television shows, they are often the same people invited; these are all very favorable to mass vaccination and multiple boosters. Those who have a different speech and/or who have doubts about the merits of non-selective vaccination of the population are generally not invited. So the speeches in the media are all in the same direction and are in favor of vaccination, which is regrettable.
I would like to specify that I personally have no conflict of interest with pharmaceutical laboratories or other lobbies. My speech is free.

Vaccines: immediate and long-term dangers of the 3rd dose

Covid-19: how to avoid the deleterious effects of vaccines

Leave a Comment