Virus Shedding and The effects

What We’ve Learned from a Year of Vaccine Shedding Data

Numerous data sources now corroborate that the COVID vaccines shed in a consistent and replicable manner

Story at a Glance:

•After the COVID-19 vaccines hit the market, stories began emerging of unvaccinated individuals becoming ill after being in proximity to recently vaccinated individuals. This confused many, as the mRNA technology in theory should not be able to “shed.”

•After seeing countless patient cases which can only be explained by COVID vaccine shedding, a year ago, I initiated multiple widely seen calls for individuals to share suspected shedding experiences.

From those 1,500 reports, clear and replicable patterns have emerged which collectively prove “shedding” is a real and predictable phenomenon that can be explained by known mechanisms unique to the mRNA technology.

•Likewise, after being blocked from publication for over a year, recently, a scientific study corroborating the shedding phenomenon was finally published.

•This article will map out everything that is known about shedding (e.g., what are the common symptoms, how does it happen, who does it affect, does it occur through sexual contact, can it cause severe issues like cancer) along with strategies for preventing it.

When doctors in this movement speak at events about vaccines, by far the most common question they receive is, “Is vaccine shedding real?”

This is understandable as COVID-19 vaccine shedding (becoming ill from vaccinated individuals) represents the one way the unvaccinated are also at risk from the vaccines and hence still need to be directly concerned about them.

Simultaneously, it’s a challenging topic as:

•We believe it is critical to not publicly espouse divisive ideas (e.g., “PureBloods” vs. those who were vaccinated) that prevent the public from coming together and helping everyone. The vaccines were marketed on the basis of division (e.g., by encouraging immense discrimination against the unvaccinated), and many unvaccinated individuals thus understandably hold a lot of resentment for how the vaccinated treated them. We do not want to perpetuate anything similar (e.g., discrimination in the other direction).

•We don’t want to create any more unnecessary fear—which is an inevitable consequence of opening up a conversation about shedding.

•In theory, shedding with the mRNA vaccines should be “impossible,” so claiming otherwise puts one on very shaky ground.

Conversely, if shedding is real, we believe it is critical to expose as:

•Those being affected by it are in a horrible situation, particularly if everyone is gaslighting them about it and insisting it’s all in their head.

•It provides one of the strongest arguments to pull the mRNA vaccines from the market and prohibit the widespread deployment of mRNA technologies in the future.

For those reasons, Pierre Kory and I have spent the last year and a half trying to collect as much evidence as possible to map out this phenomenon with the following data sets:

•Dozens of extremely compelling patient histories1,2,3 from Kory and Marsland’s medical practice, including many responding to spike protein treatment.
•My own experience with patients and friends affected by shedding.
• I read large numbers of reports of shedding in (now deleted) online support groups.
•Roughly 1,500 reports from individuals affected by shedding we were able to collect.
•Extensive menstrual data compiled by MyCycleStory.

From that and the hundreds of hours of work that went into it (particularly reviewing and sorting the 1,500 reports), we can state the following with relative certainty:

1. Shedding is very real (e.g., each of those datasets is congruent with the others), and many of the stories of those affected by it are very sad.
2. People’s sensitivity to it dramatically varies.
3. Most of the people who are sensitive to shedding have already figured it out.
4. Mechanistically, shedding is very difficult to explain. However, now that new evidence has emerged, a much stronger case can be made for the mechanisms I initially proposed a year ago.

Note: if you have a shedding experience you would like to share (or wish to read through them), please do so here, where they are compiled.

Shedding Overview:

By far, the most common symptom of shedding is unusual and disrupted menstrual bleeding (which is also the most common COVID vaccine injury). This in turn, was the first thing that alerted me to the inconceivable possibility the vaccines could shed, as I quickly received many similar reports of highly unusual menstrual bleeding, which appeared to be due to exposure to someone who was vaccinated.

After this, the most common symptoms were headaches, flu-like illnesses, nosebleeds, fatigue, rashes, tinnitus, sinus or nasal issues, and shingles. Other less frequent symptoms are also repeatedly seen (e.g., palpitations, herpes outbreaks, and hair loss).

Additionally, many noticed they could immediately tell when they were in the vicinity of a shedder, typically either due to noticing a unique odor or symptoms immediately onsetting.

Generally speaking, the character of shedding symptoms were quite similar to long COVID and vaccine injuries, but typically were more superficial in nature, suggesting the body was reacting to a harmful external pathogenic factor rather than one already deep inside the body. More severe issues (e.g., cancers or heart attacks) also occurred, but these were much rarer than what you saw in the vaccine injured population, again suggesting shedding was primarily an external reaction. Interestingly, most of the (fairly varied) shedding symptoms overlap with the conditions DMSO treats (e.g., strokes), suggesting that DMSO’s key mechanisms of action (e.g., increasing blood flow, eliminating large and small blood clots, being highly anti-inflammatory, and rescuing cells from the cell danger response) are the exact opposite of what shedding does to the body.

Note: in the following sections, each superscript citation links to individual reports I’ve received about the phenomenon. I provided these citations to show how frequent many of these effects were, so that those who’d experienced them could see many others had too, and so that anyone who wants to research this has access to the primary data. The only shedding symptom I avoided comprehensively citing was abnormal menstruation, as so many reports were received, it was not feasible to compile all of them.

Shedding Patterns

In the same manner that there is a fairly high replicability in the symptoms individuals who are affected by shedding experience, there is also a fairly high congruency in the patterns of how they are affected. Specifically:

1. Some individuals are hypersensitive to shedders and can immediately detect when they are in the presence of a shedder or are on their way to developing harmful symptoms.

2. Others are less sensitive, but quickly notice specific characteristic symptoms consistently occur following shedding exposures (e.g., always feeling ill when a vaccinated husband returns from a long trip away, when going to church each week, when singing with their choir, or when taking a crowded route to work).

In some cases, they are able to identify a “super shedder” (amongst a group) who consistently made them ill, and in many cases they can identify the exact shedding incident that made them ill. Likewise, through tracking serial spike protein antibody levels (e.g., for patients undergoing treatment for long Covid or a vaccine injury) we’ve objectively corroborated that shedding exposures repeatedly worsen these patients (providing an explanation for why their symptoms “inexplicably” ebb and flow), that this can be seen objectively in their lab work and that spike protein treatments after shedding exposures clinically improve these patients.

Note: Pierre Kory’s practice has been able to determine that those they suspect are a shedder (e.g., a husband) test positive (through an antibody test) for a high spike protein levels and that eliminating the shedder from the patient’s life or treating the (asymptomatic) shedder with a vaccine injury protocol frequently significantly improves their patient’s recovery. Likewise, readers here have reported significant improvements from avoiding shedders—which sadly in some cases has required the more sensitive individuals to isolate themselves from society.

3. In the majority of cases, the effects of shedding are temporary and go away, but in a subset of people, they can last for months if not years.

4. Recognition of the shedding phenomenon has forced many to significantly change their lives. This included regretfully terminating a long-term romantic relationship, leaving their line of work (e.g., some massage therapists can no longer handle working on vaccinated clients), or only seeing unvaccinated healthcare providers (e.g., numerous people reported getting ill from vaccinated chiropractors or massage therapists, and we now periodically will have patients state they can only see us if we are unvaccinated).

5. The “stronger” the shedding exposure, the more likely shedding is to cause issues, but conversely, for more sensitive patients, “weaker” exposures also will. More substantial exposures include being around someone who was recently vaccinated or boosted (as shedding is strongest initially), being around more shedders, being in a confined space (e.g., a car) with a shedder for a prolonged period, or having close physical contact with a shedder.
Note: given all of this, I thought flying on airlines would be a significant issue, but I have only received two reports from readers where this was the case.

6. There appear to be some unexplained symptoms otherwise healthy patients now experience that are tied to shedding. However, it’s still often very challenging to tease out when shedding is the culprit due to how many variables are involved and the ambiguity of the subject (which is part of why so much detail has gone into this post so each of you can figure out if you are being affected by shedding).

Susceptibility to Shedding

In general, there are three categories of people who are susceptible to shedding (and in many cases these categories overlap).

The first are the sensitive patients (e.g., those who frequently react to chemicals or get injured by pharmaceuticals). For example, near the start of the vaccine rollout (before I was aware that shedding was an issue), I saw this video and genuinely wondered if it was real as many of its claims were quite extraordinary but at the same time, were somewhat in line with what a highly sensitive patient (of whom I know many) would describe.

To read the rest of the article, go to:

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/what-weve-learned-from-a-year-of?publication_id=748806&post_id=154372114&isFreemail=true&r=19iztd&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Shedding a Light on Covid Vaccine Shedding

COVID Vaccine Shedding Is ‘Real’, FDA & Pfizer Documents Are Proof: Clinicians

BY TYLER DURDEN
MONDAY, FEB 19, 2024 – 10:05 AM

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The topic of COVID-19 vaccine shedding has long been controversial, but now, some doctors say it is real.

(myboys.me, Naeblys/Shutterstock)

Shedding is unfortunately real,” said Dr. Pierre Kory at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) conference in Phoenix, Arizona, in early February. “The FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) knows that.”

Dr. Kory is a co-founder of the FLCCC, a non-profit advocacy group founded by physicians for the treatment of COVID-19, long COVID, and postvaccine syndromes. He is also the co-founder of the Leading Edge Clinic and has treated over a thousand long-COVID and postvaccine patients.

Fact-checkers have largely denied shedding on the basis of definition. The commonly cited definition comes from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, which defines shedding as the release of viruses, bacteria, and their components from live vaccines.

While mRNA and adenovirus vaccines are not live vaccines, they function similarly to gene therapy products.

All gene therapy products pose a risk of shedding, according to the FDA.

FDA Documents

In a 2015 document titled Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products, the FDA defines shedding as “the release of [viral or bacterial gene therapy products] … from the patient through one or all of the following ways: excreta (feces); secreta (urine, saliva, nasopharyngeal fluids etc.); or through the skin (pustules, sores, wounds).”

In the same document, the FDA also explains what gene therapy products are: “All products that mediate their effects by transcription and/or translation of transferred genetic material.”

The COVID-19 mRNA and adenovirus vaccines fall into this category. They mediate their effects by inducing the body to translate mRNA genetic information into spike proteins.

Some gene therapy products known to shed include an eye treatment branded as Luxturna. Luxturna uses an adenovirus carrier to deliver eye protein DNA to retina cells in patients.

The Luxturna adenovirus and its DNA have been found in patients’ tears, according to the product’s package insert.

Similarly, mRNA and adenovirus COVID-19 vaccines may cause vaccinated patients to release spike proteins or other vaccine components, Dr. Kory explained.

For example, COVID-19 mRNA has been found in the breast milk of vaccinated mothers, indicating possible exposure of the vaccine to infants. Another study showed that spike protein, the product of COVID-19 vaccination, can last for at least half a year in the blood of vaccinated individuals, indicating prolonged spike protein persistence.

The FDA, however, denied that the 2015 document applies to COVID mRNA vaccines.

“COVID-19 vaccines are not regulated as gene therapy products by the FDA; therefore, the guidance document cited is not applicable to the COVID-19 vaccines,” an FDA spokeswoman told The Epoch Times.

Pfizer Investigators Told to Report ‘Environmental’ Vaccine Exposures

Another piece of evidence resides in Pfizer documents, Dr. Kory added.

In Pfizer’s COVID mRNA vaccine protocol, the company instructs investigators to report “environmental exposures” if trial participants expose people around them to the vaccine through inhalation or skin contact.

Examples of such environmental exposures are noted as follows:

  • A male participant who is receiving or has discontinued [vaccine] intervention exposes a female partner prior to or around the time of conception.”
  • “A female family member or healthcare provider reports that she is pregnant after having been exposed to the [vaccine] intervention through inhalation or skin contact.”

The protocol also goes into what Dr. Kory and his clinic co-founder, Scott Marsland, call “secondary shedding.” This occurs when a person who has had environmental exposure to the vaccine then exposes another person.

An example of environmental exposure during breastfeeding,” Pfizer writes, “is a female family member or healthcare provider who reports that she is breastfeeding after having been exposed to the study intervention (the vaccine) by inhalation or skin contact.”

Pfizer’s Documents Showing Indirect Exposures

Pfizer has documented hundreds of adverse events that occurred as a result of indirect exposures or exposure to babies during pregnancy or breastfeeding.

In its Periodic Safety Report submitted to the European Union, Pfizer listed several adverse events it deemed not attributable to the vaccine and that should be excluded from discussion.

The document listed 22 cases of adverse events in babies who had received “indirect exposure” to COVID mRNA boosters, suggesting exposure other than a direct vaccination.

The investigators also monitored several special adverse event cases. Two blood-related adverse events involved babies being exposed through breastfeeding. Ten cases of liver-related adverse events and one adverse event of the vasculature system were reported for the same reason.

Two cases of acute kidney or renal failure and eight respiratory cases also involved babies being exposed during pregnancy or breastfeeding.

Testimonies From Patients

Patients who may be affected by vaccine exposure tend to be those with a history of sensitivities and chronic diseases, said Dr. Kory and Mr. Marsland. They also tend to have bad experiences with pharmaceuticals and are more likely to be chronically debilitated by COVID-19 or the vaccine.

Dr. Kory said that after compiling over 800 anecdotal reports, they observed a clear pattern in symptoms that they determined to be shedding.

Typically, the manifestation of symptoms is repeatable and predictable, such as when a person repeatedly becomes symptomatic when going into supermarkets or crowded places.

Dr. Kory gave the example of a patient who noticed he could not handle going into grocery stores.

The patient told Dr. Kory that he just couldn’t “go into grocery stores anymore.” Within five minutes of entering a Trader Joe’s grocery store, he “feels so terrible” that he has to leave. He experienced the same aversion upon going to a crowded farmers market.

At the FLCCC event, Mr. Marsland also shared several cases where he believed shedding was involved.

One case involved a 54-year-old male, who previously suffered from symptoms after the COVID-19 vaccine, meeting up with a friend who received a COVID-19 booster.

They sat close to each other, talking and laughing. “Within hours of spending their time together, [the man] had a headache, myalgia, and joint pain, increased fatigue,” Mr. Marsland relayed.

When the patient went to a busy airport, he felt worse.

He returned home and had sexual contact with his spouse, exchanging bodily fluids. Within minutes, the spouse developed severe “nine out of 10” abdominal pain.

The two believed the pain was from shedding, so both took ivermectin, known to bind to and block spike proteins. Within about half an hour, the spouse’s abdominal pain receded.

“It’s the temporal association and the accumulation of symptoms,” Mr. Marsland reasoned.

Other doctors treating long COVID and postvaccine syndromes, such as Dr. Syed Haider and Dr. Ana Mihalcea, have also reported suspected cases of shedding.

Some Vaccinologists Disagree

Professors in vaccinology, however, do not acknowledge that mRNA vaccines may induce shedding.

“mRNA leads to the expression of proteins in cells, and this expression is different from shedding, as you would have if you are infected by certain viruses,” associate professor Paulo Verardi of the University of Connecticut told The Epoch Times.

While SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to virus shedding, and, therefore, transmission of the virus from person to person, shedding of the spike protein does not occur in individuals receiving the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine,” he continued.

While another definition of shedding refers to the release of live viruses in people infected or vaccinated with live vaccines, Dr. Kory reiterated that the shedding discussed in the case of COVID-19 vaccines is different from the shedding of live viruses.

Professor Florian Krammer at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai also told The Epoch Times that shedding does not exist.

He did not reply when The Epoch Times presented him with information regarding the FDA’s documents on gene therapy and shedding.

from:    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/covid-vaccine-shedding-real-fda-and-pfizer-documents-are-proof-clinicians?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2287