'The Science™' the WHO Relies On

Check out the single scientific (sic) paper the WHO relies on to guide them through the MPox scam

This is the third and, hopefully, last posting for a while I’ll be doing on MPox. Earlier this week, we looked at WHO’s unimpressive and little updated dedicated websites. This lack of ‘up-to-date’ (mis)information provided indicates that, contrary to Mr. Tedros’ calls for urgency (and vaccines) a ‘surprising’ lack of attention to detail:

The Monkeypox Puzzle

And then there’s the extra-shady public-private partnership by the name of the ‘Alliance for Biosecurity’, headquartered, as it were, in Washington, DC, and organised by one of the world’s largest legal/lobbying firms, Squire Patton Boggs:

The Monkeypox Grift is Coordinated out of DC by the Shady 'Alliance for Biosecurity'

Today, we’ll take a step back and focus on ‘the Science™’ the WHO relies on to assess what to do about MPox.

To do so, here are instructions for you to locate a rather obscure study:

1. If you venture over to the WHO’s website, there is a linked spreadsheet entitled ‘Therapeutics licensed or under development for Mpox’, dated 16 Aug. 2024.

2. If you’d open said Excel file and scroll to the right (column D), there is a link: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/15/4/937.

Now, I called this a rather ‘obscure’ study—for a good reason: entitled, ‘Recent Advances in Research and Management of Human Monkeypox Virus: An Emerging Global Health Threat’, this is apparently the key insight WHO relies on its current assessment of MPox.

‘AI’ or whatever has, so far, found 7 (in words: seven) citations of this article. Google Scholar lists 8 (in words: eight). Not very impressive for such a high-profile backer.

What’s in that paper, you may ask? Well, while I’m unsure you’ll be glad to have asked, let’s have a look, shall we?

Monkey the Pox, ‘the Science™’ Edition

Here’s the full citation for the paper: Viruses 2023, 15(4), 937; https://doi.org/10.3390/v15040937.

And here’s some ‘insights’ from its abstract (as always, for readability, I removed the references; emphases mine):

In 2003, the United States saw an epidemic of monkeypox that was later traced back to rodents of West Africa infected with the monkeypox virus (MPXV). Disease in the United States seemed less severe than the smallpox-like disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In this study, researchers analyzed data from Central Africa: two distinct MPXV clades were confirmed by sequencing the genomes of MPXV isolates from Western Africa, the United States, and Central Africa. By comparing open reading frames across MPXV clades, scientists can infer which virus proteins might account for the observed variation in pathogenicity in humans. Monkeypox can be prevented and controlled with a better understanding of MPXV’s molecular etiology and epidemiological and clinical features. In light of the current outbreaks worldwide, we provide updated information on monkeypox for medical professionals in this review.

So, it’s a review paper, which provides a brief history of MPox (which I slightly revised and put into chronological order):

In 1970, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) confirmed the first individual case. Spontaneous epidemics have been documented, primarily in African countries, over the last 50 years and many thousand human recorded cases have occurred. In the Republic of the Congo, the monkeypox virus, an orthopox DNA zoonotic virus associated with smallpox, was first discovered in humans in 1970. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared monkeypox an “evolving danger of considerable health concern” in June 2022, after over 3200 monkeypox virus outbreaks were detected in more than 50 nations throughout five districts in May 2022.

It only took WHO more than half a century to ‘learn’, or ‘determine’, that monkeypox was a problem of international concern. The main problem, as the study authors explain, is the following:

Concerns have been raised theoretically that the monkeypox virus and other zoonotic poxviruses could indeed spread to occupy the ecological roles previously filled by the closely linked variola virus.

Translated from the academese, scientists are concerned about a ‘return’ (if you will) of smallpox or smallpox-like disease.

This is, of course, a valid concern, esp. since those born after the mid-1980s aren’t typically vaccinated against smallpox. (If you’re unsure, check your shoulders for a small pockmark-like dent; if you have one, you received the smallpox shot as a child.)

How does MPox spread and replicate?

Transmission of the zoonotic MPXV virus from person to person occurs mostly through the handling of infected rodents [do stay clear of rodents]. However, it can also occur through interaction with lesions, respiratory droplets, or contaminated surfaces. Aerosolized MPXV has been studied in macaques, and it has been shown to invade lower airway epithelial cells, then travels to lymph nodes, and finally disseminate throughout the body via monocytic cells. Lymph nodes, spleen, thymus, skin, digestive tract, oral mucosa, and reproductive organs are also potential sites for secondary MPXV lesions.

This will probably bring back face diapers, if push comes to shove. But there’s more:

Most infections, including those during recent outbreaks, have indeed been spread by close, personal interaction with sick individuals, often during sexual interaction [more sound advice from ‘the Science™’: don’t have intercourse with a sick person]. Male-to-male sexual intercourse is the primary method of spreading infection in men [1]; nevertheless, the heterosexual transmission does occur [39]. Transfer to infants through a prolonged, non-sexual epidermis interaction with a caretaker has also been documented in cases of needlestick with a sharp that has been infected with a skin lesion, as well as through piercing and tattooing [pro tip: don’t get a tattoo from a sick person]. The most common sign of illness at diagnosis is a rash with anogenital and perioral infections [i.e., a rash around the anus and/or mouth: avoid male-to-male oral sexual encounters], with leg and face involvement, including trunk involvement occurring less frequently and later.

See, if you ever doubted ‘the Science™’ even for a moment, there so many pro tips for avoiding the monkey disease by, well, not interacting, in several intimate ways, with sick people.

How Bad is MPox-the-Illness?

The FDA has licensed no therapies for monkeypox as of yet [2023]. Cidofovir, tecovirimat, and brincidofovir are three antiviral medicines effective against MPXV. In addition to the antiviral medications, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved intravenous vaccinia immune globulin (VIGIV) [i.e., pooled blood of people once vaccinated vs. smallpox] for the treatment of post-vaccination problems such as advancing vaccinia and severe widespread vaccinia [40]. Table 1 below outlines the various therapeutic approaches that can be taken. In the event of an outbreak, the CDC keeps cidofovir, tecovirimat, and VIGIV in the Strategic National Stockpile under Expanded Access Investigational New Drug (EA-IND) procedures…

At the time of writing, the CDC was formulating EA-IND for brincidofovir as a therapy for orthopoxvirus (OPXV) infestations [41]. There is no consensus on the best way to treat MPXV infection in humans clinically. One researcher currently restricts the large-scale, placebo-controlled antiviral trials for orthopoxvirus (OPXV) infection treatment. Drug approvals and recent therapeutic techniques are currently supported by in vitro data, human pharmacokinetics, animal studies, data from pharmacodynamics, case series, and case reports.

And then there’s this segment on ‘immunization’, which appears…well, important enough to reproduce here:

The immune system’s response to orthopoxvirus (OPXV) infection has been shown to cross-protect against infection with other members of the same virus family [51,52,53] [apparently, all virus families confer some kind of cross-immunity, with the notable exception of betacoronaviruses, right?]. Unfortunately, no vaccinations are currently available to prevent infection with or disease from monkeypox [ah, the good ol’ infection with/sick from problems, I’ve missed you; note the absence of transmission control]. The vaccinations under consideration for use against MPXV (vaccines based on the virus Vaccinia) were initially intended to prevent smallpox [i.e., a different pox virus, but since there’s cross-immunity, there you go; don’t apply the same logic to Coronaviruses, though]. Unvaccinated domestic contacts of people with MPXV sickness had a subsequent rate of attack of 9.28% relative to 1.31% among those vaccinated against the [Mpox] virus in data collected in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in the 1980s [54]. From this, one may roughly calculate that receiving a smallpox vaccination in the past affords about 85% protection against monkeypox.

The good news is this: if you received a smallpox shot in the past, you’re pretty safe (and, no, this doesn’t mean engaging in random, unprotected anal sex with multiple, unknown partners might not result in infection, plus it’s a stupid idea to begin with).

And then there is this bit of relevant information:

The ACAM2000 vaccination was the only option to prevent orthopoxvirus (OPXV) infection [i.e., transmission] in the United States before 2019. The Vaccinia virus (a kind of OPXV) was used to create ACAM2000 because it is a live and replication-competent virus. The danger of significant side effects is increased when using ACAM2000 because of its replication-proficient characteristic (e.g., eczema vaccinatum [56], progressive vaccinia [57,58], as well as myopericarditis [59,60]). Vaccinia can spread from an immunized person to an uninfected person by direct skin-to-skin contact at the injection site [61] [oopsie, ACAM2000 doesn’t stop transmission or infection: what, then, is it good for?]. In 2019, the United States granted approval for its use in preventing both smallpox and monkeypox. However, Jynneos (also marketed as Imvanex and Imvamune) is a vaccine developed from an altered Ankara vaccination incapable of reproducing. However, it should be noted that immunocompromised individuals may not mount as strong an immune system response [so, ‘risk groups’ and ‘vulnerable people’ do not ‘benefit’ from these shots: why take them?] to the Jynneos vaccination, meaning that their protection may be less robust than that of immunocompetent persons [61]. In contrast to inactivated vaccines, live viruses are present in many other Monkeypox vaccines, including ACAM2000, making them unsafe for those with compromised immune systems [62].

I took the liberty of linking to the ACAM2000 package insert, from which I’m quoting a few choice excerpts here for your perusal:

Contraindications

Individuals with severe immunodeficiency who are not expected to benefit from the vaccine. These individuals may include persons who are undergoing bone marrow transplantation or persons with primary or acquired immunodeficiency states who require isolation (4).

Warnings and Precautions

Myocarditis and/or pericarditis, ischemic heart disease and non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. (5.1, 5.2)

Encephalitis, encephalomyelitis, encephalopathy, progressive vaccinia (vaccinia necrosum), generalized vaccinia, severe vaccinial skin infections, erythema multiforme major (including Stevens-Johnson syndrome), eczema vaccinatum, fetal vaccinia and fetal death. (5.1)

Ocular vaccinia and blindness. (5.3)

These risks, including risks of severe disability and/or death, are increased in vaccinees with:

• Cardiac disease. (5.2)

• Eye disease treated with topical steroids. (5.3)

• Congenital or acquired immune deficiency disorders. (5.4)

• History or presence of eczema and other skin conditions. (5.5)

• Infants < 12 months of age. (5.6)

• Pregnancy. (5.7)

This bucket list of severe adverse reactions literally includes everyone who falls into the category of ‘at-risk people’.

I’ll just quote two more paragraphs to drive home this point:

Suspected cases of myocarditis and/or pericarditis have been observed in healthy adult primary vaccinees (at an approximate rate of 5.7 per 1000, 95% CI: 1.9-13.3) receiving ACAM2000 [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)]…

The risk for experiencing serious vaccination complications must be weighed against the risks for experiencing a potentially fatal smallpox infection.

Like its directly-named competitor (Jynneos), there are no or insufficient trial data for children, pregnant or nursing women, and seniors.

It won’t surprise you, at this point I suppose, that we don’t really know if these concoctions actually work:

Vaccine efficacy was assessed…[as] the proportion of subjects with a successful vaccination/revaccination and the geometric mean neutralizing antibody titer (GMT) on Day 30. Successful primary vaccination was defined as a major cutaneous reaction on Day 7 or 10 (Days 6 to 11, with allowable visit window). Successful revaccination was defined as development of any cutaneous lesion on Day 7 (± 1 day) of a measurable size. Successful revaccination was determined by a panel of experts who reviewed digital photographs of the cutaneous lesions.

At this point, we probably should make some fun of ‘experts™ looking at pictures’ to determine ‘success’, or, in their own words:

The primary determinant for an effective immune response in those naïve to vaccine is a major cutaneous reaction [i.e., pockmarks]. ACAM2000 was non-inferior to comparator in this population with regard to eliciting a major cutaneous reaction. The measure of the strength of the generated antibody response was similar but did not meet the predefined criterion for non-inferiority. Among subjects who were previously vaccinated, development of a major cutaneous response after revaccination with vaccinia-based vaccines may not provide an accurate measure of the strength of the immune response because the pre‑existing immunity modifies the scope of the cutaneous response. In previously vaccinated subjects, ACAM2000 was non-inferior to the comparator with regard to the strength of the neutralizing antibody immune response [by day 30, we note]. Therefore, ACAM2000 was non-inferior to the comparator in the rate of major cutaneous reaction in those naïve to the vaccine, and the strength of the neutralizing antibody immune response in those previously exposed to vaccinia-based smallpox vaccines.

Are you convinced yet?

Back to the above-cited paper:

Adults aged 18 and above are permitted to receive either immunization. Jynneos’ potential in preventing or minimizing cases of MPXV needs to be better studied. Vaccine effectiveness studies in animal studies (in prairie dogs, as well as cynomolgus macaques) [63] and human safety and immunogenicity investigations [64] provide assumptions about the vaccine’s effectiveness.

Assumptions, huhum. I’m glad ‘the Science™’ is, once again and for all time, ‘settled’.

How Does MPox Spread?

The most commonly hypothesized transmission mode was sexual contact, especially between homosexual and bisexual males. Primary vaginal, anal, or mucous membrane lesions were seen, which may indicate the site of inoculation, bolstering the possibility of sexual transmission. PCR [oh, how I’ve missed you] findings of monkeypox virus DNA support this theory in 29 of 32 seminal fluid samples analyzed. However, it is yet to be determined whether the viral genome found in these samples was capable of propagation [i.e., PCR cannot tell you if the parts found by PCR are actually an indicator of transmissibility or spread; do remember: all of this is inapplicable to Sars-Cov-2 for whatever reason]. Thus, the issue of whether semen may transmit infection remains open. Clusters linked to sex events or saunas further highlight the possible importance of sexual interaction as a transmission facilitator. The worldwide spread of monkeypox may be attributed to sexually amplified transmission, facilitated by international flights, including involvement at large gatherings associated with sex-on-site events [therefore, participants in ‘Pride™’ and ‘CSD™’ events are, for all intents and purposes, disease vectors and ‘super-spreader events’]. They highlight elements of these clinical manifestations that are unique and are not included in the generally recognized clinical characteristics [103]. Even though these categories have lately been broadened to include homosexual and bisexual men and other men who have sexual relations with other men, as a risk category, they do not draw attention to mucosal and rectal manifestations or warn against the potential of first minor lesion manifestations. While existing classifications suggest considering monkeypox within the context of almost any “strange” rash, they do not include the entire spectrum of potential symptoms.

Additionally, 29% of those examined had other STIs [sexually transmitted infections] verified by laboratory testing. Therefore, researchers advise that high-risk individuals exhibiting typical STI characteristics also be evaluated for monkeypox. Swabs obtained through skin lesions were the most reliable for confirming the treatment of monkeypox in their collection [there’s a free burger if you collect at least 5 STIs, I suppose]; at the same time, samples collected from the neck or nasopharynx and blood were less prevalent. People complaining of anal pain or proctitis might benefit from a rectal or anal swab [who says ‘the Science™’ isn’t unwittingly funny?]. Among the specimens that researchers analyzed, swabs collected from skin or vaginal lesions were among the most reliable in confirming a diagnosis of monkeypox. [I move to mandate PCR testing, because that worked so well for Covid, right?]

When is ‘An Epidemic’ a Thing?

And then there’s this revelatory snippet of information:

Despite the fact that the present epidemic is mostly afflicting males who seem to have sexual relations with other men, whether they be gay, bi, or straight, monkeypox is neither a “gay illness” nor an “African sickness” [who says that?]. Nine straight men were found to have monkeypox [out of, at that time, almost some 90,000; jus’ sayin’]. In order to prevent missing diagnoses in heterosexual people, researchers recommend care while studying atypical acute rashes in any individual [so, no blanket targeting and smearing of ‘unvaccinated’ people as ‘angels of death’ this time around?], particularly when rashes are coupled with clinical manifestations. It is unusual for monkeypox to be confirmed in people who have not visited an endemic region. Even a single case in a non-endemic nation is regarded as an epidemic.

Go ahead and re-read that last sentence: this is how public health officialdom creates problems: by considering ‘a single case…as an epidemic’.

And then there is this snippet of information a bit further down in the paper in the section entitled ‘current tendencies and future scope’:

Males between the ages of 25 and 35 have accounted for the vast majority of reported cases, and many of these young men have identified as bisexual, gay, or another sexual minority. The perineal or genital lesions are examples of the unusual presentations seen in patients, suggesting that close personal encounters during sex may play a significant role in spreading…

Public health officials in the UK advise abstinence during infectious illness and for up to 8 weeks following recovery until more is known about the role of sexual transmission. Several nations are currently proposing solutions to manage the outbreak, including prioritizing the vaccination of close contacts of the case-patients as PEP and pre-exposure vaccination of bisexual men and other MSM.

Is MPox Like Covid All Over Again?

Many have drawn parallels between the early stages of the COVID-19 breakout and the multi-country epidemics of the monkeypox virus…Current monkeypox epidemics are not expected to cause a disease outbreak on the scale of COVID-19. There have been prior experiences with MPXV epidemics, so we are equipped to stop the spread of the virus. However, the spread of monkeypox is very different from that of SARS-CoV-2, and many doctors have little expertise in recognizing or managing monkeypox since it is so uncommon…

Cases can be identified, and the scope of the outbreak can be defined by applying screening technologies in healthcare institutions and keeping a high degree of suspicion utilizing the evolving clinical case criteria. It will be vital to restrict new infections and interrupt transmission chains by isolating suspected as well as confirmed patients as soon as possible and then carefully monitoring them; furthermore, the vaccination of their close connections should be undertaken, as well as any healthcare personnel having a potential-risk exposure as needed.

This is why WHO relies on this paper, I think (change my mind in the comments), because the ‘solutions’ advanced are like the ones for Covid.

The only difference, it seems, is that the Mpox or smallpox shots are already known to be of high-risk (while the modRNA juices were ‘merely’ expected to be of high-risk at the time; we know better now).

Clusters of instances among the homosexual community and other MSM have unfortunately resulted in intolerable stigma, similar to the initial periods of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In reaction to HIV and other transmissible diseases, the infected community have been at the forefront of the fight against discrimination and stigma.

This will render any campaigns also a ‘LGBTQ+ rights’ issue: good luck (riddance) to public health officials trying to sell their risky jabs to them.

Bottom Lines: A Grift For All Seasons

Conclusions

As efforts to detect more cases increase in the months ahead, scientists will learn more about the scope of this outbreak. The key to keeping it under control is swift, decisive action. In order to achieve success, it will be essential to make sure that people draw lessons from previous outbreaks and rapidly and efficiently share the resources available. There have been red flags for quite some time that monkeypox could become a major international health issue. The moment has come to take a truly international strategy that solves this issue in both developed nations and, more importantly, in the nations that have been fighting against monkeypox for decades. The foundation of the global health approach should be encouraging and devoid of judgment. Even though resources must be concentrated on finding cases on social networking sites appearing to correlate with a greater risk of infection, infectious viruses do not discriminate based on color, gender, or sexual preference, and it is imperative that researchers consistently educate their peers and the public of this fact. [we’ll never be safe until we’re all safe]

Furthermore, the monkeypox virus is the cause of the pandemic, which has been historically widespread in West and Central Africa but has been limited to these regions. However, the widespread movement of people nowadays poses a threat to MPX spreading [no more travel for you unvaccinated disease vectors of all sexual persuasions and perversions], and the movement of animals over international borders poses an imminent threat of MPX spreading [no more meat shipping across borders, you facilitators of monkeypox spread]. Knowledge about MPXV and related viruses could help with emergency management in the event of a biological attack [with…a pox virus? Against which, as mentioned above, those who received a jab many decades ago are said to be protected at a rate of 85%? All this is—is grift for gov’t contract money]. The potential effects of recently prescribed medications in the clinic, the advancement of antiviral medications, and vaccines against the monkeypox virus are urgently required.

Re-read that last sentence.

This is why this virtually unknown ‘review study’ is so important that it is the single piece of evidence cited by the WHO.

Following ‘the Science™’ once more will line the pockets of pox researchers™, Big Pharma, and the ‘Alliance for Biosecurity’, including, specifically, its ‘secretariat’, one of the world’s largest legal/lobbying firms, Squire Patton Boggs.

I’ve shown you their incentives, hence it’s quite easy to understand their motives, too. And, lest I forget, their interest isn’t your health or security.