Further, a new paper in Science Translational Medicine suggest | Alex Berenson

Further, a new paper in Science Translational Medicine suggests anti-N antibodies are important to defeating Sars-Cov-2 (at least in mice).

Researchers that mice which produced both anti-N and anti-S antibodies had “better viral control [than those that had anti-S antibodies alone], including against the Omicron variant.”

This finding raises at least two crucial questions.

First, how much of a role has the increase in anti-nucleocapsid antibodies played in reducing the threat of Covid? Second, why are vaccinated people more likely to produce those antibodies when they are infected with Omicron than with Delta? What changed?

Put another way, is it the failure of the mRNAs to stop Omicron that ultimately defanged the coronavirus this summer? Could people who received inactivated virus vaccines have developed anti-nucleocapsid antibodies more readily? Could the gap help explain why Covid disappeared so much more quickly in countries like India?

To be clear, these are questions. At this point, I don’t have the answers, and neither does anyone else.

We’d be well-advised to find them as we consider what vaccines to use in the future. Because the real-world evidence from the natural experiment we ran suggests that the mRNAs came in far short of expectations.

But here’s one bet you can make with certainty: the public health bureaucrats and politicians who have obsessively promoted the mRNA shots for two years will be in no hurry to figure out the truth. (9/9)