18 Comments

Monoclonal antibodies should be used as a potential life saving emergency intervention similar to using antivenom in a person bitten by a poisonous snake. Antibodies from recently convalesced individuals can effectively be used AFTER exposure, but using mass produced stored antibodies BEFORE exposure as a prophylactic thinking this will prevent the infection from happening is a bad idea. The problem is, the cells of our bodies are continuously mutating the genetic code of the virus. That's why there are so many clades and variants. So, you end up loading these monoclonal antibody recipients with something that might be miss-matched. This primes them for antibody dependent enhancement of infection, meaning the antibodies will signal immune cells to replicate the virus instead of destroying it. It also primes them for antibody dependent enhancement of disease, meaning it can kick off the complement cascade and worsen symptoms after exposure. Again, monoclonal antibodies should be used as a treatment, not a prophylactic.

Expand full comment

But using as a treatment rather than prophylactic won’t generate as much profit for the drug company, hospital or infusion center.

Expand full comment

Way to discern Allie.

Expand full comment

Ouch. Makes sense. It keeps carrying out the mentality of fixing a bad thing with another experiment.

Expand full comment

And so approval comes now, at a time when it cannot undermine or interfere with the mass injection campaign.

Expand full comment

Good Point.....launch drug for domain uses in T-Minus 4321.....we have liftoff.....

Expand full comment

My nephew went into the hospital in 2021 with severe Covid and a temperature of 105.7. They gave him monoclonal antibodies which made him feel better right away, so they sent him home. Within a few hours of being home, his temperature shot back up to 105, and all of his symptoms were back. So I contacted a doctor from the FLCCC’s website, and they called in a prescription to a local compounding pharmacy immediately for ivermectin, Hydroxycloroquine, and Azithromycin. He was better within hours and back to the gym in 3 days. So, for him, the monoclonal antibodies were useless. It was the IVERMECTIN, HYDROXYCLOROQUINE, AND AZITHROMYCIN THAT SAVED HIM THANKS TO THE FLCCC!!

Expand full comment
May 29·edited May 29

Color me skeptical. A minuscule percentage of people would be Covid-naive and immuno-compromised. I think this is just another push to continue experimenting with monoclonal treatments generally.

To be clear, ongoing monoclonal treatment indeed carries the risk of developing an allergy to the very treatment itself.

Due to a genetic cholesterol issue I was being strong armed into considering Repatha which is the monoclonal “de jure” in cardiology. But it had a very short human trial (2.5 yrs) — in which people died — and even Harvard admits it has no long term safety data after 3 years. Longer term User reviews of this treatment on drugs.com are very enlightening, shall we say.

My point is the “Bio med complex” wants approval to prescribe now, ask questions later — however thin the pretext.

Expand full comment
May 29·edited May 29

There must be something in it for the malignant FDA. Could it be that the manufacturing process for the newly approved product includes a step that actually increases risk of future illness? Until the people making these decisions have been 100% replaced, FDA approvals are handed down to us by psycho killers.

Expand full comment

It turns our head away from modulating our immunity system through real food, Vitamin D, and perhaps a cheap treat of ivermectin once in a while in my opinion... or heck, maybe IVs of EDTA and vitamin C? I remember a doctor (years ago) who had seen patients receiving "promising" cancer treatments of monoclonal antibodies, just to see them nose-dive shortly after because of severe intestinal/organ damage. Was her testimony trustworthy? something wrong with the dose and frequency? I really don't know.

Expand full comment

Pemgarda still has known possible side effects. (for how long?)

Begging the question, is the juice really worth the Squeeze?

Expand full comment

As I understand, the research for monoclonal antibodies used cells from a cell line called HEK293T. These cells date back to the 1970s and were originally taken from kidney cells in donated fetal tissue. I understand the product of research does not have the fetal cells. But I personally would not take a cure born out of aborted babies.

Expand full comment

“The results indicated an expected 70% relative risk reduction in the development of symptomatic COVID-19 between treatment and placebo arms.”

One of the things I’ve learned during this covid fiasco is not to give ‘relative risk’ any credence at all. What is the ABSOLUTE RISK??? That is the information that is important…..

Expand full comment

Hello, is there ANY data, or medical professional opinion on if sleep apnea is a risk factor for covid 19? I know several people who did not have the usual list of comorbidities, but do have severe sleep apnea, and had a severe case of covid 19 that caused pulmonary embolisms / clotting. It seems to me that because severe sleep apnea causes those to have more likely to clot blood, that it would be an obvious risk factor. Yet, I do not see this discussed.

Expand full comment

Compromise your immune system with regular Covid jabs, so you then also need 3 monthly monoclonal antibody infusions. Hi-tech win-win for Big Pharma, is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Perhaps a healthier lifestyle without vaccines might be a preferable alternative, especially as this would not be subsidising a predatory industry that is destroying humanity.

Expand full comment

All I need to see is "FDA approves ..." and I'm out the door.

Expand full comment

I would have clicked to like your comment, but for some reason I’m recently unable to do this on any substack it seems.

Expand full comment

I Don't Trust the FDA. Another Unsafe & Ineffective Treatment. No Thanks. I'll pass.

Expand full comment