Sooo..... I think this implies that those who have received allergy desensitisation shots for pollen, et. al., which result in IgG4 that prevents the allergy symptoms, may have an inhibitited antibody response to neoplams, likely most inhibited when the allergen is "in season". Beekeepers likely also have some risk. Sigh, just something more to worry about.
The only thing that maybe stands out is (maybe) non Hodgkins Lymphoma.
"Beekeepers had a slightly lower than expected fraction of deaths from cancer. The deficit of lung cancers in male beekeepers was significant (p less than 0.05) and may indicate that fewer beekeepers were cigarette smokers. The frequencies of other cancers did not differ significantly from expectation. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma developed in four persons, and was expected in two."
The IgG4 levels in people who had a post-Covid booster breakthrough infection were extreme... so IgG4 dose, or rather % across all IgG's may be a factor. From the excellent Rintrah post on the same subject, looking at the Irrgang, et al. paper;
"On average, the four who had a breakthrough infection after their booster are now at 42.45% IgG4. The cohort as a whole is at 19.27%, up from just 0.04%, so the ones who haven’t had a breakthrough infection yet will end up at a similar position: A response that is entirely IgG4 dominated."
Was the "combined image" your work or one of the other links? After giving https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-28101-5 a look there are a few problems with synthesizing those results to the mRNA-IgG4 question. Fig 5 shows that few participants are mRNA; this does totally reverse for the 3/4 groups but it's unclear what their total experience is. Time between infection and draws isn't clear as far as I can tell. And given that unvaccinated patients are in the same range as 3-4 dose patients it becomes more a question of what is different about the (not-mRNA-heavy) two dose group...
The combined image is mine. I wanted a one pager for visual, short attention span learners. I agree that the results in Chevaisrakul et al. are muddled by a mix of vector and LNP vaccines given in Thailand, although by the 3rd dose (booster) the majority were in fact LNP vectored mRNA. The T-cell effect could simply be from exhaustion... but no matter the mechanism, it's not helpful to have T-cells crashing. This is a weak link in an IgG4 centered mechanism hypothesis, and maybe I don't even need it.
I am reminded that there is yet another distinct mechanism by which these "vaccines" may be promoting cancer, again especially in the case of melanoma;
. 2022 Oct 18;61(1):e17-e19. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2022-0787. Print 2023 Jan 27.
title: Increased PD-L1 surface expression on peripheral blood granulocytes and monocytes after vaccination with SARS-CoV2 mRNA or vector vaccine
Arkmedic goes on the say "The chart clearly shows a large and significant rise in PD-L1 expression (in immune cells). But why? PD-L1 is the protein that T-cells use to mitigate any attack against host cells (i.e. your own body). Inhibition of PD-L1 is the basis of some of the most important and effective cancer treatments developed in the last 10 years. In fact, the most well-known PD-L1 inhibitor pembrolizumab has revolutionised the management of malignant melanoma."
The mRNA vaccines may be directly negating the beneficial effects of Keytruda. Thanks pharmacists for pushing untested mRNA vaccines and simultaneously not fulfilling prescriptions for safe drugs like IVM and HCQ that would have otherwise left our immune systems intact. So glad you went to school for years to make sure we don't have any bad drug interactions!!!
I hesitate to conclude anything causal from an association with boosters because this might be an artifact of improving / stabilizing quality of mRNA product. So if the early stuff was very low in full length RNA content, it wouldn't have been as oncogenic in my own pet theory for cancer. And this was exactly what I ventured at the time - so if there's more cancer after boosters, that might just suggest RNA quality control is all that matters.
But lots of compelling references on the generic IgG4 hazard side. It's basically certain that it would hurt rather than help, via Fc-Fc.
Oh my - Thank you for reading my little substack Jessica. I hope that Membrane Attack Complex has a brass section because I want to be the trombone player. The lip might be a bit stiff, but I could knock off all of Jimmy Pankow's Chicago trombone solos back in the day.
Back to cancer, in your piece you said;
" Now that you understand perfectly how important these antibody functions are for removing unwanted cells and foreign material, you can imagine how important they might be in suppressing tumor formation by suppressing the growth rate of cancer cells. Be very aware, these mechanisms of action are enacted by the IgG1 subclass."
And IgG1 suppression through the pictured non-specific Fc-Fc binding is exactly what the researchers found to be happening in Wang, et al. (2020).
Thanks Jim.
Sooo..... I think this implies that those who have received allergy desensitisation shots for pollen, et. al., which result in IgG4 that prevents the allergy symptoms, may have an inhibitited antibody response to neoplams, likely most inhibited when the allergen is "in season". Beekeepers likely also have some risk. Sigh, just something more to worry about.
If there is an effect in bee keepers, it's not too strong. Bee Keepers have been looked at;
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/536856/
J Occup Med
. 1979 Dec;21(12):811-3.
Cancer mortality among beekeepers
The only thing that maybe stands out is (maybe) non Hodgkins Lymphoma.
"Beekeepers had a slightly lower than expected fraction of deaths from cancer. The deficit of lung cancers in male beekeepers was significant (p less than 0.05) and may indicate that fewer beekeepers were cigarette smokers. The frequencies of other cancers did not differ significantly from expectation. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma developed in four persons, and was expected in two."
The IgG4 levels in people who had a post-Covid booster breakthrough infection were extreme... so IgG4 dose, or rather % across all IgG's may be a factor. From the excellent Rintrah post on the same subject, looking at the Irrgang, et al. paper;
https://www.rintrah.nl/the-trainwreck-of-all-trainwrecks-billions-of-people-stuck-with-a-broken-immune-response/
"On average, the four who had a breakthrough infection after their booster are now at 42.45% IgG4. The cohort as a whole is at 19.27%, up from just 0.04%, so the ones who haven’t had a breakthrough infection yet will end up at a similar position: A response that is entirely IgG4 dominated."
Awesome, thanks again.
Excellent article, Jim. I added it to my data collection on the dangers of the injection.
Was the "combined image" your work or one of the other links? After giving https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-28101-5 a look there are a few problems with synthesizing those results to the mRNA-IgG4 question. Fig 5 shows that few participants are mRNA; this does totally reverse for the 3/4 groups but it's unclear what their total experience is. Time between infection and draws isn't clear as far as I can tell. And given that unvaccinated patients are in the same range as 3-4 dose patients it becomes more a question of what is different about the (not-mRNA-heavy) two dose group...
The combined image is mine. I wanted a one pager for visual, short attention span learners. I agree that the results in Chevaisrakul et al. are muddled by a mix of vector and LNP vaccines given in Thailand, although by the 3rd dose (booster) the majority were in fact LNP vectored mRNA. The T-cell effect could simply be from exhaustion... but no matter the mechanism, it's not helpful to have T-cells crashing. This is a weak link in an IgG4 centered mechanism hypothesis, and maybe I don't even need it.
I am reminded that there is yet another distinct mechanism by which these "vaccines" may be promoting cancer, again especially in the case of melanoma;
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/philadelphia-2023
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36245120/
Clin Chem Lab Med
. 2022 Oct 18;61(1):e17-e19. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2022-0787. Print 2023 Jan 27.
title: Increased PD-L1 surface expression on peripheral blood granulocytes and monocytes after vaccination with SARS-CoV2 mRNA or vector vaccine
Arkmedic goes on the say "The chart clearly shows a large and significant rise in PD-L1 expression (in immune cells). But why? PD-L1 is the protein that T-cells use to mitigate any attack against host cells (i.e. your own body). Inhibition of PD-L1 is the basis of some of the most important and effective cancer treatments developed in the last 10 years. In fact, the most well-known PD-L1 inhibitor pembrolizumab has revolutionised the management of malignant melanoma."
The mRNA vaccines may be directly negating the beneficial effects of Keytruda. Thanks pharmacists for pushing untested mRNA vaccines and simultaneously not fulfilling prescriptions for safe drugs like IVM and HCQ that would have otherwise left our immune systems intact. So glad you went to school for years to make sure we don't have any bad drug interactions!!!
The hits keep coming - I mentioned T-cell exhaustion above;
https://twitter.com/tradsperger/status/1622656451381534728
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2022.975980/full
Evidence of exhausted lymphocytes after the third anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in cancer patients
I hesitate to conclude anything causal from an association with boosters because this might be an artifact of improving / stabilizing quality of mRNA product. So if the early stuff was very low in full length RNA content, it wouldn't have been as oncogenic in my own pet theory for cancer. And this was exactly what I ventured at the time - so if there's more cancer after boosters, that might just suggest RNA quality control is all that matters.
But lots of compelling references on the generic IgG4 hazard side. It's basically certain that it would hurt rather than help, via Fc-Fc.
You forgot my write-up on this. :)
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/igg4-and-cancer-a-mechanism-of-action
Oh my - Thank you for reading my little substack Jessica. I hope that Membrane Attack Complex has a brass section because I want to be the trombone player. The lip might be a bit stiff, but I could knock off all of Jimmy Pankow's Chicago trombone solos back in the day.
Back to cancer, in your piece you said;
" Now that you understand perfectly how important these antibody functions are for removing unwanted cells and foreign material, you can imagine how important they might be in suppressing tumor formation by suppressing the growth rate of cancer cells. Be very aware, these mechanisms of action are enacted by the IgG1 subclass."
And IgG1 suppression through the pictured non-specific Fc-Fc binding is exactly what the researchers found to be happening in Wang, et al. (2020).
Thanks 🙏🏼 Sharing this.