I’m not sure I agree with the conclusions, but as a physician that’s been accused of being a covid alarmist both IRL and on here, there is a small shred of truth to their post. The stuff about antigenic sin is completely wrong, on reread, which does lead me to believe they’re lying about their qualifications.

Immunology is incredibly complex, very counterintuitive, still not fully understood, and the roll out of this vaccine was totally fucked at every step of the way. The underlying mRNA technology is an incredible advancement that’s been studied for decades but never had adequate funding - don’t get me wrong, I still recommend vaccination and got the most recent booster the first day it was available, but if I’m still alive when the full details come out decades later I guarantee it’s gonna be bananas.

I haven’t seen any specific evidence or indications that it goes beyond the normal corruption, copyright monopolies and bog standard market collusion, though, just to restate what should be clear. But as most people probably suspect, just like the incredibly confusing public health messaging, the airborne/mask deception, the vaccine testing and deployment could absolutely have been done just so much better.

2nd edit: I am happy to admit I was confused and mistaken, I thought ‘original antigenic sin’ was referring to antibody dependent enhancement, which is something completely different and was a much more prominent public debate earlier during covid and was a legitimate concern about the vaccine that turned out to not be an issue ultimately.

So mea culpa, I had forgotten completely about antigenic sin, but on re-reading some immunology references does show that there is again, a shred of truth there but I do not agree with the conclusion, and there is strong evidence against it. If I remember correctly (no guarantees) antigenic sin was largely discredited and thought to not be an accurate representation of how the immune system works, but there is still some debate over this, from what I can tell.

I am still suspicious that the description above of antigenic sin is the same misleading phrasing that wikipedia uses. But like I said, immunology is incredibly complex, very counterintuitive, and still not fully understood. The multiple studies by neutral parties that I have read over the last few years and pored over in detail do NOT support the conclusion that the vaccine “sets those individuals up for recurring infections.” and in fact strongly supports the opposite, even for young and healthy people.

I will agree that the vaccine objectively sucks (in that it does not provide total immunity and I completely understand how a layperson got the impression it did) and was grossly misrepresented in terms of efficacy, that’s an easy, lazy dunk on it.

Again - it’s still worth getting, especially now that the virus (a vasculitis with substantial risk of permanent damage to a random % of your highly perfused organs, all of which are fairly fucking important) is the most contagious infectious disease known to man, now that it’s passed measles.