In spring, 2021, the International Journal of Clinical Practice, published an important critical review on patient understanding of the experimental covid jab. They stated ”Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs. The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID‐19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus”.
Generally, people have such blind faith in the governments and medicine, they forget that these all still care about making a profit, especially pharmaceutical companies. It seems the indoctrination of fear numbs the ability of people to question the full validity and safety of what is being offered to them so quickly as a solution, their vulnerability allows them to be exploited. Meanwhile, the reality is that corporate big tech and governments alike have supressed safe alternative repurposed and award winning medicines like Hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin, that has already been shown to be 100 percent effective and safe preventative treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 by non-biased frontline doctors who have saved thousands of lives with these measures. Meanwhile, people do not go so far as to question the plutocratic monopoly of pharmaceuticals or the world’s now 5 controlled news media agencies and how these entities together to protect corporate investments.
The masses believe in what is being peddled as the COVID-19 ”Vaccine”, without being presented well-informed facts. It is a Nuremberg code violation for doctors, nurses, or healthcare workers to administer any experimental medicine to a patient without educating the patient, and without offering alternative pre-existing safely tested preventative medicines such as Ivermectin, or hydroxychloroquine.
Doctors have a moral and ethical duty to be sure that the patient is fully aware of the implications of taking an experimental medicine and the risks involved in these trials, especially when these covid shots were granted temporary FDA emergency use authorization, which means they have skipped normal animal lab testing trial protocols that usually last for years. These doctors and nurses aren’t protecting the patients but instead they are serving the vaccine companies and their profits, which is only resulting in the most shocking exponential number of patient adverse reactions and deaths on global databases that only collect 10 percent of reported adverse reactions, so if the number is already large and only ten percent are being reported, then what is the full scale reality of adverse reactions and deaths due to this experimental medicine?
Patients are not even told about the UK government Yellowcard Scheme, EU and Vaers data of adverse deaths and reactions, and it seems nor are the healthcare workers and advisors aware that these websites exist, and the doctors and nurses certainly don’t tell the patients to look at these sites first before going ahead with the medication. Medical research group in the U.K. pointed out that the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines are “unsafe for humans” based on adverse event reports. Scientists and doctors looked at data from the British government’s Yellow Card vaccine event reporting system. They found that the “overwhelming” number of adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines definitely raised alarm bells. Dr. Tess Lawrie is a world-class researcher and consultant to the World Health Organization, she recently wrote to the MHRA regarding the Yellowcard deaths and adverse reactions. Dr, Naomi Wolf wrote on her telegram channel on Dr Lawrie et al, ”Researchers at the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy (EbMC) research group based in Bath, England unveiled concerning findings. EbMC Director Dr. Tess Lawrie wrote about her group’s findings in a June 9 letter to the MHRA Chief Executive Officer Dr. June Raine.”
Dr. Tess Lawrie wrote in her letter that between Jan. 4 and May 6 of this year, a total of 888,196 adverse events and 1,253 deaths were reported to Yellow Card. Similar to VAERS data, these were not directly proven as correlated with the COVID-19 vaccine. Despite this, the EMBC director raised safety concerns for those getting the vaccine. She wrote that given the Yellow Card figures, “the MHRA now has more than enough evidence … to declare the COVID-19 vaccine unsafe for use in humans.”
Lawrie’s urgent questions for the MHRA were to respond as soon as possible. She asked how many people have died within 28 days of vaccination and how many people have been hospitalized for the same period. She also asked for the total number of people disabled by the vaccination. (Since the actual Yellowcard data only reflects ten percent of reported cases, so that leaves the question, what about the unreported cases?).
In a later interview with TrialSiteNews, she described the total number of cases as “concerning” and called for follow-ups on persons who reported adverse reactions “to ensure there are no further problems.” Lawrie said: “The scope of morbidity is striking, evidencing a lot of incidents and what amounts to a large number of ill.
Lawrie also lamented that Yellow Card was “incredibly opaque” during her TrialSiteNews interview. She shared that researchers are unable to filter vaccine safety incidents by age, gender or other attributed. According to the EbMC director, about 60 percent or more of COVID-19 vaccines in the U.K. came from AstraZeneca, with the remainder from the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. The letter called on the MHRA to urgently make reports of vaccine adverse reaction public, given that pharmacovigilance data is known to be subsequently under-reported. It also called on the regulator to assist people with reporting adverse reactions.
”Lawrie concluded the letter: “Preparation should be made to scale up humanitarian efforts to assist those harmed by the COVID-19 vaccines, and to anticipate and ameliorate medium to longer term effects. As the mechanism for harms from the vaccines appears to be similar to COVID-19 itself, this includes engaging with numerous international doctors and scientists with expertise in successfully treating COVID-19.” – Dr Naomi Wolf.
Patients are being left out on a limb when they are not told about adverse events or where to find out this information about the reported events. Moreover, patients are not being told that in the event that anything were to happen to them after taking the covid jab, they are not going to get the legal or financial support they would require, let alone, knowledgeable treatment on how to deal with the medical ”side effects”. The vaccine manufacturers have been granted immunity by governments, prior to the emergency roll out, which means they aren’t liable to be sued for damages should the patient suffer adverse reactions or death and require financial compensation.
Patients are generally not told the actual facts which are that it is a biological experimental mRNA based gene therapy, not actually a vaccine. They aren’t being informed that this experimental medicine has never been done before and or the effects of the novel ingredients such as the mRNA and nanoparticles. Therefore, due to the emergency FDA roll out, this covid jab has not undergone any of the normal lab trial animal studies, nor usual safety measures which a normal vaccine is usually subject to, including, 7 to 10 years of animal experiments, laboratory tests, risk assessments and safety measures before being offered to the public.
A journal article published in International Journal of Clinical Practice recently published in spring of 2021, shows research that all of these Covid jabs are given without the patient being made aware of the full details on implications and side effects, as Dr Tess Lawrie and thousands of other concerned doctors and scientists are saying but who not being given a voice by the main stream media. Therefore, the sad fact remains, if patients are not being fully informed and only partially informed, they cannot give full informed consent. Nuremberg violations are being broken on an unprecedented scale, and the critical implications of this being ignored all for profit for governments and corporations who will become liable for their actions along with doctors, nurses and public health advisors who have ignored their Hippocratic oath to protect the patient. Furthermore, the PCR test which was not designed for detecting viruses, according to scientists who work with PCR tests, Karry Mullis the original innovator stated this test was designed to read genomes not virus material, it cannot identify viruses. The correct number of cycles according to experienced lab scientists should not go beyond the limit of 11 cycle threshold, the higher the number of cycles the higher the number of distorted false positives. Therefore, why are governments and health advisors setting the threshold so high, 25, 35 and 45 cycle thresholds that provide higher false positives to keep generating increased inaccurate statistics, in order to keep the emergency situation to continue to administer an experimental medicine without the normal safety test criteria.
As we know, the experimental biological agent being peddled as a vaccine has been widely administered. Aside from the mercury, cancer cells, (mutagenic MRC-5 cell line), polyethylene glycol (PEG), the animal and aborted human foetal cells, lets consider the implications of other patented genetic material contained in what is described as innovative medicine by mainstream media and governments, mRNA spike proteins use aluminium or other metalic nanoparticles contained in the vaccine. Furthermore, another interesting point raised by Dr. Chinda Brandolino is the ramifications of whoever is administered this patented mRNA gene therapy, will lose human rights and become property of those who own the mRNA patent.
Graphene Oxide–Who is telling the truth about Graphene Oxide in the Covid Jab-Main Stream Media and the Vaccine Manufacturers or La Quinta Columna?
La Quinta Columna TV shared results of lab tests that discovered large quantities of graphene oxide in these ”vaccines”, however, mainstream media moguls and sponsored fact checkers quickly rebuttals this as a false claim, however, if an independent journalist, scientist or critical thinker looks at the scientific journals in nanomedicine, one will see it is clearly true, graphene oxide nanoparticles are in fact discussed as a serious nanoparticle ingredients used in these innovative experimental covid jab medicines.
The shocking realization leaves us to conclude La Quinta Columna TV are correct- graphene oxide is being used in the covid jabs and obviously, the vaccine manufacturers are liars protecting their own profits, moreover, how has it become a reality that we live in a society, where corporate media and sponsored fact checkers are biasedly supporting these pharmaceutical profits as well? What happened to democracy? Doesn’t this feel like communism? How are they allowed to get away with such huge lies with the gravest of consequences being hundreds of thousands of human deaths and adverse reactions? Just for protecting invested stakeholders with a major role in the suppression of truth or why else would paid journalists and news agencies lie? This takes us back to the plutocracy that is now designing our consensual reality especially in highly controlled news media and big tech censoring of the real facts and real science, no matter what the consequences are, including human death and suffering. See below Frontiers in Medicine, have published at article in June, 2021 on the use of Graphene oxide in the covid jab. Frontiers in Medicine specialize in research and medical innovations in the area of Infectious disease, surveillance, prevention and treatment.
The article is called ”Nanomedicine: A Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approach to COVID-19”, the article openly discusses the surveillance advantages of nanoparticles and metals such as graphene oxide
”There are several designs for nanoparticle-based peptide vaccines. Nanoparticles can be used to construct a multiple antigen-presenting platform. Self-assembling lipo-peptides, consisting of a lipid chain bound to an antigen, can form micelles with enhanced epitope presentation ability”.
” Their size, ranging from 10 to 100 nm, allows them to easily interact with a biological target of similar size and pass through several types of membranes, such as the lung-blood vessel junction and the blood-brain barrier ”.
Doctors have been raising concerns that any nanoparticle material that can cross the blood brain barrier can increase risk of blood clotting in the brain.
”Specialized nanoparticles with a magnetic nature can be guided through the body via a system of external magnets and forced to increase their temperature by exposing them to an oscillating magnetic field, a technique currently used in oncology for tumor suppression”
”The SpyCatcher/SpyTag technology allows irreversible conjugation of a recombinant protein by adding a sequence of the SpyTag peptide (13 amino acids) to its DNA sequence. The SpyTag spontaneously reacts with the SpyCatcher protein and allows for oligomerization”.
”Recent advancements in nanotechnology have allowed for the release of a SARS-CoV-2 detection platform that uses graphene conjugated to an anti-spike antibody. This novel kit requires no sample pretreatment or labeling and is impressively effective in detecting SARS-CoV-2 at very low concentrations (183). Alternative detection methods have been designed such as dual-functioning plasmonic biosensors, which tap into the energetics of DNA-RNA hybridization, as well as Graphene Oxide particles coated with fluorophore-bound DNA target strands that can detect viral helicase”.
”Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles (GO-NPs) have been shown to increase leukocyte numbers such as macrophages and T cells. This effect boosts adaptive immunity, thus allowing for a better immune response and viral clearance, or a possible use as vaccine adjuvants. In the scenario of uncontrolled hyperinflammation, nanodiamonds elicit an anti-inflammatory state in macrophages, while carbon and graphene sheets can be repurposed to remove pro-inflammatory cytokines and interleukins from the blood of patients , ”-Nanomedicine: A Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approach to COVID-19”. 4th June, 2021. -Arjun Sharma et al.
The article also outlines the limitations and drawbacks of the use of nanoparticles in the covid-19 jab,
”Another limitation of nanoparticles are risks of unwanted tissue interactions and toxicity, unwanted spread and deposition in the body including unwanted crossing of the blood-brain barrier (194, 195). Accidental inhalation into the lungs is feared to cause epithelial injury, pulmonary inflammation and contribute to fibrosis depending on the size and chemical composition of the nanoparticles (196). Moreover, nanoparticles have been shown to interfere with biological processes like inflammation, oxidative stress, mitochondrial function, macrophage phagocytosis and platelet function (2). Acute or chronic toxicity of nanoparticles may be caused via ROS generation, cell membrane binding, DNA damage, altered cell cycle regulation and protein denaturation (197). Another important issue is the incomplete understanding of long-term effects of nanoparticles in humans and the environment. For example, a study on the effect of chronic administration of nanoparticles to rats resulted in structural damage in their testis, including disorganization of spermatogenic cells, misoriented testis and reduction of germ cells (198, 199). Allergic reactions and anaphylaxis to the mRNA lipid nanoparticle vaccines (Moderna, Pfizer/BioNtech) for COVID-19 have been blamed on the nanoparticle design and composition’‘ (200)
The invention is used as a novel adjuvant and vaccine, and can be expected to be used for preventing and treating human diseases. –Patent number CN112089834A
With this vital information about nanoparticles and how the body can react to them, shouldn’t this information be made readily and clearly available to every patient considering the covid jab?
Going back to the other journal article published in spring 2021, on patient’s informed consent-
Results of the study
”COVID‐19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID‐19 disease via antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID‐19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.”
Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications
”The specific and significant COVID‐19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.”
by Carlita Shaw
Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID‐19 vaccines worsening clinical disease Timothy Cardozo, Ronald VeazeyInt J Clin Pract. 2021 Mar; 75(3): e13795. Published online 2020 Dec 4. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13795PMCID: PMC7645850 ArticlePubReaderPDF–309KCite
Further journal articles on nanoparticles in medicine
3. Abd El-Aziz TM, Stockand JD. Recent progress and challenges in drug development against COVID-19 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) – an update on the status. Infect Genet Evol. (2020) 83:104327. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2020.104327
4. Wu P, Hao X, Lau EHY, Wong JY, Leung KSM, Wu JT, et al. Real-time tentative assessment of the epidemiological characteristics of novel coronavirus infections in Wuhan, China, as at 22 January, 2020. Euro Surveill. (2020) 25:2000044. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000044
6. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. JAMA. (2020) 323:1239–42. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2648
7. Lai CC, Shih TP, Ko WC, Tang HJ, Hsueh PR. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): the epidemic and the challenges. Int J Antimicrob Agents. (2020) 55:105924. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105924
10. Ke R, Romero-Severson E, Sanche S, Hengartner N. Estimating the reproductive number R0 of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States and eight European countries and implications for vaccination. J Theor Biol. (2021) 517:110621. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2021.110621
11. Chen TM, Rui J, Wang QP, Zhao ZY, Cui JA, Yin L. A mathematical model for simulating the phase-based transmissibility of a novel coronavirus. Infect Dis Poverty. (2020) 9:24. doi: 10.1186/s40249-020-00640-3
12. Petersen E, Koopmans M, Go U, Hamer DH, Petrosillo N, Castelli F, et al. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics. Lancet Infect Dis. (2020) 20:e238–e44. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30484-9
13. Helmy YA, Fawzy M, Elaswad A, Sobieh A, Kenney SP, Shehata AA. The COVID-19 pandemic: a comprehensive review of taxonomy, genetics, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, and control. J Clin Med. (2020) 9:1225. doi: 10.3390/jcm9041225
15. Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, Fan G, Liu Y, Liu Z, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. (2020) 395:1054–62. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3
17. Ziegler CGK, Allon SJ, Nyquist SK, Mbano IM, Miao VN, Tzouanas CN, et al. SARS-CoV-2 receptor ACE2 is an interferon-stimulated gene in human airway epithelial cells and is detected in specific cell subsets across tissues. Cell. (2020) 181:1016–35 e19. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.04.035
20. McIntosh K, Dees JH, Becker WB, Kapikian AZ, Chanock RM. Recovery in tracheal organ cultures of novel viruses from patients with respiratory disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (1967) 57:933–40. doi: 10.1073/pnas.57.4.933
25. Fraser C, Donnelly CA, Cauchemez S, Hanage WP, Van Kerkhove MD, Hollingsworth TD, et al. Pandemic potential of a strain of influenza A (H1N1): early findings. Science. (2009) 324:1557–61. doi: 10.1126/science.1176062
26. Hammad MA, Syed Sulaiman SA, Aziz NA, Mohamed Noor DA. Prescribing statins among patients with type 2 diabetes: the clinical gap between the guidelines and practice. J Res Med Sci. (2019) 24:15. doi: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_100_18
29. Bianchi M, Benvenuto D, Giovanetti M, Angeletti S, Ciccozzi M, Pascarella S. Sars-CoV-2 envelope and membrane proteins: structural differences linked to virus characteristics? Biomed Res Int. (2020) 2020:4389089. doi: 10.1155/2020/4389089
30. Hu Y, Wen J, Tang L, Zhang H, Zhang X, Li Y, et al. The M protein of SARS-CoV: basic structural and immunological properties. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. (2003) 1:118–30. doi: 10.1016/S1672-0229(03)01016-7
32. Robson B. COVID-19 Coronavirus spike protein analysis for synthetic vaccines, a peptidomimetic antagonist, and therapeutic drugs, and analysis of a proposed Achilles’ heel conserved region to minimize probability of escape mutations and drug resistance. Comput Biol Med. (2020) 121:103749. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.103749
35. Zang R, Gomez Castro MF, McCune BT, Zeng Q, Rothlauf PW, Sonnek NM, et al. TMPRSS2 and TMPRSS4 promote SARS-CoV-2 infection of human small intestinal enterocytes. Sci Immunol. (2020) 5:eabc3582. doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abc3582
36. Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Schroeder S, Kruger N, Herrler T, Erichsen S, et al. SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell. (2020) 181:271–80 e8. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052
37. Zeng F, Hon CC, Yip CW, Law KM, Yeung YS, Chan KH, et al. Quantitative comparison of the efficiency of antibodies against S1 and S2 subunit of SARS coronavirus spike protein in virus neutralization and blocking of receptor binding: implications for the functional roles of S2 subunit. FEBS Lett. (2006) 580:5612–20. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2006.08.085
38. Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Pohlmann S. A multibasic cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is essential for infection of human lung cells. Mol Cell. (2020) 78:779–84 e5. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.04.022
39. Huang J, Hume AJ, Abo KM, Werder RB, Villacorta-Martin C, Alysandratos KD, et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection of pluripotent stem cell-derived human lung alveolar type 2 cells elicits a rapid epithelial-intrinsic inflammatory response. Cell Stem Cell. (2020) 27:962–73 e7. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2020.09.013
41. Huang Y, Yang C, Xu XF, Xu W, Liu SW. Structural and functional properties of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein: potential antivirus drug development for COVID-19. Acta Pharmacol Sin. (2020) 41:1141–9. doi: 10.1038/s41401-020-0485-4
43. Lu R, Zhao X, Li J, Niu P, Yang B, Wu H, et al. Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet. (2020) 395:565–74. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30251-8
45. Jary A, Leducq V, Malet I, Marot S, Klement-Frutos E, Teyssou E, et al. Evolution of viral quasispecies during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. (2020) 26:1560 e1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.032
46. Laha S, Chakraborty J, Das S, Manna SK, Biswas S, Chatterjee R. Characterizations of SARS-CoV-2 mutational profile, spike protein stability and viral transmission. Infect Genet Evol. (2020) 85:104445. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2020.104445
48. Zhou B, Thao TTN, Hoffmann D, Taddeo A, Ebert N, Labroussaa F, et al. SARS-CoV-2 spike D614G change enhances replication and transmission. Nature. (2021) 592:122–7. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03361-1
49. Korber B, Fischer WM, Gnanakaran S, Yoon H, Theiler J, Abfalterer W, et al. Tracking changes in SARS-CoV-2 spike: evidence that D614G increases infectivity of the COVID-19 virus. Cell. (2020) 182:812–27 e19. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.06.043
50. Zhang L, Jackson CB, Mou H, Ojha A, Rangarajan ES, Izard T, et al. The D614G mutation in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein reduces S1 shedding and increases infectivity. bioRxiv. (2020) doi: 10.1101/2020.06.12.148726
54. Nile SH, Nile A, Qiu J, Li L, Jia X, Kai G. COVID-19: pathogenesis, cytokine storm and therapeutic potential of interferons. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. (2020) 53:66–70. doi: 10.1016/j.cytogfr.2020.05.002
55. Polak SB, Van Gool IC, Cohen D, von der Thusen JH, van Paassen J. A systematic review of pathological findings in COVID-19: a pathophysiological timeline and possible mechanisms of disease progression. Mod Pathol. (2020) 33:2128–38. doi: 10.1038/s41379-020-0603-3
58. Bohn MK, Lippi G, Horvath A, Sethi S, Koch D, Ferrari M, et al. Molecular, serological, and biochemical diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19: IFCC taskforce evaluation of the latest evidence. Clin Chem Lab Med. (2020) 58:1037–52. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2020-0722
59. Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, Qu J, Gong F, Han Y, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet. (2020) 395:507–13. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7
60. Sun X, Wang T, Cai D, Hu Z, Chen J, Liao H, et al. Cytokine storm intervention in the early stages of COVID-19 pneumonia. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. (2020) 53:38–42. doi: 10.1016/j.cytogfr.2020.04.002
64. Sagar M, Reifler K, Rossi M, Miller NS, Sinha P, White LF, et al. Recent endemic coronavirus infection is associated with less-severe COVID-19. J Clin Invest. (2021) 131:e143380. doi: 10.1172/JCI143380
65. Pinto D, Park YJ, Beltramello M, Walls AC, Tortorici MA, Bianchi S, et al. Cross-neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 by a human monoclonal SARS-CoV antibody. Nature. (2020) 583:290–5. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2349-y
66. Wec AZ, Wrapp D, Herbert AS, Maurer DP, Haslwanter D, Sakharkar M, et al. Broad neutralization of SARS-related viruses by human monoclonal antibodies. Science. (2020) 369:731–6. doi: 10.1126/science.abc7424
69. Caress JB, Castoro RJ, Simmons Z, Scelsa SN, Lewis RA, Ahlawat A, et al. COVID-19-associated Guillain-Barre syndrome: the early pandemic experience. Muscle Nerve. (2020) 62:485–91. doi: 10.1002/mus.27024
70. Kabeerdoss J, Pilania RK, Karkhele R, Kumar TS, Danda D, Singh S. Severe COVID-19, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and Kawasaki disease: immunological mechanisms, clinical manifestations and management. Rheumatol Int. (2021) 41:19–32. doi: 10.1007/s00296-020-04749-4
71. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. (2020) 395:497–506. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5
72. O’Driscoll M, Ribeiro Dos Santos G, Wang L, Cummings DAT, Azman AS, Paireau J, et al. Age-specific mortality and immunity patterns of SARS-CoV-2. Nature. (2021) 590:140–5. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2918-0
73. Pastor-Barriuso R, Perez-Gomez B, Hernan MA, Perez-Olmeda M, Yotti R, Oteo-Iglesias J, et al. Infection fatality risk for SARS-CoV-2 in community dwelling population of Spain: nationwide seroepidemiological study. BMJ. (2020) 371:m4509. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m4509
75. Shenoy AT, Brissac T, Gilley RP, Kumar N, Wang Y, Gonzalez-Juarbe N, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae in the heart subvert the host response through biofilm-mediated resident macrophage killing. PLoS Pathog. (2017) 13:e1006582. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006582
80. Kumar S, Sarma P, Kaur H, Prajapat M, Bhattacharyya A, Avti P, et al. Clinically relevant cell culture models and their significance in isolation, pathogenesis, vaccine development, repurposing and screening of new drugs for SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review. Tissue Cell. (2021) 70:101497. doi: 10.1016/j.tice.2021.101497
81. Alflen A, Aranda Lopez P, Hartmann AK, Maxeiner J, Bosmann M, Sharma A, et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps impair fungal clearance in a mouse model of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Immunobiology. (2020) 225:151867. doi: 10.1016/j.imbio.2019.11.002
83. Johansen MD, Irving A, Montagutelli X, Tate MD, Rudloff I, Nold MF, et al. Animal and translational models of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19. Mucosal Immunol. (2020) 13:877–91. doi: 10.1038/s41385-020-00340-z
86. Lin DC, Xu L, Ding LW, Sharma A, Liu LZ, Yang H, et al. Genomic and functional characterizations of phosphodiesterase subtype 4D in human cancers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2013) 110:6109–14. doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-586
88. Dao Thi VL, Herbst K, Boerner K, Meurer M, Kremer LP, Kirrmaier D, et al. A colorimetric RT-LAMP assay and LAMP-sequencing for detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in clinical samples. Sci Transl Med. (2020) 12:eabc7075. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abc7075
90. Kruttgen A, Cornelissen CG, Dreher M, Hornef M, Imohl M, Kleines M. Comparison of four new commercial serologic assays for determination of SARS-CoV-2 IgG. J Clin Virol. (2020) 128:104394. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104394
91. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu DK, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. (2020) 25:2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045
95. Zhang W, Du RH, Li B, Zheng XS, Yang XL, Hu B, et al. Molecular and serological investigation of 2019-nCoV infected patients: implication of multiple shedding routes. Emerg Microbes Infect. (2020) 9:386–9. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1729071
96. Patchsung M, Jantarug K, Pattama A, Aphicho K, Suraritdechachai S, Meesawat P, et al. Clinical validation of a Cas13-based assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Nat Biomed Eng. (2020) 4:1140–9. doi: 10.1038/s41551-020-00603-x
97. Dabbous HM, El-Sayed MH, El Assal G, Elghazaly H, Ebeid FFS, Sherief AF, et al. Safety and efficacy of favipiravir versus hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19: a randomised controlled trial. Sci Rep. (2021) 11:7282. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85227-0
98. Group RC, Horby P, Mafham M, Linsell L, Bell JL, Staplin N, et al. Effect of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2020) 383:2030–40. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2022926
99. Al-Bari MA. Chloroquine analogues in drug discovery: new directions of uses, mechanisms of actions and toxic manifestations from malaria to multifarious diseases. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2015) 70:1608–21. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv018
100. Gautret P, Lagier JC, Parola P, Hoang VT, Meddeb L, Mailhe M, et al. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial. Int J Antimicrob Agents. (2020) 56:105949. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949
105. Guaraldi G, Meschiari M, Cozzi-Lepri A, Milic J, Tonelli R, Menozzi M, et al. Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Rheumatol. (2020) 2:e474–84. doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30285-X
107. Takla M, Jeevaratnam K. Chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and COVID-19: systematic review and narrative synthesis of efficacy and safety. Saudi Pharm J. (2020) 28:1760–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2020.11.003
108. Schogler A, Kopf BS, Edwards MR, Johnston SL, Casaulta C, Kieninger E, et al. Novel antiviral properties of azithromycin in cystic fibrosis airway epithelial cells. Eur Respir J. (2015) 45:428–39. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00102014
109. Molina JM, Delaugerre C, Le Goff J, Mela-Lima B, Ponscarme D, Goldwirt L, et al. No evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in patients with severe COVID-19 infection. Med Mal Infect. (2020) 50:384. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2020.03.006
110. Lo MK, Jordan R, Arvey A, Sudhamsu J, Shrivastava-Ranjan P, Hotard AL, et al. GS-5734 and its parent nucleoside analog inhibit Filo-, Pneumo-, and Paramyxoviruses. Sci Rep. (2017) 7:43395. doi: 10.1038/srep43395
111. WHO Rapid Evidence Appraisal for COVID-19 Therapies (REACT) Working Group Sterne JAC, Murthy S, Diaz JV, Slutsky AS, Villar J, et al. Association between administration of systemic corticosteroids and mortality among critically ill patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis. JAMA. (2020) 324:1330–41. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.17023
112. Mihara M, Ohsugi Y, Kishimoto T. Tocilizumab, a humanized anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody, for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Open Access Rheumatol. (2011) 3:19–29. doi: 10.2147/OARRR.S17118
114. Roumier M, Paule R, Vallee A, Rohmer J, Ballester M, Brun AL, et al. Tocilizumab for severe worsening COVID-19 pneumonia: a propensity score analysis. J Clin Immunol. (2021) 41:303–14. doi: 10.1007/s10875-020-00911-6
115. Sarfraz A, Sarfraz Z, Sarfraz M, Aftab H, Pervaiz Z. Tocilizumab and COVID-19: a meta-analysis of 2120. Patients with severe disease and implications for clinical trial methodologies. Turk J Med Sci. (2020) doi: 10.3906/sag-2010-131. [Epub ahead of print].
116. Horby PW, Pessoa-Amorim G, Peto L, Brightling CE, Sarkar R, Thomas K, et al. Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): preliminary results of a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial. medRxiv. (2021) doi: 10.1101/2021.02.11.21249258
117. Hansen J, Baum A, Pascal KE, Russo V, Giordano S, Wloga E, et al. Studies in humanized mice and convalescent humans yield a SARS-CoV-2 antibody cocktail. Science. (2020) 369:1010–4. doi: 10.1126/science.abd0827
118. Fischer JC, Zanker K, van Griensven M, Schneider M, Kindgen-Milles D, Knoefel WT, et al. The role of passive immunization in the age of SARS-CoV-2: an update. Eur J Med Res. (2020) 25:16. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00414-5
120. Young MK. The indications and safety of polyvalent immunoglobulin for post-exposure prophylaxis of hepatitis A, rubella and measles. Hum Vaccin Immunother. (2019) 15:2060–5. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2019.1621148
121. Corti D, Passini N, Lanzavecchia A, Zambon M. Rapid generation of a human monoclonal antibody to combat Middle East respiratory syndrome. J Infect Public Health. (2016) 9:231–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2016.04.003
122. Zheng Z, Monteil VM, Maurer-Stroh S, Yew CW, Leong C, Mohd-Ismail NK, et al. Monoclonal antibodies for the S2 subunit of spike of SARS-CoV-1 cross-react with the newly-emerged SARS-CoV-2. Euro Surveill. (2020) 25:2000291. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.28.2000291
123. Baum A, Fulton BO, Wloga E, Copin R, Pascal KE, Russo V, et al. Antibody cocktail to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein prevents rapid mutational escape seen with individual antibodies. Science. (2020) 369:1014–8. doi: 10.1126/science.abd0831
124. Chen P, Nirula A, Heller B, Gottlieb RL, Boscia J, Morris J, et al. SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 in outpatients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2021) 384:229–37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029849
126. Group A-TL-CS, Lundgren JD, Grund B, Barkauskas CE, Holland TL, Gottlieb RL, et al. A neutralizing monoclonal antibody for hospitalized patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2021) 384:905–14. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2033130
127. Gottlieb RL, Nirula A, Chen P, Boscia J, Heller B, Morris J, et al. Effect of bamlanivimab as monotherapy or in combination with etesevimab on viral load in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. (2021) 325:632–44. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.0202
128. Weinreich DM, Sivapalasingam S, Norton T, Ali S, Gao H, Bhore R, et al. REGN-COV2, a neutralizing antibody cocktail, in outpatients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2021) 384:238–51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2035002
129. Osama El-Gendy A, Saeed H, Ali AMA, Zawbaa HM, Gomaa D, Harb HS, et al. Bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine, antimalarial, age and gender relation to COVID-19 spread and mortality. Vaccine. (2020) 38:5564–8. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.06.083
134. Team CC-R, Food, Drug A. Allergic reactions including anaphylaxis after receipt of the first dose of moderna COVID-19 vaccine – United States, December 21, 2020-January 10, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. (2021) 70:125–9. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7004e1
141. Krammer F, Srivastava K, Alshammary H, Amoako AA, Awawda MH, Beach KF, et al. Antibody responses in seropositive persons after a single dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. N Engl J Med. (2021) 384:1372–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2101667
143. Palestino G, Garcia-Silva I, Gonzalez-Ortega O, Rosales-Mendoza S. Can nanotechnology help in the fight against COVID-19? Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. (2020) 18:849–64. doi: 10.1080/14787210.2020.1776115
144. Rivera-Gil P, Jimenez de Aberasturi D, Wulf V, Pelaz B, del Pino P, Zhao Y, et al. The challenge to relate the physicochemical properties of colloidal nanoparticles to their cytotoxicity. Acc Chem Res. (2013) 46:743–9. doi: 10.1021/ar300039j
145. Austin LA, Mackey MA, Dreaden EC, El-Sayed MA. The optical, photothermal, and facile surface chemical properties of gold and silver nanoparticles in biodiagnostics, therapy, and drug delivery. Arch Toxicol. (2014) 88:1391–417. doi: 10.1007/s00204-014-1245-3
147. Leister H, Luu M, Staudenraus D, Lopez Krol A, Mollenkopf HJ, Sharma A, et al. Pro- and anti-tumorigenic capacity of immunoproteasomes in shaping the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Immunol Res. (2021) doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-20-0492. [Epub ahead of print].
148. Douziech-Eyrolles L, Marchais H, Herve K, Munnier E, Souce M, Linassier C, et al. Nanovectors for anticancer agents based on superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles. Int J Nanomed. (2007) 2:541–50.
149. Weiss C, Carriere M, Fusco L, Capua I, Regla-Nava JA, Pasquali M, et al. Toward nanotechnology-enabled approaches against the COVID-19 pandemic. ACS Nano. (2020) 14:6383–406. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.0c03697
156. Butkovich N, Li E, Ramirez A, Burkhardt AM, Wang SW. Advancements in protein nanoparticle vaccine platforms to combat infectious disease. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. (2020) 13:e1681. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1681
157. Li M, Cripe TP, Estes PA, Lyon MK, Rose RC, Garcea RL. Expression of the human papillomavirus type 11 L1 capsid protein in Escherichia coli: characterization of protein domains involved in DNA binding and capsid assembly. J Virol. (1997) 71:2988–95. doi: 10.1128/JVI.71.4.2988-2995.1997
159. Kaiser CR, Flenniken ML, Gillitzer E, Harmsen AL, Harmsen AG, Jutila MA, et al. Biodistribution studies of protein cage nanoparticles demonstrate broad tissue distribution and rapid clearance in vivo. Int J Nanomed. (2007) 2:715–33.
160. Bruckman MA, Randolph LN, VanMeter A, Hern S, Shoffstall AJ, Taurog RE, et al. Biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, and blood compatibility of native and PEGylated tobacco mosaic virus nano-rods and -spheres in mice. Virology. (2014) 449:163–73. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2013.10.035
161. Singh P, Prasuhn D, Yeh RM, Destito G, Rae CS, Osborn K, et al. Bio-distribution, toxicity and pathology of cowpea mosaic virus nanoparticles in vivo. J Control Release. (2007) 120:41–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2007.04.003
162. Sunkar S, Nachiyar CV. Biogenesis of antibacterial silver nanoparticles using the endophytic bacterium Bacillus cereus isolated from Garcinia xanthochymus. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed. (2012) 2:953–9. doi: 10.1016/S2221-1691(13)60006-4
163. Husseiny MI, El-Aziz MA, Badr Y, Mahmoud MA. Biosynthesis of gold nanoparticles using Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc. (2007) 67:1003–6. doi: 10.1016/j.saa.2006.09.028
164. Konishi Y, Ohno K, Saitoh N, Nomura T, Nagamine S, Hishida H, et al. Bioreductive deposition of platinum nanoparticles on the bacterium Shewanella algae. J Biotechnol. (2007) 128:648–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2006.11.014
168. Mukherjee S, Mazumder P, Joshi M, Joshi C, Dalvi SV, Kumar M. Biomedical application, drug delivery and metabolic pathway of antiviral nanotherapeutics for combating viral pandemic: a review. Environ Res. (2020) 191:110119. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110119
169. Upadhyay SK, Dan S, Girdhar M, Rastogi K. Recent advancement in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, treatment, and vaccine formulation: a new paradigm of nanotechnology in strategic combating of COVID-19 pandemic. Curr Pharmacol Rep. (2021) 7:1–14. doi: 10.1007/s40495-021-00250-z
170. Kumar R, Nayak M, Sahoo GC, Pandey K, Sarkar MC, Ansari Y, et al. Iron oxide nanoparticles based antiviral activity of H1N1 influenza A virus. J Infect Chemother. (2019) 25:325–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2018.12.006
172. Ren G, Hu D, Cheng EW, Vargas-Reus MA, Reip P, Allaker RP. Characterisation of copper oxide nanoparticles for antimicrobial applications. Int J Antimicrob Agents. (2009) 33:587–90. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.12.004
173. Shaikh S, Nazam N, Rizvi SMD, Ahmad K, Baig MH, Lee EJ, et al. Mechanistic insights into the antimicrobial actions of metallic nanoparticles and their implications for multidrug resistance. Int J Mol Sci. (2019) 20:2468. doi: 10.3390/ijms20102468
174. Davis ME, Zuckerman JE, Choi CH, Seligson D, Tolcher A, Alabi CA, et al. Evidence of RNAi in humans from systemically administered siRNA via targeted nanoparticles. Nature. (2010) 464:1067–70. doi: 10.1038/nature08956
175. Sharma A, Steven S, Bosmann M. The pituitary gland prevents shock-associated death by controlling multiple inflammatory mediators. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. (2019) 509:188–93. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.12.101
177. Adhikari A, Pal U, Bayan S, Mondal S, Ghosh R, Darbar S, et al. Nanoceutical fabric prevents COVID-19 spread through expelled respiratory droplets: a combined computational, spectroscopic and anti-microbial study. bioRxiv. (2021) doi: 10.1101/2021.02.20.432081
178. Abo-Zeid Y, Ismail NSM, McLean GR, Hamdy NM. A molecular docking study repurposes FDA approved iron oxide nanoparticles to treat and control COVID-19 infection. Eur J Pharm Sci. (2020) 153:105465. doi: 10.1016/j.ejps.2020.105465
179. Khairil Anuar INA, Banerjee A, Keeble AH, Carella A, Nikov GI, Howarth M. Spy&Go purification of SpyTag-proteins using pseudo-SpyCatcher to access an oligomerization toolbox. Nat Commun. (2019) 10:1734. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09678-w
180. Cohen AA, Gnanapragasam PNP, Lee YE, Hoffman PR, Ou S, Kakutani LM, et al. Mosaic nanoparticles elicit cross-reactive immune responses to zoonotic coronaviruses in mice. Science. (2021) 371:735–41. doi: 10.1126/science.abf6840
181. Roewe J, Stavrides G, Strueve M, Sharma A, Marini F, Mann A, et al. Bacterial polyphosphates interfere with the innate host defense to infection. Nat Commun. (2020) 11:4035. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-17639-x
182. Puri N, Niazi A, Srivastava AK, Rajesh. Synthesis and characterization of reduced graphene oxide supported gold nanoparticles-poly(pyrrole-co-pyrrolepropylic acid) nanocomposite-based electrochemical biosensor. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. (2014) 174:911–25. doi: 10.1007/s12010-014-0997-9
183. Seo G, Lee G, Kim MJ, Baek SH, Choi M, Ku KB, et al. Rapid detection of COVID-19 causative virus (SARS-CoV-2) in human nasopharyngeal swab specimens using field-effect transistor-based biosensor. ACS Nano. (2020) 14:5135–42. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.0c02823
184. Jang H, Ryoo SR, Kim YK, Yoon S, Kim H, Han SW, et al. Discovery of hepatitis C virus NS3 helicase inhibitors by a multiplexed, high-throughput helicase activity assay based on graphene oxide. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. (2013) 52:2340–4. doi: 10.1002/anie.201209222
185. Qiu G, Gai Z, Tao Y, Schmitt J, Kullak-Ublick GA, Wang J. Dual-functional plasmonic photothermal biosensors for highly accurate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 detection. ACS Nano. (2020) 14:5268–77. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.0c02439
189. Keech C, Albert G, Cho I, Robertson A, Reed P, Neal S, et al. Phase 1-2 trial of a SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine. N Engl J Med. (2020) 383:2320–32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2026920
192. Wang W, Huang B, Zhu Y, Tan W, Zhu M. Ferritin nanoparticle-based SARS-CoV-2 RBD vaccine induces a persistent antibody response and long-term memory in mice. Cell Mol Immunol. (2021) 18:749–51. doi: 10.1038/s41423-021-00643-6
193. Abd Ellah NH, Gad SF, Muhammad K, G EB, Hetta HF. Nanomedicine as a promising approach for diagnosis, treatment and prophylaxis against COVID-19. Nanomedicine. (2020) 15:2085–102. doi: 10.2217/nnm-2020-0247
195. Ray PC, Yu H, Fu PP. Toxicity and environmental risks of nanomaterials: challenges and future needs. J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. (2009) 27:1–35. doi: 10.1080/10590500802708267
198. Thakur M, Gupta H, Singh D, Mohanty IR, Maheswari U, Vanage G, et al. Histopathological and ultra structural effects of nanoparticles on rat testis following 90 days (Chronic study) of repeated oral administration. J Nanobiotechnology. (2014) 12:42. doi: 10.1186/s12951-014-0042-8
199. Noon JB, Sharma A, Platten J, Quinton LJ, Reinhardt C, Bosmann M. IL-27 enhances the lymphocyte mediated innate resistance to primary hookworm infection in the lungs. bioRxiv. (2020). doi: 10.1101/2020.08.12.248021