Local News Doctor Says Ebola Vaccine Virus Injected Into Denver Health Workers 'Can't Make You Sick'—FDA Insert Contradicts Her Claim
Vaccine manufacturer insert lists dozens of adverse reactions to the live virus-containing drug.
Healthcare workers at Denver Health in Denver, Colorado received doses of a live virus-containing Ebola vaccine in November 2023.
Follow Jon Fleetwood on Instagram @realjonfleetwood / Twitter @JonMFleetwood
The Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Center team became some of the first to receive Merck’s ‘ERVEBO’ Ebola jab.
The vaccinations were for “preventative measures in case of a future outbreak.”
The fact that those selected to receive an Ebola vaccine were workers located in Denver is significant because the city is only 65 miles south of Fort Collins, where a new bat lab is to be built, that, according to The Daily Mail, could study ebola.
The lab will be built despite Fort Collins’ already checkered safety record in handling the deadliest pathogens known to man.
Colorado State University (CSU), where the new facility will be erected, denies Ebola will be studied in the building.
However, documents reviewed by Daily Mail “suggest scientists wanted to infect bats with Covid, Ebola and Nipah virus,” according to the outlet.
One document submitted by CSU researchers in December 2022 states, “We will infect horseshoe bats with SARS-CoV2 and a SARSr-CoV detected in these bats.”
Daily Mail also cites emails from Dr. Greg Ebel, director of CSU’s ‘Center for Vector-borne Infectious Diseases,’ in which the director “called the proposed facility an important resource to conduct experimental work involving high containment pathogens, such as Ebola.”
Follow Jon Fleetwood on Instagram @realjonfleetwood / Twitter @JonMFleetwood
Denver Doctor Contradicts FDA Ebola Vaccine Insert
Two months ago, a local NBC News outlet, 9News, interviewed a doctor who claimed that the Ebola virus vaccine injected into Denver Health workers “cannot make you sick with the virus.”
Dr. Payal Kohli doubled down on her claim, saying that the vaccine virus—which is a composite mixture of a Vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) “backbone” and the Ebola virus envelope glycoprotein—“can’t make you sick.”
Dr. Kohli made these claims despite the U.S. Food & Drug Administration’s (FDA) package insert for the drug clearly stating the jab is a “live virus vaccine” that can cause dozens of adverse reactions, i.e. make you sick.
Experiencing any of these adverse events meets the definition of being sick, according to various dictionaries:
Cambridge Dictionary defines ‘sick’ as being “physically or mentally ill; not well or healthy.”
The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “[s]uffering from illness of any kind; ill, unwell, ailing.”
Merriam Webster as “ill health” and “a disordered, weakened, or unsound condition.”
Dictionary.com as “affected with ill health, disease, or illness.”
The Free Dictionary defines ‘sickness’ as “[t]he condition of being sick; illness” and “disease; a malady.”
Texas Health and Human Services equates sickness with “illness or loss of health.”
It’s worth noting the vaccine has also not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, or impairment of male fertility.
We also don’t know its impact on milk production in lactating mothers, nor its “presence in breast milk, or its effects on the breastfed child.”
However, there were two spontaneous abortions at around one month after conception and one stillbirth out of a total of 20 women who were pregnant when vaccinated or became pregnant soon after receiving Merck’s ERVEBO Ebola vaccine, according to a March 2020 publication in Emerging Infectious Disease.
This represents an overall pregnancy loss rate of 15%.
The vaccine also “shed[s]” in 31.7% of participants, meaning the vaccine virus is detectable in bodily fluid and capable of being transmitted to others.
It’s potentially contagious.
“Transmission of vaccine virus is a theoretical possibility,” the insert reads. “Vaccine virus RNA has been detected in blood, saliva, or urine for up to 14 days after vaccination. The duration of shedding is not known.”
A 2016 New England Journal of Medicine publication confirms the release and replication of infectious virus particles from an infected individual into the environment “can occur and persist for up to 2 to 3 weeks after immunization—in other words, that early innate responses may not always be sufficient for complete viral control.”
Dr. Richard Bartlett is a 30-year Texas emergency room (ER) physician and recipient of the Meritorious Service Award from the Texas Department of Health and Human Services for his numerous contributions to improving the health of all Texans.
He bases his opinion regarding whether or not the vaccine virus is capable of causing illness on the manufacturer’s insert.
“My opinion is that the vaccine virus could make you sick,” he said. “My medical opinion is based on the FDA package insert.”
Dr. Bartlett, an emergency room medical director, pointed to the various side effects the vaccine can cause, and argued that experiencing any of these symptoms constitutes being sick “by definition.”
“Obviously you can get sick from the vaccine. You can have injection-site swelling and erythema, abdominal pain, nausea, arthritis, vomiting, mouth ulceration, myalgia, arthralgia, and diarrhea. If someone came into my emergency room with any of those ailments, they are sick by definition.”
Follow Jon Fleetwood on Instagram @realjonfleetwood / Twitter @JonMFleetwood
Denver Doctor Fails to Mention Non-Vaccine Ebola Interventions
In the 9News interview, Kohli also alleged that we “don’t have antivirals yet for Ebola that are very effective,” arguing the vaccine represents the only protective option against the virus.
But there are both antiviral as well as antibody options for Ebola: Nitazoxanide (NTZ) and monoclonal antibodies.
Nitazoxanide (NTZ)
NTZ is reported to be effective against both DNA and RNA viruses, which represent all viruses.
This publication has reported elsewhere that a 2019 study in iScience confirms the FDA-approved oral drug NTZ “broadly amplifies the host innate immune response to viruses and inhibits Ebola virus (EBOV) replication.”
Boston Children’s Hospital later praised the study, emphasizing how the drug “enhances the immune system’s ability to detect Ebola, normally impeded by the virus.”
A March 2022 publication in Viruses also cited the iScience study, underscoring how the paper showed NTZ “could broadly enhance innate antiviral immunity, which inhibited EBOV replication and counteracted EBOV VP35’s immune suppression.”
Monoclonal Antibodies
A December 2019 publication from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) reported how two monoclonal antibodies—Ridgeback Biotherapeutics’ mAb114 (Ansuvimab; Ebanga) and Regeneron’s REGN-EB3 (Inmazeb)—reduced the risk of death from Ebola.
Both of these monoclonal antibodies are FDA-approved (here; here).
In August 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) published guidelines for Ebola virus disease therapeutics, with strong recommendations for the use of both of these monoclonal antibodies.
In March 2023, a study published in Frontiers confirmed the safety and efficacy of Ebanga.
You can watch the 9News interview below:
Follow Jon Fleetwood on Instagram @realjonfleetwood / Twitter @JonMFleetwood