I’ve hesitated for over a year to write this. Not because the science isn’t clear, but because the topic is deeply nuanced—and, frankly, explosive.
Still, I believe it's time we confront a difficult question: Did we repeat a mistake from 1918—by deploying mass vaccination before fully understanding the disease? And more specifically: Could the spike protein, much like bacterial endotoxins during the Spanish flu, be provoking dangerous immune responses in certain people today?
Let me be absolutely clear from the outset: this is not an anti-vaccine narrative. I support science. I support informed, responsible medical decisions. And I support the idea that interventions should be matched to need. But we cannot make sound decisions without first understanding the full picture—especially when it comes to the immune system.
The Forgotten History of the 1918 Flu Pandemic
In 1918, the world was devastated by a pandemic that killed an estimated 50 million people. Medicine was still evolving. At the time, we didn’t know that viruses existed. The leading theory was that the disease was caused by a bacterium—Haemophilus influenzae, also known as Pfeiffer’s bacillus. It made sense. The bacterium was often found in the lungs of people who died of the flu.
So, based on this incomplete understanding, doctors around the world developed and administered bacterial vaccines—formulations made from heat-killed pathogens like H. influenzae, Streptococcus, and Staphylococcus. These were given to millions, especially military personnel. Estimates suggest up to 80% of soldiers received some form of bacterial vaccine.
The problem? They were targeting the wrong thing.
The real killer wasn’t just the virus—it was the secondary bacterial infections and the hyperinflammatory immune responses they triggered. Young, healthy adults—typically the most resilient—were the ones dying. Something was profoundly off.
The Endotoxin Hypothesis
Bacterial vaccines at that time were crude and unpurified. Many contained lipopolysaccharides (LPS)—endotoxins found in the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. These are potent immune stimulators. In fact, the immune system reacts to LPS with such intensity that it often shuts down its long-term memory afterward—likely a protective mechanism against future overreaction.
In 1918, young people who had been vaccinated with LPS-containing products, and then infected with influenza (often followed by H. influenzae pneumonia), may have been primed to overreact immunologically. This overreaction—what we now call a cytokine storm—could have contributed to the massive death toll among the healthiest in the population.
Spike Protein: A Modern Echo of Endotoxin?
Fast forward to today. We now face a different virus—SARS-CoV-2—but potentially a similar misjudgment in how we approached it.
Vaccines were developed to target the spike protein, which is the most immunogenic surface structure of the virus. The assumption was simple: if you teach the immune system to attack the spike, you can neutralize the virus.
But here’s the problem: the spike protein is not just an inert antigen. It’s biologically active. It binds to ACE2, neuropilin-1, CD147, and heparan sulfate. It triggers inflammation, disrupts vascular function, and—crucially—it seems to induce immune tolerance, much like LPS.
A 2023 study showed that SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific plasma cells are not durably established in the bone marrow. In simple terms: the immune system does not want to remember the spike protein. This is highly unusual. It’s how we behave toward toxins—not typical viruses.
Have We Primed Ourselves for an Overreaction?
If spike protein behaves like an endotoxin, and we have vaccinated billions of people with repeated exposure to it, then what happens with ongoing or repeated infections?
Are we inadvertently setting the stage for a delayed immunological crisis, especially if a future variant triggers more aggressive immune activation—something more like Delta than Omicron?
This is the uncomfortable question I believe we must face. Just as in 1918, we may have intervened too quickly, without understanding the full scope of the disease or the long-term implications of the antigen we were using.
A Plea for Scientific Humility
In 2021, I said the vaccines should be reserved for high-risk individuals who had not been previously infected. That seemed like the most logical and ethical approach at the time. But instead, the rollout expanded indiscriminately—and in some countries, it was even mandated.
That, I believe, was an error. Not because vaccines are inherently bad, but because spike protein may not be a suitable antigen for repeat exposure. It’s a matter of understanding the pathophysiology before applying the solution.
Final Thoughts
I hope I am wrong about what lies ahead. But science must be proactive, not reactive. The comparison between lipopolysaccharide-induced immune storms in 1918 and spike-induced autoimmunity today is not just poetic—it may be prophetic.
We owe it to the public, to the science, and to future generations to learn from history—and to admit when we've acted before fully understanding the consequences.
Let’s not bury these questions under politics or fear. Let’s ask them out loud—before it’s too late to change course.
Vejon COVID-19 Review is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Share this post