The reason I do not find VB compelling is I am mainly convinced that the variant narrative is bogus. So anything propping the variant narrative I find is disinfo. I think his stuff is subtle and pernicious, in that it will seem to be true under many circumstances where it is not.
There is very good proof that there wasn’t any sort of new pandemic virus. The UK data shows that only 10k people died of Covid as primary cause – and even then it may have been the treatment that killed them, not the disease. People are getting sick who were vaccinated – not for some evolved variant but likely because of vaccine complications.
VB thesis is a precursor to greater lockdowns. We had regular covid before – but now we have super-covid etc. etc.
But most everyone they tested after vaccination had memory antibodies show up, demonstrating they already had natural immunity and Covid was not novel. So VB’s theory cannot work. A) because there was a previous virus and no new virus and B) if people already had natural immunity the vaccine can’t then drive evolution and likely C) corona virus creates so many variants on it’s own evolution can’t be driven in the way he says.
You can believe it if you want – I think he is a disinfo agent.
This is an email sent by a friend with whom I often communicate on covid and other subjects. He has been quite strong in his criticism of Vanden Bossche’s predictions, so I asked him why. ABN