Children Should be Freed NOW – ACE2 receptors (Dr. Trozzi / Dr. Alexander) Expand

Children Should be Freed NOW by Dr. Paul Alexander and Dr. Mark Trozzi

ACE 2 Receptors

First, as the reader may know, coronaviruses are spherical and have many spike proteins projecting from their surface all around. For a coronavirus to infect a human cell, these spike proteins first must attach to receptors on the surface of the cell, called ACE2 receptors. Without this first stage of attachment, the coronavirus cannot infect the human cell.  ACE2 receptors are the vulnerability that coronaviruses use to attach to human cells and initiate infection.


These ACE 2 receptors have limited (less) expression and presence in the nasal epithelium in young children; this is part of the reason that children are less likely to be infected in the first place, or spread it to other children or adults, or even get severely ill; the apparatus is simply not there as reported by (1a) Patel and (1b) Bunyavanich.

Pre-activated Antiviral Innate Immunity

Second, another mechanism of children’s powerful resistance to coronaviruses is revealed in recent research (2) August 2021 by Loske, which deepens our understanding even further. This research shows that pre-activated antiviral innate immunity in the upper airways of children works to further control early SARS-CoV-2 infection. The study provides evidence that “the airway immune cells of children are primed for virus sensing, resulting in a stronger early innate antiviral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection than occurs in adults”.

“Imagine deciding to kill more than one hundred children, for everyone possibly saved. It is ludicrous or evil. Stop these injections immediately!”

Natural Immunity

Third, unlike the unnatural, dangerous, and less effective pseudo-immunity triggered by experimental biologic covid-19 injections (3), we know that natural immunity is very broad and effective. That means that naturally, we have immunity to new coronaviruses because of exposure to other coronaviruses in the past. This is true even in young children. Coronaviruses are one of the virus families that cause the “common cold”. Even little children have been exposed to various colds before covid-19 was launched. With the colds that were coronaviruses, the children were minimally sick due to low ACE2 receptors in their nostrils and their innate anti-viral immunity; but still the exposure helped them develop strong and broad immunity and antibodies to coronaviruses. This natural immunity works even between very different coronaviruses. That’s one of the reasons why the infamous variants are of less concern for non-injected people, who have natural immunity.

In children, this broad natural immunity to covid, thanks to prior colds, is demonstrated by research evidence of (4) Yang which was published in Science (May 2021). It showed that blood examined from children retrieved prior to COVID-19 pandemic, had memory B cells that can bind to SARS-CoV-2. This indicates the potent role of early childhood exposure to common cold coronaviruses (coronaviruses), in giving them enhanced immunity to SARS-CoV2 and its variants.

In other words, this underscores the importance of early childhood B cell clonal expansions and cross-reactivity/cross-protection, in subsequent exposures and responses to novel pathogens including SARS-COV-2. Here we quote this work by Dr Yang: “Consistent with reported serology, pre-pandemic children had class-switched convergent clones to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 with weak cross-reactivity to other coronaviruses… these results highlight the prominence of early childhood B cell clonal expansions and cross-reactivity for future responses to novel pathogens”.

“The injections should be stopped immediately, especially in children.”

Children are less likely to spread covid.

Fourth, we would also like to draw the readers’ attention to research in the (5) Journal of Infection by Galow (April 2021) that examined household transmission rates in children and adults. They reported that there was “no transmission from an index-person < 18 years to a household contact < 18 years (0/7), but 26 transmissions from adult index-cases to household contacts < 18 years (26/71, SAR 0=37)”. These findings are in line with evidence that children are less at risk of developing severe illness courses, and also are far less susceptible and likely to spread and drive SARS-CoV-2 (6, 7, 8, 9).

In Summary

In summary: Children have minimal ACE2 receptors present in their upper airway; they have powerful innate immune responses to viruses in the upper airways; they have broad effective immunity to SARS-CoV2 and its variants from prior exposures to coronaviruses; and further evidence demonstrates that by and far they do not transmit covid to other people, even those in close contact with them.


So, the idea imposed on children that by hugging or socializing with their grandparents, they will give them covid and cause their death, is completely unfounded. This idea has been nothing more than one part of the severe psychologic abuse our children have undergone for more than one and a half years now. We must end this now. Children need no masks, no anti-social distancing, no limitations on their life at all, they need no facial obstructions or unnatural distancing from their teachers, and they most certainly should be spared the dangerous genetic nanoparticle experimental injections.


We now know that even in the elderly who are far more prone to significant illness with covid-19, the injections kill five times as many as they save. (10) In children this ratio goes off the scale to more than one hundred. Imagine deciding to kill more than one hundred children, for everyone possibly saved. It is ludicrous or evil. Stop these injections immediately!


The injections should be stopped immediately, especially in children.


  • 1a.Patel AB, Verma A. Nasal ACE2 Levels and COVID-19 in Children. JAMA. 2020 Jun 16;323(23):2386-2387. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.8946. PMID: 32432681.
  • 1b. Bunyavanich S, Do A, Vicencio A. Nasal Gene Expression of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 in Children and Adults. JAMA. 2020;323(23):2427-2429. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.8707
  • 2. Loske, J., Röhmel, J., Lukassen, S. et al.pre-activated antiviral innate immunity in the upper airways controls early SARS-CoV-2 infection in children. Nat Biotechnol(2021).
  • 3. M. Trozzi MD June 2022 Covid “Vaccines”, How Dangerous Are They?
  • 4. Yang F, Nielsen SCA, Hoh RA, Röltgen K, Wirz OF, Haraguchi E, Jean GH, Lee JY, Pham TD, Jackson KJL, Roskin KM, Liu Y, Nguyen K, Ohgami RS, Osborne EM, Nadeau KC, Niemann CU, Parsonnet J, Boyd SD. Shared B cell memory to coronaviruses and other pathogens varies in human age groups and tissues. Science. 2021 May 14;372(6543):738-741. doi: 10.1126/science.abf6648. Epub 2021 Apr 12. PMID: 33846272; PMCID: PMC8139427.
  • 5. Galow L, Haag L, Kahre E, Blankenburg J, Dalpke AH, Lück C, Berner R, Armann JP. Lower household transmission rates of SARS-CoV-2 from children compared to adults. J Infect. 2021 Jul;83(1):e34-e36. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.04.022. Epub 2021 Apr 28. PMID: 33930468; PMCID: PMC8079264.
  • 6. Koh WC, Naing L, Chaw L, Rosledzana MA, Alikhan MF, Jamaludin SA, Amin F, Omar A, Shazli A, Griffith M, Pastore R, Wong J. What do we know about SARS-CoV-2 transmission? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the secondary attack rate and associated risk factors. PLoS One. 2020 Oct 8;15(10):e0240205. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240205. PMID: 33031427; PMCID: PMC7544065.
  • 7. Viner RM, Mytton OT, Bonell C, Melendez-Torres GJ, Ward J, Hudson L, Waddington C, Thomas J, Russell S, van der Klis F, Koirala A, Ladhani S, Panovska-Griffiths J, Davies NG, Booy R, Eggo RM. Susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Children and Adolescents Compared With Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Feb 1;175(2):143-156. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.4573. Erratum in: JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Feb 1;175(2):212. PMID: 32975552; PMCID: PMC7519436.
  • 8. Jung J, Hong MJ, Kim EO, Lee J, Kim MN, Kim SH. Investigation of a nosocomial outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 in a paediatric ward in South Korea: successful control by early detection and extensive contact tracing with testing. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Nov;26(11):1574-1575. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.06.021. Epub 2020 Jun 25. PMID: 32593744; PMCID: PMC7315989.
  • 9. Wongsawat J, Moolasart V, Srikirin P, Srijareonvijit C, Vaivong N, Uttayamakul S, Disthakumpa A. Risk of novel coronavirus 2019 transmission from children to caregivers: A case series. J Paediatr Child Health. 2020 Jun;56(6):984-985. doi: 10.1111/jpc.14965. PMID: 32567772; PMCID: PMC7361585.
  • 10. Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19? Ronald N.Kostoff, Daniela Calina, Darja Kanduc, Michael B.Briggs, Panayiotis Vlachoyiannopoulose, Andrey A.Svistunov, and AristidisTsatsakisg
6 Studies Showing Why Children Don’t Need – and Shouldn’t Get – a COVID Vaccine (Dr. Alexander) Expand

6 Studies Showing Why Children Don’t Need – and Shouldn’t Get – a COVID Vaccine by Paul Alexander

When it comes to COVID, public health officials have consistently downplayed and/or ignored natural immunity.

Yet these public health experts and many doctors and scientists know that no vaccine can confer the type of robust, full, sterilizing and life-long immunity to COVID that natural-exposure immunity confers.

Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) know anyone exposed, infected and recovered from SARS-CoV-2 has acquired cellular immunity.

They know how natural immunity works, yet they continue to deceive the public on this issue by falsely insisting vaccines are the only answer to “ending the pandemic.”

The authors of a 2008 study on the 1918 pandemic virus showed how potent and long-lived natural immunity is, and how the immune system generates new antibodies if and when needed (re-exposed).

The researchers wrote:

“A study of the blood of older people who survived the 1918 influenza pandemic reveals that antibodies to the strain have lasted a lifetime and can perhaps be engineered to protect future generations against similar strains … the group collected blood samples from 32 pandemic survivors aged 91 to 101 … the people recruited for the study were 2 to 12 years old in 1918 and many recalled sick family members in their households, which suggests they were directly exposed to the virus … The group found that 100% of the subjects had serum-neutralizing activity against the 1918 virus and 94% showed serologic reactivity to the 1918 hemagglutinin.

“The investigators generated B lymphoblastic cell lines from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of eight subjects. Transformed cells from the blood of 7 of the 8 donors yielded secreting antibodies that bound the 1918 hemagglutinin.

” … here we show that of the 32 individuals tested that were born in or before 1915, each showed sero-reactivity with the 1918 virus, nearly 90 years after the pandemic. Seven of the eight donor samples tested had circulating B cells that secreted antibodies that bound the 1918 HA. We isolated B cells from subjects and generated five monoclonal antibodies that showed potent neutralizing activity against 1918 virus from three separate donors. These antibodies also cross-reacted with the genetically similar HA of a 1930 swine H1N1 influenza strain.”

The very same CDC that fights against COVID natural immunity, argues just the opposite when it comes to chickenpox.

Guidance on the CDC website, “Chickenpox Vaccination: What Everyone Should Know,” states: “People 13 years of age and older who have never had chickenpox or received chickenpox vaccine should get two doses, at least 28 days apart.”

“Natural, beautiful robust immunity, typically lasts for the rest of a person’s life.”

In this reasonable guidance, the CDC says you need the chickenpox jab if you “have never had chickenpox.” If you have had it, then you do not need the vaccine.

The CDC goes even further, stating: “You do not need to get the chickenpox vaccine if you have evidence of immunity against the disease.” So if someone has had chickenpox and recovered, and can demonstrate that via a laboratory test, they don’t need the vaccine.

Again, this makes sense. All parents know this, and have for generations. You do not need a vaccine for measles, if you already had measles and cleared the rash and recovered. Natural, beautiful robust immunity, typically lasts for the rest of a person’s life.

The same goes for the CDC’s guidance for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR). The CDC clearly states no MMR vaccine is needed if “You have laboratory confirmation of past infection or had blood tests that show you are immune to measles, mumps, and rubella.”

So, what is different for COVID-19? Is something other than science at play here?

SHOCKING STATEMENT ABOUT RISKING CHILDREN’S HEALTH: “We’re never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it.”

We now have a major crisis as the race is on to vaccinate our 5- to 11-year-old children who bring no risk to the table, with a vaccine that has been shown to be sub-optimal and carrying risks.

We even have one of the FDA advisory committee members, Dr. Eric Rubin, who is also lead editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, stating: “We’re never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it.”

This is a shocking statement by someone who played a role in the decision-making, and should lead us to examine if Rubin and others on that committee were conflicted in terms of relationships to the vaccine developers.

Rubin further stated: “The data show that the vaccine works and it’s pretty safe … we’re worried about a side effect that we can’t measure yet,” he said, referring to a heart condition called myocarditis.

So then why would Rubin and others agree to expose our children to potential harm from a vaccine for an illness that poses little risk to children, if they have serious concerns and admit they have not and cannot yet measure the safety?

This depth of uncertainty should never exist in any drug or vaccine that the FDA regulates, much less a drug officials propose to administer to 28 million children. Something is very wrong here.

It is clear that children are at very low risk of spreading the infection to other children, of spreading to adults as seen in household transmission studies, or of taking it home or becoming ill, or dying – this is settled scientific global evidence ((references 1234).

An April 2021 study in the Journal of Infection (April 2021) examined household transmission rates in children and adults. The authors reported there was “no transmission from an index-person < 18 years (child) to a household contact < 18 years (child) (0/7), but 26 transmissions from adult index-cases to household contacts < 18 years (child) (26/71, SAR 0=37).”

These findings add to the stable existing evidence that children are not spreading the virus to children but rather that adults are spreading it to children.

Why vaccinate our children for this mild and typically non-consequential virus when they bring protective innate immunity towards this SARS-VoV-2, other coronaviruses and other respiratory viruses?

Why push to vaccinate our children who may well be immune due to prior exposure (asymptomatic or mild illness) and cross-reactivity/cross-protection? Why not consider assessing their immune status?

Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche writes that children’s innate immunity:

“… normally/ naturally largely protects them and provides a kind of herd immunity in that it dilutes infectious CoV pressure at the level of the population, whereas mass vaccination turns them into shedders of more infectious variants. Children/ youngsters who get the disease mostly develop mild to moderate disease and as a result continue to contribute to herd immunity by developing broad and long-lived immunity.”

Here are six studies that make the case for not vaccinating children:

1. A 2020 Yale University report indicates children and adults display very diverse and different immune system responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection which explains why they have far less illness or mortality from COVID. 

According to the study:

“Since the earliest days of the COVID-19 outbreak, scientists have observed that children infected with the virus tend to fare much better than adults … researchers reported that levels of two immune system molecules – interleukin 17A (IL-17A), which helps mobilize immune system response during early infection, and interferon gamma (INF-g), which combats viral replication – were strongly linked to the age of the patients. The younger the patient, the higher the levels of IL-17A and INF-g, the analysis showed…these two molecules are part of the innate immune system, a more primitive, non-specific type of response activated early after infection.”

2. Studies by Ankit B. Patel and Dr. Supinda Bunyavanich show the virus uses the ACE 2 receptor to gain entry to the host cell, and the ACE 2 receptor has limited (less) expression and presence in the nasal epithelium in young children (potentially in upper respiratory airways).

This partly explains why children are less likely to be infected in the first place, or spread it to other children or adults, or even get severely ill. The biological molecular apparatus is simply not there in the nasopharynx of children. By bypassing this natural protection (limited nasal ACE 2 receptors in young children) and entering the shoulder deltoid, this could release vaccine, its mRNA and LNP content (e.g. PEG), and generated spike into the circulation that could then damage the endothelial lining of the blood vessels (vasculature) and cause severe allergic reactions (e.g., hereherehereherehere).

3. William Briggs reported on the n=542 children who died (0-17 years (crude rate of 0.00007 per 100 and under 1 year old n=132, CDC data) since January 2020 with a diagnosis of COVID linked to their death. This does not indicate whether, as Johns Hopkins’ Dr. Marty Makary has been clamoring, the death was “causal or incidental.” That said, from January 2020, 1,043 children 0-17 have died of pneumonia. 

Briggs reported:

“There is no good vaccine for pneumonia. But it could be avoided by keeping kids socially distanced from each other – permanently. If one death is “too many,” then you must not allow kids to be within contact of any human being who has a disease that may be passed to them, from which they may acquire pneumonia. They must also not be allowed in any car … in one year, just about 3,091 kids 0-17 died in car crashes (435 from 0-4, 847 from 5-14, and 30% of 6,031 from 15-24). Multiply these 3,000 deaths in cars by about 1.75, since the COVID deaths are over a 21-month period. That makes about 5,250 kids dying in car crashes in the same period – 10 times as many as Covid.”

Briggs concluded: “there exists no justification based on any available evidence for mandatory vaccines for kids.”

4. Weisberg and Farber et al. suggest (and building on research work by Kumar and Faber) that the reason children can more easily neutralize the virus is that their T cells are relatively naïve. They argue that since children’s T cells are mostly untrained, they can thus immunologically respond (optimally differentiate) more rapidly and nimbly to novel viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 for an effective robust response. 

5. Research published in August 2021 by J. Loske deepens our understanding of this natural type biological/molecular protection even further by showing that “pre-activated (primed) antiviral innate immunity in the upper airways of children work to control early SARS-CoV-2 infection … the airway immune cells in children are primed for virus sensing…resulting in a stronger early innate antiviral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection than in adults.”

6. When one is vaccinated or becomes infected naturally, this drives the formation, tissue distribution and clonal evolution of B cells, which is key to encoding humoral immune memory.

Research published in May 2021 showed that blood examined from children retrieved prior to COVID-19 pandemic have memory B cells that can bind to SARS-CoV-2, suggestive of the potent role of early childhood exposure to common cold coronaviruses (coronaviruses). This is supported by Mateus et al. who reported on T cell memory to prior coronaviruses that cause the common cold (cross-reactivity/cross-protection).

There is no data or evidence or science to justify any of the COVID-19 injections in children. Can the content of these vaccines cross the blood-brain barrier in children? We don’t know because it wasn’t studied.

There is no proper safety data. The focus rather has to be on early treatment and testing (sero antibody or T-cell) to establish who is a credible candidate for these injections, as it is dangerous to layer inoculation on top of existing COVID-recovered, naturally acquired immunity.

There is no benefit and only potential harm/adverse effects (hereherehere).

Published by Children’s Health Defense