Hybrid Harms: When Covid Shots and Infections Compound
A new preprint co-authored by IMA’s Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Jessica Rose introduces the “Hybrid Harms” hypothesis: Covid shots may silently prime the body for greater damage from later infections
Most of us remember the promises.
The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were supposed to stop the spread. Prevent infection. Keep people out of the hospital. And perhaps most importantly, reduce the long-term harm caused by the virus.
Since then, we’ve seen studies define post-vaccine syndrome and identify risk factors that make some people more vulnerable than others. Now, another layer is emerging.
A new preprint co-authored by several researchers, including IMA’s Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Jessica Rose, argues that even people who didn’t experience immediate side effects may still face lasting consequences.
According to the authors, mRNA COVID vaccination could leave the body more vulnerable to complications after a future COVID infection. When infections follow vaccination—especially repeated ones—the result, they say, isn’t less severe illness but more. Sometimes much more.
The study, titled Compound Adverse Effects of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination and Coronavirus Infection: A Convergence of Extensive Spike Protein Harms, is a preprint, meaning it has not yet undergone peer review. But its premise is damning: at worst, the vaccines didn’t just fail to prevent long-term harm; they may have quietly laid the groundwork for it.
The full preprint, authored by M. Nathaniel Mead, Jessica Rose, Stephanie Seneff, Claire Rogers, Breanne Craven, Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, Kirstin Cosgrove, Paul Marik, and
Introducing the “Hybrid Harms Hypothesis”
The paper proposes a simple but striking idea: that mRNA vaccination and natural infection don’t act independently—they compound. Each exposure to spike protein adds to the total burden.
And in a body already primed by the vaccine, a later infection may push someone over the edge into chronic illness.
The authors call this framework the “Hybrid Harms Hypothesis.” This model re-examines how repeated spike protein exposure might explain the waves of chronic symptoms, immune dysfunction, and all-cause mortality seen in highly vaccinated populations.
Spikeopathy: A Common Pathway
Both the vaccine and the virus produce spike protein. And both can leave that spike lingering in the body far longer than originally claimed—months, even years.
The study builds on the concept of spikeopathy: the idea that spike protein itself is the common pathological driver behind many post-COVID and post-vaccine complications. The authors outline how it can damage blood vessels, dysregulate immune function, and trigger neurological, cardiovascular, and autoimmune problems.
Crucially, the paper argues that it’s not just about how someone is exposed to spike. It’s about how much and how often.
Clinical Signals Are Being Missed
One of the study’s key warnings is that health systems may be missing the full picture. Many long-COVID diagnoses, the authors argue, may actually be hybrid harms—conditions worsened or even made possible by prior vaccination, then activated by infection.
In Table 2, the paper lists dozens of overlapping symptoms shared by post-acute COVID syndrome (PASC) and post-COVID vaccine syndrome (PCVS). These include:
- Cardiovascular: myocarditis, arrhythmias, POTS
- Neurological: brain fog, peripheral neuropathy
- Autoimmune: Hashimoto’s, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis
- Endocrine and hormonal dysregulation
If both sources produce similar harms and both exposures are common, then official counts may be dramatically underestimating risk by failing to connect the dots.
National Trends Back It Up
The paper also presents population-level data from Nordic and Southeast Asian countries, as well as Australia, South Korea, and Singapore. These regions all saw spikes in excess mortality during the “Living with COVID” era when vaccination rates were high and infections surged.
The authors stop short of claiming definitive causality, but their message is clear: it’s time to ask harder questions about what’s really driving these patterns.
More Investigation is Needed
The authors have compiled a shocking amount of evidence in this study. Still, they are calling for immediate, independent investigation into:
- Long-term spike protein persistence
- The impact of repeated exposure from both infection and vaccination
- Immune dysregulation and vascular injury mechanisms
- Better pharmacovigilance for overlapping harms
They argue that current monitoring systems are blind to multi-hit injury patterns and that public health institutions must re-evaluate how they define and track both vaccine injuries and COVID-related illness.
The Long Game of Spike Protein Harm
The premise that vaccination protects against long-term harm is now hanging by the thinnest thread. The evidence pointing to the opposite effect is taking shape rapidly.
If this hypothesis holds, it changes everything.
It means millions may be walking around with silent vulnerabilities—unaware they’re one infection away from lasting illness.
We urgently need better surveillance, honest research, and public health strategies that recognize the possibility of compounding harm.
See more here substack.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Dean Jackson
| #
We start by throwing light on the neglected subject regarding the shocking breach of medical ethics regarding safety protocols for the pre-testing of vaccines. It takes 5-10 years to complete Phase III trials to ensure that the human species isn’t wiped out should a general-use vaccine’s adverse effects prove deadly…
https://web.archive.org/web/20200501110007/https://www.ifpma.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/IFPMA-ComplexJourney-2019_FINAL.pdf
…thereby identifying the Satanist co-option of our institutions (who use the more numerous Marxists as pawns to implement their policies*) that knew the vaccines were deadly [if a blood vessel is pricked], otherwise no non-Satanist-Marxist entity would take a chance on the annihilation of humanity should the long-term adverse effects prove deadly. Oh yes, we’re currently in Year 5 of what should be Phase III.
Firstly, when pressed under oath in court, medical science is compelled to admit there is no such thing as a virus.* Secondly, medical science tells us there are no vaccines for cold viruses, the coronavirus, and RSV, being a cold virus.** Thirdly, if a blood vessel is pricked receiving a jab, where the needle wasn’t aspirated, that means, in the case of the COVID-19 “vaccines”, the nanoparticles carrying the mRNA have entered the bloodstream, and will now enter the cells of organs throughout the body,*** and being a foreign element within those cells, the immune system destroys the cells, leading to organ damage and/or subsequent death, the severity of the outcome depending on if the syringe carried a full mRNA load, or if its contents was merely saline.
This is why in 2017 the CDC and WHO alerted the medical community there was no longer a need to aspirate a needle, preventing the contents of the syringe from entering a blood vessel…
“Aspiration before injection of vaccines or toxoids (i.e., pulling back on the syringe plunger after needle insertion but before injection) is not necessary because no large blood vessels are present at the recommended injection sites, and a process that includes aspiration might be more painful for infants (22).”
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/imz-best-practices/vaccine-administration.html?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/general-recs/administration.html
“…no large blood vessels”? The smallest blood vessels are measured in millionths of a meter (um), while nanoparticles that carry the mRNA are measured in billionths of a meter (nm). That’s called premeditated murder, identifying the Marxist co-option of our institutions.
Let’s take a look at WHO…
“Do NOT aspirate, i.e. do not pull back on the syringe after inserting in the injection site as it increases the pain:
− There are no large blood vessels at the recommended injection sites or injection into a large vessel, so no risk of major bleeding.”
https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/immunization/multiple-injections/trainingmodule_painmanagement_final.pdf?sfvrsn=1b91f223_7&ua=1
The PCR Diagnostic Scam and the Quest for False Positives
“5′ nuclease assay specificity Assay specificity is the degree that the assay includes signal from the target and excludes signal from non-target in the results. Specificity is arguably the most important aspect of any assay. The greatest threat to assay specificity for 5′ nuclease assays is homologs. Homologs are genes similar in sequence to that of the target, but they are not the intended target of the assay. Homologs are extremely common within species and across related species.
…
5′ nuclease assays offer two tools for specificity: primers and probes. For maximal impact on specificity by primers, a mismatch between the target and homolog must be positioned at the 3′ -most base of the primer. A mismatch further away from the 3’ end may have little to no impact on specificity. In contrast, mismatches across most of the length of a MGB probe, which is shorter than a TaqMan® probe, can have a strong impact on specificity—TaqMan® MGB probes are stronger tools for specificity than primers.
For example, a one or two-base random mismatch in the primer binding site will very likely allow the DNA polymerase to extend the primer bound to the homolog with high efficiency. A one or two base extension by DNA polymerase will stabilize the primer bound to the homolog, so it is just as stably bound as primer bound to the intended, fully complementary target. At that point, there is nothing to prevent the DNA polymerase from continuing synthesis to produce a copy of the homolog.”
https://www.gene-quantification.de/real-time-pcr-handbook-life-technologies-update-flr.pdf
Homolog is an errant target genome the primer has latched onto in order to duplicate, duplication numbers depending on the number of cycles used.
When the above was written in 2012, medical science only tested when one was sick with symptoms, this protocol being SOP because mass testing would naturally lead to massive false positives, precisely why one-hundred years of medical science was turned on its head overnight by the self-identified Satanist establishment.
Of course, also turned on its head was the use of PCR for diagnostics that had been going on before 2019. At the bottom of every odd numbered page, Life Technologies warns…
“For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.”
“I have to expressly clarify that one cannot provide evidence in the classical sense in biology as one can in mathematics or physics. In biology one can only gather clues, which at some point in time in their entirety attain probative value.“ — Professor Andreas Podbielski, University of Rostock, 2015, giving expert testimony on the existence of viruses at Ravensburg Local Court.
As Dr. Lanka observes:
“Based on this extremely unscientific claim arising from Podbielski’s lack of arguments and his bias due to the discrepancies between reality and the beliefs he had grown so fond of, something happened which behavioural scientists call “displacement”. Podbielski invented a desperate excuse, namely that biology and the medicine based thereon as well as vaccinations are per se unscientific and without evidence, without proof: In his opinion, only a collection of clues could “some day” and “somehow” (practically) attain probative value. A more explicit admission of the existent unscientific nature of current biology and medicine has never been expressed with such clarity.”
https://dokumen.pub/wissenschafftplus-magazin-the-virus-misconception-part-1-measles-as-an-example-i-01-2020nbsped.html
Now, for the real shocker: How a virus is manufactured piecemeal, not captured whole…
“1. The fact of Alignment
Virologists have never isolated a complete
genetic strand of a virus and displayed it directly,
in its entire length. They always use very short
pieces of nucleic acids, whose sequence consists
of four molecules to determine them and call
them sequences. From a multitude of millions of
such specific, very short sequences, virologists
mentally assemble a fictitious long genome
strand with the help of complex computational
and statistical methods. This process is called
alignment.
The result of this complex alignment, the
fictitious and very long genetic strand, is
presented by virologists as the core of a virus
and they claim to have thus proven the
existence of a virus. However, such a complete
strand never appears in reality and in scientific
literature as a whole, although the simplest
standard techniques [Gel Electrophoresis]
have long been available to
determine the length and composition of nucleic
acids simply and directly. By the fact of the
alignment, instead of presenting a nucleic acid
of the appropriate length directly, the virologists
have disproved themselves.
…
Alignment is only done by means
of mental constructs
In order to be able to mentally/computationally
assemble the very short sequences of the
nucleic acids used into a long genome, the
virologists need a template to align the short
sequences into a very long, supposedly viral
genome strand. Without such a given, very long
sequence, it is not possible for a virologist to
construct a viral genome
theoretically/computationally. Virologists argue
that the constructed genome is from a virus
because the alignment was done with another,
given viral genome.
This argument of the virologists is briefly and
unambiguously refuted by the fact that all
templates with which new genetic material
strands were generated
theoretically/computationally were themselves
and finally generated
theoretically/computationally and do not
originate from a virus.” – Dr. Stefan Lanka
https://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/wissenschafftplus-virologists.pdf
…and…
** “What’s Causing My Cold?
…
Here are a few of the most common cold viruses.
Rhinovirus. Doctors have found three different types and at least 169 different strains of rhinovirus around the globe. It’s most active in early fall, spring, and summer. Rhinoviruses cause 10%-40% of colds. You’ll feel miserable when you catch one, but they rarely make you seriously sick.
Coronavirus. This group of viruses is common in people and animals. They were discovered in the 1960s. Some kinds only cause mild cold symptoms, but a newer kind, SARS-CoV-2, causes COVID-19. A coronavirus strain is most likely to cause your cold in the winter and early spring.
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). This virus is so common that most kids have it by the time they turn 2 years old. While RSV symptoms are often mild, they can get severe enough that you’ll need to go to the hospital.
https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/common_cold_causes
*** Instead of entering muscle cells in the deltoid region.
Reply