Tag Archives: natural immunity

My Head Is Spinning!

Posted on by

The Covid pandemic has brought us a lot of information and a lot of censorship of information. Oddly enough, a lot of the information that was censored is now being reported as true. Currently the difference between a conspiracy theory and a major news story is a few months.

On Tuesday, Issues & Insights reported the following:

This disinformation business sure has gotten complicated lately.

In the past few days, a key federal agency concluded that COVID was likely the result of a Chinese lab leak. A prestigious medical journal reported that natural immunity is better than vaccines against COVID. Another that mask mandates were worthless. And President Joe Biden’s advanced age is now, according to Biden, a legitimate issue.

All of these claims had been labeled as “disinformation” by the mainstream press, by “independent” fact-checkers, by social media platforms. Anyone who espoused them was attacked as a crazy anti-vaxxer, QAnon racist, Russian stooge who deserved to be de-platformed, demonetized, and discredited.

Take the lab-leak story. The Energy Department, “citing new intelligence,” changed its view on the origins of COVID-19 and now thinks it did, in fact, escape from a lab in Wuhan, China.

The article notes how the lab leak theory was treated in the past:

A-list journalist Anne Applebaum once compared Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., to a Soviet propagandist for suggesting that COVID came from a lab. A New York Times reporter said the lab-leak theory had “racist roots.” The editor in chief of Scientific American called it a “conspiracy theory.” CNN said it was “like something out of a comic book.”

Politifact, one of the supposed independent guardians against disinformation, said that any such claim was “inaccurate and ridiculous. We rate it Pants on Fire!” Facebook banned posts mentioning the lab-leak theory.

The article concludes:

One of the articles that Google is right now targeting is our Feb. 23 editorial applauding Congress for investigating COVID vaccines (Congress To Probe COVID Vaccines — And It’s About Time).

Apparently, merely calling for a congressional investigation “promotes harmful health claims or relates to a current, major health crisis and contradicts authoritative scientific consensus,” according to Google’s thought police.

So, let’s review.

The stuff labeled as dangerous disinformation keeps turning out to be true. The supposed guardians of credible information turn out to be some of the biggest peddlers of actual disinformation. And groups that are supposedly targeting disinformation are really just out to defund conservatives.  

In all this confusion, one thing is perfectly clear. If you want to know what will be labeled as disinformation tomorrow, just look at whatever is on the left’s agenda today.

The mainstream media is simply pointing out the need for Americans to find alternative sources for their news.

Is Anyone Comfortable With This?

Posted on by

On Sunday, The U.K Daily Mail posted the following headline, “FDA set to authorize updated COVID-19 booster shots for newer Omicron strains without completed human tests: Agency will assess new jabs based on mice research and older vaccines.”

The article reports:

New COVID-19 booster shots are set to be authorized this week by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and will be available to most Americans before human testing has even been completed.

The shots have been modified to target the latest Omicron variant, but won’t have finished testing in humans when the FDA makes the decision. Instead, the FDA is relying on data from other sources – like research in mice and older vaccines, the Wall Street Journal reported.

‘Real world evidence from the current mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, which have been administered to millions of individuals, show us that the vaccines are safe,’ FDA Commissioner Robert Califf said in a tweet last week. 

This is insane.

The article notes:

WILL THEY WORK BETTER?

No one knows. Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and an FDA vaccine adviser, said the antibody jump from that earlier BA.1-tweaked candidate was ‘underwhelming.’

‘What the administration is asking us to do is to accept this bivalent vaccine as significantly better’ than another dose of today’s vaccine, he said. ‘It would be nice if there were data to support that.’

But while FDA hasn’t made a final decision, Marks said there’s evidence that the updated boosters are safe and that waiting for more study of their effectiveness would risk another mutant appearing before they could roll out.

They ‘essentially refresh the immune response,’ he said. ‘Granted, it’s still a bit of a guess how long it will last but, this is doing our best.’

Given how outdated the current shots are, an update makes sense, said Dr. Walter Orenstein of Emory University, a former vaccine director at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While he’d like to see more data, he plans to get the new booster.

 A large percentage of Americans have had Covid. They have natural immunity. The shots did not prevent people from getting or spreading Covid, so why in the world should they get the booster. The current variant of Covid is not a danger to most Americans. The only reason to continue with the nonsense of creating vaccines that don’t work is financial, and that is not a valid reason to inject people with an untried vaccine.

Somehow The Mainstream Didn’t Report This

Posted on by

On July 11th, The Epoch Times posted the following headline, “New Study: Unvaccinated Wrongly Maligned.” Some of us have suspected this for quite some time, but it is nice to see someone reporting it.

The article reports:

A large-scale international study of those unvaccinated against COVID-19 finds a pattern of discrimination—and a relatively low hospitalization rate.

While the study’s findings are limited by the nature of the selection process, in which unvaccinated people opted in to participate, the new study suggests that those who declined the vaccine may not be the burden to the health care system many have claimed them to be. The study is now available as a preprint (which means it hasn’t yet been peer-reviewed). It was uploaded to ResearchGate earlier this month.

The findings hold significant importance to policymakers. According to Our World in Data, 60 percent of the world is fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The 40 percent who aren’t vaccinated against the virus have been frequently blamed for the duration and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, even as vaccination rates reached up to 90 percent in many jurisdictions.

The COVID-19 virus became political because it was useful to pave the way for voter fraud. I suspect we are about to see a ‘serious outbreak’ of the virus some time before the mid-term election so that ballot drop boxes can be reinstated. If you have seen the movie “2000 Mules,” you know why that is important.

The article continues:

In many places in the United States, those who declined the COVID-19 vaccines have been discriminated against, stigmatized, and marginalized from society. Nurses and health care workers were fired, Air Force cadets were denied commissions, and family members found themselves ostracized within some of their most intimate and important relationships.

The vilification of the unvaccinated has come with the censorship of both science and personal experience. Many doctors, nurses, scientists, and other health care professionals who speak out about the safety and necessity of these vaccines have been threatened with the loss of their medical licenses, deleted from social media, canceled from events with their peers, and fired from their jobs.

The article includes information on the study that was conducted to help people who chose not to get the vaccine:

The study was conducted by Robert Verkerk, founder of the Alliance for Natural Health International, an affiliate of the CGC. A team of international scientists contributed to the research. The study analyzes the data from the CGC survey from the first five months of its operation—from September 2021 through February.

The article concludes:

For Verkerk, it’s about choice. We shouldn’t vilify those who rely on natural immunity or refuse the vaccines for religious, medical, or ethical reasons, he said.

“We have seen a dramatic erosion of the principles of medical ethics,” he wrote.

We need to respect autonomy (the right of competent adults to make individualized and informed decisions about their own medical care) and adhere to the principle of first doing no harm, as well as to the principles of beneficence and justice, according to Verkerk.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. There is a lot of good information about the vaccine and about the treatments for COVID-19.

Common Sense Finally Shows Up

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released a study showing that natural immunity from prior infection granted stronger levels of protection against the Delta variant of COVID-19 than vaccination alone.

The article reports:

Before Delta became dominant, individuals who had natural immunity were experiencing higher case rates than individuals who were only vaccinated, the study found, but after Delta took hold, those with natural immunity caught COVID-19 less frequently than those who were only vaccinated.

…The study examined four categories of people — unvaccinated and vaccinated who survived a previous COVID-19 infection, and unvaccinated and vaccinated who had never been infected — in California and New York between May and November 2021. The highest case rates were among those who had neither been vaccinated or previously infected. The most protection against infection and hospitalization was in those who had both been vaccinated and survived an earlier bout with the virus.

Most of the press, as usual, preached the current media view on vaccines:

Many legacy media outlets covered the study by minimizing the finding that natural immunity outperformed vaccines and emphasizing that a combination of both provided the best protection. Headlines from the New York Times, Associated Press, CNN and others claimed that vaccination offers the “best” or “safest” protection according to the study.

In a press call Wednesday, the CDC’s Dr. Benjamin Silk, an epidemiologist that co-authored the study, did not elaborate on the increased protection natural immunity provides and repeated the administration line that every American should get vaccinated.

There are still many of us out here who wonder why we should take a vaccine that has not been in existence or been tested for the number of years that vaccines are usually tested. We have no idea what the long-term effects of this vaccine are because it hasn’t been in existence very long.

 

The Logic Of This Escapes Me

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Townhall posted an article quoting Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla on the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine against the coronavirus.

The article reports:

Speaking during remarks to a J.P. Morgan healthcare conference this week, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla openly stated current vaccines the company developed for Wuhan coronavirus offer “limited, if any” protection against contracting current variants of the disease. He then encouraged booster shots. 

If two shots offer questionable protection, why in the world would anyone want to get a booster shot? What are you boosting?

The article also notes:

The statement from Bourla comes as the Biden administration continues to justify vaccine mandates for federal workers, contractors and private businesses. The Supreme Court heard arguments about President Biden’s mandates for private companies and medical workers last week. A ruling is expected soon on the constitutionality of the mandates.

A number of people who have pointed out the waning efficacy of Pfizer’s vaccines, which Bourla touted last year as being “100 percent” effective against contracting or transmitting the virus, have been banned by social media companies.

One of the problems with this entire discussion is the omission of natural immunity. In April 2021, Denver Channel 7 reported the following:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates about 35% of all Americans have been infected with COVID-19 over the last year.

From February 2020 to March 2021, the CDC estimates 114.6 million Americans were infected with COVID-19, 97.1 million had symptomatic illnesses and 5.6 million were hospitalized with COVID-19.

How many more have had Covid since then and have natural immunity? Just for the record, I had Covid in November 2020 and a very recent blood test showed that I still had antibodies. I think it’s time to consider natural immunity when we discuss the coronavirus and the vaccines.

Following The Science?

Posted on by

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to the Health and Human Services Department.

The article includes the response from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):

So the letter states that the CDC has no information on whether people who have recovered from Covid have become infected again or have transmitted the disease to other people. It seems to me that in the world of looming vaccine mandates, that might be important information.

The article links to a substack article which states the following:

You would assume that if the CDC was going to crush the civil and individual rights of those with natural immunity by having them expelled from school, fired from their jobs, separated from the military, and worse, the CDC would have proof of at least one instance of an unvaccinated, naturally immune individual transmitting the COVID-19 virus to another individual.  If you thought this, you would be wrong.

My firm, on behalf of ICAN, asked the CDC for precisely this proof (see below).  ICAN wanted to see proof of any instance in which someone who previously had COVID-19 became reinfected with and transmitted the virus to someone else.  The CDC’s incredible response is that it does not have a single document reflecting that this has ever occurred.  Not one.  (See below.)

In contrast, there are endless documents reflecting cases of vaccinated individuals becoming infected with and transmitting the virus to others.  Such as this study.  And this study.  And this study.  And this study.  It goes on and on…

But it gets worse.  The CDC’s excuse for not having a shred of evidence of the naturally immune transmitting the virus is that “this information is not collected.”  What?!  No proof!  But yet the CDC is actively crushing the rights of millions of naturally immune individuals in this country if they do not get the vaccine on the assumption they can transmit the virus.   But despite clear proof the vaccinated spread the virus, the CDC lifts restrictions on the vaccinated?!  That is dystopian.   

At some point, Americans are going to have to realize that this is not about the vaccine or the virus and begin to reclaim their freedom.

Blocking The Truth

Posted on by

Yesterday Just the News posted an article about some of the politics in the medical profession regarding the coronavirus.

The article reports:

Medical professionals are facing threats to their careers and livelihoods for challenging COVID-19 orthodoxy, while an oft-censored Harvard Medical School professor is facing his latest Big Tech kerfuffle.

The University of California put psychiatrist and bioethics professor Aaron Kheriaty on “investigatory leave” after he sued the university system for refusing to recognize natural immunity such as his among exemptions to its COVID vaccine mandate.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Kheriaty had previously invoked the post-Nazi Nuremberg code in urging universities to abandon their mandates.

In his personal newsletter Wednesday, Kheriaty said he’ll lose half his income while on so-called paid leave, because he’s banned from “seeing my patients, supervising resident clinics, and engaging in weekend and holiday on-call duties.” 

His contract also bans him from working as a physician outside the UC system to recoup his revenue loss. “The University may be hoping this pressure will lead me to resign ‘voluntarily,’ which would remove grounds for my lawsuit,” Kheriaty wrote.

UC’s action came a day after a court refused to issue a preliminary injunction, functionally declaring a draw between each party’s scientific arguments about different forms of immunity and what risk vaccination poses for the recovered.

The article concludes:

Harvard Med’s Martin Kulldorff, a pioneer in vaccine safety and coauthor of the year-old Great Barrington Declaration, had his second tangle with LinkedIn over an article he wrote.

The Microsoft-owned professional social network removed two of his posts this summer as misinformation. He had said mandates feed vaccine hesitancy and noted Iceland’s top epidemiologist recommended natural immunity to complement vaccination.

This time LinkedIn removed posts that shared Kulldorff’s most recent article on why hospitals should welcome nurses with natural immunity rather than firing them, according to the Brownstone Institute, which published the article. Kulldorff’s own posts also disappeared.

After a few hours, the network allegedly shifted to removing the preview image, headline and description of the Oct. 1 article, so that only the URL remained, likely reducing reader engagement. 

Just the News confirmed Wednesday the link is still bare when shared on LinkedIn, with the disclaimer: “Cannot display preview. You can post as is, or try another link.” LinkedIn didn’t respond when asked why it continues throttling Kulldorff’s new article.

…Kulldorff initially moved over to LinkedIn because of a monthlong Twitter suspension for questioning the protective power of masks. He previously told Just the News he is more guarded on Twitter for that reason.

At one point you have to wonder who has the power to silence these doctors and why they are doing this. I am sure money plays a role in this, but I suspect there is a deeper root cause.

Good News

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times reported that New York City Police Benevolent Association (PBA) President Patrick Lynch stated in an email that if New York City puts a vaccine mandate in place for police officers, the organization will take legal action.

The article reports:

City workers in New York must either get a COVID-19 shot or submit to weekly testing, Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, announced last month. More recently, de Blasio announced that teachers and other school staffers must get a vaccine or face termination.

While New York City Police Commissioner Dermot Shea said on NY1 last last year that officers wouldn’t be required to get a COVID-19 vaccine, that has changed.

Asked this week if he would support a mandate, Shea said he would.

“One hundred percent. I think we’re well past that time. We lost three members last week, two of them to COVID, and I think it’s all unnecessary to some degree,” he said. “Everyone, I think, all across this country really should be embracing these vaccines.”

Shea noted that the Pfizer vaccine was fully approved by the Food and Drug Administration before adding, “I think everyone should be lining up to get it that hasn’t gotten it yet.”

Notice that no one demanding universal vaccines is allowing for people who have natural immunity because they have previously had and recovered from Covid. Recent studies show that natural immunity is not only longer lasting than the shot but is better protection against the Delta variant of the disease. Why is natural immunity being ignored?

More Questions Than Answers

Posted on by

There are two things that puzzle me about the insistence that all Americans be vaccinated against Covid-19. The first is the lack of emphasis on the methods of treatment that have proven to be successful–Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin, Ivermectin, Resveratrol, etc. Various combinations of these substances have been proven effective in treating even severe Covid-19 cases. The second thing that puzzles me is the total ignoring of the concept of immunity due to having recovered from the disease.

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about a new study of Covid-19 cases and those who have recovered from the disease.

The article reports:

People who have recovered from COVID-19 retain broad and effective longer-term immunity to the disease, according to a new study.

Findings of the study, which is the most comprehensive of its kind so far, have implications for expanding understanding about human immune memory as well as future vaccine development for coronaviruses.

For the longitudinal study in Cell Reports Medicine, researchers looked at 254 patients with mostly mild to moderate symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection over a period of more than eight months (250 days) and found that their immune response to the virus remained durable and strong.

The findings are reassuring, especially given early reports during the pandemic that protective neutralizing antibodies didn’t last in COVID-19 patients, said Rafi Ahmed, director of the Emory University Vaccine Center and a lead author of the paper.

“The study serves as a framework to define and predict long-lived immunity to SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection. We also saw indications in this phase that natural immunity could continue to persist,” Ahmed said.

The research team will continue to evaluate this cohort over the next few years.

The article notes:

In following the patients for months, researchers got a more nuanced view of how the immune system responds to COVID-19 infection. The picture that emerges indicates that the body’s defense shield not only produces an array of neutralizing antibodies but activates certain T and B cells to establish immune memory, offering more sustained defenses against reinfection.

…Ahmed said investigators were surprised to see that convalescent participants also displayed increased immunity against common human coronaviruses as well as SARS-CoV-1, a close relative of the current coronavirus. The study suggests that patients who survived COVID-19 are likely to also possess protective immunity even against some SARS-CoV-2 variants.

“Vaccines that target other parts of the virus rather than just the spike protein may be more helpful in containing infection as SARS-CoV-2 variants overtake the prevailing strains,” Ahmed said. “This could pave the way for us to design vaccines that address multiple coronaviruses.”

The researchers said the study more comprehensively identifies the adaptive immune components leading to recovery, and that it will serve as a benchmark for immune memory induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

This is good news.

Fear Is A Powerful Tool That Government Bureaucracies Use Well

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Townhall posted an article about the government’s handling of the coronavirus crisis. At this point there have been a lot of mixed messages and a lot of confusion about the seriousness of the virus and how the treat it effectively. Actually, the information on how to treat the virus effectively has been pretty much left out of any news you hear about the virus.

The article reports:

Well, take a break from being mad and read what Johns Hopkins doctor Dr. Marty Makary wrote about new studies about natural immunity which is ignored by Fauci and company. He also rehashed an old Fauci statistic that shreds the current push for new mask protocols and possible lockdowns (via WSJ) [emphasis mine]

The news about the U.S. Covid pandemic is even better than you’ve heard. Some 80% to 85% of American adults are immune to the virus: More than 64% have received at least one vaccine dose and, of those who haven’t, roughly half have natural immunity from prior infection. There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health leaders should pay it heed.

Only around 10% of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests, but four to six times as many have likely had the infection. A February study in Nature used antibody screenings in late summer 2020 to estimate there had been seven times as many actual cases as confirmed cases. A similar study, by the University of Albany and New York State Department of Health, revealed that by the end of March 2020—the first month of New York’s pandemic—23% of the city’s population had antibodies. That share necessarily increased as the pandemic spread.

[…]

Natural immunity is durable. Researchers from Washington University in St. Louis reported last month that 11 months after a mild infection immune cells were still capable of producing protective antibodies. The authors concluded that prior Covid infection induces a “robust” and “long-lived humoral immune response,” leading some scientists to suggest that natural immunity is probably lifelong. Because infection began months earlier than vaccination, we have more follow-up data on the duration of natural immunity than on vaccinated immunity.

[…]

Skeptics of natural immunity point to Manaus, capital of the Brazilian state of Amazonas, where reports in January suggested a wave of re-infections despite herd immunity. But the initial estimate of those infected was incorrect because it was based on antibody testing among those who donated convalescent plasma—an unrepresentative subgroup of the population. A follow-up study debunked the re-infection hypothesis and found only three confirmed re-infections in the entire state, whose population exceeds four million. Other studies have confirmed that re-infections are rare and usually asymptomatic or mild.

Some health officials warn of possible variants resistant to natural immunity. But none of the hundreds of variants observed so far have evaded either natural or vaccinated immunity with the three vaccines authorized in the U.S.

Should the previously infected be vaccinated? My clinical advice to healthy patients with natural immunity is that one shot is sufficient, and maybe not even necessary, although it could increase the long-term durability of immunity. A University of Pennsylvania study of people previously infected with Covid found that a single vaccine dose triggered a strong immune response, with no increase in that response after a second dose. A separate study from New York’s Mount Sinai School of Medicine concluded that “the antibody response to the first vaccine dose in individuals with pre-existing immunity is equal to or even exceeds the titers found in naïve”—never-infected—“individuals after the second dose.”

[…]

Dr. Fauci said last Aug. 13 that when you have fewer than 10 cases per 100,000, “you should be able to open up safely and clearly.” The U.S. reached that point in mid-May. It’s time to stop the fear mongering and level with the public about the incredible capabilities of both modern medical research and the human body’s immune system.

When was the last time you heard anyone who was pressuring people to get vaccinated talk about the natural immunity that comes from having recovered from the disease? When was the last time you heard anyone who was pressuring people to get vaccinated talk about the inexpensive treatments for the coronavirus? It’s time to have those discussions.