Natural immunity provides 'at least as high, if not higher' protection against COVID as mRNA vaccine, study reveals



Natural immunity provides "at least as high, if not higher" levels of protection against COVID-19 as two doses of an mRNA vaccine, according to a study published in The Lancet – one of the oldest and most respected medical journals in the world.

The research analyzed 65 studies from 19 different countries to determine the level of protection from past infection against "subsequent re-infection, symptomatic COVID-19 disease, and severe disease."

The study noted, "Our meta-analyses showed that protection from past infection and any symptomatic disease was high for ancestral, alpha, beta, and delta variants, but was substantially lower for the omicron BA.1 variant."

"Although protection from re-infection from all variants wanes over time, our analysis of the available data suggests that the level of protection afforded by previous infection is at least as high, if not higher than that provided by two-dose vaccination using high-quality mRNA vaccines (Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech)," the authors of the study wrote.

"Furthermore, although protection from past infection wanes over time, the level of protection against re-infection, symptomatic disease, and severe disease appears to be at least as durable, if not more so, than that provided by two-dose vaccination with the mRNA vaccines for ancestral, alpha, delta, and omicron BA.1 variants, which is also seen from studies directly comparing natural immunity to vaccine-induced protection," the authors said.

"Protection from past infection against re-infection from pre-omicron variants was very high and remained high even after 40 weeks," the study found, adding that natural immunity diminished the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19 by 88% for at least 10 months.

The authors added that there were "risks of severe morbidity and mortality associated with the initial infection."

Dr. Christopher Murray, the director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington and senior study author, stated, "This is really good news, in the sense that protection against severe disease and death after infection is really quite sustained at 10 months."

"There's quite a long sustained protection against severe disease and death, almost 90% at 10 months," Murray said. "It is much better than I had expected, and that's a good thing for the world, right? Given that most of the world has had omicron. It means there's an awful lot of immunity out there."

Murray added, "The safest way to get immunity is vaccination."

The study advised, "The immunity conferred by past infection should be weighed alongside protection from vaccination when assessing future disease burden from COVID-19, providing guidance on when individuals should be vaccinated, and designing policies that mandate vaccination for workers or restrict access, on the basis of immune status, to settings where the risk of transmission is high, such as travel and high-occupancy indoor settings."

In May 2021, Dr. Anthony Fauci said, "The issue of vaccines actually, at least with regard to SARS-CoV-2, can do better than nature."

The next month, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) slammed Fauci and the CDC for not admitting the benefits of natural immunity.

"One of the biggest scandals during this whole pandemic is the coverup that's been committed by Dr. Fauci and the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] — especially the CDC — about the effectiveness of immunity that's conferred after a natural infection, after you've recovered from [COVID], they've completely ignored that," Massie declared. "They want everybody to get vaccinated, even those who don't need [to be] vaccinated."

According to the CDC, only 16% of Americans are vaccinated with a COVID-19 booster shot.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up!


Horowitz: New study shows more effective immunity from prior infection than in vaccinated among organ transplant recipients



Few people are as immunocompromised and vulnerable to COVID as solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). Those are the people whom the medical establishment suggests should get shots and boosters early and often — even if they have to "mix and match" different variations of the shots. However, given the fact that these people are also the most vulnerable to complications from the pathogenic spike protein of the shots, why are doctors not first making sure they don't have natural immunity? A new study demonstrates that it is criminal to assume the risks of vaccination for SOTRs with prior infection.

We already have at least 122 studies attesting to the durability of immunity from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, many of which clearly show that immunity to be much stronger and longer-lasting than vaccine-mediated immunity. However, a new study from researchers at Ajmera Transplant Centre, University Health Network, in Toronto, Canada, demonstrates that even organ transplant patients have robust T cell immunity from prior infection, much greater than those who are vaccinated.

"Vaccinated SOTRs mounted significantly lower proportions of S-specific polyfunctional CD4 + T-cells after two doses, relative to unvaccinated SOTRs with prior COVID-19," concluded the authors of the study, published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases. "Together, these results suggest that SOTR generate robust T-cell responses following natural infection that correlate with disease severity but generate comparatively lower T-cell responses following mRNA vaccination."

Rather than studying the less meaningful antibody responses, the researchers studied T cell responses in three cohorts at Toronto's University Health Network (UHN) Transplant Centre: SOTRs who had prior infection but were not subsequently vaccinated, SOTRs who were vaccinated 4-6 weeks prior to the study but never had the virus, and a control group of regular non-SOTRs with prior COVID. While the non-immunocompromised naturally immune cohort obviously mounted the greatest T cell response, the study still found that SOTRs with prior immunity had robust antigen-specific helper (CD4) and killer (CD8) T cells. Overall, the researchers found a detectable antigen-specific T-cell response in SOTRs with prior immunity at a 41.4% greater frequency than in the vaccine-only group. Also, most of those in the vaccine cohort received the Moderna shot, which is believed to be more potent than the Pfizer shot.

The findings of this study are a bombshell, because they suggest, at least in the short run, that even the most immunocompromised people with prior infection mount a serious antigen-specific T cell response that, unlike the vaccines, targets the nucleocapsid and membrane of the virus, not just the spike protein. While there is no long-term follow up in this study of SOTRs, it is important to remember that there are endless studies showing long-term and likely lifetime immunity from prior infection in the general healthy population. At the same time, we already have numerous studies and the reality of the current hard data from fully vaccinated countries hit hard with a new spread that the vaccine-mediated immunity completely wears off even for healthy people after six months.

Moreover, studies have already shown that the immunity conveyed by the shots might be particularly short-lived for the immunocompromised. For example, a study from Puerto Rico's Department of Health recently found the shots to be 0% effective in those 85 years and older after 150-200 days after vaccination. A massive Swedish study of half the country's population showed "notable waning among men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities" after about six months.

The results of the SOTR study raise some serious questions:

  1. How can our government continue to ignore the power of natural immunity if it is this potent even in organ transplant recipients?
  2. How can we continue denying organ transplants to those who don't get the shot when some of them already had the virus and the shot itself doesn't work much?
  3. What is our solution to the immunocompromised? The shots barely work and will likely not work at all with the new variants, yet they are most dangerous to those people. They have never even been tested in people with kidney failure, much less an organ transplant. Are they supposed to live in their homes forever and atrophy with no safe and effective solution? Why is the government not studying the idea of using preventives like ivermectin, nitazoxanide, or monoclonal antibodies? A recent study of the general population showed that Regeneron given pre-emptively could work for at least eight months of protection without any of the severe risks that are associated with the failed shots. Our government won't even advise these people to use Betadine nasal spray after being around people.

Just how vociferously is our government working to deny natural immunity? At the other end of the health spectrum from elderly transplant patients are healthy children. As scandalous as it is to risk the shot on healthy kids, it's unfathomable to push the shot on kids who also had prior infection. Already in March, the government estimated that 42% of children 5-17 had prior infection, and that was long before the "Delta wave," which was more transmissible and seemed to infect kids more than the ancestral strain. We all assumed that a solid majority would have been infected by now and were waiting for new data to be published. But finally the CDC has updated its numbers, and you will never guess the new data. Immunity magically slid backward!

CDC finally updated their burden estimates... and they bizarrely find that the percent of age 0 to 17 ever-infected fell from 36.7% through May to just 29.9% through September.\n\nEven more bizarre: they claim a higher % of symptomatic COVID than infection. Literally impossible.pic.twitter.com/B3ujqf5Csw

— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) 1636496130

Although they don't have new numbers isolated for 5- to 17-year-olds (excluding really young kids and babies who were generally more isolated), their numbers for the 0-17 cohort have slid backward from 36.7% through May to just 29.9% through September ... after Delta! This makes no sense because the media and our government were panicking about this wave hitting the schools much harder. For those with children in schools, we can attest to that fact that last year barely any kids got the virus, whereas this year more seemed to get it (although still mildly) and, unlike before, even spread it in the classrooms to some degree. There is simply no way that a majority of children are not already immune.

This is yet another example of the government retracting a talking point, data point, or study once our side begins using it.

What will it take for people to wake up and realize we are being lied to?

Horowitz: 15 studies that indicate natural immunity from prior infection is more robust than the COVID vaccines



It's the 800-poundgorilla in the pandemic. The debate over forced vaccination with an ever-waning vaccine is cresting right around the time when the debate should be moot for a lot of people. Among the most fraudulent messages of the CDC's campaign of deceit is to force the vaccine on those with prior infection, who have a greater degree of protection against all versions of the virus than those with any of the vaccines. It's time to set the record straight once and for all that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is broader, more durable, and longer-lasting than any of the shots on the market today. Our policies must reflect that reality.

It should be noted that this exercise is not even necessary now that our own government concedes that immunity from the vaccines, particularly the Pfizer shot, wanes each month. With the Mayo Clinic researchers suggesting, based on old data that likely got even worse since, that Pfizer's efficacy against infection is only 42%, there is no reason to even attempt to compare this degree of immunity to the near-perfect immunity of prior infection, even against Delta. It should be obvious to any intellectually honest person that an unvaccinated individual with prior infection is exponentially safer to be around than someone who had the vaccines but not prior infection.

Remember, a significant portion of the population already got infected, and when the latest Delta wave is over in the South, the region will likely reach clear supermajorities of the population with immunity, as was found in India following the circulation of this very contagious strain of the virus.

Now consider the fact that studies have shown those with prior infection are associated with 4.4x increased odds of clinically significant side effects following mRNA vaccination. Thus, it is as scandalous as it is unnecessary to vaccinate those with prior infection, even if one supports vaccination for those without prior immunity. But as you can imagine, that would take a massive share of the market off the table from the greedy hands of Big Pharma.

To that end, it's important to clarify once and for all, based on the current academic literature, that yes, people with prior infection are indeed immune, more so than those with vaccines. Here is just a small list of some of the more recent studies, which demonstrate the effectiveness of natural immunity — even from mild infection — much later into the pandemic than the study window of the vaccines:

1) New York University, May 3, 2021

The authors studied the contrast between vaccine immunity and immunity from prior infection as it relates to stimulating the innate T-cell immunity, which is more durable than adaptive immunity through antibodies alone. They concluded, "In COVID-19 patients, immune responses were characterized by a highly augmented interferon response which was largely absent in vaccine recipients. Increased interferon signaling likely contributed to the observed dramatic upregulation of cytotoxic genes in the peripheral T cells and innate-like lymphocytes in patients but not in immunized subjects."

The study further notes: "Analysis of B and T cell receptor repertoires revealed that while the majority of clonal B and T cells in COVID-19 patients were effector cells, in vaccine recipients clonally expanded cells were primarily circulating memory cells." What this means in plain English is that effector cells trigger an innate response that is quicker and more durable, whereas memory response requires an adaptive mode that is slower to respond. Natural immunity conveys much more innate immunity, while the vaccine mainly stimulates adaptive immunity.

2) Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, May 24, 2021, published in Nature

The media scared people last year into thinking that if antibody levels wane, it means their immunity is weakening, as we are indeed seeing with the vaccines today. But as Nature wrote, "People who recover [even] from mild COVID-19 have bone-marrow cells that can churn out antibodies for decades." Thus, aside from the robust T-cell memory that is likely lacking from most or all vaccinated individuals, prior infection creates memory B cells that "patrol the blood for reinfection, while bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) hide away in bones, trickling out antibodies for decades" as needed.

It's therefore not surprising that early on in the pandemic, an in-vitro study in Singapore found the immunity against SARS-CoV-2 to last even 17 years later from SARS-1-infected patients who never even had COVID-19.

3) Cleveland Clinic, June 19, 2021

In a study of 1,359 previously infected health care workers in the Cleveland Clinic system, not a single one of them was reinfected 10 months into the pandemic, despite some of these individuals being around COVID-positive patients more than the regular population.

4) Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle/Emory University, Washington, July 14, 2021, published in Cell Medicine

The study found that most recovered patients produced durable antibodies, memory B cells, and durable polyfunctional CD4 and CD8 T cells, which target multiple parts of the virus. "Taken together, these results suggest that broad and effective immunity may persist long-term in recovered COVID-19 patients," concluded the authors. In other words, unlike with the vaccines, no boosters are required to assist natural immunity.

5) University of California, Irvine, July 21, 2021

The authors conclude: "Natural infection induced expansion of larger CD8 T cell clones occupied distinct clusters, likely due to the recognition of a broader set of viral epitopes presented by the virus not seen in the mRNA vaccine" (emphasis added).

6) University of California, San Francisco, May 12, 2021

Conclusion: "In infection-naïve individuals, the second dose boosted the quantity but not quality of the T cell response, while in convalescents the second dose helped neither. Spike-specific T cells from convalescent vaccinees differed strikingly from those of infection-naïve vaccinees, with phenotypic features suggesting superior long-term persistence and ability to home to the respiratory tract including the nasopharynx."

Given that we know the virus spreads through the nasopharynx, the fact that natural infection conveys much stronger mucosal immunity makes it clear that the previously infected are much safer to be around than infection-naive people with the vaccine. The fact that this study artfully couched the choices between vaccinated naive people and vaccinated recovered rather than just plain recovered doesn't change the fact that it's the prior infection, not the vaccine, conveying mucosal immunity. In fact, studies now show that infected vaccinated people contain just as much viral load in their nasopharynx as those unvaccinated, a clearly unmistakable conclusion from the virus spreading wildly in many areas with nearly every adult vaccinated.

7) Israeli researchers, August 22, 2021

Aside from more robust T cell and memory B cell immunity, which is more important than antibody levels, Israeli researchers found that antibodies wane slower among those with prior infection. "In vaccinated subjects, antibody titers decreased by up to 40% each subsequent month while in convalescents they decreased by less than 5% per month."

8) Irish researchers, published in Wiley Review, May 18, 2021

Researchers conducted a review of 11 cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID patients who were followed up with over 10 months. The key finding? Unlike the vaccine, after about four to six months, they found "no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time."

9) Cornell University, Doha, Qatar, published in the Lancet, April 27, 2021

This is one of the only studies that analyzed the population‐level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients with supporting evidence of reinfection. Researchers estimate the risk at 0.66 per 10,000 person-weeks. Most importantly, the study found no evidence of waning of immunity for over seven months of the follow-up period. The few reinfections that did occur "were less severe than primary infections," and "only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal." Also, unlike many vaccinated breakthrough infections in recent weeks that have been very symptomatic, "most reinfections were diagnosed incidentally through random or routine testing, or through contact tracing."

10) Israeli researchers, April 24, 2021

Several months ago, Israeli researchers studied 6.3 million Israelis and their COVID status and were able to confirm only one death in the entire country of someone who supposedly already had the virus, and he was over 80 years old. Contrast that to the torrent of hospitalizations and deaths we are seeing in those vaccinated more than five months ago in Israel.

11) French researchers, May 11, 2021

Researchers tested blood samples from health care workers who never had the virus but got both Pfizer shots against blood samples from those health care workers who had a previous mild infection and a third group of patients who had a serious case of COVID. They found, "No neutralization escape could be feared concerning the two variants of concern [Alpha and Beta] in both populations" of those previously infected.

12) Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, published in Journal of Experimental Medicine

Many people are wondering: If they got only an asymptomatic infection, are they less protected against future infection than those who suffered infection with more evident symptoms? These researchers believe the opposite is true. "Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2–infected individuals are not characterized by weak antiviral immunity; on the contrary, they mount a highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response," wrote the authors after studying T cell responses from both symptomatic and asymptomatic convalescent patients. If anything, they found that those with asymptomatic infection only had signs of non-inflammatory cytokines, which means that the body is primed to deal with the virus without producing that dangerous inflammatory response that is killing so many hospitalized with the virus.

13) Korean researchers, published in Nature Communications on June 30, 2021

The authors found that the T cells created from convalescent patients had "stem-cell like" qualities. After studying SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells in recovered patients who had the virus in varying degrees of severity, the authors concluded that long-term "SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell memory is successfully maintained regardless of the severity of COVID-19."

14) Rockefeller University, July 29, 2021

The researchers note that far from suffering waning immunity, memory B cells in those with prior infection "express increasingly broad and potent antibodies that are resistant to mutations found in variants of concern." They conclude that "memory antibodies selected over time by natural infection have greater potency and breadth than antibodies elicited by vaccination." And again, this is even before getting into the innate cellular immunity which is exponentially greater in those with natural immunity.

15) Researchers from Madrid and Mount Sinai, New York, March 22, 2021

Until now, we have established that natural immunity provides better adaptive B cell and innate T cell responses that last longer and work for the variants as compared to the vaccines. Moreover, those with prior infection are at greater risk for bad side effects from the vaccines, rendering the campaign to vaccinate the previously infected both unnecessary and dangerous. But the final question is: Do the vaccines possibly harm the superior T cell immunity built up from prior infection?

Immunologists from Mount Sinai in New York and Hospital La Paz in Madrid have raised serious concerns. In a shocking discovery after monitoring a group of vaccinated people both with and without prior infection, they found "in individuals with a pre-existing immunity against SARS-CoV-2, the second vaccine dose not only fail to boost humoral immunity but determines a contraction of the spike-specific T cell response." They also note that other research has shown "the second vaccination dose appears to exert a detrimental effect in the overall magnitude of the spike-specific humoral response in COVID-19 recovered individuals."

As early as March 27, among the many accurate statements Dr. Fauci made before he became a political animal, he declared he was "really confident" in the immunity conferred by prior infection. That was long before 17 months of data and dozens of studies confirmed that. Yet, today, there are thousands of doctors and nurses with infinitely better immunity than what the vaccines can confer who are losing their jobs during a staffing crisis for not getting the shots. Just know that the big lie about natural immunity is perhaps the most verifiable lie, but it is likely not the only lie with devastating consequences we are being told about the virus, the vaccines, and alternative treatment options.

Horowitz: No, this is not an epidemic of the unvaccinated



Those in favor of mass forced vaccination have an amazing narrative, or at least they think they do. They think that a bunch of "low vaccinated" areas are getting hit strongly with the virus and that somehow this is "an epidemic of the unvaccinated."

But when you open your eyes a crack, you can see that almost every area of America is relatively highly vaccinated for adults and especially seniors and that the virus is bizarrely spreading uncontrollably out of season, even in northern latitudes and even in areas with virtual universal adult vaccination. In fact, what this phenomenon might point to is not only a complete lack of power of vaccination to stop the spread, but also that it is serving as an unnatural viral escape mechanism to create durable and prolific mutations that would not have been created absent mass vaccination.

The truth about the southern states, seasonality, and vaccination rates

India had a low vaccination rate of 3% when cases began to plummet in mid-spring, and indeed the country achieved close to de facto herd immunity without the vaccine. On the other hand, no place in America truly has a low vaccination rate. Even states like Arkansas have 85% of seniors with at least one dose and 71% with two doses. It simply makes no sense that with the degree of efficacy the "experts" ascribe to the vaccine, we would be witnessing this amount of spread. What's more, Florida actually has a higher vaccination rate than California among seniors and a pretty solid overall rate.

Yet cases are spreading in places like Florida quicker than they did a year ago with much less immunity and 0% vaccinated last summer. There's no way the unvaccinated alone could explain this phenomenon, because even if the vaccine didn't exist today at all, we should be seeing less, not more spread, than last year, simply based on built-up immunity. Thus, this indicates something of a negative effect of the vaccine.

Obviously, we all expected to experience a summer uptick in the South because, as we saw last year, southern latitudes tend to get a wave in the hot months of the year, known as the "Hope-Simpson curve." However, this degree of spread makes no sense. Moreover, unlike last year, when the virus was essentially dead north of the 35th parallel in the summer, cases are spreading much more, despite extremely high rates of vaccination. Cases in New York and New Jersey are running four to five times higher than this week last year. San Francisco, with most adults vaccinated (and masked), is experiencing its greatest spread yet — all out of season.

Fully masked San Francisco, with one of the highest vaccination rates on earth, has now matched their highest case… https://t.co/9Rjm3G9jmG

— IM (@ianmSC) 1628451826.0

We can only imagine what these northern latitudes will experience in season, with the vaccination rates having a negative effect on the case rate.

Wherever one stands on the vaccine, the case explosion makes no sense. There are twice as many cases in the U.S. this week than this time last year, without any vaccine and with nearly half the country already immune. There is simply no way the unvaccinated could account for this degree of spread, because last year everyone was unvaccinated (plus fewer with natural immunity), yet we are seeing both greater numbers and off-season spread in climates that should not be getting a summer spread. For example, Oregon has nearly five times the number of cases over last year with very high vaccination rates.

Mass-vaccinated countries getting slammed with prolific spread

Our observations in America are accentuated in other countries, where entire populations are fully vaccinated. The entire adult population of Gibraltar is vaccinated, yet the country has one of the highest case per capita rates and the fifth-highest death rate. Israel was the poster child for successful vaccination, after draconian lockdowns and mask mandates, yet 17 months into this, the Israelis have double the case rate of this time last year. Then we are also seeing even northern climates get an out-of-season spread, like the U.K. last month and Iceland at present. Iceland's cases have gone up exponentially despite near-universal adult vaccination. Iceland has never seen any spread like this during the entire epidemic. How can it be that the worst spread is taking place after near-universal adult vaccination?

Everyone is quick to point out that most of these places, Iceland included, are not experiencing deaths, which they credit to the vaccines rather than the virus becoming less deadly (as we saw in India with a low vaccination rate).

If vaccines are causing the de-coupling of cases and fatalities, what explains what is happening in Finland?Cases… https://t.co/38g05u3aJQ

— PLC (@Humble_Analysis) 1628279587.0

They claim the vaccine ameliorates symptoms. That may very well be true – at least temporarily, before it wears off, as we are seeing in Israel – but clearly it is not doing one iota to stop the spread, and clearly the vaccinated are spreading the virus just as prolifically as the non-vaccinated. Unlike in America, some of these other countries (or places like San Francisco) are almost exclusively composed of vaccinated adults.

And let's not forget that in March, April, and May, when the South was completely clear, the Northeast and upper Midwest – with their impervious restrictions and mask mandates in place, along with already high vaccination rates – had high case counts.

Companion version for you, @ianmSC from your buddy Hold2...with another Neanderthal state added.Date range starts… https://t.co/CYH1JPOcFY

— Hold2 (@Hold2LLC) 1620433610.0

Thus, we've never seen any correlation of the vaccines with better outcomes on a macro level.

So why are cases worse than ever before?

There is no scientifically proven answer to this, but we should find out soon enough. With strong evidence from two Israeli studies that the efficacy of the vaccines even against severe illness wanes after about five months, particularly for the people who need it the most, and Fauci downright admitting they won't work against some variants, perhaps it's time to study Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche's concern that we are making things worse.

Bossche, a former top vaccinologist at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, clearly not an anti-vaxxer, has been frantically warning that mass vaccination (especially with a narrow spike protein vaccine) during the middle of a pandemic is unprecedented and comes with a degree of risk. He warns that weak and waning antibodies from the vaccine can create a natural selection for the virus to mutate around and induce a vicious cycle of endless strengthening of the virus, at least quantitatively if not qualitatively. This is the exact opposite of what Fauci is saying – that somehow more mass vaccination equals less viral immune escape.

Here is a small synopsis of Dr. Bossche's warning from March, when there was little evidence to support his concern:

Why is nobody worried about "immune escape" whereas Covid-19 has already escaped people's innate immunity as reflected by multiple emerging, much more infectious, viral variants (most likely due to the global implementation of infection prevention measures)? Vaccine deployment in the ongoing mass immunization campaigns are highly likely to further enhance (adaptive) immune escape as none of the current vaccines will prevent replication/ transmission of viral variants. The more we use these vaccines for immunizing people in the midst of a pandemic, the more infectious the virus will become. With increasing infectiousness comes an increased likelihood of viral resistance to the vaccines. It's not exactly rocket science, it's a basic principle taught in a student's first vaccinology class: One shouldn't use a prophylactic vaccine in populations exposed to high infectious pressure (which is now certainly the case as multiple highly infectious variants are currently circulating in many parts of the world). To fully escape selective immune pressure exerted by vaccinal antibodies, Covid-19, a highly mutable virus, only needs to add another few mutations in its receptor-binding domain ...
I am beyond worried about the disastrous impact this would have on our human "race". Not only would people lose vaccine-mediated protection but also their precious, variant-nonspecific (!), innate immunity will be gone (this is because vaccinal antibodies outcompete natural antibodies for binding to Covid-19, even when their affinity for the viral variant is relatively low).

Fast-forward five months, and Moderna has already warned everyone will need a third dose, something that is already under way in Israel. But this is akin to giving last year's flu shot to this year's strain. We will continue chasing our tails. Rather than achieving natural immunity, which is much broader and longer-lasting – and using cheap medicines to get people through the virus safely – we will continue to make the virus worse in the long run while continuously offering shorter-term protection for those vaccinated themselves. Israel is already seeing hospitalization from the brand-new third injection!

Iceland's Chief Epidemiologist Þórólfur Guðnason appears to finally understand the failures of the past and the only way forward. When I point to Iceland's unprecedented spread post-universal vaccination, opponents are quick to point out the country's terrific record on preventing deaths. However, notwithstanding the fact that (for whatever reason) Icelandic people appeared to do better with this virus even before the vaccine, their chief epidemiologist clearly understands that 0% efficacy for cases is an obvious harbinger of waning efficacy against critical illness in the future. Which is why in a recent interview he lamented that vaccination failed to achieve herd immunity and conceded that nothing we do, short of focusing on those vulnerable, will stop the natural progression toward herd immunity, whether we like it or not.

"We need to somehow navigate this way, and we are now in this, not to get too many serious illnesses so that the hospital system does not collapse, but still try to achieve this herd immunity by letting the virus somehow run," said Guðnason [translated from Icelandic via google translate].

Thus, as Bossche has been warning, you can't vaccinate your way out of a pandemic. Fortunately, we need not choose between ineffective and harmful interventions and simply letting the virus rip us without protection. There are numerous ways to treat this virus early and even preventively, if only our government would facilitate a new plan. But alas, the administration would rather constantly lead us to hell than follow others on a new path to heaven.

Horowitz: Israeli government data shows natural immunity from infection much stronger than vaccine-induced immunity



Everything the public health "experts" said about the shortcomings of infection-induced immunity actually appears to hold true for the vaccines. If you speak to any man on the street, they will tell you, based on every censored article they read online, that vaccines are stronger than infection in terms of immunity. New data from Israel, the epicenter of mass vaccine hysteria, demonstrates just the opposite.

Israel's channel 13 reports very preliminary data showing that the resurgence of COVID infections in Israel is being driven almost exclusively by those who never had prior infection – whether they are vaccinated or not. In fact, 40% of the 7,700 new cases since May 1 in this very heavily tested and traced country were among those who were fully vaccinated.

Israel National News reports that this data was presented to the Israeli Health Ministry and yielded the following breakdown of breakthrough infections of those vaccinated vs. those with prior infection:

With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.

With over 60% of their respective populations now fully vaccinated, Israel and the U.K. are perfect case studies demonstrating that vaccines are not playing the predominant role in slowing down the viral spread. If you compare all of the European countries by recent cases per million to vaccination rates, you will find zero correlation, and in fact, eastern European countries with low vaccination rates seem to have fewer cases.

In Europe, there is no correlation between level of vaccination and covid infection - if anything, nations with mor… https://t.co/ZfjgJd3UFy

— PLC (@Humble_Analysis) 1626108448.0

Dr. Ryan Cole, a Mayo Clinic-trained pathologist who runs the largest independent laboratory in Idaho, explained to me how infection-induced immunity is much deeper and broader. "A natural infection induces hundreds upon hundreds of antibodies against all proteins of the virus, including the envelope, the membrane, the nucleocapsid, and the spike," said Dr. Cole, who has spent the past 16 months examining and culturing SARS-CoV-2 specimens. "Dozens upon dozens of these antibodies neutralize the virus when encountered again. Additionally, because of the immune system exposure to these numerous proteins (epitomes), our T cells mount a robust memory, as well. Our T cells are the 'marines' of the immune system and the first line of defense against pathogens. T cell memory to those infected with SARSCOV1 is at 17 years and running still."

However, in vaccine-induced immunity, according to Cole, "we mount an antibody response to only the spike and its constituent proteins." He explains how this produces much fewer neutralizing antibodies, and "as the virus preferentially mutates at the spike, these proteins are shaped differently and antibodies can no longer 'lock and key' bind to these new shapes."

It is simply criminal for the global governments to suggest that those with deeper and broader natural immunity should risk the side effects of a vaccine that is now expected to wane in effectiveness. Much of the focus now is on scaring people about the "Delta variant," but it could very well be that the vaccine effectiveness was bound to wane (unlike what they predicted with natural infection) over time, regardless of the mutations. Some Israeli health officials are hypothesizing that the vaccine-induced immunity might wane after six months, which is why Pfizer is already pushing for a third dose, without learning any lessons from all of the needless deaths and side effects people have just incurred in return for questionable immunity.

Contrast that with immunity from infection, which has been shown to be impervious in every study. Irish researchers recently published a review of 11 cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID patients who were followed up with over 10 months. They found the reinfection rate to be just 0.27% "with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time."

Moreover, the only study (from Qatar) analyzed that estimated the population‐level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients with supporting evidence of reinfection estimated the risk at 0.1%. Most importantly, the study found no evidence of waning of immunity for over seven months of the follow-up period. The few reinfections that did occur "were less severe than primary infections" and "only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal."

Despite the endless search by the media to find cases of severe reinfection, they have failed to find it. Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and vice chief of medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, told me in an interview that "there has never been a confirmed second infection beyond 90 days with similar or worse cardinal symptoms and confirmed PCR/Antigen/Sequencing test" in a case where the patient already had a well-documented case with acute illness. He notes that most database studies that attempt to quantify reinfection "are not sufficiently reliable to declare recurrent cases" and usually contain a false positive PCR on one or more occasions.

McCullough is of the top five most published medical researchers in the U.S., and his paper in the American Journal of Medicine in August 2020 about treatment protocol for COVID remains the most downloaded and used paper during the pandemic from that journal.

The media has focused incessantly on antibody levels and the observation that they often drop months after the infection; however, as with other viruses, that does not indicate waning immunity. "Yes, our antibody levels drop over time, however, scientifically, the memory B cells that make antibodies have been proven to be present in our lymph nodes and bone marrow," explained Dr. Cole. "They are primed and ready to produce a broad array of antibodies upon viral pre-exposure. It would be physiologically, energetically impossible to maintain high antibody levels to all the pathogens we are constantly exposed to, and we would look like the 'swollen Stay-Puft marshmallow man' of lymph nodes, constantly, if the immune system were required to do that."

Already in April, researchers from Tel Aviv University concluded that their research "puts into question the need to vaccinate recent previously-infected individuals." Unfortunately, it appears that the Israeli government did not listen.

Thus, dealing with variants like "Delta" by focusing solely on risk-fraught injections with questionable effectiveness is the most counterproductive strategy ever. The U.K.'s very thorough data updated last week shows just a 0.2% case fatality rate for Delta, and only 0.03% for those under the age of 50, lower than any other variant. If it's more transmissible, it's less deadly. Natural infection is the only phenomena that will ultimately burn out all variants, and the entire focus should be on getting seniors and other vulnerable people early treatment the minute they feel symptoms and even a prophylactic regimen of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine when appropriate.

Just imagine if all of the trillions spent on lockdowns and vaccines had been used for cheap anti-viral and anti-inflammatory treatments to be used outside the hospitals. It's the only thing that hasn't been tried, because there is nothing to be gained but saving lives.