Israeli Study Finds that Natural Immunity Protects Much Better Against Infection than Pfizer Vaccine
Since the start of the global vaccine roll-out, it’s become increasingly clear that – although the vaccines provide strong protection against severe disease – they provide only limited protection against infection.
Israel and Iceland, two of the most vaccinated countries in the world, have recently seen major outbreaks of COVID-19. Both countries had fully vaccinated 60% of the population by July 1st. Yet by early August, Iceland had posted its largest daily total for the number of new infections since the pandemic began, and case numbers in Israel were soaring.
However, the question of whether vaccines are superior to natural immunity in terms of protection against infection has remained open. According to a Guardian article titled “Common myths about Covid – debunked”, which was written by a member of Independent SAGE, natural immunity is “not as good as the protection you get from being vaccinated”.
Yet a new paper suggests the reverse may be true: natural immunity is stronger and longer-lasting than vaccine-induced immunity.
Sivan Gazit and colleagues analysed a large sample of anonymised patient records from Israel. Their sample included two key groups: fully vaccinated people who’d never tested positive; and unvaccinated people who had tested positive.
In addition to matching these two groups for size, and average demographic characteristics, they controlled for ‘immune activation time’. This was done by limiting the sample to people who’d been vaccinated or infected between January 1st and February 28th, 2021.
Patients’ Covid outcomes (subsequent infection, hospitalisation or death) were measured during a follow-up period between June 1st and August 14th.
What did the researchers find? Of the 257 cases that were detected in the follow-up period, 93% occurred in the vaccinated group, and only 7% occurred in the previously infected group. And of nine hospitalisations, eight occurred in the vaccinated group, compared to just one in the previously infected group.
These results indicate that natural immunity confers substantially more protection against infection than vaccine-induced immunity. They also suggest that natural immunity confers more protection against hospitalisation, although one should be cautious here, as there were only nine hospitalisations in total.
The researchers point out that their results may only apply to the Delta variant, and to the Pfizer vaccine, and that they couldn’t control for all relevant differences between the two groups. Nonetheless, their paper provides the strongest evidence to date that natural immunity beats vaccine-induced immunity when it comes to infection.
Francious Balloux of UCL, a self-described “militant corona-centrist”, said the paper “is a bit of a bombshell”. Though he added that “essentially every adult who hasn’t been infected yet greatly benefits from being vaccinated”.
Gazit and colleagues’ findings still need to be replicated. But if they prove to be robust, then government priorities may shift substantially going forward. The case for vaccinating healthy young people will be even weaker. And the case for donating surplus vaccines to poor countries will be that much stronger.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
No shit!
No shit?Not exactly… having had the ‘wild’ virus counts for jack shit.
Natural herd immunity was erased by the WHO last year as a ‘thing’ it can only come from vaccines from now on… no really. Trust the science… PMSL
My sibling lives in Italia had the bug March last year, his immune system did too good a job, had the positive PCR confirmed result saying he was afflicted/had it… however does that get you a COVID health pass…?Ergh nope it doesn’t.
That only comes with regular expensive ‘negative’ testing or getting double-jabbed and then the required never-ending booster shots…
[Just like MSWIndows security updates] Kill Gates beams with pride…
You’re being herded toward medical apartheid.
W A K E U P
Yeah point made but: A PCR neg results proves nothing (especially with plus 30 cycles) beyond viral fragments from any number of viruses… also what is the virus? And how distinctive is it from flu a and flu b strains or a type of viral pneumonia? etc. It’s real but no one has isolated it and this only matters because the sequence is a computer fiction (genomics = £££) and one lie becomes a few lies become many lies (a kind of pyramid scheme) – watch Dr Samantha Bailey’s Once Upon a Time in Wuhan. The end = dangerous pointless jabs. If only Lewis Carroll had written it – would be magical and meaningful – but we got Karl Schwab meets Netflix.
Samantha Bailey believes in the very, very fringe view of Terrain Theory that ALL viruses do not exist including measles, flu and the common cold.
She has a book to sell to the gullible.
All virologists know that they cannot be “isolated” in the dictionary sense of the word.
If you watch: https://youtu.be/3GzzBD1kJ0g, any CT rate greater than 25 has been proved to be completely worthless
The CT rate employed, if above 25, delivers no meaningful result – especially as it cannot test for the whole gene as we all know.
This is arrogance in the extreme to suggest a vaccine is better than several million years of immune system development. Our species has evolved in parallel with viruses and bacteria.
The same arrogance that leads people to believe they can “control” a virus…
They don’t believe they can control the virus, they know full well that they can’t. They do believe though that they can control people and they’re doing quite well on that front
Well… vaccines have actually been better than several million years of immune system development in cases where the body dies before the immune system adapts. The difference is that in most cases the body does not die before the immune system kicks in, and that this vaccine isn’t exactly a vaccine. They’re not trying to help the immune system learn the virus and deal with it. They’re trying to trick the immune system and tell it directly what to do. Which begs an interesting question… So the claim is that this “vaccine” instructs cells to create inert viral particles that then get recognized by the immune system, and the immune system learns to counteract the infection. But the thing is… Why not simply use inert viral particles? You cannot isolate them? Why? This is a coronavirus. We’ve been dealing with coronaviruses for decades. The only way to deliver genetic instructions inside a cell in order for it to reproduce the viral particles is by using a virus. There is no other way to do that. So the only possible conclusion is that they are injecting people with a virus. If this virus injection does what they claim to do, which… Read more »
….this vaccine isn’t exactly a vaccine. They’re not trying to help the immune system learn the virus and deal with it. They’re trying to trick the immune system and tell it directly what to do. The three vaccines in use in the UK at the moment present the immune system with part of the virus – in what sense is that “telling the immune system what to do”? Others, such as the Chinese Sinopharm vaccine, present a deactivated version of the virus – although this appears to be less effective than the ones in use in the UK. Another deactivated virus vaccine is completing clinical trials and is expected to get approval in the UK by the end of the year. Why not simply use inert viral particles? You cannot isolate them? Why? This is a coronavirus. We’ve been dealing with coronaviruses for decades. See above – being done right now. The only way to deliver genetic instructions inside a cell in order for it to reproduce the viral particles is by using a virus. There is no other way to do that. So the only possible conclusion is that they are injecting people with a virus. The AZ vaccine uses a… Read more »
Because it does not. Vaccines do not activate T cells. That only happens with a real infection. So why would exposing parts of the virus to the immune system not produce the same result as when those parts of the virus are exposed to the immune system naturally, through infection? And do remember that the outer shell of the virus is all that the immune system sees during infection. Whether the payload is there or not, it makes no difference.
So as far as I can tell, this vaccine does not work in the advertised manner. It doesn’t elicit a natural response from the immune system, which means that the natural response mechanism of the immune system is bypassed.
Of course, there is the possibility that the reason why no T cell involvement is noticed as a result of vaccination is that whatever the vaccine is wouldn’t normally trigger T cell involvement. Maybe someone with more knowledge on the topic can opine on this more.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210719/Do-mRNA-based-COVID-19-vaccines-induce-memory-T-cell-response-similar-to-natural-infection.aspx
The study reveals that mRNA-based coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are highly potent in inducing spike-specific T cell response in naïve individuals and triggering memory T cell response in COVID-19 recovered individuals. The study is currently available on the medRxiv* preprint server.
And yet even the media has had to admit recently that it’s not all as it seems…
Can you provide a link? I don’t understand what “it’s not all as it seems” means.
The antibodies produced fade far faster than in natural immunity, and protection is at best six months, with very wide and sometimes deadly side effects. Even on what we know now – without what may appear down the line – not a success.
Where did you get the data on how fast immunity fades following infection?
You know what I think about the scare stories about side effects. There are some, as there are for almost all medical interventions – but the risk is small compared to the risk of side effects of getting natural immunity.
Tell the people who died from the vaccines that.
Tell the people who died from the vaccines that.
Tricky – ouija board perhaps?
However, I agree it would be little compensation to their relatives knowing that they were desperately unlucky – far less likely than being struck by lightning.
Well, if you consider death as a side effect as a small risk you go for it.
i would rather take my chances with the real thing.
MTF = troll
… especially if you have some ivermectin or similar to hand,
The MHRA itself believes that the ‘Yellow Card System’ captures less than 10% of suspected adverse reactions to drugs and medical interventions (VAERS in the US believes their figure to be around 2%). Working on the 10% figure for the UK, with 1500+ deaths reported following vaccination, I think your saying “the risk is small” is quite a bold statement (and that’s without without considering the 700,000+ non-fatal adverse reaction reports). From a personal perspective, the first death from covid of someone I actually knew occurred 2 weeks ago, but since covid vaccine roll-out, 2 people I knew personally have died from stroke within a couple of weeks of vaccination, 1 person has died from a heart attack, 1 was admitted to hospital with heart problems, 1 has developed serious eye problems and 1 will be on blood-thinning medication for the rest of their life due to an incurable blood-clot. In fairness, I’ve known quite a lot of people to be really ill with Covid…. but they’ve survived. I personally rate my chances of surviving covid higher than my chances of surviving a stroke or a heart attack.
MTF does not belong to this group. Is an alien. Of course is name is not Alf. He is an idiot.
“the risk is small compared to the risk of side effects of getting natural immunity”
Can you substantiate that claim? Would this help? https://www.scivisionpub.com/pdfs/us-covid19-vaccines-proven-to-cause-more-harm-than-good-based-on-pivotal-clinical-trial-data-analyzed-using-the-proper-scientific–1811.pdf
Do not loose time and fingers with MTF
So why does everyone need a booster every five months?
Some people might need a booster after six or seven months – this is not necessarily a pattern that needs repeating – that is to be seen. However, I accept the immunity from vaccines fades. The question was whether it fades far faster than natural immunity. As Sandra was unable to provide any data on how fast natural immunity fades, and I can’t find any, for the moment I don’t know the answer to that.
Please view: Dr Richard Fleming’s presentation of July 11th 2021 on BASES 2021 which details in depth why these jabs are lethal and harmful to humans, and how the affect of RT-PCR is a completely inappropriate test regime with CT rates greater than 25. Please see Episode 230 of “The Highwire”, including the Jefferey Janzen Report and the sections with Dr Ryan Cole and Dr Bryan Ardis. In fact watch any episode of the Highwire because they are scrupulously fair in putting their presentation out in a balanced way which details, among other things, why these jabs and everything connected with them is not what we were and still are being told by Politicians etc etc.. If, after investing some time watching these people speak, you are still of the same opinions, God help you. If you do not think the studies they cite detailing serious concerns about ADE, “vaccine” inefficacy, the danger double jabbed people face from cytokine “storm” ADE reactions – and I am one being severely morbidly affected by Analphylaxis – are very meaningful, truthful and very scary, I have no idea what will convince people like you who are defending the utterly indefensible – it is… Read more »
Actually other vaccines based on attenuated viruses do produce a T cell response, they have to as infants depend on this to obtain immunity, their antibody response is negligible. If a child has a temperature and swollen glands after an injection then that is an innate /T cell reaction. Glands are swollen due to the proliferation of T cells in the lymphatic system.
Cristi.Neagu
Beware: MTF is either a troll or a stupid.
So you are sure it has been isolated now? Is that very recent because I think it was only a month ago the CDC was still admitting it had not been isolated.
Have you got a link? I would be surprised as they have been offering reference samples for many months.
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.
The spike protein is the cause of the damage as it induces clotting and inflammation throughout the body – you know the self same spike protein that the mRNA jab induces the body to produce…..which inhabits the whole of your body, is then present in over 85% of the body’s chromosomes – but “it is not a DNA altering vaccine”. Dr Richard Fleming explains exactly how it does that – look him up.
Digging around here is a report of isolating the virus in Feb 2020 – it is not the first but quite early: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045880/
The virus replicated in Vero cells and cytopathic effects were observed. Full genome sequencing showed that the virus genome exhibited sequence homology of more than 99.9% with SARS-CoV-2 which was isolated from patients from other countries, for instance China.
Is 99.9% sufficient? Aren’t we 80% (or something like that) genetically the same as bananas?
Cristi.Neagu wrote «So they are injecting people with a virus, and the immune system is not responding as expected».
He didn’t wrote as you put «What makes you think it does not respond in a natural manner?»
Be an adult.
I’d stop at the beginning – why can’t they isolate it? Has anyone managed a definitive photo of it?
I think billion not millions. Probably started with the first cellular life forms.
I was talking about multicellular organisms. We have viral DNA, also our mitochondria are likely to have been a symbiotic relationship between single cells and bacteria.
Big Fan of ‘vaccines’. Shame there isn’t one for Covid. – FIGHT. BACK. BETTER. – updated useful information, resources and links: https://www.LCAHub.org/
Yep, all the arguing about the vaccine pre-supposes we need one, we don’t…it’s a cold, or less, for the vast majority of people…if you want to inject yourself, feel free, but can the vaccine lovers just stop trying to make a flu efficacy vaccine sound as though it’s the saviour of us all…it isn’t.
Covid Kid parties instead of forced vaccinations then.
Covid healthy adult parties as well.
Have said this all along.
do they? Let’s see the proof of that then.
That’s the kick. No one has any proof and will never be able to prove they protect you. I hear many people around me say ‘Got covid but if I hadn’t of had the vaccine I know I would have been far worse off’.
How do you know? You don’t. Someone told you but that’s not proof. You can prove vaccines cause damage and blood clots and death, but that’s okay. What’s a ‘few’ deaths or many adverse reactions when there’s a ton of money to be made?
Look at deaths or severe covid illness, which are actually covid – test positive twice maybe, definite covid symptoms, then you control for age and state of health (e.g. BMI, other severe or chronic illnesses, immunodeficiencies), and compare outcomes for vaccinated in various degrees (different vaxxes, one or two jabs, how long since jab), and variants, with as large a sample size as possible, in a country with a reasonably consistent healthcare system, consistent treatments used. I think that would get you a fair way towards some defensible position as far as vaccine efficacy. Trouble is, that data probably doesn’t exist, and no-one with the power to do so has the slightest interest in gathering it, or if it does exist then it won’t be released if it doesn’t support the narrative.
The proof is here:
https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated
The vaccine stops you getting very ill when you catch the virus. It doesn’t stop you catching the virus that well.
There are still questions that are not answered by just age. For example, those very elderly people who make up the largest number of severe cases, why did they not get vaccinated in the first place? Was it because they were for example already very ill/frail?
As Julian says above, unless you have very detailed stats on other illness, lifestyle etc you can’t really prove efficacy with any degree of certainty.
“those very elderly people who make up the largest number of severe cases, why did they not get vaccinated in the first place?”
Perhaps some are intelligent, and saw (a) that the jabs had never been tested on a compromised population and (b) following roll-out, there was a sharp increase in mortality – probably amongst the most vulnerable – in many countries.
… and (c) who would trust anything recommended by a cartel of financial and political interests?
People who’ve survived the two experimental injections are, accordingly, selected for robustness. This greater than average, for their peer group, robustness will afford them better outcomes when they encounter a respiratory infection.
OK, the selective effect may be negligible (given that
fewnot a massive number of people are killed by the injections), for most sections of the population, but amongst the frail it may become a significant factor.This is interesting but I wonder if a confounding variable may be the reason for not being vaccinated. Of course, for some it will be from choice, but for others it may be that they have clinical reasons not to be vaccinated which may also increase their risk for severe illness.
has anyone looked into the effectiveness of a healthy immune system at stopping you get very ill? I’m pretty sure all the young people they are clot jabbing have healthy immune systems – healthy immune systems are such a barrier to pharma profits – best just to pretend they don’t exist
Or better letr’s create a “vaccine” that destroys the immune system, and then replace it with more “vaccines” in perpetuity.
It’s a dichotomy between people who think we evolved and those whp think we were created in a test tube.
Not ‘proof’ of anything. Look at the figures < age 60, where there is a minute risk of severe disease. That’s why the raw data is missing.
In the days when reasonable RCTs were possible (and the raw data was available), the ARR put this sort of stuff into perspective.
The above is a blog post!! There are many studies coming out all saying the same thing..natural immunity gives a far fuller, complete and lasting immunity. The latest Israeli scientific study (came out Sunday)..agreed not yet peer-reviewed…”Antibody titers in vaxxed people start high but fall by 40% per month. Natural titers fell by 5% over the same time period.” ( plus, no side-effects for the natural immunity)!
PHE’s latest paper ‘variants of concern’ shows that two thirds of deaths from Delta are in the vaccinated group.
The only ‘efficacy’ data we see is the type given by ‘modelling’ and not by real-world data. It is ONLY by modelling that the ONS have been able to claim that vaccines reduce infections. In their latest paper the raw data shows that 86% of Delta infections were in the vaccinated, about the same number of people vaccinated….I.e…NO EFFECT.
what I’m seeing with my own eyes! Cases soaring, and more deaths this year WITH mass-vaccination, than last year, even though all the science says Delta is much less deadly that previous variants!
What a shock. Who would ever have even imagined that covid “19” would behave in the same way as all other viruses said to cause upper respiratory infections. Maybe, just maybe, natural immunity is better after all?
This astonishing concept will no doubt shake the “mainstream” immunological community and bring about a total change in the way the powers that be dictate policy.
Doubtless this will mean an end to fear ramping, mandatory “vaccination” and Passports.
I will now eagerly watch the BBC for signs of a renaissance.
You might add. All pigs fuelled and ready for takeoff!
As cows jump over the blue, blue moon.
I like
oink . . . flap . . . oink . . . flap . . .
In a minute we will be talking about that massive conspiracy theory … the human immune system!!! Glory be, if only the likes of us could just get it into our thick sceptical heads immune system bad, vaccine good, we could live nicely amongst the covid cult!!!
I have been feeling despondent recently what with the care home workers mandatory vaccination and the 12 to 15 years injections sure to get the go ahead but this research has given me a little hope – even though the cult will try to ignore or bury it, it will be difficult to do so.
A study comparing reinfection rates among those with natural infection Versus those with natural infection, who were subsequently jabbed, would be very interesting…
I have the same suspicion as you as to regarding the results of testing the immune system retardant jabs.
Yes – I think I read of one study suggesting the jabs damage natural immunity. But only one. I hope not. I know many, many people with NI who have taken the needle.
“although the vaccines provide strong protection against severe disease “
EXCUSE ME?
What evidence do you have for this statement?
Fact: vaccine programs started with elderly and vulnerable
Fact: these programs show death rates increase AFTER jab rollouts
Fact: there is no study so far that controls for vaccinated vs unvaccinated
All that can be said is as the rollouts go through the age groups, deaths and cases also fall.
This is correlation NOT causation.
There is no way to determine what would have occurred in the SAME population WITHOUT these rollouts. There is no proper control against the natural Gombertz curve of viral activity.
Comparison to populations and countries that had low jab rates with better population wide hospitalisation rates and deaths such as Palestine vs Isreal suggest that these jabs are worse than doing nothing.
The damages reported and unreported by these Frankenshots are off the charts.
THEY ARE NOT WORTH THE UNPROVEN “PROTECTION” YOU CLAIM
> Fact: there is no study so far that controls for vaccinated vs unvaccinated
They deliberately unblinded the jab studies in order to make sure this happened.
Big pharma never have and never will do anything remotely resembling large publicised studies of vaccinated v. unvaccinated insofar as any vaccine is concerned.
The reasons given are it would be “unethical” – wow, concerned about ethics are we – to do so and that even beginning any such trial would undermine public confidence in vaccines generally. Also it would only give ammunition to lawyers seeking to prove vaccine damage.
That said, I do recommend trawling through ” VaxinePapers.org ” .
A bit of an eye opener to say the least.
I
It’s all here by age stratification from the Israeli data.
https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated
Distorted stats – people (in good health) under 30 have a statistical non-existent chance of dying from the virus – to claim that the jabs have anything to do with that fact is disingenuous.
The figures Lucan Grey points to don’t make any claim about the under 30s. They do basic age stratification between <50 and >50 which is absolutely bog standard statistics. As the figures show – there is an extremely high VE against severe disease. Note that is up-to-date 15th of August.
Can’t help noticing NonCompliant’s comment: “…. cults cannot accept any evidence contrary to their belief systems”
The media will just bury it, cults cannot accept any evidence contrary to their belief systems.
Cults lead by Independent Sage and The Guardian! I have loathed these two all through.
Well knock me down with a feather….
Decent virologists were telling anyone that listened this 18 months or more ago.
No one listened then and no one will listen now.
You will just get the likes of Guardian, Wapo, NYT, etc spending time and money doing their best to discredit the report and the authors who will eventually retire to the hills for their health, just like almost everyone else has who has put their heads above the parapet.
The SNP directed Scottish public inquiry commencing in December has a vested interest in discrediting the Johnson government’s vaccine ‘triumph’, supposedly a shining example of the benefits of the union, and in discrediting the Johnson government in general.
There is some (only faint) hope that that inquiry will flush out the weak and silly government/NHS/’SAGE’ arguments one by one and blow them out of the water through long overdue and public forensic analysis.
The hopeless nincompoopery of flawed PCR tests, the bovine idiocy of mask mandates, the lack of any detailed substantive cost/benefit analysis, is such a massive open flank/open goal that no inquiry could possibly miss it, could it?
As I posted on here a couple of days ago I hope this enquiry is completely independent and starts with a blank piece of paper.
If they are given questions to answer such as ‘should lockdown have started earlier’ or ‘did lockdown end too soon’ then in my opinion it’s a waste of time. They would be starting from a point of assuming lockdown was correct solution and would then be trying to see if it was done properly.
An independent enquiry like you say should look at everything, were there alternatives to lockdown? Do masks make any difference? etc
Do you remember the excellent Nigel Hawthorne as Sir Humphrey Appleby in Yes Minister? The report is already written its just a case of making sure some of the ‘right’ questions are asked. To quote him ‘ It’s always a victory of the heartless over the mindless.’
“Francious Balloux of UCL, a self-described “militant corona-centrist”,”
This has to be a made up name. It’s too close to Frank Bollocks, which seems to accurately describe his opinion. I wonder if his middle name is Lee
The man is, nearly, a legend:
‘The likelihood of a lineage emerging that is 50 times more lethal is extraordinarily implausible. I say that because we have 200 respiratory viruses in circulation and most of us get infected on a regular basis. We’ve never seen that kind of sudden change in mortality. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but you may have a better chance of winning the lottery jackpot many times over.’
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2021/aug/interview-prof-francois-balloux-pandemic-has-created-market-gloom-and-doom
If only he had finished by saying that, as a consequence, the idea of a ‘pandemic’ is clearly a load of old Balloux……
“These results indicate that natural immunity confers substantially more protection against infection than vaccine-induced immunity.”
While that is true as a statement, it doesn’t really do justice to the real world event sequence.
The real world event is the protection against a *second* infection. In that case both vaccinated and unvaccinated would be in the same boat – since they would both have natural immunity at that point.
However against the *first* infection the unvaccinated starts with no protection, whereas the vaccinated starts with some protection – which will reduce the severity of the first infection in a great many people.
It’s important to avoid comparing apples and pears here. These vaccines are non-sterilising. They are not expected to stop infection, just slow it down and reduce its severity.
Then it’s not a vaccine.
It’s (allegedly) a ‘disease severity prophylactic.’ Like an ivermectin-based protocol.
Just not as effective and more dangerous.
Who is alleging this?
Everyone who can read and understand their language of origin.
Give me an example.
With the greatest of pleasure: https://youtu.be/3GzzBD1kJ0g It would be great if you could “fact check” Dr Fleming’s ( highly technical) exposition that “seems to suggest” the chain of events from the 1990’s onwards has been completely deliberate; GoF research into the pathogenic qualities of Coronaviruses funded by the US taxpayer, involving the highest level of authority ( Fauci et al), the US military and Intelligence Services, acceptance that this research was/is highly dangerous, designed for bioweapons purposes but shrouded as a base for virus vaccines….key elements of which were ( and still are ) patented by US government organisations, the disclosure by Daszak and Zhengli that they have succeeded in engineering 8 chimeric viruses using “base” viruses prevalent in Bats and Rats ( note not humans) with two “variants” ( my term ) resulting which they confirmed were highly pathogenic to humans via tests on humanised mice ( which all died if I remember correctly from Dr Fleming’s presentation ); the release from WIV or other facility ( leading to the colossal cover up by the Chinese, and then the white wash investigation lead by Daszak ). His explanation of the effects of the S1 and S2 spike proteins are… Read more »
… and mandatory (where I live)
The infection wasn’t really severe to begin with. And while they may also be claiming that the point of the vaccine is to reduce the severity of symptoms, their actions do not match their words. If this was indeed the case, then the vaccine should have been only given to people who do have severe symptoms: the elderly. But now we’re down to injecting it to children, who have been pretty much unaffected by this. There is more going on here.
Yes, just reduce severity so that much more dangerous variants can emerge.
Surely the unvaccinated start with some protection, not none as you state, as they have their natural immune system which already has knowledge of coronaviruses.
Who says we start with no protection? This is a coronavirus remember.
These vaccines are non-sterilising. They are not expected to stop infection, just slow it down and reduce its severity.
I have lost count of the number of times I have unsuccessfully asked for a reference for this idea that vaccines are not expected to stop infection. They are not 100% effective (no vaccines are) but they are very much expected to reduce your chances of infection.
And I have lost count of your statements with no validity. They have never been expected to reduce chances of infection, not at any time have the manufacturers claimed that facility , nor has the use of them been every predicated on it.
There must be some misunderstanding or subtlety of interpretation I am not aware of – efficacy against infection has always been one of the major objectives for the vaccines. When the vaccine efficacy figures were first announced it was efficacy against infection. Here is the Pfizer press release announcing its vaccine. Note the very first bullet (my emphasis):
Vaccine candidate was found to be more than 90% effective in preventing COVID-19 in participants without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first interim efficacy analysis
There is no mention of hospitalization or death in the release.
Just give me a reference to the contrary – it may clarify a misunderstanding.
You’ve given the reference to the contrary yourself: 90% effective in preventing COVID-19, a disease diagnosed based on symptoms, in people who didn’t get infected before they were vaccinated, ie, they weren’t already immune to Sars-CoV2.
I take “efficacy against infection” as a measure of ability to prevent infection, rather than of ability to fight an infection. In this sense, the (ongoing) phase III studies are not designed to measure it; the design monitors reduced instances of symptom detection.
If reduction in symptom detection qualified as the measure of “efficacy against infection”, then so, too, would reduction in hospitalisation, and reduction in death. However, these are being reported separately, and not as the “efficacy against infection”.
No, they’re not and cannot. Infection is an externally induced even and does not depend on the immune system. An immune response necessarily happens after an infection.
For six months. And side effects include death. Pretty piss poor vaccine.
“the real world event sequence” – I suspect that, for a great many people, this includes naturally clearing a SARS-CoV-2 infection before any experimental injection becomes available to them.
“Mumbai: Sero-survey finds antibodies in 57 % of those tested”, and that was over a year ago: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-sero-survey-finds-antibodies-in-57-of-those-tested-in-slums/articleshow/77245665.cms
You’ve got muddled. Natural immunity and unvaccinated may overlap, but they are not the same.
I find it fascinating and terrifying in equal measure the fact that we are just now ‘discovering’ that a vaccine which presents a piece of a virus (its spike protein) directly into your blood isn’t as effective as inhaling the whole virus.
I mean…. wow… Dido Harding quote needed
So… hear me out, here. What if this is the plan? What if the plan is to sell everyone on this “our only salvation are vaccines” plan, and when vaccines fail (or rather, they are proven to be worse than nothing), they’ll just turn around and say “our last hope against this virus has failed, there is no chance to get out of this, we cannot fight this, everyone must stay in indefinite lockdown, no external contact allowed”?
We are likely to be entering an age where “testing” will become endemic and the route to being able to participate in every day life. Bill and Claus have, after all, invested in facilities that manufacture “accurate” tests. I’m sure there will be a little trans-human bio hack coming along to make it even easier to check your health as you walk past a conveniently sited “mast”.
They want the cash too. It’s already: Ooops, you have to take a stab every five months. Or you can’t order a pizza.
So.
Test for immunity. Pre or acquired.
Assess for vulnerability to Covid.
Offer a vaccine (that works). Your choice.
“…. the vaccines provide strong protection against severe disease….”
Do they? Didn’t we see spikes in the death rate accompanying the shots’ roll out all over the world? And hadn’t the virus’ spread begun it’s natural decline before shots were administered?
This oft repeated claim about the vaccines is not at all “abundantly clear.”
Especially since people have always experiences mild symptoms or even no symptoms at all since this whole thing started.
Duh!…….
“essentially every adult who hasn’t been infected yet greatly benefits from being vaccinated”, might be better expressed as “everyone who isn’t vulnerable would do better being naturally infected than vaccinated”.
natural immunity protects better than jabs …
No kidding Sherlock, it only evolved over a couple of billion years of often extreme evolutionary pressure, what a surprise.
Is there anyone with a brain that didn’t predict that? Traditional vaccines usually worked so well because they primed the natural system not tried to usurp it.
of course, the vaccine merely starts the natural defences, it is useful to build up some defence prior to actually getting sick.
No really. There is a thing called ‘Original Antigenic Sin’ added to which this ‘not a vaccine’ consists of just one protein of the virus rather than (I think) 4 in the whole virus, meaning that ‘vaccine escape’ is far more likely when minor changes to that one protein occur (especially in the RBD region). And while it is reported that the ‘Delta variant’ is now 98% dominant, there are well over 100,000 discrete virus ‘variants’ identified so far, all of which differ in that 1 protein from that in the Alpha/Wuhan virus.
Well worth a watch. This guy is a hero.
A Message From Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. One Year After the Historic Rally in Berlin: “It’s Time For (peaceful) Civil Disobedience!”
https://childrenshealthdefense.eu/covid-19/a-special-message-from-robert-f-kennedy-jr-a-year-ago-after-historical-rally-in-berlin-we-must-resist-this-coup-detat/
“According to a Guardian article …, natural immunity is ‘not as good as the protection you get from being vaccinated’.” Christina Pagel justified that claim by linking to a Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health piece that is so piss poor it has, apparently, already been pulled. We must resort to the Internet Archive to read it: https://web.archive.org/web/20210819172111/https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccines-offer-better-protection-than-infection.html In it, “virologist Sabra Klein, PhD ‘98” asserts, “Studies have shown that people who have been infected can benefit significantly from vaccination. It gives them a strong, lasting immunity boost. After receiving the first dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, they have immunity levels comparable to those of uninfected people who have received their second dose.” She does not, however, identify these studies, but, since the article is from late May, they must be quite well known, by now. Dr Klein added, “The immune system of people who have been infected has been trained to target all these different parts of the virus called antigens. You’d think that would provide strongest immunity, but it doesn’t. … By focusing on this one big antigen [the spike protein], it’s like you’re making our immune system put blinders on and only be able to see… Read more »
It’s like Klein was making it up.
I simply do not understand why anyone ever thought they conferred any sort of protection from catching or spreading Covid. I read the manufacturers aims when they were in the process of creating these obscenities and every single one had “mitigation of effects” as the main aim. Not one ever said they offer any sort of immunity.
The figures bandied around such as 90% for Pfizer are a complete and utter joke, the real figure for Pfizer is ~ 1%. In the CDC guidelines they state that both figures have to be issued and the important one is the Actual figure i.e. the 1%. The CDC does not follow its own guidelines for Covid vaccines and it is easy to see why: they know people would laugh at 1% and refuse to take these abhorrent things.
So, how much more ‘official’ does it have to get before the lie that a vaccine passport proves that the holder is no risk to society and conversely that no passport means the non-holder of a passport is a danger to society, can be laid to rest.
A vaccine passport is now proven to be only a mark of compliance as it is of no practical use in containing infection – just like the zombie edicts on face masks.
We have to point that out gently to anyone who will listen. Lots of people still haven’t got that it doesn’t protect against infection or transmission.
Japan continues it seems to publish slightly more of the truth than some countries
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/08/27/national/moderna-contamination-metal/
Does this explain the widespread reports from Europe of magnets sticking to arms even in tests done in the street by independent researchers. These findings were called conspiracy theories by ‘fact checkers’ and the MHRA if I recall correctly.
Others may wish to share this link on FB, Twitter or YT. AFAIK the Japan Times is a totally mainstream newspaper so this is ‘respectable news’ not, shock horror, a ‘conspiracy theory’.
One thing struck me as odd. I read elsewhere that Japan had refused to use Moderna because they wanted to keep some ingredients secret, i.e. even more so than AZ or Pfizer. Now it appears they are using it. Anyone know the truth?
Weird, this constant obsession with giving our excess crap vaccines to the Third World (unless you have eugenicist tendencies). Folks there don’t need them, they’re about as useful as a fridge on the North pole….and they use cheap effective re-purposed meds like ivermectin etc.