The public health establishment has been extremely reluctant to admit that natural immunity provides strong protection against severe Covid. And while protection against infection is lower for the highly mutated (and possibly lab-generated) Omicron variant, it’s still better than what the vaccines provide.
For example, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky signed the John Snow Memorandum – a clumsy rebuttal to the Great Barrington Declaration which claimed “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection”. (The Memorandum was published in October of 2021.)
Given this reluctance, it’s unsurprising that health authorities have insisted that those with natural immunity still need to get vaccinated. For example, the US federal vaccine mandate did not include an exemption for such people. And to this day, the CDC website states, “You should get a COVID-19 vaccine even if you already had COVID-19.”
Anthony Fauci was among those who stressed that previous infection was no reason not to get vaccinated, telling one radio host who’d already had Covid, “it’s very likely that if you didn’t get the vaccine your antibodies levels will start going down and down and down and down.” (This was in April of 2021.)
Now a 2004 video clip of Fauci has resurfaced, in which he takes a very different line on natural immunity. Fauci is asked whether a woman who’s had the flu for 14 days should get a flu shot, and he responds as follows:
Well, no, if she got the flu for 14 days, she’s as protected as anybody can be because the best vaccination is to get infected yourself … If she really has the flu, she definitely doesn’t need a flu vaccine … She doesn’t need it because the most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.
In fact, as recently as March of 2020, Fauci told an email correspondent who asked whether someone is likely to be immune after catching Covid, “you would assume their would be substantial immunity post infection”.
And the issue of whether convalescents (people who’ve already had Covid) need to get vaccinated isn’t purely academic.
There’s tentative evidence that side effects are more common among those with natural immunity, meaning the costs may well outweigh the benefits for that group. What’s more, we ended up wasting millions of doses that could have gone to people who actually needed them, such as the elderly and vulnerable in poor countries.
As Fauci’s comments from 2004 and March of 2020 make clear, the John Snow Memorandum was simply wrong to claim “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection”.
After all, evidence from other respiratory viruses surely counts (even if it’s not as powerful as evidence from SARS-CoV-2 itself). Each time a new respiratory virus emerges, do scientists go back to the drawing board and pretend they know nothing about how it interacts with the immune system?
In fact, the first challenge trial for Covid was published way back in May of 2020, although it involved monkeys rather than humans. There was clear evidence for natural immunity, with the researchers finding “near-complete protection in all animals after SARS-CoV-2 rechallenge”.
So we’ve always had good circumstantial evidence for natural immunity from Covid. But health authorities chose to ignore or downplay it.
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.
One of many side effects of politicising health issues, perhaps. Ignorance and misunderstanding being root causes.
Yes, it’s true. More countries are heading in the right direction, both figuratively and politically;
”Hungary has built a fence and does not allow social (welfare) tourists to enter Europe unchecked. Hungary protects Germany and Austria from further chaos. So, what does the conglomerate of mentally ill lawbreakers in Brussels do in response? It obliges Hungary to pay a massive fine. These previous sentences were delivered by Austrian politician and commentator Gerald Grosz in a statement, but they describe the EU’s mishandling of the problem of illegal immigration so succinctly and accurately that any sane patriot could have said them. Today, the situation has become so much better that more and more people dare to take on their attitude in public, agreeing with the Hungarian position all over Europe.
It is no coincidence that the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) won a historic victory on Sunday in the election whose central theme was illegal migration. Our neighbor has seen unbearable conditions develop in the big cities, for example, more than half of the students in Viennese schools do not know the German language. Whoever forms a government must radically change the current migrant policy, otherwise serious social conflicts may break out, the consequences of which are unforeseeable.
The situation is similar in several EU member states. In the Czech Republic, Andrej Babiš’s party, ANO, won the Senate election by a landslide. Although their strengthening does not bring an immediate change in the Czech migrant policy, it is still a very important development. It is no coincidence that Viktor Orbán concluded his congratulations by saying, “They can tremble in Brussels, the Patriots are coming.”
https://rmx.news/article/patriots-are-advancing-across-europe/
The narrative of the global elite, with its promotion of multiculturalism, wokism, leftism will hopefully trigger a self-preservation defense mechanism in the population.
I remember Vienna from the 80’s. It was a chocolate-box image of affluence, peace and safety. Apparently it’s not like that any more. I suppose some Austrians have started asking the question why.
Killed in a car crash in 2008? That’s a really cute way to word it. Crashed his car against an obstacle on the way back from a Cocaine-fuelled orgy at a certain Gay club is more realistic description. Not quite the kind of political leader we ought to be looking forward (or back) to.
The FPÖ has been part of Austrian governments from 1983 – 1987, 2000 – 2007 and 2017 – 2019. It’s absolutely nothing but another Austrian establishment party.
Is it the cocaine, the gay, or the orgy you object to in a leader?
Get yourself a Haider-T-Shirt if you like. It’s not illegal.
I don’t want a Haider t-shirt (I know nothing about him and don’t want to know) but I am interested in an answer to Arum’s question.
That’s not a question but an attempt to put words in my mouth which differ from the statement I made. Haider (and the FPÖ in general) has a track record of accomplishing exactly nothing when in office and the FPÖ is – in Austria – rightfully regarded as nothing but another corrupt establishment party. Further, he also wasn’t “killed in a car crash” but killed himself (and luckily, no one else) when he lost control of his car while driving under influence. Considering why he was driving under influence, one can also conjecture that he – like Geert Wilders, BTW – mainly objected to Muslim immigration because he didn’t believe this would be beneficial to certain spare-time activities which were very dear to him.
If you think being sex-obsessed and a reckless and irresponsible law breaker who effected his own untimely demise because of this is just the kind of material our political leaders should be made of, then, I suggest to vote for such types whenever the opportunity arises. I must, however, caution you against expecting anything from that save saddling yourself with their lifestyle bills I certainly don’t want to pay.
What political leaders do in their spare time is very low on my list of priorities
What people do in their so-called spare time is a function of what kind of person they are and I absolutely wouldn’t be surprised if the claim that’s implied in your statement, namely, character doesn’t exist, just inherently featureless people who turn into whatever they’re dressing up at the moment once they did this, is also a Marxist ‘intellectual innovation’.
But there’s really no issue here:Vote Keir. And be grateful for whatever befalls you.
I tend to think most people attracted to politics are probably somewhat questionable
There is no “Right wing” only “Far Right”. Populism – what the people want and vote for has replaced democracy which is what the Establishment want for which the people are required to vote.
In next door Germany, the AfD (Far Right) is being blocked from Parliamentary committees (like Reform) despite its high level of electoral support, and harassed in other ways as ‘a threat to democracy’.
The problem with the headline, Centrism (aka Statism rooted in Socialism/Fascism hybrid) holds all the levers of power and has the monopoly on violence.
Death throes of a mortally wounded beast is when it is at its most dangerous… and has nothing to lose.
I don’t suppose those ‘unclean’ unvaccinated persons from 2021/2022 will have forgotten their treatment by the Austrian State at that time. Time for payback hopefully.
You can always tell an article is propaganda as soon as the terms “Far right” and “Populism” appear.
The global wave of Right-wing populism … Whether consciously or unconsciously, Right-wing populists from Trump to Farage have been following in Haider’s footsteps …
Populism simply means doing something that a majority appreciate: is there something wrong with that and is it not something every politician hopes to achieve?
And the terms right-wing or far right are just a short step away from Nazi, or a step beyond for some people.
I would refer to German AfD politics (my knowledge of Austrian politics is scant) as being centrist, or what would have been called conservative a few decades ago. Today’s European politics are all what I would term “Far left”, adhering to rather extreme ideological viewpoints, including publishing such propaganda pieces as this one!