Back in October of 2020, the John Snow Memorandum was published as a letter in the Lancet. Originally co-signed by 31 scientists, hundreds of others have since added their names.
Although it does not explicitly name the Great Barrington Declaration, the Memorandum is widely understood as a response to that document. It refers to “a so-called herd immunity approach”, which proponents claim “would lead to the development of infection-acquired population immunity in the low-risk population”.
However, the Memorandum states: “This is a dangerous fallacy unsupported by scientific evidence.” And it goes on to claim “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection”.
According to the organisers’ website, more than 6,900 scientists, researchers and healthcare professionals have signed the Memorandum to date (including names from Oxford and Harvard). So almost 7,000 people with supposed expertise deemed it plausible that natural immunity would not provide any lasting protection against reinfection.
Incidentally, the language used in the Memorandum may be partly responsible for the Great Barrington Declaration being mischaracterised as a ‘herd immunity strategy’. As the authors have been at pains to point out, this is like describing a pilot’s plan to land a plane as a ‘gravity strategy’. (Their approach is more properly described as ‘focused protection’.)
It’s now one year on from the John Snow Memorandum. Is there any evidence for “lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection”? Yes, in fact, there is.
A recent systematic review (which has not yet been peer-reviewed) found that natural immunity confers a high degree of protection against reinfection. The researchers analysed 10 studies, and calculated a weight-average risk reduction of 90%.
But is this protection lasting? According to a new study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases, immunity persists for at least 12 months in the vast majority of convalescents (those who’ve previously been infected).
Chinese researchers carried out a “systematic antigen-specific immune evaluation” on 74 individuals, 12 months after their original infection. They found that “humoral immunity is present within ~95% of convalescents and T-cell memory against at least one viral antigen is measurable among ~90% of subjects at 12m post-infection”.
Note: ‘humoral immunity’ refers to the type of immune response mediated by antibodies, whereas ‘cellular immunity’ refers to the type mediated by T-cells (as well as phagocytes and cytokines).
Although the researchers also had data from 28 healthy controls (individuals who’d never been infected), their sample was not large enough to estimate the protective effect of natural immunity on reinfection. Though it’s worth noting that not a single participant reported reinfection.
A study published last year analysed data on ten healthy males over a period of three decades, to see how often reinfections with seasonal coronaviruses occurred. They found that the median reinfection occurred after 30 months, suggesting that protective immunity lasts for years, not decades.
If SARS-CoV-2 is anything like the four other coronaviruses, we can expect immunity against reinfection to wane on a similar timescale. However, this seems more than sufficient to achieve focused protection, in the sense of shielding the vulnerable through the initial epidemic, and allowing time for treatments and vaccines to be developed.
Lockdown proponents might respond that lockdown need only have lasted as long as it took to develop the vaccines. But this argument completely ignores the costs side of the ledger. Focused protection could have worked, if only we’d bothered to try it.
Stop Press: The Brownstone Institute has compiled a list of 29 studies showing that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is “robust, long-lasting, and broadly effective”.
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.
Same choice as in the UK – if you want to preserve your country, you know who you need to vote for.
Apparently there’s been an increase, compared to previous elections, in young women, Jews and Catholics voting for Le Pen. I can make an educated guess why. Unfortunately I don’t think these particular ‘young women’ ( below ) are included in the numbers.
This brings me to, once again, shine a light on the hypocrisy of feminism and to just ask, what the hell is the point? If you watch the vid ( *max cringe factor* ) and read this short piece you’ll see what I mean. What I’d like to know is this: are all self-identified feminists Leftards? Because all I see are contradictions and double-standards everywhere. So much so that I think the whole thing becomes meaningless and cancels itself out, to be fair, it’s that farcical. What are these women even meant to stand for nowadays? It’s impossible to tell.
They call Le Pen’s party ”fascists” and ”racist” whilst ignoring the crime stats which show clearly that more foreigners commit sex crimes ( and stabbings ) as a proportion of their numbers vs those without a migrant background. But keep those ”Refugees Welcome” signs handy, feminist ladies…ya bloody irrational nutcases;
”Nudity warning, but this video perfectly sums up the utter stupidity that’s apparently a shared trait between leftist women in the West…
They’ve got their bare boobs out, doing “housework” in a skirt and heels, looking cute enough with their makeup, all without the financial stability and safety net of a provider husband because…they’re mad about electoral results. Seriously, if you’re going to become a cliché male fantasy, at least get the serious benefits that a man brings to the table as a partner. Why give all that up for nothing in exchange?
If the relationship between men and women is all so gross and transactional, as leftist feminism routinely implies, then this little stunt just goes to show how truly incompetent leftist women are when they come to the bargaining table. Leftist feminism accuses men of being pigs who “only want one thing” which means any woman who adopts such an ideology and then acts like the woman epitomizes stupidity—a more intelligent woman would use that knowledge, and her femininity, to her advantage.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/07/french_feminists_don_skirts_go_topless_and_start_mopping_the_floors_in_protest_of_the_far_right_winning_at_the_ballot_box.html
What would be interesting is to get these feminist ladies’ opinion on these nice young gentlemen and their song lyrics. I mean, fundamentally they’re on the same page. Aren’t they??
*Pardon my French!*
”French rappers release ULTRA-VIOLENT new anti-National Rally music video:
“Marine and Marion the whores, beat these female dogs in heat with a stick.
“Jodan, you’re dead.”
“If the fascists come by, I’m going out with a big caliber.”
Other lyrics include;
“They deserve the cane.”
“This is for my friends under QQTF (French deportation orders).”
The track was produced by a collective of 20 popular rappers, including Fianso, ISK, Alkpote and Akhenaton
They are already raising money through the anti-National Rally video, as the left eats up the brutal, murderous, and anti-female lyrics.”
https://x.com/RMXnews/status/1808064777874255984
And let’s not forget: That’s how to BE KIND.
Well nothing screams ”I object to being objectified!” like getting your Bristol Cities out in public and writing words on said baps. Next they’ll be saying that sex workers and lap dancers are the embodiment of ‘female empowerment’. And don’t get me started on the music industry ( or what passes for ”music” these days ) because there seems to be a correlation between female artists’ success and how few clothes they wear ( and how sexually suggestive they are in videos and on stage ), with only a few exceptions that I can count on one hand, e.g Adele when she was big, and Sia. Just look at one genre of music, rap, to see exactly what I’m on about. So do they all count themselves as feminists, I wonder?
I think I may have inadvertently done a ‘Mary Whitehouse’ there and unwittingly entered the ‘The Prudey Zone’….bah.
Crikey, do I sound like an old vanilla fart?
I’ve long since come to the conclusion that the so-called music industry is really in the business of making films about barely clothed black (mostly) women.
And about people filthy rich. Can’t they imagen a hard working man in a music video.
I’m unsure if it was Mary Whitehouse or Barbara “Walkies!” Windsor to be honest Mog LOL!
I think you mean Barbara Woodhouse…
My Mom, wife and three sisters are all strong women in their 60’s upwards into 90’s. All of them believe in women’s rights but, as my Mom said in the 1970’s “I believe in women’s rights but it’s gone too far when they do stupid things like burning their bras. What are they trying to prove?”.
Well, that applies even more to today: what are Labour, a deeply antisemitic, anti-British and anti-women party, trying to prove? They intend to remove all of the women’s rights to be women because of blokes in dresses. They already drove out all but two Jewish MP’s from their party. They loathe Rosie Duffield because she tells the truth.
Quentin Crisp, all those years ago, had a point to prove. Today my son and his husband have the same rights as I do. So what do Pride and Labour want? My son is perfectly happy, by the way, with his terrible plight
What on earth were the former Tories trying to do by hanging onto sick people’s coattails?
Macron happy to get in bed with communists to keep France in the EU. Says it all, ppl are so dumb not to see through this “liberal” dictatorship. Macron and the communists are merely fellow travellers.
Reading the above, I find it difficult not to associate it with Python’s ‘Life of Brian’ and the Judean Peoples’ Front’ discussion. I recall a diversion for the fighter pilots operating QRA (quick reaction alert) for many hours at a time cooped up in a bunker awaiting a possible ‘scramble’ call was a huge supply of videos to while away the hours. The Life of Brian vid’ was essential viewing in the early 80s for the fighter ‘jocks’. Indeed, so ‘seriously’ did they take it, that alongside flying suit badges such as 1,000hrs F4 Phantom and 1,000hrs Lightning and various other patches was the much coveted ‘100hrs Life of Brian’ badge. To qualify to wear the patch, 100hrs watching the vid had to be logged, and a testing exam on the dialogue had to be passed.
France, politically, economically, is preserved in aspic. The Establishment is too strong fir that to change.
What would force change is if/when the EU implodes and the money spigot is turned off so France will have to support itself – and can’t.
The Dutch Blob tried the same tactic. All it did was delay things a bit.
As Tice and Farage said yesterday, you first get a bridgehead and the entire project is a long process. We now have 5 MP’s, the bridgehead. Le Penn has spent far longer but she is almost within touching distance of the goal.
France as with Britain: they can’t thwart the people forever. If Le Penn doesn’t win this time, she will next time. Reform will be 2nd or 3d next time, it’s a process. Reform will now get funding and that builds professionalism. We face the same process Le Penn went through.