Over the last few months, many countries around the world have introduced vaccine passports and/or vaccine mandates. While some of these schemes are more accurately described as ‘immunity passports’ – since they recognise natural immunity from previous infection – many of them of do not.
In the U.S., there are already examples of healthcare workers with natural immunity being fired for refusing to comply with vaccine mandates. And this is despite the fact that natural immunity provides better immunity against infection than the vaccines.
Similarly, the UK’s vaccine mandate for care home workers does not include an exemption for those with natural immunity. Indeed, bioethicists at the University of Oxford have argued that it should include an exemption, on the grounds that natural immunity is at least as good as what the vaccines provide.
One potential counter-argument is that even natural immunity wanes, so those who’ve already been infected still stand to benefit from vaccination. However, this ignores the risks side of the equation. And while such risks might be low on average, they appear to be greater for young people – who face almost no risk from Covid to begin with.
What kind of risks are we talking about? First, there’s the ‘tail risk’ that the vaccines have serious long-term effects, which haven’t shown up in the data yet. Although this seems unlikely, it shouldn’t be dismissed entirely. Second, there are the rare but quantifiable side effects that we do know about.
The need to take account of both benefits and risks for those who’ve already been infected was summed up well by the vaccine scientist Christine Benn. (I found this quote in a BMJ article by Jennifer Block, which is definitely worth a read.)
If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown.
Of particular importance is the fact that ‘adverse events’ (i.e., side effects) appear to be more common in those who’ve already been infected. This has been found in at least half a dozen studies, based on data from several different countries. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
(I also found two studies reporting that adverse events were not more common in those who’ve already been infected. However, one of these studies had only two people with prior infection in the sample, so it doesn’t really tell us anything.)
Several of the studies that did report a difference simply compared the frequency of adverse events between those with and without prior infection. This leaves open the possibility that any difference is due to those with prior infection being younger.
However, some studies actually controlled for age and sex, and still found elevated rates of adverse events among those with prior infection.
Now, the vast majority of adverse events reported in these studies were mild or moderate – things like fatigue and flu-like illness. Yet one study found that severe side effects were more common among those with prior infection. Of course, this is just one study, so it shouldn’t be given too much credence.
A higher risk of fatigue or flu-like illness might not actually change the cost-benefit calculus for someone with prior infection who’s deciding whether to get vaccinated.
However, the evidence suggests that those who’ve already been infected not only face lower benefits from vaccination; they also face higher – or at least slightly higher – costs. (The cost-benefit ratio may be particularly unfavourable for young people who’ve already been infected.)
Vaccine passports and vaccine mandates are objectionable for a whole number of reasons. And when it comes to those who’ve already been infected – which will soon be most of us – there’s no case for them at all.
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.
Who gives a fuck. I have an immune system
Natural immunity should give lifelong immunity. The elderly sometimes might require a booster as immune systems fade but healthy adults who recover from a natural infection should not require a booster.
This is particularly true if Omicron is milder than previous iterations.
“natural immunity is at least as good as what the vaccines provide”
Well – the understatement of the year!
Shame that he couldn’t be consistent with his previous paragraph, where he linked to a previous article he had written, and stated that natural immunity is better than what the vaccines provide.
Had Covid in first Spring wave. Went for my 1st Covid shot late last February (I’m on the immuno comprised list even though Covid wasn’t even in my top 20 of worst illnesses) and I was out for 3 days. Called my GP and he sounded surprised. “Didnt none tell you if had Covid before it would feel like you had an awful flu for a few days? Sorry, thought that was being shared broadly.”
That was last winter. So this is a horrible example of “we already know!”
I got my 2nd (not as bad). Won’t have another.
Sir, you’re a doctor of medicine, I presume. You had natural immunity. Why did you get jabbed? Professional pressure?
What kind of moron gets “vaccinated” against a virus that already gave them an illness that their immune system defeated? Don’t they understand shee-yit about antibodies and stuff?
If nursy told them to put their head in the gas oven, and then the prime minister went on telly apparently putting his own head in the gas oven, would they do it?
What kind of moronic health authority strongly recommends vaccination against a disease for which there is already immunity and even makes this mandatory for their staff?
The kind in which the government has inserted process between the doctor & the patient. The kind which is ‘just following orders’
and now they probably have no T cell memory of this.
So they’re on the pfiser subscription immune system for the rest of their shortened life.
Surmise: the so-called immune response, after the jab, is merely the body’s response to the trauma which is the jab and nothing more. There is no protective effect as there is nothing to protect against. However, the body is working to protect itself against the effects of the jab.Sadly, the bodies of too many are not equal to the task as they experience permanent injuries or die.
Unjabbed. I had Covid in Jan 2020, pretty early and before it was a big thing. That’s my own diagnosis, met with scepticism by my family. Since then I’ve been around people with Covid and about to be diagnosed with Covid but I haven’t had anything for almost 2 years except for an unusually short-lived cold a couple of months ago. I deduce that I’m still immune at least for the time being whereas nearly everyone I know who has been jabbed got Covid soon after.
There is nothing in the world like getting the beginnings of a cold and then watching them disappear after only a few hours for telling a person that yes, you are looking after your immune system very capably. I’ve experienced that twice in the last few years.
You are Jab Free. Reclaim or position, don’t use the negative derogatory language of the propaganda.
If one has not taken the covid jab, one is Jab Free
Exactly the same here.
If anyone should have succumbed badly to this deadly virus it should have been me.
Fact that it hasn’t been me speaks volumes.
Same here. I’ve decided to shell out for some private work to see if really was that. The usual suspects aren’t interested, and while it’s difficult to prove exactly when it was, I’d suggest that if it wasn’t that, it must have been more recent, and so benign that I didn’t notice it; we’ll see.
While it might have made sense to use the vaccines as an emergency for the most vulnerable 12 months ago, as soon as this was completed (about a month) they should have started proper large-scale cohort studies for vaccinations after that point. If they’d have done this they could have picked up on relative risks between the vaccines, specific risks in different age groups, vaccine efficacy, etc, etc.
But they didn’t do this — they already had the information that the vaccines were both excellent and very low risk, so any additional information could only have shown them to have been not excellent and/or not very low risk.
So, from a normal person’s point of view those cohort studies would have given very valuable information about whether vaccination was right for them, whereas from the government’s point of view those studies would only have introduced risks that people would think that they’d done the wrong thing. Of course, as time goes on the more the government can say ‘but we didn’t know!’.
Ie, by not doing them it gives them plausible deniability.
Only up to a point. Dr Tess Lawrie wrote to the head of MHRA in June 2021 asking for the vaccines to be stopped until the yellow card reports could be properly assessed. No response was forthcoming. The letter was copied to Matt Hancock, Whitty, Vallance & the PM (if my memory serves me correctly) & published in the media.
After that, how could they not know of concerns?
the bottom line is there are PLENTY of TOP CLASS covid treatment protocols which could have been used to effectively treat covid cases but they have A) not been used and B) have been actively supressed because governments everywhere wanted to make this ALL about a vaccine.
We already have knowledge of diseases where vaccination doesn’t offer additional protection for those who have already had an immune response after natural infection and for whom vaccination introduces additional risks.
Eg, this is exactly why we have the Mantoux test (previously tine test) before giving the BGC vaccine. Everyone knows this is necessary to reduce risks for the TB vaccine, but for some reason they’re very very reluctant to accept that a similar need to test for existing immunity exists for the covid vaccines.
Remember also human rights legislation. Dr Sam White won his case against the GMC because they didn’t take his human rights into account. Anyone of us, or all of us, could serve notice on the main actors in this. Just need to serve it to a PC who is ‘awake’ & where the custody Sergeant is also awake so that he/she doesn’t buckle to pressure from the top to drop charges on nice Mr So&So. These notices are being filed in the bin at many, many stations on orders from the big brass.
UNESCO UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF BIOETHICS & HUMAN RIGHTS, 2005.
Article 6:
1. Any 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲, 𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗻𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰 & 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗰 medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free & informed 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗡𝗧 of the person concerned based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason WITHOUT DISADVANTAGE OR PREJUDICE .
2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice.
And quite a few politicians and their mates have perjured themselves on account of that.
ea“…the ‘tail risk’ that the vaccinations have serious long term effects which haven’t shown up in the data yet. Although this seems unlikely (my italics) it shouldn’t be dismissed entirely.”
Really? What’s the evidence that risk is unlikely, Noah?
Has Noah not seen Pfizer’s own published market study which showed that they knew in advance that there were MANY serious long term effects from their concoction?
You’re doing the disease eradicators from the WHO too much of a favour by assuming their disposition would suffciently humane to care for vaccine side effects. They want to inhibit transmissions. Hence, the absolutely best vaccination outcome is death. One less person which could serve as reservoire for the virus.
Isnt the issue that the blood of the injected has been completely trashed by these shots. This is VERY IMPORTANT and NEEDS ATTENTION FROM THE MEDIA.
UNVAXXD BLOOD:
VAXXD BLOOD:
SOURCE:
Researchers present strange vax microscopy findings & blood comparisons
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2kMarfZKTMQx/
Natural immunity isn’t something you can sell every few months.
The ongoing COVID-19 nonsense here in the United States exists solely and exclusively because our governments have failed to use the correct treatment. They used so-called “vaccines” when Japan has just proven, in less than ONE MONTH, that Ivermectin can wipe out the disease. IVM was awarded the Nobel prize for medicine in 2015. One of the 3 most important drugs in human history: Aspirin, Penicillin, and Ivermectin. Get your Ivermectin today while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
This was news in the middle of this year IIRC.
Bonkers, bonkers, bonkers!
Have you been vaccinated against measles? No. I had measles as a child. I don’t need a vaccine!
Referring to the headline: It’s a good reason to determine via a blood test if anyone has already dealt with it themselves, before taking on an enhanced risk for no benefit. They don’t want to do it – I suggested this to my local place, and they said nothing, in effect. More expensive than just dishing out the drugs.
Another lie in the government’s bag, that the covid-recoverd ‘need’ to be vaccinated. How many more lies can they come up with?
Write to your MPs cataloguing all the govt lies, and ask them how that can stand there in silence accepting them?