[Craic] CBC censors these scientific studies demonstrating effectiveness of NaturaL Immunity to covid
Arthur Blomme
art at integralshift.ca
Sun Oct 17 08:19:37 PDT 2021
Is that the talking point your Big Pharma owned summary journal provides
you when hard irrefutable evidence is presented that natural immunity is
better than the covid19 quasi vaccine? Art
On 10/16/21 1:18 p.m., 2docp 2docp wrote:
>
> Here are just a few infectious diseases that we, thank God, no longer
> rely on "natural immunity": Small pox, polio, diphtheria, pertussis,
> measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, yellow fever, tetanus, typhoid,
> typhus, meningococcus, H. influenza. Paul.
>
>> ---------- Original Message ----------
>> From: Arthur Blomme via craic <craic at lists.integralshift.ca>
>> Date: October 16, 2021 at 4:02 PM
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> The question I keep asking myself is how can you believe anything the
>> CBC says if they are so biased in their presentation of Covid19 science.
>>
>> For the past several months the CBC has demonstrated collusion with
>> big Pharma by censoring information that does not support the need
>> for vaccine mandates. While natural immunity has been considered the
>> consequence of surviving all infectious diseases to this point, in
>> Canada this logic is denied and not given due consideration by Big
>> Pharma, the CBC and most other mainstream media sources. In Canada,
>> if you survive the disease and acquire natural immunity you will
>> still be mandated to get both jabs to save your job.
>>
>> The general belief seems to be that surviving Covid does not give you
>> immunity; despite a plethora of scientific studies from reputable
>> journals demonstrating the superiority of natural immunity. As I have
>> said repeatedly, the only data presented in the media is data that
>> support the thesis that vaccines are our only salvation from this
>> horrible disease. No nuances allowed. This policy is extremely
>> prejudicial to the survivors of Covid19. In addition to having the
>> best protection available, those with natural immunity also face
>> higher stakes when taking the COVID shot, as their preexisting
>> immunity makes them more prone to side effects. Life 2021; 11(3):
>> 249, Discussion <https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/11/3/249/htm>
>>
>> Moreover, the dogmatic ‘get vaccinated’ position constitutes a lack
>> of honesty about the data . The policy bias in favor of vaccines
>> ignores many other facts as well, such as the relative risks of
>> vaccines, especially for the young.
>>
>> /Below is a list of some of the studies that indicate the comparative
>> effectiveness of natural immunity over covid19 vaccines:
>> /
>>
>> An Israeli study ^4 that included 700,000 people, posted August
>> 25, 2021, on the preprint server medRxiv, found those with prior
>> SARS-CoV-2 infections were 27 times less likely to develop
>> symptomatic infection for a second time, compared to those who
>> were vaccinated.
>>
>> * ^4 medRxiv August 25, 2021
>> <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1>
>>
>>
>> A June 11, 2021, Public Health England report^5 also showed that
>> as a hospital patient, you are six times more likely to die of
>> the COVID Delta variant if you are fully vaccinated, than if you
>> are not vaccinated at all.
>>
>> * ^5 Public Health England Briefing 15 June 3, 2021
>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/993879/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_15.pdf>
>>
>> October 4, 2021, Project Veritas released a video^6 (below) in
>> which Pfizer scientist Nick Karl states, “When somebody is
>> naturally immune ... they probably have more antibodies against
>> the virus,” correctly explaining that “When you actually get the
>> virus, you’re going to start producing antibodies against
>> multiple pieces of the virus ... So, your antibodies are probably
>> better at that point than the [COVID] vaccination.”
>>
>> * ^6 Project Veritas October 4, 2021
>> <https://www.projectveritas.com/news/pfizer-scientist-your-antibodies-are-probably-better-than-the-vaccination/>
>>
>>
>> Yet another senior associate scientist at Pfizer, Chris Croce, is
>> caught saying that “You’re protected for longer” if you have
>> natural COVID antibodies compared to the COVID vaccine. Croce
>> adds that he works “for an evil corporation” that is “run on
>> COVID money.
>>
>> * ^7 Reddit COVID-19 and Immunity
>> <https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/oy84pe/covid19_and_immunity/>
>>
>> ”Science Immunology October 2020 found that “RBD-targeted
>> antibodies are excellent markers of previous and recent
>> infection, that differential isotype measurements can help
>> distinguish between recent and older infections, and that IgG
>> responses persist over the rst few months after infection and are
>> highly correlated with neutralizing antibodies.”
>>
>> * ^8 Science Immunology October 8, 2020; 5(52): eabe0367
>> <https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/52/eabe0367>
>>
>> The BMJ January 2021^9 concluded that “Of 11, 000 health care
>> workers who had proved evidence of infection during the first
>> wave of the pandemic in the U.K. between March and April 2020,
>> none had symptomatic reinfection in the second wave of the virus
>> between October and November 2020.”
>>
>>
>> * ^9 BMJ 2021;372:n99 <https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n99>
>>
>>
>> Science February 2021^10 reported that “Substantial immune memory
>> is generated after COVID-19, involving all four major types of
>> immune memory [antibodies, memory B cells, memory CD8+ T cells,
>> and memory CD4+ T cells]. About 95% of subjects retained immune
>> memory at ~6 months after infection.
>>
>>
>> Circulating antibody titters were not predictive of T cell
>> memory. Thus, simple seriological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies
>> do not reflect the richness and durability of immune memory to
>> SARS-CoV-2. A 2,800-person study found no symptomatic
>> reinfections over a ~118-day window, and a 1,246-person study
>> observed no symptomatic reinfections over 6 months.”symptomatic
>> reinfections over 6 months.”
>>
>> * ^10 Science February 5, 2021; 371(6529): eabf4
>> <https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063>
>>
>> A February 2021 study posted on the prepublication server
>> medRxiv^11 concluded that “Natural infection appears to elicit
>> strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for
>> at least seven months.”
>>
>> * medrxiv February 8, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.15.21249731
>> <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249731v2>
>>
>> An April 2021 study posted on medRxiv^12 reported “the overall
>> estimated level of protection from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for
>> documented infection is 94.8%; hospitalization 94.1%; and severe
>> illness 96·4%. Our results question the need to vaccinate
>> previously-infected individuals.”
>>
>> * ^12 medRxiv April 24, 2021 (PDF)
>> <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255670v1.full.pdf>
>>
>> Another April 2021 study posted on the preprint server BioRxiv^13
>> concluded that “following a typical case of mild COVID-19,
>> SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells not only persist but
>> continuously differentiate in a coordinated fashion well into
>> convalescence, into a state characteristic of long-lived,
>> self-renewing memory.”
>>
>> * ^13 BioRxiv April 29, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.04.28.441880
>> <https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.28.441880v1>
>>
>>
>> A May 2020 report in the journal Immunity^14 confirmed that
>> SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies are detected in
>> COVID-19 convalescent subjects, as well as cellular immune
>> responses. Here, they found that neutralizing antibody titers do
>> correlate with the number of virus-specific T cells.
>>
>> * ^14 Immunity June 16, 2020; 52(6): 971-977.E3
>> <https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30181-3?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS1074761320301813%3Fshowall%3Dtrue>
>>
>>
>> A May 2021 Nature article^15 found SARS-CoV-2 infection induces
>> long-lived bone marrow plasma cells, which are a crucial source
>> of protective antibodies. Even after mild infection,
>> anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies were detectable beyond
>> 11 months’ post-infection.
>>
>> * ^15 Nature 2021; 595: 421-425
>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03647-4>
>>
>> A May 2021 study in E Clinical Medicine^16 found “antibody
>> detection is possible for almost a year post-natural infection of
>> COVID-19.” According to the authors, “Based on current evidence,
>> we hypothesize that antibodies to both S and N-proteins after
>> natural infection may persist for longer than previously thought,
>> thereby providing evidence of sustainability that may influence
>> post-pandemic planning.”
>>
>> * ^16 E Clinical Medicine 2021; 36: 100902 (PDF)
>> <https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2589-5370(21)00182-6>
>>
>>
>> Cure-Hub data^17 confirm that while COVID shots can generate
>> higher antibody levels than natural infection, this does not mean
>> vaccine-induced immunity is more protective. Importantly, natural
>> immunity confers much wider protection as your body recognizes
>> all five proteins of the virus and not just one. With the COVID
>> shot, your body only recognizes one of these proteins, the spike
>> protein.
>>
>> * ^17 Cure-hub June 11, 2021
>> <https://www.cure-hub.com/post/covid-19-natural-infection-vs-vaccine-immunity>
>>
>>
>> A June 2021 Nature article^18 points out that “Wang et al. show
>> that, between 6 and 12 months after infection, the concentration
>> of neutralizing antibodies remains unchanged. That the acute
>> immune reaction extends even beyond six months is suggested by
>> the authors’ analysis of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells in
>> the blood of the convalescent individuals over the course of the
>> year.
>>
>> These memory B cells continuously enhance the reactivity of their
>> SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies through a process known as somatic
>> hypermutation. The good news is that the evidence thus far
>> predicts that infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces long-term
>> immunity in most individuals.”
>>
>> * ^18 Nature June 14, 2021
>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01557-z>
>>
>> Another June Nature paper^19 concluded that “In the absence of
>> vaccination antibody reactivity [to the receptor binding domain
>> (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2], neutralizing activity and the number of
>> RBD-specific memory B cells remain relatively stable from 6 to 12
>> months after infection.” According to the authors, the data
>> suggest “immunity in convalescent individuals will be very long
>> lasting.”
>>
>> * ^19 Nature July 2021; 595(7867): 426-431
>> <https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34126625/>
>>
>> A September 2021 paper^20 in the European Journal of Immunology
>> assessed the persistence of serum antibodies following wild-type
>> SARS-CoV-2 infection at 8 and 13 months after diagnosis in 367
>> patients. At 13 months, neutralizing antibodies against the
>> wild-type virus persisted in 89% of cases, and SARS-CoV-2 spike
>> immunoglobulin G (S-IgG) persisted in 97% of cases.
>>
>> * ^20 European Journal of Immunology September 24, 2021 DOI:
>> 10.1002/eji.202149535
>> <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eji.202149535>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Peace
>>
>> Art Blomme
>>
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> craic mailing list
>> To send message: craic at integralshift.ca
>> To manage Subscription:
>> http://lists.integralshift.ca/listinfo.cgi/craic-integralshift.ca
>> To Unsubscribe send email to: craic-unsubscribe at integralshift.ca
>> To Subscribe send email to: craic-subscribe at integralshift.ca
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.integralshift.ca/pipermail/craic-integralshift.ca/attachments/20211017/5fc51035/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the craic
mailing list