<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4">Hi all</span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4">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. <br>
</span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4">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. </span><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4">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. </span><span
id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4"><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4">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</span>. </span> <a target="_blank"
href="https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/11/3/249/htm"
id="lnkReference">Life 2021; 11(3): 249, Discussion</a></p>
<p><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4"><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">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.</span></span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_rptStory_cslStory_4"><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"><em>Below
is a list of some of the studies that indicate the
comparative effectiveness of natural immunity over covid19
vaccines: <br>
</em></span></span></p>
<blockquote>An Israeli study<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn4" data-hash="#ednref4">4</span></sup> 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.
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref4"
data-hash="#edn4"><span id="lblReferenceNo">4</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">medRxiv August 25,
2021</a></li>
</ul>
<div class="MidProductAd"> </div>
<p>A June 11, 2021, Public Health England report<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn5" data-hash="#ednref5">5</span></sup>
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.</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref5"
data-hash="#edn5"><span id="lblReferenceNo">5</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/993879/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_15.pdf"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Public Health
England Briefing 15 June 3, 2021</a></li>
</ul>
<p>October 4, 2021, Project Veritas released a video<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn6" data-hash="#ednref6">6</span></sup>
(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.” <br>
</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref6"
data-hash="#edn6"><span id="lblReferenceNo">6</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.projectveritas.com/news/pfizer-scientist-your-antibodies-are-probably-better-than-the-vaccination/"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Project Veritas
October 4, 2021</a></li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
<p>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.</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref7"
data-hash="#edn7"><span id="lblReferenceNo">7</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/oy84pe/covid19_and_immunity/"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Reddit COVID-19 and
Immunity</a></li>
</ul>
<p>”Science Immunology October 2020 found that “RBD-targeted
antibodies are <span id="bcr_FormattedBody">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.”</span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref8"
data-hash="#edn8"><span id="lblReferenceNo">8</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/52/eabe0367"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Science Immunology
October 8, 2020; 5(52): eabe0367</a></li>
</ul>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody">
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">The BMJ January 2021<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn9"
data-hash="#ednref9">9</span></sup> 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.”</span></p>
</span><br>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref9"
data-hash="#edn9"><span id="lblReferenceNo">9</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n99"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">BMJ 2021;372:n99</a></li>
</ul>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody">
<p> <span id="bcr_FormattedBody"> </span></p>
<p>Science February 2021<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn10" data-hash="#ednref10">10</span></sup> 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.<br>
</p>
</span><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">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.”</span></p>
</span>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref10"
data-hash="#edn10"><span id="lblReferenceNo">10</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Science February 5,
2021; 371(6529): eabf4</a><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span></li>
</ul>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody">A February 2021 study posted on the
prepublication server medRxiv<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn11" data-hash="#ednref11">11</span></sup> concluded
that “Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection
against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven
months.”</span><br>
<ul>
<li> <a target="_blank"
href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249731v2"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">medrxiv February 8,
2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.15.21249731</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span><span
id="bcr_FormattedBody">An April 2021 study posted on medRxiv<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn12"
data-hash="#ednref12">12</span></sup> 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.”</span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref12"
data-hash="#edn12"><span id="lblReferenceNo">12</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255670v1.full.pdf"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">medRxiv April 24,
2021 (PDF)</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span><span
id="bcr_FormattedBody">Another April 2021 study posted on the
preprint server BioRxiv<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn13" data-hash="#ednref13">13</span></sup> 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.”</span>
</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref13"
data-hash="#edn13"><span id="lblReferenceNo">13</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.28.441880v1"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">BioRxiv April 29,
2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.04.28.441880</a></li>
</ul>
<p><br>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">A
May 2020 report in the journal Immunity<sup style="font-size:
10px;"><span id="edn14" data-hash="#ednref14">14</span></sup>
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.</span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref14"
data-hash="#edn14"><span id="lblReferenceNo">14</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30181-3?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS1074761320301813%3Fshowall%3Dtrue"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Immunity June 16,
2020; 52(6): 971-977.E3</a></li>
</ul>
<p><br>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody"><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">A May
2021 Nature article<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn15" data-hash="#ednref15">15</span></sup> 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.</span></span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref15"
data-hash="#edn15"><span id="lblReferenceNo">15</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03647-4"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Nature 2021; 595:
421-425</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">A May 2021 study in E Clinical
Medicine<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn16"
data-hash="#ednref16">16</span></sup> 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.”</span><br>
</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref16"
data-hash="#edn16"><span id="lblReferenceNo">16</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2589-5370(21)00182-6"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">E Clinical Medicine
2021; 36: 100902 (PDF)</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"> </span></p>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">Cure-Hub data<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn17"
data-hash="#ednref17">17</span></sup> 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.</span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref17"
data-hash="#edn17"><span id="lblReferenceNo">17</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.cure-hub.com/post/covid-19-natural-infection-vs-vaccine-immunity"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Cure-hub June 11,
2021</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"> </span></p>
<p>A June 2021 Nature article<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn18" data-hash="#ednref18">18</span></sup> 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.</p>
<p>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.”</p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref18"
data-hash="#edn18"><span id="lblReferenceNo">18</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01557-z"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Nature June 14,
2021</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">Another June Nature paper<sup
style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="edn19"
data-hash="#ednref19">19</span></sup> 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.”</span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref19"
data-hash="#edn19"><span id="lblReferenceNo">19</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34126625/"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">Nature July 2021;
595(7867): 426-431</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"><span id="bcr_FormattedBody">A
September 2021 paper<sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span
id="edn20" data-hash="#ednref20">20</span></sup> 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.</span></span></p>
<ul id="footnote-references2">
<li><sup style="font-size: 10px;"><span id="ednref20"
data-hash="#edn20"><span id="lblReferenceNo">20</span></span></sup> <a
target="_blank"
href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eji.202149535"
id="lnkReference" moz-do-not-send="true">European Journal of
Immunology September 24, 2021 DOI: 10.1002/eji.202149535</a></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p><span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Peace <br>
</p>
<p>Art Blomme</p>
<p><br>
<span id="bcr_FormattedBody"></span></p>
</body>
</html>