Doctors are among the health workers least likely to be vaccinated against Covid-19, while fitness instructors, artists and waiters have some of the highest unjabbed rates overall.
New figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show vaccination rates by profession at the end of last year. The data provides an early indication of which parts of the NHS and social care workforce could be hardest hit by the compulsory vaccination rule that comes into force in April.
Natural Immunity
Browse the articles related to this topic below.
Join our community on Guilded.
One of the checks and balances on rampant bad scientific research is to continuously assess how new ideas fit into the framework of the bigger picture. A new piece of information may seem perfectly reasonable and well-documented, but the domino effect of its implications gives you another way to test its validity. When multiple lines of seemingly rock-solid evidence contradict one another, that’s a good sign that something is wrong, even if you don’t yet know why. Whenever a thread seems out of place, it’s time to pull on that thread until you can figure out what exactly is going on.
…”Trusting the science” is not (and never has been) about trusting results or trusting experts. Trusting the scientists is what got us into this mess. For science to function properly, we must NOT trust the scientists. Instead, we must trust in the messy self-correcting process that allows truth to boil to the surface even if every participant in that process is flawed.
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of the Experts”
— Richard P. FeynmanScience is the relentless competition between measurable pieces of evidence, the ruthless gauntlet of debate, the willingness to question even the most “obvious” of assumptions, and the humbleness to test and retest any and all assumptions against hard evidence, most especially when those assumptions are our own.
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2022/01/who-do-you-trust-if-you-cant-trust.html
More than thirty doctors, scientists and MP’s have signed a joint letter to the government’s vaccine watchdog urging it to “reassess” the Covid vaccine rollout for healthy 12-15 year olds following new data showing potentially serious harms of the jab are likely to outweigh any potential benefits.
It argues the risk benefit calculations made by the JCVI and the Chief Medical Officer were based on “less than complete data on both the harms and the benefits of vaccinating children compared to the evidence now available.”
It cites new evidence showing the risk of myocarditis in young men and boys is up to 14 times higher after vaccination than after infection.
And it states that given the high level of naturally acquired immunity from infection as well as the replacement of the Delta variant by milder Omicron, “it’s crucial that, if we are to proceed with the mass double vaccination of healthy children, we are absolutely certain this policy will do more good than harm.”
It states that the justification for vaccinating children was to provide “marginal benefits” of reducing time spent out of school due to covid infection but it cites new data showing that vaccines are no longer effective at preventing infection with Omicron.
It states: “Furthermore, the negligible risks of Covid infection to children have become even more nugatory if, as it appears, Omicron is associated with less severe disease, whereas the benefits of natural infection (rather than vaccination) in terms of longer lasting immunity are becoming more clear.”
Dr. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, is a board-certified cardiologist who has testified before committees of the US and Texas Senate regarding the treatment of COVID-19 and management of the ongoing pandemic.
Backup mirrors:
Dr. McCullough speaks about vaccine safety, efficacy, and the continued need for early treatment.
Dr. Al Johnson is back with Dr. Peter McCullough to discuss the problem with long COVID as well as vaccine reactions.
Public health officials and the medical establishment with the help of the politicized media are misleading the public with assertions that the COVID-19 shots provide greater protection than natural immunity. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, for example, was deceptive in her October 2020 published LANCET statement that “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection” and that “the consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future.”
The authorities are literally going against the science and lying to victims of Covid in order to avoid creating a benefit that others might seek out at a potential risk. Except that they themselves are responsible for creating the restrictive system from which people are now literally seeking out infection to find relief – if only to acquire a health pass good for six months so they’re able to access everyday venues and basic freedoms.
Peter McCullough, MD, MPH speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of AAPS on October 2, 2021.
Presentation notes:
- 1min: Something was going very wrong very early in 2019.
- 2m: The threshold for shutting down a new biologic product is just a few cases.
- 3m: Covid-19 was going to be the showcase of what we could do for biotech.
- 5m: The spike protein created by the new Covid-19 is a deadly protein.
- 11m: Our institutions are all culpable in medical malfeasance.
- 13m: We have the biggest biological catastrophe on our hands with a medicinal product in human history…and no-one knows how to stop it.
- List of risk
- 14m: 86% of deaths have no other explanation other than the vaccines.
- 20m: We are in freefall into a lawless state. The Vaccines are not safe for use on either side of the Atlantic. It’s clear that this first generation of [Covid-19] vaccines is not safe.
- 22m: The FDA did not approve Pfizer. The gave a continuation of the emergency use authorization and then conditionally approved Comirnaty with BioNTech which is legally and potentially medicinally distinct. The Pfizer approval is a false talking point.
- 23m: When Pfizer came up for boosters, McCullough and his team presented at the FDA showing that death with the vaccine is greater than death just taking your chances with the infection. The vaccines aren’t safe across the board and the panel agreed 16:2 against the booster.
- 26m: Data for the efficacy of the vaccines do not take into account the Delta variant. These vaccines have failed against Delta and other variants. Two-thirds who get sick with Delta are fully vaccinated. Data shows that the vaccines can’t stop transmission.
- 27m: Effectiveness for Pfizer is at 42%. A vaccine that falls below 50% protection and can’t last a year is not a viable product. Pfizer has failed as a commercial product.
- 29m: The CDC was telling us in May 2021 that the vaccines were failing. They started to do asymmetric reporting to craft a narrative that this was going to be a crisis of the unvaccinated but the CDC data showed the opposite. The ineptitude and willful misconduct of the people running our public health agencies is astounding.
- 32m: The ‘99% of hospitalized were unvaccinated’ message was a propagandized false talking point because the data is not there.
- 33m: The vaccines have had zero impact on the epidemic curve. Mortality is a function of treatment.
- 34m: Many experts have been warning that we shouldn’t vaccinate into a pandemic because it creates resistance. As soon as we started vaccinating, the number of strains starting falling. The virus was figuring out how to thrive in the vaccinated.
- 36m: The Delta variant has achieved antigenic escape. The data shows that the vaccinated is an equal threat to the unvaccinated.
- 38m: Early home treatment is the only thing that makes sense. That’s what it should have always been.
- 40m: Doctors at my institution cannot look me in the eye because they are so ashamed of what they’ve done during the course of this pandemic.
- 44m: If you look through the clinical records [of those who have died] and I will tell you they were all inadequately treated.
- 50m: Natural immunity is superior to vaccine immunity. If we vaccinate people who are covid-recovered, we harm them considerably. The only backstop is natural immunity.
File download:
A Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons – PDF (1.4MiB)
Slides:
Backup mirrors:
Professor Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University explains herd immunity, highlighting critical details about both the concept and its relevance to the COVID-19 pandemic that are often overlooked in public discussion.
The development of immunity through natural infection is a common feature of many pathogens, and we now know that COVID-19 does not have any tricks up its sleeve to prevent this from happening. If it did, it would have posed a serious problem for the development of a vaccine.
That being said, COVID-19 belongs to a family of viruses that do not typically confer lifelong immunity against infection. Most of us have never heard of the other four ‘seasonal’ coronaviruses that are currently circulating in our communities. And yet, surveys indicate that at least 3% of the population is infected by any one of these corona cousins during the winter months each year. These viruses can – and do – cause deaths in high-risk groups or require them to receive ICU care or ventilator support. Hence, it is not necessarily true that they are intrinsically milder than the novel COVID-19 virus. And like the COVID-19 virus, the other coronas are much less virulent in the healthy elderly and younger people than influenza.
One important reason why these corona cousins do not kill large numbers of people is that, even though we lose immunity and can be reinfected, there is always a sufficient proportion of immune people within the population to keep the risk of infection low for those who might die upon contracting it. Also, all of the coronaviruses in circulation — including COVID-19 — have some features in common, which means that getting one coronavirus will probably offer some protection against the others. This is becoming increasingly clear from work in many labs, including my lab in Oxford. It is against the background of acquired immunity to COVID-19 itself, as well as its close relations, that the new virus has to operate.
It is misleading to speak of “reaching” herd immunity. Herd immunity is a continuous variable that increases as people become immune and decreases as they lose immunity or die. There is a threshold of herd immunity at which the rate of new infections begins to decrease. We do not yet have a clear idea of what this threshold is for COVID-19 as the transmission landscape includes people who are susceptible to it, people who have built up immunity to it, and people who have immunity to other coronaviruses.
Unfortunately, we do not have a good way of telling how many people have been exposed to the new virus, nor how many people were resistant to begin with. We can test for antibodies but, as with other coronaviruses, COVID-19 antibody levels decline after recovery, and some people do not make them at all. Thus, antibody levels will not answer this question. More and more evidence is accumulating that other arms of immunity, like T cells, play an important role.
Indications of the herd immunity threshold having been reached in a given location are visible in the time signatures of epidemics where death and infection curves tend to either “bend” in the absence of intervention or to stay down when interventions are relaxed (in comparison with other locations where the opposite happened). Unfortunately, we do not know how far (or close) we are to that threshold in most parts of the world. This means that we need to make public health decisions based only on limited information and do so in a constantly changing environment.
Focused Protection was initially proposed as a solution for how we could proceed in the face of such uncertainty and it remains relevant now. It suggests that we exploit the fact that COVID-19 does not cause much harm to the large majority of the population and allow those individuals to resume their normal lives, while shielding those who are vulnerable to severe disease and death. We have good information about who falls into these groups and the availability of vaccines, which offer excellent protection for vulnerable populations and guard against hospitalisable illness, provide us with the ideal setting in which to implement such a plan.
Sunetra Gupta is Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology in the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford and a member of Collateral Global’s Scientific Advisory Board.
By Professor Sunetra Gupta
28 May 2021
Backup mirrors:
The public is being threatened by the government…It doesn’t leave much room in their direction of travel…Look to Austrailia
This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1