Himalaya Toronto Maple Leaf – Liberte

Unfortunately, politicians, public health “experts”, and journalists in particular do not have natural immunity to personal political ideology, stupidity and undue influence. They have all gone suspiciously silent on the previously well-recognized medical reality of natural immunity.

Natural immunity is the immunity that you get to a disease after recovering from it, as a result of your immune system remembering how to fight the pathogen the next time the two cross paths. It includes the antibody released in response to the spike protein (spike protein is a protein that forms a structure, known as a spike, on the surface of a virus and it plays a role in the entry of the virus into the cell) but also other antibodies, along with various memory B and memory T cells. Vaccines are intended to mimic natural immunity by promoting a manageable immune response that doesn’t cause serious illness.

The longevity of natural immunity to most pathogens is not disputed, only conveniently relegated to a “memory hole” during the current COVID-19 pandemic. A 2008 Nature article showed that survivors of the 1918 influenza pandemic were still able to mount an immune response to the 1918 virus roughly 90 years later. Even the CDC considers natural immunity an acceptable substitute for measles vaccination. 

The National Institutes of Health reports (1) that antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were found in 98% of Covid-19 recovered patients. Durable immune responses were detected 8 months after infection.

✔︎Why then has Natural Immunity become a taboo subject in the, supposedly, scientifically and medically advanced world? 

✔︎Why did the WHO suddenly change its definition of herd immunity by erasing the role of natural immunity?

✔︎Why did the CDC change the definition of vaccination from “introduce a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a disease” to “introduce a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a disease”?

✔︎Why did the FDA (on May 19) issue a safety communication that Covid-19 antibody tests should not be used to evaluate immunity or protection from the virus?

✔︎Why did NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci announce early in the pandemic that herd immunity would be reached at 60-70% immunity, then change that to 80-85%, then change that again to say that herd immunity was “a mystical elusive number” and “distracting endgame” and therefore not worth considering.

✔︎Why did the Mayo Clinic remove from its Internet site the historically important fact that “those who survived the 1918 influenza pandemic were later immune to infection with H1N1 flu”(2)? And why have they reoriented their guidance to feature vaccination over natural infection immunity?

Why, from people who know better, is there so much interest in downplaying or erasing natural immunity? They seem to be changing the definitions of vaccine, herd immunity and natural immunity to fit the propaganda we are being fed.

To intelligent discerning people all these unjustified changes by people and Institutions, that the entire world looks to for cogent medical advice, seem coordinated, and very nefarious.

Those interested in herd immunity in itself shouldn’t have a moral or political preference for one form of immunity to the exclusion of the other. Immunity is immunity, regardless of whether a particular person has it naturally or by a vaccine. All immunity contributes to herd immunity.

Others, however, are much less circumspect. They seem to have forgotten the ultimate goal of the public campaign for people to receive vaccination against Covid-19. It’s not to be vaccinated; it’s to have immunity. People with natural immunity — i.e., people whose immune systems have faced Covid-19 and won — don’t need a vaccine. And, by extension, vaccine passports are an affront to Science and Ethics.

Let’s consider the possible reasons that the knowledge of natural immunity has been erased from medical knowledge, in the same way Communists revise or erase history when convenient.

Is natural immunity difficult to detect in people after Covid-19? No, serology tests are available and accurate. Is there uncertainty with respect to how long the antibodies last or to what extent they protect against reinfection? Well, the Mayo Clinic web page on Covid-19 antibody testing claims so, but available research belies this claim: 

👉 Early results from Denmark, published in The Lancet in March 2021, show the protective value of infection. In that study, which involved testing of 69 percent of the country’s population, prior infection was found to shield people well from reinfection, though less so among older groups.

👉 Notably, an April study on the entire population of Israel found that vaccination by the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was roughly as protective as prior infection.

👉 An August study on data from Israeli’s Maccabi Healthcare Services went further, showing that prior infection was associated with greatly reduced risks of hospitalization and symptomatic illness compared to two doses of the vaccine among people who had never been infected.

👉 And a September feature by The BMJ, a UK-based company that helps provide clinicians with medical information, summarized some of the older and newer research suggesting that natural immunity is as or more effective than vaccine-induced immunity.

👉 Studies from Austria, Ohio’s Cleveland Clinic, and other countries and organizations, as well as systematic reviews and similar summaries of previous research, have painted a similar picture: immunity from prior infection is as or more powerful than immunity from vaccination.

👉 Further underlining the immune system’s resilience to infection, a very recent study from the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare showed that protective antibodies remained in the vast majority of those who had had COVID-19, persisting at least 12 months after their initial infection.

👉 Meanwhile, new research from Israel and Qatar has shown that the vaccine’s protective effects begin to wane several months after the second dose.

Clearly the emerging data on natural immunity to Covid-19 belies the coordinated propaganda against it. Furthermore, outside the United States and Canada, many other countries, particularly in Europe, acknowledge the protective effects of natural immunity. England recognizes natural immunity when granting vaccine passports. 

So, if natural immunity to COVID-19 is real and significant, why is it being kept out of the conversation? Censorship, including the silencing of knowledgeable physicians and scientists, is certainly part of the answer.

The nonprofit Brownstone Institute concludes that the social networking website LinkedIn is suppressing its content, including a piece from Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff, in which Kulldorff argued that hospitals shouldn’t be firing unvaccinated nurses who have acquired natural immunity.

Facebook users have reported censorship or threats of censorship for sharing the Israeli natural immunity study, Project Veritas videos, and other content related to natural immunity.

The climate of speech suppression around COVID-19 is nothing new. The Pfizer employees recently recorded by Project Veritas suggest that a climate of censorship and self-censorship hobbles the pharmaceutical researchers themselves. “Oh God, I signed NDAs [non-disclosure agreements] against this,” said Nick Karl (Pfizer Biochemist). “You don’t talk about anything that can possibly implicate you or, like, Big Pharma,” said Chris Croce (senior associate scientist at Pfizer). “Even if you shut the door to the office, it’s kind of like, who’s listening?”

But Karl clearly spilled the beans on the whole conspiracy. “When somebody is naturally immune, like they got COVID, they probably have better—like, not better, but more—antibodies against the virus…so your antibodies are probably better at that point than the vaccination”. Karl is heard saying in the Project Veritas recording.

Croce revealed that natural immunity leaves people “protected most likely for longer [than vaccination] since there is a natural response.” “If you have [COVID-19] antibodies built up, like, you should be able to prove that you have those built up,” said Rahul Khandke, another Pfizer scientist.

All the evidence – research proving natural immunity exists and is enduring, the coordinated censorship by media and Social media, the obscene redefinition of terms by the CDC, WHO and FDA, and lying politicians refusing to be drawn on the topic, leads us to only one conclusion. The worst kept secret of the pandemic – we are being lied to. 

Natural immunity to Covid-19 has not ceased to exist. Instead morality and ethics in our politicians, public health experts, and media has ceased to exist.

Obscenely the refusal to acknowledge natural immunity is being used to force vaccine mandates and passports. This in turn is leading to the firing of essential workers and supply-chain problems (and soon a health care emergency). But of course, even this has been planned. After all, politicians learned long ago that creating an emergency and setting themselves up as the solution to it, is the most effective way to extract more power and money, remove freedoms, and to impose your ideology on society.

This is known as Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, and they are being used to drag us down the road to Marxism and population control.

REFERENCE:

[1] https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19

[2] https://www.aier.org/article/why-is-there-such-reluctance-to-discuss-natural-immunity/?gclid=CjwKCAjw5c6LBhBdEiwAP9ejG34vP1BJCrX2ZvcZm0ycA1AzV1ZBU8WXLDn9Vv-R8CpgfnebP0KEfRoCJKgQAvD_BwE