Natural immunity is superior to vaccine-induced ...stating otherwise is disinformation
Vaccines Effectiveness Myth (Part 3) - Despite the false narrative, clinical data continues to show that natural immunity is best - Covid Myth Buster Series
This article is a reprint of my June article1. Multiple studies2 3 4 have since confirmed and demonstrated the superiority of natural immunity over current anti-Covid vaccines. This contradicts the narrative many of you are still hearing from vaccine zealots, but the clinical facts are undeniable. Since June 2021, the reported deaths in pharmacovigilance databases for the US, the EU and the UK have quadrupled from 12,064 to 48,555.
Read by 250,000 people so far, I hope you will enjoy the reprint, if you haven’t read it yet.
June 2021 - Paris
Should people who have recovered from COVID take a vaccine?
Epidemiology, immunology and the clinical data all say a clear “No!”. There is no good reason to vaccinate the recovered.
A British friend, recovered from COVID, decided to get vaccinated despite being naturally immune. This is the email he recently sent me:
“Marc I suffered a mild stroke on Wednesday 8 days after taking the AstraZeneca 2nd dose. Since I am a marathon runner I am a very ‘rare case’. I don’t smoke, have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, family history or come into any of the risk categories for blood clots…
You did warn me against taking the second dose and I wished I’d heeded your advice. I’ve taken a totally unnecessary risk with my life and I bitterly regret doing it.”
Contrary to most, Tony was informed; he had been told about the power of natural immunity, about the long—if not lifelong—duration of immunity, of the risk inherent to any medical procedure (Yes, vaccination is a medical procedure!), as well as of the rising levels of adverse events. He admitted he hadn’t imagined it could happen to him…
Though it is hard to assess precisely the actual severity and breadth of vaccine-related adverse events5, it is very clear that vaccination against COVID-19 isn’t as harmless as pharmaceutical companies, mainstream media, academia, health authorities and the medical community have been saying. And, in contrast to high risk individuals who are still susceptible, recovered people have no real benefit to balance the additional risks of vaccination.
For over a year, mainstream media, health authorities as well as many “experts” have been downplaying the power of the immune system, dismissing natural immunity and proclaiming that immunity to COVID-19 was short-lived. Simultaneously, vaccines have been portrayed as the silver bullet to this crisis, an incidental procedure with no risk whatsoever. The data shows a different picture and many are coming forward, to challenge the official narrative. We will demonstrate that the official narrative is a dangerous fallacy.
The human immune system is one of the most sophisticated achievements of evolution. The survival of our species has depended on it for millennia. Today, we still very much rely on it. For the record, 99% of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 recover without treatment. Only 1% of SARS-CoV-2 patients, who did not receive early home-based treatment, end up hospitalised. In other words, the immune system overwhelmingly protects. Even vaccines are entirely dependent on the immune system: vaccines essentially teach our immune systems what viral markers to be prepared for, they are not cures per se. Without a functional immune system, there can be no effective vaccine.
On the waning immunity fallacy
Once recovered, the immune response recedes, notably via a decrease in antibodies. It is not only natural; it is indispensable to restore the body to a normal, balanced state. Just as a permanent state of fever is harmful, a high number of target-less antibodies or T-cells constantly circulating throughout the body could create serious complications, such as autoimmune diseases. Taking an evolutionary perspective, only those whose antibody and T-cell count waned post-infection survived. So, a decreasing number of antibodies and T-cells is reassuring, even healthy.
Antibody Levels
during infection and post infection
Redline= antibodies - Blue-line= Memory B cells credit: Nature
But this decrease in T-cells and antibodies doesn’t mean that immunity is lost . It means the immune system has adapted to the new situation, and is now just on sentinel mode: Memory B- and T-cells, circulating in the blood and resident in tissues, act as vigilant and effective sentinels for decades:
survivors of the Spanish Flu epidemic were tested for their immunity to the 1918 influenza virus 90 years later -, and still demonstrated immunity;
people who had recovered from the 2003 SARS infection demonstrated robust T-Cell responses seventeen years later.
the wide-spread prevalence of high cross-immunity— gained from past common cold infections—further demonstrates the resilience of natural immunity for coronaviruses.
Indeed, all recent studies show that specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity remains effective, possibly for a lifetime. Our immune system is a modular platform, it can combine in an infinite number of ways to address a multitude of threats in a variety of contexts. As such it is neutral to the viral threats it faces. In other words, there is absolutely no reason to believe that those recovered from Covid-19 would lose their immunity over the years, or even the decades to come.
On the reinfection fallacy
You might have also heard of people becoming reinfected by SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, immunity, natural or vaccine-induced, isn’t the impenetrable shield described by many. Essentially harmless and asymptomatic reinfections do take place. That is, in fact, the very mechanism by which adaptive immunity is triggered.
However, symptomatic reinfections are very rare. Like an army that adapts its response to the size and the progression of its enemy forces, adaptive immunity provides a specific, rapid and resource-optimized response. As such reinfections are mostly asymptomatic and recovered patients are protected from severe disease.
In fact, innocuous reinfections can play a positive public health role by acting as continuous immune updates for the population. They can help form a seamless and progressive adaptation to emerging variants and strains. And indeed a recent study showed that couples with children were more frequently asymptomatic than couples without, most likely because children act as natural and harmless immunisation vehicles. The most likely reason why high density countries mostly have very low death tolls is that they have asymptomatic reinfections that regularly and widely update the population’s immunity .
On the variant fallacy
As demonstrated by the low numbers of symptomatic reinfections mentioned above, and also by multiple studies, variants have thus far not escaped acquired immunity.
Just as Americans can speak and interact seamlessly in England, unhindered by a few word variants, natural immunity is unhindered by variants, possibly more so than vaccine-induced immunity.
There is ample evidence of the sophistication and breadth of the human immune system, and it is clear that a few minor gene changes in the virus cannot evade its arsenal .
Across the world, multiple studies demonstrate high levels of pre-existing cross-reactive T-cells and antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. In other words, many were already largely immune via other coronaviruses. This is the most likely explanation for the unexpectedly high level of asymptomatic infections during the pandemic. More importantly, this demonstrates that even with large genetic differences, prior immunity to related coronaviruses is sufficient to avoid severe COVID-19. Therefore, it is quite evident that variants are of no concern to the recovered population.
On the vaccine better-than-natural-immunity fallacy
You might have heard people stating that vaccines provide better protection than natural immunity. That is an interesting way of bending reality.