Just as it is a thought crime to discuss the origins of the Wuflu, or to discuss any therapies for it, the lefties do not seem to want the receivers of God's vaccine to be exempt from jabbin'.
Have you accounted for the fact that many of us have had multiple tests each? I’m not much for math either but it does change the demographics a bit.
There must be a reason for hiding the data at this point. Most likely not a good reason, either.
Here is what I used to look at when I was worried sbout it
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
There is but we don't know what to do with it. It isn't a known, discreet group of people - it overlaps with both the vaccinated and unvaccinated so it's hard to include it in calculations.
Everyone…and I mean everyone, politically and medically…ignores us COVID survivors.
BTW, In the timeframe you stated I was tested 5 times. 6 by now. Keep that in mind as well as the fact some deaths and cases may be counted more than once due to states and counties being so anal about following those who contracted it.
You are correct although I did not check the math. When they began testing everyone and their dog, it was used to push fear and gain control.
I figured it would come back to bite them because their own figures would show herd immunity.
Of course they finally got wise to that, which is why we never hear about those who had covid only vaccination numbers. When we all know the best immunity is that which surviving the virus provides. The idea that those that had covid need to vaccinate is ludicrous.
Oh and I hear upwards of 80% plus needed for herd immunity. That is nonsense, no virus can live on with 80% plus immune. Typical herd immunity is achieved far earlier than 80%.
Anyway, they cannot count those that already had covid because that would put an end to their control.
You are not wrong. Someone here on FR stated roughly the same numbers—around one third have been exposed. Then you have kids. I know a 5 year old whose mother got the virus and the kid tested positive with an antigen test. The kid never had symptoms.
Natural immunity works, there have been several studies, one from the Cleveland Clinic. It had a very high sample size, tens of thousands. None of the recovered became sick again.
As to why natural immunity is dismissed for this disease I cannot tell you. It may just be plain financial, for instance not accepting foreign vaccines as counting. There could be much more nefarious motives. Having Bill Gates at the forefront of the vaccination efforts was a bad idea given his push for population control. It creeped the public out.
I think even if you can get the information about the effects of natural immunity, it would be put in statistics that you could not understand. The amount of scientific gobbledygook you get in those scientific investigations lends itself to misinterpretation of the results. America needs a place where questions about this pandemic can be answered in common language without the technical jargon. I will give you an example of the language we get:
“Between June 4 and July 3, 2020, we enrolled 327 children (mean age 1·9 [SD 0·9] years; range 5 months to 4·4 years), 197 daycare centre staff (mean age 40 [12] years), and 164 adults in the comparator group (42 [12] years). Positive serological tests were observed for 14 children (raw seroprevalence 4·3%; 95% CI 2·6–7·1) and 14 daycare centre staff (7·7%; 4·2–11·6). After accounting for imperfect sensitivity and specificity of the assay, we estimated that 3·7% (95% credible interval [95% CrI] 1·3–6·8) of the children and 6·8% (3·2–11·5) of daycare centre staff had SARS-CoV-2 infection. The comparator group fared similarly to the daycare centre staff; nine participants had a positive serological test (raw seroprevalence 5·5%; 95% CI 2·9–10·1), leading to a seroprevalence of 5·0% (95% CrI 1·6–9·8) after accounting for assay characteristics. An exploratory analysis suggested that seropositive children were more likely than seronegative children to have been exposed to an adult household member with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (six [43%] of 14 vs 19 [6%] of 307; relative risk 7·1 [95% CI 2·2–22·4]).”
It’s even worse than that, how we’re being lied to by omission. Many people have had Covid who were never tested. People got a mild case, never were tested, had some symptoms for a couple days, got on with life.
They have natural antibodies and are helping us be at herd immunity.
This has been obvious for some time now.
I’ve mentioned this on other threads, seems appropriate here. The Red Cross released a report of antibody tests on all blood donated by unvaccinated people. They found 20% of blood donated by unvaccinated people had covid antibodies. And that’s just unvaxxed. Who knows how many who were jabbed also had pre-existing antibodies.
Now the RC data may not be a great representative sample since it is likely that a greater % of blood donated comes from front line workers - hospital employees, EMTs, fire and police officers etc. Thus more likely to have been exposed. But still something to consider.
It isn’t a pandemic… it’s an IQ test
It isn’t a vaccine… it’s a Darwin Award.
- Greatawakening.win
It’s all about the jab. I suppose if they show you have natural antibodies, you won’t get jabbed. And I would think the jab is contraindicated of you already have antibodies. But IAND. Something doesn’t smell right (for those of us who can still smell.)
I know of two members of one family, who have not been together and do not live in the same part of the country who in the past two days have tested positive for COVID. Both have been vaccinated very early this year.
I am thinking, the efficacy of the vaccine is much shorter lived than we have been told and they are passing it off as the Delta variant. OR, the vaccine does not work for the Delta variant.
The increased number of people with acquired immunity and reduced pool of those likely to die from Covid can therefore skew vaccination effectiveness stats. Meanwhile last year also saw a steady decrease in new cases after mid April and then a substantial increase during July followed by a steady decline until a continued increase from mid September, basically paralleling but with lower numbers what we are could be seeing now if testing had not significantly decreased along the same periods.