In before “I hate this story so I will get it pulled and use the excuse ‘search still works’ “ crowd.
Biggest scam in world history!
“A preprint study from Israel examining an extensive amount of the country’s medical data has found that natural exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), provides significantly greater immunity to the virus than Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine.”
...that should be the end of the article.
And that’s why all the youth who were quarantined didn’t save the day with their natural immunity. We would have had herd immunity sooooooooo early in the game.
Yes. But a certain number of people die while achieving “natural immunity” so that’s the problem
So maybe it’s best to get vaccinated and either have a mild case or none at all and have both natural and vaccine immunity
Why hasn’t use of Pfizer been halted yet?
Yes, very few who understand the immune system would disagree that the natural immunity acquired by those who have survived COVID is the best immunity.
So… how many times more likely to get COVID are the UNVACCINATED who have NOT gotten natural immunity compared to those with natural immunity already?
Most drug dealers disapprove of this story...
Israel is the only one telling the truth.
This document does not square with what is happening in Israel. For example the following news report states the following:
Israel’s 17% Unvaccinated Now Account for 65% of All Serious COVID-19 Cases
For every death of an Israeli over 60 that had received the booster shot, there are roughly 15 deaths of unvaccinated Israelis in the same age group
All models reflect protection equal to that claimed by the mfgrs for hospitalization/death but falls from 90 to 84% for protection against asymptomatic infection with Pfitzer:
Model 1* - vaccinated asymptomatic infection 15.7% = 84% efficacy against infection
Model 2** - vaccinated asymptomatic infection 1.4% = 98.6% efficacy against infection and 98.1% against symptomatic infection
Evidence of waning natural immunization from 13.6-fold to 5.6fold uninfected by end of study, and, “ Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection “
Throughout the models there is a disclosure that over 60’s skewed the results but no percentages are attributed to them. Since CCPVirus is most dangerous to those over 60, I’d like to see the elderly broken out.
Model 1* asymptomatic - vaccinated asymptomatic infection 14.7%; unvaccinated asymptomatic reinfection 0.12%.
Apart from age ≥60 years, there was no statistical evidence that any of the assessed comorbidities significantly affected the risk of an infection
Model 2** symptomatic vaccinated 1.1%; symptomatic unvaccinated 0.15%; nonsymptomatic vaccinated reinfection 1.4% nonsymptomatic unvaccinated reinfection 0.24%
Being 60 years of age or older significantly increased the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalizations
Model 3 asymptomatic unvaccinated reinfection rate 0.26%; asymptomatic infected plus vaccine reinfection rate 0.14%; symptomatic unvaccinated - 0.16% symptomatic prior infection plus vaccine booster - 0.11%
* * *
This is a good case for why getting vaccinated - at least soon after having an actual infection - is useless and counterproductive. But this continued argument that getting an infection is more effective at preventing a first infection - is a breathtakingly stupid argument - and it appears those who keep making it are oblivious to this fact.