Just because you and your family are lucky does not mean everyone is. When 1% of the people who catch Covid die, and another 20-30% experience long-term health impairments because of Covid, that actually does mean that the majority of people will get over it and feel fine afterwards. Is smoking safe because most smokers don't develop lung cancer?
From a public health perspective, a disease that kills off 1% of those who catch it is devastating. And the 7% or so of people whose long Covid will not relent represent a huge burden on our health care system and social welfare systems.
Naturally acquired immunity is just as good if not better than these mRNA vaccines.
I think you mean "disease-induced immunity," so that is how I will answer this. Since immunity is only valuable if it keeps you from catching a disease, then what is the point of immunity if your method of getting it is by catching a disease? And recatching the disease whenever your immunity fades after a few months? How is that protective and how can that possibly benefit your health?
I am aware that many professional antivaxxers try to promote the idea of immunity as a health goal in itself. And then they stress the superiority of disease-induced immunity over vaccine-induced immunity. But immunity in itself, being immune just for the sake of being immune, is useless. You are highly unlikely to catch Japanese encephalitis without leaving the US, so what possible health benefit is there in developing an adaptive immunity against it? There isn't one. No one gets a Japanese encephalitis vaccine unless they are traveling to a place where it is endemic. Only then is there benefit in being protected.
I should also point out that due to the nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the damage it causes seems to be cumulative. You might not have noticed any heart, lung, kidney, etc., damage after your first bout of Covid. But each subsequent bout causes more damage. You can avoid that damage by getting vaccinated. The good news is that Covid survivors typically have an excellent immune response to the vaccine.
Plus, you have not even addressed the infections people have had despite being vaccinated and boosted several times. I have friends who have been reinfected more than once despite vaccination and boosting.
Actually, I did address that in another post. I explained how the immunity following vaccination is only as good as the immune function of the person receiving the vaccine. I explained that there are several reasons a person's immune system might not work well.
Catching a contagious disease is more complicated than just a simplistic "I was exposed to a virus and I got sick." Whether the exposure leads to illness is dependent on how large the dose of virus was and whether you have preexisting specific immunity and how strong that immunity is. Thanks to the nucleases (nucleic acid destroying enzymes) and antiviral systems in the innate immune system, your body destroys virus particles if the exposure is low enough. An infection can only occur if you are exposed to enough virus particles to overwhelm the innate immune system. If you do not already have pathogen-specific T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies developed by the adaptive immune system, you will get sick.
But let's say that you have adaptive immunity through disease or vaccine. Then, whether you get sick depends on how strong your immune response was and how much time has elapsed since the last immune response provoking event occurred. If you have what is called a breakthrough infection, meaning that you do not have sufficient antibodies to prevent an infection, the illness will be less severe (assuming you actually do have pathogen-specific antibodies). That is because even though the amount of antibody is insufficient to prevent an infection, there was still antibody that neutralized a significant number of viral particles that you were exposed to. Plus, the infection will cause your immune system to spring into action and produce new T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies. In the worst case scenario, despite vaccination, you do not become immune at all. Then you have an increased chance of dying or developing long-term health issues.
As for your friends who have become ill despite being vaccinated and boosted--how much time elapsed between their last vaccination and their catching of Covid? Are they elderly people whose immune systems don't work well, or do they have a disease that impairs the immune system? There are any number of reasons even a vaccinated and boosted person can catch Covid. The purpose of vaccines is not to restore immune system to optimal performance, but to train the immune system to fight pathogens.
RE: Just because you and your family are lucky does not mean everyone is.
And Just because someone does well as a result of vaccination does not mean that everyone does well.
RE; From a public health perspective, a disease that kills off 1% of those who catch it is devastating.
You are assuming that vaccination always prevents death from Covid. But isn’t true. See here:
https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/why-do-vaccinated-people-represent-most-covid-19-deaths-right-now/
Vaccinated or unvaccinated, death comes to the individual depending on his personal condition.
RE: And the 7% or so of people whose long Covid will not relent represent a huge burden on our health care system and social welfare systems.
Uh Huh, and you are assuing that vaccination helps prevent long Covid. Again. not true. See here:
https://www.medpagetoday.com/neurology/longcovid/103708
RE: Since immunity is only valuable if it keeps you from catching a disease, then what is the point of immunity if your method of getting it is by catching a disease? And recatching the disease whenever your immunity fades after a few months? How is that protective and how can that possibly benefit your health?
Well, the question you ask can also be asked of those who are vaccinated. The effectivenes of the vaccine wanes in a few months as well. Whenever your immunity fades in a few months, you have to get boosted again. So how does continous MRNA vaccination become good for your health?
In fact, there is evidence to show that naturally acquired immunity lasts longer than the immunity provided by vaccines. See here:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1
COPY AND PASTE:
Conclusions: 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.
RE: I should also point out that due to the nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the damage it causes seems to be cumulative. You might not have noticed any heart, lung, kidney, etc., damage after your first bout of Covid. But each subsequent bout causes more damage. You can avoid that damage by getting vaccinated.
Errr... you are assuming that those vaccinated will never suffer the above health problems you enumerated.
First off, it is important to understand a little bit about the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein.
The only difference in the actual protein sequence between the original “Wuhan” strain Spike protein of the virus, and that coded for by the genetic vaccines, is two amino acids which have been changed in the S2 region of the protein.
These were not introduced to make that vaccine version less toxic (as some “factcheckers” have asserted), but rather to make it better able to stimulate an antibody-based immune response. Whether vaccine encoded or virus encoded, the S1 subunit (which includes the receptor binding domain (to which the majority of “neutralizing” antibodies are directed) gets cut free (“proteolytically cleaved’) to yield an S1 subunit which is free to circulate in the blood, bind ACE2 receptors, interact with platelets, neurons, open up vascular endothelial tight junctions etc.
HOW IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE S1 SUBUNIT RELEASED FROM THE VACCINE SPIKE PROTEIN AND THE S1 SUBUNIT RELEASED FROM THE VIRUS SPIKE PROTEIN?
The question then is how much and for how long does this free S1 subunit spike protein, including the receptor binding domain, become produced by the mRNA vaccines, versus how much and for how long by natural infection?
Surely this was well understood and characterized by Pfizer before these vaccines were widely deployed? Surely the FDA required that these studies be performed?
Well no, it took over a year for another study to come out.
SEE HERE:
It says:
“Immunohistochemical staining for spike antigen in mRNA-vaccinated patient LNs varied between individuals but showed abundant spike protein in GCs 16 days post-second dose, with spike antigen still present as late as 60 days post-second dose.”
So, the vaccine produces far more spike S1 subunit for far longer than the natural infection does. Hmm. Curiouser and curiouser.
But is the S1 subunit (which is identical between the virus and the vaccine) actually a toxin? Good question.
First question - does spike S1 subunit get into the brain across the blood brain barrier?
Well, yes it does according to this paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-020-00771-8
TITLE: The S1 protein of SARS-CoV-2 crosses the blood–brain barrier in mice
Next question. Does Spike S1 do any damage to the brain when it hits nerve cells (neurons)?
Looks like it does! Who would have guessed. read it for yourself here:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fncel.2021.777738/full
TITLE: SARS-CoV-2 S1 Protein Induces Endolysosome Dysfunction and Neuritic Dystrophy
AND THEN THERE IS THIS ONE:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666354621002027
As I read this, I can’t help but say to myself: There does not seem to be a significant difference between the symptoms of long COVID and post vaccination syndrome.
If you want to take that risk, be my guest.
RE: As for your friends who have become ill despite being vaccinated and boosted—how much time elapsed between their last vaccination and their catching of Covid?
I know of 5 of them ( 2 colleagues ) who became ill after being vaccinated and boosted. I don’t know the specific details of the 3 others.
But 2 of them are quite close to me.
of these 2, one got reinfected after boosting 4 months later.
The other got reinfected not long after the first one ( since both work in the same company ). I would say 5 months after boosting.
They are both WORKING AGE — in their late 40’s.
There have been studies to show that 94% of the US population were estimated to have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 at least once.
See here:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.19.22282525v3
[COPY AND PASTE]
Results:
“By November 9, 2022, 94% (95% CrI, 79%–99%) of the US population were estimated to have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 at least once. Combined with vaccination, 97% (95%–99%) were estimated to have some prior immunological exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Between December 1, 2021 and November 9, 2022, protection against a new Omicron infection rose from 22% (21%–23%) to 63% (51%–75%) nationally, and protection against an Omicron infection leading to severe disease increased from 61% (59%–64%) to 89% (83%–92%). Increasing first booster uptake to 55% in all states (current US coverage: 34%) and second booster uptake to 22% (current US coverage: 11%) would increase protection against infection by 4.5 percentage points (2.4–7.2) and protection against severe disease by 1.1 percentage points (1.0–1.5).”
I read the above study and here’s my take:
Highlights:
If 22% (double the 11% currently boosted) of the US population would be boosted a second time, the initial increased protection against infection would rise by 4.5 percentage points (2.4–7.2), and furthermore…
If 22% (double the 11% currently boosted) of the US population would be boosted a second time, the protection against severe disease would increase by 1 percentage points. Of course, as the CDC has implied above - that extra ONE percent protection would wane rapidly and be gone in sixty days…
It doesn’t get any more clear than this. These “boosters” don’t look to be effective.
And then, I read this:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36436751/
TITLE:
SARS-CoV-2 antibodies persist up to 12 months after natural infection in healthy employees working in non-medical contact-intensive professions
[COPY AND PASTE]
Conclusions: In this cohort, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies persisted for up to one year after initial seropositivity, suggesting long-term natural immunity.
Juxtapose the results of the booster study above that shows very little protection against severe disease with this study - which documents long-term natural immunity in a vaccine free population and what can I conclude?
Clearly, the results are in. Natural immunity is best ( at least against Omicron ). But why can’t it be the same for later variants?
So, my friend, if you want to be continually boosted, that’s your prerogative. But please, leave me out of it. And please remember that America ( last I saw ) is still a free country where our rights to put whatever we want in our body are ( at least OUGHT ) to be protected by law.
And worse come to worst, if I want to take the vaccine, I’ll wait till maybe 2027 or 2028 ( about the same time it took for other vaccines to be fully approved ). These mRNA vaccines came out first as Emergency Use Authorizations, only approved after a year of COERCIVE use. I can wait till more detailed peer reviewed studies are published.
But before we continue, I want to ask you a question and please answer me directly:
DO YOU ADVOCATE TO GIVE POWER TO THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE EVERYONE TO TAKE THE COVID VACCINES ( AND BOOSTERS ) UNDER THREAT OF LOSING THEIR JOBS?
A simple Yes or No will suffice.
Now, use this same logic to calculate the relative number of spike protein molecules in your bloodstream (encased in lipid nanoparticles) directly from the clot shot, as opposed to being in a room when someone who has a mild case of COVID (we're talking general public, they're not in the ICU here), sneezes near you.
Dingbat.
Catching a contagious disease is more complicated than just a simplistic "I was exposed to a virus and I got sick." Whether the exposure leads to illness is dependent on how large the dose of virus was and whether you have preexisting specific immunity and how strong that immunity is. Thanks to the nucleases (nucleic acid destroying enzymes) and antiviral systems in the innate immune system, your body destroys virus particles if the exposure is low enough. An infection can only occur if you are exposed to enough virus particles to overwhelm the innate immune system. If you do not already have pathogen-specific T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies developed by the adaptive immune system, you will get sick.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is why the PCR is not useful or accurate as a diagnostic tool. You can have low exposure following which you never became ill, but a month or two after exposure there could be fragments of viruses in your body that the PCR flags and suddenly , the CDC declares a 'new Covid case'. You can have fragments of virus in your body up to 2 months after being ill, and though you are now healthy, the CDC can declare you an 'active Covid case'. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR assay stated that it was not suitable for use in diagnosing any disease for this reason, among others. THe CDC knew this, and made the PCR the 'diagnostic test' to drive lockdowns and 'vaccine' trials. The CDC also knew that the PCR was not designed to identify the COvid VIrus, because accourding to the CDC, isolated samples of the Covid virus were 'unavailable', so the useless PCR identifed 'related corona viruses', whatever that means because the whole reason for the 'PANDEMIC" was the CDC telling the public that Covid was 'novel' which would mean that none of us had any immunity to it because we'd never encountered a virus like it before. So, how could the PCR be based on a 'related virus' (related to Covid) which, according to the CDC, doesn't exist? And the CDC based its decisions on this fake test for 3 years, never apparently acquiring an 'isolated sample' of the COvid Virus.