One of the strangest things about the last few months on planet Earth has been the relentless drive to vaccinate everyone, regardless of what their individual risk from the virus is, and whether or not they’ve already had the disease. It was well known long before covid came along that people who have had an infection are usually at least as well protected as those who get vaccinated. The whole point of vaccination is, after all, to mimic infection so as to stimulate immunity. If you’ve had measles, you don’t need to take the measles vaccine. If you’ve had hepatitis A, you don’t need to take the hepatitis A vaccine. If you’ve had chickenpox, you don’t need to take the chickenpox vaccine. Yet if you’ve had covid, you should supposedly still take the covid vaccine. Strange.
The obsession with vaccinating everyone is particularly odd in a situation where access to vaccines is limited and the stated goal is to reach herd immunity as quickly as possible, since wasting time vaccinating people who have already had the infection will inevitably delay the time it takes for a population to reach herd immunity.
Yet many people who should know better have been happy to play along with the “everyone needs to be vaccinated” mantra, in spite of the fact that it runs counter to the stated goal of governments and public health agencies. Many doctors had covid during 2020, yet they were more than happy to stand at the front of the line and take the vaccine in late 2020 and early 2021, even though they knew (or should have known) that they were almost certainly already maximally protected from the virus, and that taking the vaccine would inevitably mean a delay in vaccination of those who had not yet had the infection.
A few months back I wrote about a study, published in The Lancet in April, that showed a 93% decreased risk of re-infection in people who had already had covid. That would make prior infection equivalent to the most effective vaccines, in terms of its ability to protect against covid (which is as we would expect).
For those who remain unconvinced that prior infection is at least equivalent to vaccination, however, a very interesting study was recently posted on MedRxiv. This was a retrospective cohort study of the 52,238 employees of the Cleveland Clinic, who were followed from December 16th 2020 (when the Cleveland Clinic started vaccinating its staff) until May 15th 2021. The objective of the study was to compare the relative rates of infection between four groups of employees: Thos who had had covid and been vaccinated, those who had had covid but not yet been vaccinated, those who had not had covid but had been vaccinated, and those who had neither had covid nor been vaccinated.
A PCR test was used to diagnose covid in the study. The Cleveland Clinic was not engaging in any screening of asymptomatic staff during the study period, so tests were in almost all cases carried out when participants developed symptoms suggestive of covid. In other words, the method used to diagnose covid in this study was equivalent to the method used in most other studies, and also the method that is used in the real world.
So, what were the results?
There were 2,139 new covid infections among the 52,238 participants. In other words, 4.1% of the participants in the study developed covid during the five month period. 99.3% of these infections were among participants who had neither had covid nor been vaccinated. The remaining 0,7% were among participants who hadn’t had covid but had been vaccinated.
2,579 participants had already had covid at the start of the study. Not a single one of them developed covid during the five month period. This includes both the 1,229 with prior infection who were vaccinated, and the 1,359 who weren’t. What that means is that prior infection was associated with a 100% reduction in the relative risk of infection. That was true regardless of whether the person with prior infection was vaccinated or not. Vaccination did not provide any additional benefit to those who had already had covid.
What can we conclude?
Prior infection is highly effective at protecting against covid. There is thus no need for people who have already had covid to get vaccinated. When governments do vaccinate people who have already had covid, they are wasting taxpayers money and putting people at risk of side effects for no good reason.
197 thoughts on “Does it make sense to vaccinate those who have had covid?”
“If you’ve had measles, you don’t need to take the measles vaccine. If you’ve had hepatitis A, you don’t need to take the hepatitis A vaccine. If you’ve had chickenpox, you don’t need to take the chickenpox vaccine. Yet if you’ve had covid, you should supposedly still take the covid vaccine. Strange.”
The comparison is a bit unfair? Some are recommended to take the flu vaccine every year?
Some seem to recommend taking the vaccine for long-covid, any thoughts related to that or the studies involved?
Flu mutates far more than covid does, so a new version of the vaccine is developed each year. That is not the case with covid.
(Bill) & Sebastian,
The Corona-virus is certainly mutating, even if not in the same way as flu viruses.
I thought, perhaps errantly, that there was no such thing as “Covid”. What are we talking about here?
Um, that is most certainly not something I’ve ever claimed.
I repeatedly told my 25 year old son that there was no point in him being vaccinated because he’s already had a bad case of Covid in November 2020.
Then he got it again along with a number of his friends who all caught it together last time.
Maybe it wears off after 9 months?
Any ideas Seb?
But even if the Covid virus is mutating, the “vaccine” is not “mutating”–that is to say, the vaccine is basically unchanged from its original virus rna (if I read correctly). That is why we continually hear of the current vaccines being 80+ or 90+ effective against this or that strain of Covid. Booster vaccines are in the works, but not yet approved and I’ve not heard whether of not this uses mutated virus rna.
Also, I suspect, the reason(s) that one who has not been vaccinated–but successfully overcame the disease, or perhaps even been asymptomatic–has not changed. The new variants are touted as more virulent, but not really shown to be more deadly. Why, after a light bout with Covid, would I consider taking a (unproven by the test of time) vaccine?
Ask yourself this: Why does the flu mutate annually? Last year’s vaccine creates this year’s resistant strain. Coronavirus will now behave on a very similar predictable cycle as influenza. Vaccines are a hot industry.
The influenza mutates at a higher rate that SARS-Cov2 (in animals and humans) ~6.×10−4 vs. 1.5-2.0 × 10−6 (A) or 0.6 × 10−6 (B) (mutations per-site-per infectious cycle), mainly due to SARS-COV-2 having a better RNA proofreading mechanism (influenza doesn’t have any). Mutations are not ‘created’ by vaccines, but happen spontaneously during reproduction. If you lower infections (infection cycles), you slow the creation of new variants.
Why would immunity from vaccination differ from that created from infection, on future mutations? Wouldn’t both have almost the same effect?
In an effort to be more precise, we should use the correct terms:
– severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) is the virus
– Covid-19 is the disease, caused by SARS‑CoV‑2
David, your haste to defend aggressive vaccination causes you to miss the point. I’ll spell it out a little more plainly. Natural immunity in a ‘herd’ creates a very broad and diverse range of antibodies to suppress entire viral clades. Vaccines introduce artificial selective pressure for very narrow range of antigens. Just as everyone is vaccinated against a particular variant the vaccine directly promotes the next year’s resistant variant. The highly predicable annual cyclical nature of modern influenza is a man-made phenomenon. It’s frankly irrelevant that influenza has a higher mutation rate. Most mutations are not viable, but when we’re talking viral replication, there are plenty more than enough generations for adaptation against vaccine to occur with any virus.
That’s an interesting theory and I agree that it sounds logical, but I haven’t seen anything to back it up. There are indications of the opposite (https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/13/600/eabi9915). Does this mean that vaccinations provides broader protection? The immune system is complicated.
This paper seems to indicate that both infection and vaccination provide good protection. There have been some publications showing mechanisms where vaccination does provide additional protection (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/372/6549/1413, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/372/6549/1418). I would imagine that it works the other way around – that the 15 vaccinated people infected in the paper now have improved immunity, but I haven’t seen anything.
Do you think that infection is a better way to get immunity than vaccination?
In fact, flu vaccines often includes biological material from multiple strains, providing a broader protection than infection from one strain.
David, you asked “Why would immunity from vaccination differ from that created from infection, on future mutations? Wouldn’t both have almost the same effect?”
Well, they are by design different. See this: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.15.440089v2.full.pdf
The vaccines target (and more than natural infection btw) only the S protein and subunits, and rbd. They don’t produce antibodies for the nucleocapsid, which is what a natural infection does the most.
Does that means the vacccine response is better? Who knows. Only time will tell. But I tend to think our immune system knows what it’s doing since it had millions of years to come up with this mechanism, while the vaccine they barely had months.
Also note that nucleocapsid mutates less than spike protein. Also, it is more cross-reactive.
Time will tell how good the vaccines are.
There is apparently no evidence of (new nuclei acid sequence) variants. I just watched a very disturbing exposee on the fact that the so call “novel” covid SARS virus is not novel at all (73 patents on its genome since 2009). Coronavirus was potentially weaponized according to US patent records going back nearly 20 years.
Ever wonder WHY the rec for the flu vaccination? Because they NEVER want to say one could do things to STAY healthy. It’s a BUSINESS. And the efficacy of the flu vax is always overblown. Never more than 60%. But with the risk of flu at about 2% your ARR , ACTUAL risk reduction, goes to approximately 1%. It’s NOT a 100% chance that you get flu so that it’s brought down to 40%. No one seems to understand ARR from RRR, RELATIVE risk reduction. So they cash in on fear. Ignorance and fear.
This is the closest business model you can get to monetising the air we breathe. Besides the masks, that is.
Had the Flu vaccine for years prior to 2013, but had flu every single year, on average twice or thrice a year. After a bad bout of flu in 2013, I decided to join the Echinacea bandwagon, taking it in the liquid form. Have never suffered more than a light cold since. With Covid 19, I’ve heard that in certain variants, antibodies do not remain longer than 3 months in your blood, so, hence re-infection is possible thereafter???
Antibodies are not a good measure of long term immunity. Antibodies wane automatically after a few months, but memory T-cells and B-cells remain that can quickly mount a full response if re-exposed to the pathogen.
Sebastian, are there any test one can do to know if we have memory T-cells and B-cells?
Great job Sebastian. Big hit on Twitter. Congratulations. nana.
The key word is “recommendation.” The Code of Federal Regulations regarding Bioethics that stemmed from the Nurenberg Trials states the following requirements:
(1) Risk must be disclosed.
(2) Disclosure must be comprehensible and comprehended (medical jargon explained).
(3) No coercion and no enticement.
All of the above have been scuttled for an experimental, non-approved genetic treatment.
I haven’t taken the vaccine and do not intend to. I had Covid in December 2020. What i am wondering is how long does the vaccine last in ones system that still makes it effective. Also if one has had Covid, how long is it normally in the system, and still be considered an immunity.
Like you I had COVID December 2020. Last month (July 2021) I had my blood drawn at Labcorp to test for COVID antibodies. A value equal to or greater than 0.8 was indicative of having antibodies against covid. My lab value returned 462 So, yeah… I think I’m good.
I had covid in March of 2020 and received a positive antibody certification in March of 2021, when I donated convalescent plasm for the 9th time.
True, time will tell. How much time do you think we need? How many people do you think need to tested?
It seems that the NP was not used, as prior research indicated the potential for ADE in NP-based SARS-COV-1 vaccines (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18941225/). Maybe the Sinovac vaccine, CoronaVac (inactivated virus COVID-19 vaccine) would be a better bet for you, as in includes the NP? However, the clinical and real world data has not been that positive.
So, if a vaccinated person is infected, there would be an ‘improved’ immunity (NP + SP), with less severe symptoms that infection (a good thing)?
Be wary that unfortunately the Spike protein is another possible mechanism for ADE:
This study says both that the N protein is a better candidate for a vaccine, and the S protein can cause ADE:
If developing a vaccine was that easy, it would have been made long ago. There are too many variables to account for. I do think isolated vaccines like only N or only S will tend to fare worse.
So I agree with you that a more diverse response will be better leaving less points of failure.
Unfortunately the Coronavac has its own issues, as it does not induce t-cell response.
Yes, we don’t have time, and the situation we are now is that you need to factor the benefits and the risks of the vaccines to take your decision.
Edit: sorry, I meant Coronavac does not stimulate a cell-mediated response, not T antibodies.
Why would they have made one long ago? For what? Where is the demand?
I understand that those were the considerations, and maybe also for the modifications made to the S-protein (in addition to stability). There is always a possibility for ADE, regardless of the segment used, but so far I haven’t seen any evidence. Have you?
What do you think are the ‘benefits and the risks of the vaccines’? How do you think that the risks compare to infection?
It is unquestionable that the situation now has put quite a demand. But they have been trying to find one ever since the first outbreak in the early 2000s. Also, you can find the sars in the list of “select agent” since 2012:
“October 5: The National Select Agent Registry Program declared SARS-coronavirus a select agent. A select agent is a bacterium, virus or toxin that has the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety.”
So well, they have always tried to find a vaccine for both animals and humans, they just weren’t on a rush like now, where they had to cut the phase 3 almost entirely.
And that’s exactly where my concerns lie. It’s on phase 3 that you address these kinds of issues. By pfizer’s chronogram, the trial is due to 2023, although we no longer have a control.
Yes, we are not seeing evidence of ADE happening so far, and that is excellent news. However, if you read the FDA reviews of the vaccines, all of them say along the lines of “there is still the theoretical risk of ADE due to decay of antibodies over time”.
It took 7 or 8 years for them to find that a measles vaccine was causing ADE. Also a couple of years to find the same for the RSV and the Dengue vaccines. I will grant that they weren’t looking for it and the crisis we are at now is nowhere close. Well, hopefully they are paying attention to it now.
For risk, I defend a highly individual approach. I am in my 30s, active, fit. For me personally a 0.7% reduction in the risk of contracting the bug is not worth the unknown risks of a vaccine side effect (both ADE or something unexpected, like the narcolepsy induced by the h1n1 vaccines). If I were at a higher risk, I would consider taking it. I still might once we have more data in.
Sorry for the long post, hope you make it to here.
I assume that having a positive response on an antibody test , without having had any Covid symptoms, gives one the same assumption of immunity? And I am reading about a new t-cell test (T-direct) that says it can tell one if you have t-cell immunity. Does this convey the same assumption of immunity?
Yes, a positive antibody test means you’ve had covid. The idea behind the T-cell test is similar, I haven’t looked in to how accurate the T-cell tets is however.
T Cell and B Cell immunity can be REALLY long-lived.
In my view, there needs to be a greater public policy push to recognize naturally acquired immunity from past infection and recovery as equivalent to vaccination.
Love your work Dr. Rushworth
Hmm, there are a number of people who’ve had covid twice. (One of them is on the Swedish football team.) Why is this fact omitted?
And might the vaccines prove more effective against mutations, compared to previous infection?
Re-infection is possible, just as infection is possible after vaccination, but it is rare, and vaccinating someone who has had the infection does not appear to improve the level of protection further.
I know people personally who have been reinfected after a previous infection (see comment above) and I know even more who get Covid having had both jabs. The latter is becoming more common in the U.K. according to my personal knowledge.
I know someone who tested positive for covid, was health compromised but barely had any symptoms. Is planning on getting vaccinated because (according to CDC?), she said immunity lasts for about three months.
I assume this is the current assessment regarding immunity.
May another explanation be the (un)reliability of the PCR test. A positive test may not necessarily mean one has the virus. I’m still brimming with antibodies after a year…I’m assuming I continue to get re-exposed and my immune system has not settled into t-cell mode?
On a different note, Dr., could you address the spike protein issues? Any possible danger to the blood supply of those who take the shot and donate blood? I was around for the contaminated blood fiasco for HIV in early 80s…thanks.
And thanks for your work. Love the stuff on staying healthy and interviews with Ivor. I’ve been a big fan of his for 4 or so years now. Recently had my first heart scan at 60YO, it was zero!!!!!! I did virtual cartwheels.
I’m looking at the use of antivirals, which might make one prone to a second infection.
It seems that my family had covid twice, three weeks apart. Perhaps we didn’t develop a strong immunity to the virus because we treated with an antiviral early, so the immune response was lessened and we had fewer memory cells and antibodies than if the disease had taken its natural course. The second infection, we cleared symptoms within twelve hours, which was faster than the 24 hours it took the first time. We haven’t had symptoms since. So maybe the second infection was a “booster.”
How do you KNOW they had it twice? If no one knows the CT level of those tests, and no one knows if they were run under 28 cycles, then no one can say that they had the virus twice. Because it’s nothing if it’s run over 28 cycles. And, almost all tests have been run to 40 cycles rendering almost all results false.
For my son and his friends they all tested positive on the PCR and all had symptoms both times.
The symptoms are EXACTLY like countless other respiratory illnesses. In a healthy person it never progresses past something that looks like many others. You MUST know thePCR cycle threshold to know if he had it and if IT was the thing causing the illness. TheRNA of SARSCoV2 can be in the nose, DEAD, for months. Look it up. This is fact. So you see how the world has been confused? On purpose. It depends on the CT level, UNDER 28, to be alive and be doing anything at all. They are NOTtesting vaccinated with symptoms withCT levels over 28 bc they say NOW, the viral RNA would be DEAD.
It’s quite possible that your son and his friends had the flu the 2nd time around and tested positive for covid because they still had covid RNA in their systems from a previous infection.
A PCR test for covid is between 32 and 256k more likely to be positive than a PCR test for flu. Most positive tests for covid contain merely viral RNA without any infectious virus.
Interesting hypothesis, but 9+ months for the viral RNA to clear the airwaves? Is there any data showing that the RNA can last months in the nose/mouth?
If that was the case, PCR could not be used to show that an infected person was recovered (in some places, a negative case is used to show recovery).
Or is this a ‘false positive’? Your calculation of ’32 and 256k more likely’, would lead me to the conclusion that most, if not all, positives are false positives, are flu. If that was the case, that would lead me to the further conclusion that this has been a very, very deadly flu season. Or that we have a very high rate of false positives and that therefore the IFR of SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 is much higher than previously calculated.
Are you with me? Is this your logical conclusion as well?
You can be exposed to an ILI many times without showing symptoms. A PCR test will come back positive if you are tested after exposure to a virus. But you might have symptoms due to an ILI for which you have not been diagnosed because doctors don’t understand probability, relative PCR cycle thresholds for flu and covid, etc.
Another possibility is that many deaths were attributed to covid, but were due neither to covid nor to influenza. Things like heart attacks, etc., for which numbers have been up.
And let’s not forget deaths due to premature ventilation in New York and New Jersey back in March, for which covid was blamed. Thousands.
Some have estimated that 25% of US deaths attributed to covid were actually due to something other than covid. I expect that that’s a very low estimate. I remember reading about a deadly flu that was expected this year. Maybe it hit and doctors were unaware because they believed the test results. (But even a deadly flu can’t account for excess deaths by itself.)
(Some people say that influenza was down because of masks, but somehow masks didn’t prevent covid. Very illogical and obviously grasping at straws. So I don’t believe the public health data on influenza with its absurdly low numbers.)
Excess deaths were likely due to ordinary chronic diseases (from people avoiding the hospital), suicides, influenza, and, of course, covid (to some degree).
My SWAG for US covid deaths is 50k.
I’m guessing you also don’t think that doctors know virology. They must be so glad they have you to help them out.
How do you get to ’50k’? >90% of deaths are from other things? In every country? Really? Fascinating. How do you get to that? What’s your logic? Can you show me your calculations?
Doctors don’t know probability, as Dr. Rushworth has pointed out.
Let’s say that you are showing ILI symptoms and your doctor orders a viral panel. You have a viral panel with 20 ILIs. 12 of them use PCR at various cycle thresholds ranging from 22 to 27 and various specificities and sensitivities. You also have covid PCR using a cycle threshold of 42.
You get a positive from covid and negative from the rest on your panel. What are the chances that you actually have covid?
You’d have to calculate the chances of false negatives from all the viral tests to figure out your chances of having covid.
Here’s the chance that your non-covid negatives are all true, using typical sensitivities:
.99 x .98 x .98 x .97 x .96 x .95 x .95 x .92 x .88 x .87 x .77 x .75
What is the chance that your covid positive represents actual covid disease?
< 1%, because the cycle threshold is set so high
Now what if you get both a positive for flu and a positive for covid from your panel? Which illness is more likely?
Answer: not covid
There are many, many other possibilities here. You _could_ be infected with two or more ILIs, for example.
Almost _all_ ILIs will end up getting diagnosed as covid because doctors don't understand probabilities and hospitals will be recompensed for covid patients (at least in the US).
You can get positives from covid PCR up to 100 days from when you were first infected, although you may have cleared the virus within the first two weeks. You will show positive for covid for months, potentially.
So if covid is often a misdiagnosis and covid misdiagnosis is extremely likely, what reason is there to believe that the covid death counts are accurate? Answer: none.
Yes, I understand probabilities better than most doctors.
Covid hasn’t mutated, a variant is not the same thing as a mutation.
We need to use the right terms:
– SARS-COV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) is the virus,
– COVID-19 is the disease (Coronavirus disease 2019) caused by SARS-COV-2.
SARS-COV-2 has accumulated >100 mutations over the last 18+ months, with <10 of them considered to be of epidemiological significance. For example, the Alfa variant (UK variant, “Kent variant”, B117 or 20I/501Y.V1) has 23 mutations (a few are responsible for the increased rate of spread of this variant, but most having little evolutionary relevance). Some mutations have emerged over and over again in different and separate variants. Thousands of SARS-COV-2 variants have been identified (sometimes called 'emerging variants'), with less than 1% being of any importance and being designated as VOI (or subsequently as VOC) and given a 'name' for greater clarity when used in media (https://cov-lineages.org/lineage_list.html).
In general, a variant (or "genetic variant") is often used to describe a subtype of the virus that is genetically distinct from a main strain, but not sufficiently different to be termed a distinct strain. Each variant has specific mutations that affect the structure or behavior of the virus, and some that don't (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535543/).
Variants of interest (VOI) (or variants under investigation or variant of note) and variants of concern (VOC) are just the designation(s) given by the WHO/CDC etc. to variants of specific viruses, considered to be problematic (increased transmissibility, increased morbidity, increased mortality etc.).
All of my friends who have survived being infected with the virus have subsequently been vaccinated. I am pleased that you have found the evidence that this was a totally pointless procedure.
One of my friends, when I queried why he’d agreed to be vaccinated, said that he imagined it would provide him with ‘super-immunity’. I don’t think he was entirely joking…
I was in hospital for 2 weeks. No possibility to go to toilet because of breathing problems.
Noise,”smell” of oxygen and fear. No comorbidities.
I wanted to be vaccinated since medical experts in my country say it can help.
Then you have been fooled . Since last autumn there is very convincing evidence that an infection with sarscov 1, more than 10 y. ago, gives a robust T-cel response to a sarscov2 infection. There is no reason whatsoever so assume the latter will not lead to a similar immunity respons.
Do you have a citation? Some data to back up your ‘assumptions’?
I have been seeing lots of publications reporting ‘T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 in 20% to 50% of people with no known exposure to the virus'(https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563). That sounds great – but I haven’t seen this have an effect in the real word.
After more than a year, you should really move past the stage of ‘assume’. But, maybe that’s just naive of me
There have been many studies showing that the baseline immunity to covid is around 40%. Use google scholar if you don’t believe me.
SARS-COV-2 was not a “novel” virus.
I know – I cited one (didn’t see any reason for more). Do you see any data showing that this effected spread? Could this be the case of ‘asymptomatic’ cases?
Please show me how this was not a novel virus (cross immunity is not proof) – I would live to see this
There would not be 40% asymptomatic cases due to preexisting immunity if SARS-COV-2 were novel. This is patently obvious.
Will immunity decline over time so a vaccination would eventually make sense for previously infected people?
Maybe. That type of long term follow-up data doesn’t exist yet, since the virus has only been known for a year and a half. One study of people infected with sars-cov-1 suggested that they still had good immunity 17 years later.
Interesting with 17 years of immunity. Please, provide a link to your source of this information.
I had covid symptoms (similar to a mild flu case but more extended in time, about 8 days from onset to recovery) in the first week of december/2020. On the 30th December made a sorological test, positive for IgG (high levels) and IgM (low levels).
In the end of march/2021 did it again. IgG remained high. IgM below the positive/negative threshold. 2 weeks ago, end of June, did the test again. IgG just below detection level (0,8 would be considered positive for IgG, I had 0,7). This is anecdotal of course, but it shows antibodies lasted for 7 months post symptoms.
Ok, did not read that in time. My guess is, the ‘maybe’ can be left out.
But other research has indicated that the SARS-COV-2 immune response is correlated to disease severity – wouldn’t this indicate that immunity for Covid-19 might not last as long as for SARS-COV1, especially in asymptomatic or mild cases (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-020-00588-2?elqTrackId=9486461bf3fa43558b92163a58631b68)?
“Immune response” being correlated to disease severity means that the immune response is pathological and that the immune system is incompetent and overreacts. It has nothing to do with asymptomatic covid and competent immune systems.
A pathological immune response is indicated by high levels of IL-6 and high fever.
I expect that immunologists will eventually show that mucosal immunity and high levels of IgA with cross-reactivity to the coronavirus clade is responsible for asymptomatic and mild covid.
But that’s not a popular topic for research funding right now because of the potential negative impact on vaccine sales.
Once you understand how different things might impact vaccine sales, lots of the reasons for the “science” narrative start to make sense.
Maybe – but as HCQ, ivermectin etc. papers have shown, there’s no shortage of money for conducting bad research and everything gets published, if only as a preprint.
If you’re trying to undermine the competition, then conducting research to poison the well may be money well spent.
Hence all the bad pharma-backed late treatment research.
This is very helpful. And frustrating that not better known out in the world. The attitude to this virus has been utterly mad from the outset. We had it in March last year, but we’re never allowed by friends, family or acquaintances to treat ourselves as having any protection. The common consensus seems to be that you can’t gain immunity without vaccination, which is nonsensical.
Precious immunity has been ignored in consequence, when it could have been better galvanised towards community assistance for those most vulnerable.
And my vaccine doses, which made me very ill with side effects lasting weeks were completely wasted on me when they could have stopped someone else getting ill.
Thanks for this post. As I’ve had the virus myself I see no upside in getting the vaccine and a non-zero downside / risk (however small, not zero). At least there’s the downside of a day or so with post-vaccine symptoms.
I understand the “why” is not something you’ve addressed, but does feed the various conspiracy theories when the government is pushing so hard something that is so evidently unnecessary. My personal conspiracy-theory-lite is a blend of politicians loving a statistic to aim for (% vaccinated), the narrative being more important than the truth, and a sizeable sprinkling of self-interest among those benefiting from delivering Covid supplies and services. Then of course “everybody vaccinated” is nice and tidy and “fair”, with no awkward control group lying around in case there are long-term adverse consequences of the vaccine.
I wish I had the option to uptick this. Couldn’t agree more.
Absolutely agree. Wish I could upvote that comment.
That is not a conspiracy theory lite…I would call it applied political science…I see it similar.
There’s a new market in Delta variant testing which various labs are rushing to fill. Hence the panic mongering around Delta.
Is there data on how this natural immunity compares to the booster shots lobby? Waning protection rarely is a thing right? It all seems only commercially driven.
I do think the vaccine data is looking really good, especially the mrna ones, but the lobby to keep the gravy train going is out in full force as well.
In my county, which is about half-vaxxed, covid cases among the vaccinated outnumber cases among the unvaxxed. Covid mortality looks to have declined, so it’s like we’re looking at a cold. Who cares?
Some of the reasons to vaccinate those post-covid:
PCR is fallible, so some who have been PCR positive have not actually had covid.
How do you test for “not having had covid before” – you can’t. So if the vaccine is valid (I think it is) then you need to vaccinate all that have not had a positive PCR AND symptoms.
In other words not vaccinating those post-covid still means vaccinating most who have had it.
And leads to mixed messages for anyone who thinks they may have had it once, or isolated once.
Not a practical policy.
More importantly, the real danger here is dumb lockdown policies (the auto-immune overreaction that kills economies and health services with great irony). Vaccines may not be necessary for a return to normality (and the chance for a modern full life for those of us under 80). But if Vaccines are an effective lockdown exit for dumb governments, the result must be good.
What is the false positive rate of PCR for covid? 1%?
Those who test positive almost certainly were exposed (maybe with an asymptomatic infection).
As to PCR test results and false positives, I hope mine *is* correct as I’m betting on innate immunity rather that the “jab”. I’d look pretty silly catching Covid after avoiding all the precautions. What I’m betting on is that my Covid positive test came back after positive tests for wife and friends who had symptoms. I myself had a mild “cold” for a couple of days. Was recovered before test results came back.
However, should I come up short, I shall endeavor to post to the good doctor (and the group) as to my mistake. 😉
“A PCR test was used to diagnose covid in the study. The Cleveland Clinic was not engaging in any screening of asymptomatic staff during the study period, so tests were in almost all cases carried out when participants developed symptoms suggestive of covid.”
32-256k % likelihood of misdiagnosing a non-covid ILI as covid
The timing is Dec. 16. The pandemic likely ended in the US about three weeks previously, based on deaths peaking in my county the end of Dec.
Hospital employees are likely exposed to more ILI than the general population. They probably test positive more than the general population for any ILI. Because of the high Ct used for covid versus other ILIs on a viral panel, the vast majority of panel results will show positive for covid no matter what caused the actual infection. The Cleveland study amounts to connecting the dots based on researcher/testing bias.
Despite my criticisms (which I don’t think amount to nitpicking), I also believe that prior infection generally reduces the likelihood of reinfection and almost certainly reduces the severity of reinfection.
If you treat an ILI early with antivirals before peak immune response occurs, you likely will have a weaker persistent immunity to that ILI than if you had not treated. In that case, a reinfection will likely provide full-strength immunity to the ILI, even if treated with an antiviral.
A vaccine likely will have limited benefit if your immune system isn’t functioning properly. Otoh, the effectiveness of antivirals is often independent of the proper functioning of immune systems.
Common sense isn’t it!
How good to see YOU pointing it out.
A bit off topic but what makes me spitting mad is that the UK government are intending to make vaccination mandatory for all who work in care homes.
The UK government killed thousands of elderly people at the start of this by throwing them out of hospital and putting them in ‘care homes’ where they could not access the medical help they needed.
These elderly were then locked up in solitary confinement and denied family visits, is it any wonder that so many of them died so as to create the initial spike in deaths?
So now our glorious government want to force plumbers and electrians working in care homes to be vaccinated, so why not force anyone visiting (assuming visitors) a relative to be vaccinated?
Truly our own government are the greatest threat any of us face.
Along with the patients transferred from hospitals being infected with covid and spreading it to care home residents. Thousands died.
If the government of the UK requires employees of nursing homes to be vaccinated against the China virus, it’s likely to be difficult or impossible to staff those homes.
As someone getting older in the UK, I’d rather die alone at home than be put in a care home where someone else can kill me.
Thanks, Dr. Rushworth.
Thank You AT läkare Sebastian Rushworth! At last someone visible says it like it is. Well done. Thank you
A related question, why do most Covid-19 vaccine require two doses?
Personally I chose the Janssen vaccine which is one dose only while still giving good protection. How come were they able to do that with one dose when the others need two doses?
Two doses is a better deal with the Pharma companies? While Pfizer and Moderna enjoy the reveneie AZ are selling theirs at cost.
Two doses spread apart often provides better protection than a single dose. As you suggest it is also preferable to pharmaceutical companies because it doubles sales.
Thank you Dr Rushworth.
(Plus now Pfizer are promoting a third dose … )
So, with the same logic… Is it wise, as some countries are promoting, that if you had the natural infection it is enough with one vaccine dose?
Does anyone know the “scientific” reason why Janssen offer good protection after one dose only? How is it different to the AZ vaccine?
From the Pfizer patient fact sheet.
1) No claim to prevent transmission.
2) No claim on how long it lasts.
WHAT IS THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?
The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.
WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?
In an ongoing clinical trial, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine has been shown to prevent COVID-19 following 2 doses given 3 weeks apart. Duration of protection
against COVID-19 is currently unknown.
Tack för en väldigt sansad och informativ blogg. Jag brottas verkligen med frågan om huruvida man bör vaccinera sig mot covid 19 eller inte. Är skeptisk till denna massiva kampanj men vill heller inte framstå som en knasboll i periferin. Eller vara en del av de mörka krafter som jag tycker mig skönja bland vissa vaccin-motståndare. Den ena sidan räknar upp sjukdomens verkningar och dödstal. Den andra sidan varnar för vaccinets rapporterade biverkningar, konsekvenser och dödstal. Vänner och familj tycker att jag sviker samhället och utmanar svår sjukdom och död om jag inte vaccinerar mig. Fullt frisk, vad göra?
Jag tycker definitivt du ska avvakta om du inte är säker på att du vill bli vaccinerad. Jag gissar att du bor i Sverige? Isåfall kommer ingen tvinga dig utan det är bara “grupptryck” (som du kan ignorera.)
Det är värre i vissa andra länder där det är eller kan bli obligatoriskt att vaccinera sig beroende på yrke mm.
Thank you so much for this article and the Q and A.
I’ve been positive for antibodies for 16 months. My husband and I both. We are surrounded by vaccinated people. Many whom think we should be vaccinated. Our doctors feel well are okay. I’m teaching in person prek and have been for months now. I’ve been exposed. My hubby as well. No reinfection.
We are dismayed though that here in NY we are pushed aside. Labeled as anti vax and not afforded same privileges as vaccinated. We are living proof that the immune system works. In addition to antibodies we are working very hard to improve our health to not get sick again.
It’s hard because in NY we are facing employers being pushed to force us into the shot. Colleges as well. Our Governor is a tyrant and dictator.
I in fact have medical issues that has my doctor concerned as to how I’d respond to the shots. But all that does is continue my exclusion in some activities.
Why can’t immunity as long as we continue to test positive be counted along with vaccine?
We are forced to wear masks when those with the hab aren’t.
Joann. I am touched by your story. It is deeply unfair and makes no sense that you are not enjoying the same privileges as vaccinated. Interesting that you are still showing antibodies after 16 months. Should be proof enough. Anybody who has had the Covid-19 should be treated equally to vaccinated. It is a strange and nonscientific world we are living in now. I hope for a fast recovery to the sanity of all policymakers around the world.
@Joann. Thanks for your info.
Good question. Hope you keep asking, and pressuring the politicos regarding that.
Locally, where I live people are organizing against the government doing such things. I assume there are groups where you live doing that also?
One thing that politicians pay attention to is when you threaten to campaign door-to-door for their opponents. (That’s a lot more pressure than just giving a campaign contribution.) Once we did that in my county, mask mandates were dropped.
Great points Sebastian! I suspect you’ve barely scratched the surface here…
It doesn’t make sense to inject anyone with a novel gene therapy that has undergone such minimalistic amounts of safety testing, especially for an illness that poses next to no threat to the vast majority of the population.
But this was never about sense, this was only ever about creating fear so as to get people to sumbit to being injecting with a new type of warp speed ‘vaccine’ and imposing vaccine passports so as to guarantee a massive income stream for the pharmaceutical giants into the future.
So from now on if you want to travel for work, see family or holiday you will need your vaccine passport and you better believe that the number of jabs you will need for that passport to be valid is going to sky rocket very quickly.
The next step is to make internal vaccine passports a requirement for day to day life, pharma can’t believe how well this scam is working out.
At least in the EU countries you can have the Digital Covid Certificate also by proof of prior infection or negative antigen or PCR test.
The negative test is typically valid 48 hours, but at least 24 hours I don’t know how long the “prior infection” is valid.
So, at least, over here there isn’t a great pressure from governments to get people to vaccinate and I hope it stays this way…
In my opinion you underestimate the final goal of this game. Think bigger. Money for big pharma is just a additional bonus. A one of the means for a much bigger end. Think bigger way bigger… Be more drastic.
How does this survey differ from the previous ones? Did it tell us anything we didn’t know? Is there anything that disagrees with the previous publications?
I think that they all came to the general conclusion, ‘Prior infection is highly effective at protecting against covid’.
I think that the small number of positive cases (~15 out of >20,000) make it hard to compare (could be more, presenting as asymptomatic). Even at the same infection rates, how many infections would you expect, out of the 1,359 unvaccinated/previously infected? Maybe 5, at the most? If they are asymptomatic, it’s not all that surprising they didn’t find any.
Do you agree with the other conclusion they make:
– vaccines work
– they shouldn’t be wasted
– If you haven’t been infected, go get vaccinated.
Vaccines are least likely to work for/do the most damage to the immune-compromised, who are most at risk from covid precisely because they are immune compromised.
Antivirals don’t depend on having a competent immune system and are at the sweet spot of the risk/benefit curve. And supplement with sun/vitamin D (in winter) to improve the competence of your immune system.
I see mothers putting sun screen on their kids _before_ they get any sun exposure. Child abuse.
The reason there is a relentless drive to vaccinate every single person is because this is not about a virus, it never was. This is about money and control.
You don’t think that keeping people from dying could be an important goal?
I could accept such a humanitarian objective by our rulers IF Sputnik V was accepted from Day One instead of being despised till today.
You know that a vaccine will only be approved by the FDA/EMA if they submit for approval, right? Has Sputnik V been submitted?
“the EMA lists the vaccine’s authorization as being under “rolling review”.
…a comment from EU internal-market commissioner Thierry Breton in March that the EU has “absolutely no need of Sputnik V”.”
Come on now, geopolitical considerations are clearly more important than the health of the plebes…
If keeping people from dying were an important goal, then pharma would have done competent RCTs on antivirals. Not RECOVERY’s trial of HCQ, which was a joke.
“You don’t think that keeping people from dying could be an important goal?” Dear David, are you kidding? After one y. and a half, that sounds incomprehensible naive to me.
Every measure taken is contraproductive to better health. Exclusion of other treatments, directing sick old people back into the nursing homes, postponing other critical healthcare etc. have caused and not prevented illness and death. The collateral damage is immense. In my country absolutely nothing has been done for the sake of prevention, promoting change of lifestyle, scale up hospital capacity.
This is not about saving lives. If it were, the scene would have been completely different and people like Rushworth would manage a crisis like this.
This is about control, wether there is or there is not someone in – direct – control.
Then please enlighten me – How would you (and the good doctor) deal with this? How would you do ‘for the sake of prevention’? What would you do to lower ‘the collateral damage’? Or do you think that we shouldn’t do anything?
What do you think is a bigger problem: the cost to the economy, or to health?
If we did a better job of dealing with COVID-19, we wouldn’t have to postpone other critical healthcare, etc. I don’t think that it has to be either/or, but rather both.
Don’t you agree? Or am I naive?
I would say that those two are only a side effect of a bigger plan. A bigger fish to fry…. Let’s say a way to change the world.
You are mixing up a number of things: the vaccines are different and work different. You wouldn’t expect them to work exactly the same, would you?
‘How come were they able to do that with one dose when the others need two doses?’ They are different formulations, and therefore behave differently in the body. It seems that the immune response from the JJ is more robust than from the AZ.
As you probably know, ‘Pfizer and Moderna’ are mRNA vaccines, this is a different technology, and they need two doses as the body removes the mRNA very quickly.
The AZ vaccine (also referred to as Oxford-AZ in Europe) was developed by Oxford University (not a for-profit pharma company). They granted the use of the patent to AZ on the condition that they pay for the clinical trials and sell the vaccine at cost.
Thanks David. I am looking for a bit more information on the “special formulation” of the J&J vaccine.
But it seems difficult to find, maybe a well-kept secret? Or, it could in fact be very similar to AZ but they just decided and only tested it as one-dose and therefore that’s the way it is…
Not every person needs this vaccine to NOT DIE. Healthy people have no need for it. There IS an immune system and the VAST majority of everyone has used it already. We have been around this virus for 18 months….you think you have not been exposed? You are living in a dream world. The variants are NOT an issue. They are LESS of a problem health wise. Viruses get more transmissible and LESS deadly. That is how it works. ALWAYS. Basic virology.
Not always – the influenza viscous has been around and some years it’s more deadly and some years less, some years more transmittable and some years less.
The evolution of viruses seems to go in that direction, but not at the timescale you are hoping for.
As for everyone already being infected, do you want to make a bet on that? Look what happened in India when they through that they had in under control, or in Israel, where they thought that enough people were vaccinated?
Yes I DO want to make a bet on that! In India, the seroprevalence studies that have been done show 87% immunity in Uttar Pradesh. 76% in Delhi. In 17 studies from around the world the number is around 72% BEFORE vaccination. And guess what? RIGHT AFTER the vax started in those places, and many MANY other countries, is when they had their spikes. LOOK IT UP. LOOK for graphs that show this information. NOT TO MENTION, the testing is completely faulty…..a PCR test that is run over 28 cycles shows DEAD nucleotides. It shows nothing that is causing any illness whatsoever. And the have been run to 40 cts for a year! And are you aware that 25,000 die in India EVERY DAY of diarrhea? No one cares!! But suddenly when 800 die supposedly OF covid, and may very well have other illnesses as well, suddenly it’s a blood bath. The media is making MONEY. Wake up.
Show me the data, please
By the way, do you really know how the testing works?
Are you still thrashing about in quicksand? Relying on standalone PCR?
What do you think that PCR is showing that isn’t there (False positives or test specificity) and what do you think PCR is missing (false negatives or test sensitivity)?
How do you think that that viral culturing will add or correct, regarding the detection of infected people (in comparison to RT-PCR)? Viral culturing seems to be more useful as a tool for viral shedding/infections, by isolation, rather than detection. Do you consider only cases with ‘Viable virus’ to be positives? Wouldn’t ‘unviable virus’ also be proof of infection (maybe the last stage infection or an active immune system), and maybe of lax test-and-trace?
There are five possible results from a PCR test: positive, negative, false positive, false negative, and unculturable positive. Both positive and false negative are culturable and viral culturing may be used to discover false negatives, false positives, and unculturable positives. Unculturable positives are evidence of exposure and they indicate that there is no active covid infection.
I know of no way to distinguish between the presence of viral nucleotides and virions without doing viral culturing. The ability to distinguish between the two is essential for research involving either viral load or transmission. And viral load research obviously involves quantitative PCR with viral culturing.
Specificity and false positives are related. Sensitivity and false negatives are related. My comment was unrelated to either specificity or sensitivity. Unculturable positives are unrelated to either specificity or sensitivity.
I have elsewhere mentioned the cases where PCR and viral culturing are needed.
Viral culturing isn’t useful for clinical application unless the clinical application is in the context of research into either viral load or transmission.
If viruses are anything like bacteria, they will mutate to fill a niche extremely rapidly–maybe in one generation. There are bacteria which consume plastic.
You suck at the Psyops thing. I hope your handlers get their money back. If you want to to learn how to do it properly, I’m available. I’ll give you a sympathy discount.
I guess you were referring to me – please explain
1) Guess? Your in-depth knowledge displayed and suddenly you have to guess…
2) David, Bernie… You need to pay attention to handles. The sentence structure is an immediate tell.
You have the basics, just need to tone down the white night when conveying the talking points from the script. Again, my rates are reasonable…
You are actually cheep – but still not worth the price. I don’t use any another name, on this or any other forum (ask theasdgamer).
Thanks for the compliment
They are cheep – but still not worth the cost. We are different people, this is the only name I use, on this or any other forum (ask theasdgamer).
Thank you for the other compliment.
David et al.
Oh vey!🤦♀️ Look at the timestamps in to your replies to my comments. Exactly 10 minutes…
Just didn’t see that the comment had been added, wrote again.
“Oxford University (not a for-profit pharma company)”. Again David, you’re being very naive.
Hello, I think there is one hidden assumption in this article – That the SarsCov2 virus i a Real Pathogen (and our immune system just wants to get rid of it).
This view is driven by perceived problems which the virus is causing to healthcare system.
But it is not so obvious. I believe our immune system, in general, is playing games with viruses (they can be somehow usefull if only can be controlled) and only when it finds that the virus can only make a harm, it will block it for life (if one survives first contact).
Otherwise, our immune system can only block temporary virus, looking forward for future cooperation, thus you can loose your “immunity” to it.
On the other hand, vaccination is forcing our immune system to fight enemy, even if this is not an enemy (at least from a signle organism point of view).
So, vaccinations can be more effective in repelling virus than having a virus if the virus is not a real enemy. Which is making things even more crazy.
A resurgence of cases of the China virus — including severe cases — among both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, has been reported first in Israel and the UK and now in the Netherlands. If the reports are accurate, then whatever the protection afforded by the vaccine or vaccines in question, its duration would appear a matter of mere months.
The problem is limited immunity–it’s merely to the S-protein. So it’s quite easy for a mutation or two to enable a coronavirus to evade antibodies.
Compare with natural immunity, where antibodies are created against several of the viral proteins, so that a single mutation won’t allow the virus to evade the immune system.
Another excellent blog post Sebastian thank you. I agree wholeheartedly with views on this. There is no point in vaccinating those who’ve already recovered from Covid. But then there’s no point in wearing a useless piece of cheap cloth around your face under the illusion it’s going to protect you from an aerosol virus either. I don’t fall for any of the propaganda pedalled by our government or medical “experts”. Thanks for your posts, I really enjoy reading them, as I do Dr Malcolm Kendrick’s also whom I believe is a friend of yours. I purchased your book earlier this year. Excellent.
Could Doctor Rushworth give advise on if you are over 65 not diabetic , overweight , smoker , drinker and you are in excellent physical shape are pills in order to lower your Cholestrol numbers worth the risk if they are less than 225
I’m afraid I cannot offer individual patient advice in this forum.
“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” – Sherlock Homes”
There is a reason. Yet 99% of ppl. Will not accept it. All the actions all over the world have a lot in common. Most sensible ppl. Who analyse sourounding reality see the problems. That’s why so many ppl say that Covid is a global conspiracy and vaccination is a part of that hoax. But to understand what is going on one must look from a global perspective. Take into account a lot of factors. Such analysis is hard for individuals. But start from 3 factors. 1. Global warming. 2. AI revolution. 3 growing social inequality around the globe. There are additional ones that coincide and are synoptic with the main 3. They all lead to one conclusion. There is to many humans. Like 4 billion .
And to grasp the means you must read The Shock Doctrine. By Naomi Klein. And when you finish that read a last paragraph of “Four Futures: Life After Capitalism”
I wonder what will you think then.
Global warming is why wealthy lefties are buying beachfront property all over the globe at discount prices.
Don’t fall for political scams.
An epidemic of safetyism.
In the UK, COVID cases are ‘on the rise’ again. Yet when you look at the positivity rate, it still remains (relatively) low. As in all things, context is needed. More testing is driving more cases, which has been the ‘case’ since last year.
I’m sure the data exists but it doesn’t seem easy to get hold of; what is the actual number of asymptomatic in the daily number of cases? Where are the infections actually taking place? Hospitals, schools? What ages are the infected?
If the vaccines work, they offer the individial protection against COVID. Therefore, everyone who has protection against the virus from the vaccine has it. The drive to vaccinate entire populations is therefore proposterous and totalitarian – as the long term success of vaccinating an ‘entire’ population depends on mandatory vaccination, or at least making life near impossible not to get vaccinated.
I’m beginning to look at living outside of the UK. I advise all of you to flee if you can to safer countries.
“The obsession with vaccinating everyone is particularly odd in a situation where access to vaccines is limited and the stated goal is to reach herd immunity as quickly as possible, since wasting time vaccinating people who have already had the infection will inevitably delay the time it takes for a population to reach herd immunity.”
Succinctly stated. It is obvious that *something* is going on that they are not telling us. One result is to make people suspicious and thus more resistant to getting the vaccine. So that also is counterproductive.
I do not know what is being concealed. I am reasonably sure that they are *not* using this as cover to inject us all with microchips. 🙂 Perhaps they are testing how much they can control us; if they can get us to accept vaccine passports then they can push for even more state control beyond that. Maybe big pharma profits plays a role. Or maybe they know, but won’t admit, that the PCR tests have a really high rate of false positives and so can’t be relied on to decide if you are immune.
There’s absolutely no need to vaccinate ANYONE- especially when the vaccine if FAR more dangerous than “COVID” itself. Steve Kirsch, who was pro-vaccine up to mid-May, has written a superb and extensive document about this. World governments and the mainstream media have been censoring all of the adverse effects and deaths from the vaccine, but Kirsch believes the dam will soon burst.
Unfortunately, Kirsch isn’t a “conspiracy theorist” (like me) so he doesn’t realize this is really about the “Great Reset” and has nothing to do with public health: the goal is to sterilize/depopulate as many people as possible before they’re finally “caught”. Meanwhile, the deaths continue like this 18 year old girl.
There’s still NO proof that the SARS-COV-2 virus causes COVID-19 even if it exists. COVID-19 could very well be a toxin like Graphene Oxide instead (just like polio was really due to toxins like insecticides):
I am 66 years old. I have not been sick with any illness since January, 2020 when “covid” began. But then, I have not been sick with any illness for the past 14 years.
What changed for me? In 2007 I started taking D3. I test my D3 level often. In March, 2020 it was 81. For most people in the US their D3 level is 20 or less.
I am sure that I have been exposed to the covid. My immune system suppressed it.
I am not obese. I walk 4 miles/day. And take many nutritional supplements. But D3 is the most important.
I do not know what is going on with this government push for these “vaccines.” Or forcing 3 year old children to wear masks.
We will see what happens in the coming weeks.
Thank you for supporting common sense
Two of your posts in a row, Dr Rushworth, with which I am in full agreement. Either you are getting better or I am getting lax, or both. Thanks for the interesting posts.
I live in Crete, Greece. We are from tomorrow living under vaccine apartheid – no entry to restaurants indoors, cinemas, bars, or anywhere indoors unless you are vaccinated, fine of 10,000 Euros to owner if discovered (by Vaccine Police?). In effect until end of August. To begin with. Supermarkets are still ok, but for how long?? I am sure I had Covid 19 in January/February 2021 but of course there were no tests then. I nursed my 88 year old father through Covid in December 2020 and was not ill. I have asked if a positive antibody test means I don’t need the vaccine but it has to be accompanied with a positive Covid test in order to have the right NOT to be vaccinated. . So what do I do now? What has happened to my personal rights?
I sympathise with your ordeal in southern Balkans.
It must be tough living under such amateur-magician type of government with zig-zagging policies.
Clearly, the pandemic is being used as an excuse for all sorts of authority abuse aiming at herd control.
Informative, clear and supported by evidence. I wish you were my doctor!
So the question is the fifth group:
– Do you consider the ‘unculturable positive’ to be a positive or a false positive?
– Is it an ‘inactive infection’ an infection?
– What percentage of positives do you estimate are ‘unculturable positive’?
I would say the evidence of a viral RNA as evidence of infection, not just exposure, even if the person is past the point of ‘active SARS-COV-2 infection’. If viral culturing corrected the issue of false negatives, this would improve sensitivity.
How would ‘viral culturing’ influence testing, treatment and/or mortality calculations, if not by removing false positives/negatives? I can see how this would influence implementation of social distancing/quarantines (and research) but how else would this be used?
A false positive is when a PCR test is positive but there is no RNA present for some reason. Probably lab error.
A positive has viral RNA present.
An unculturable positive has viral RNA present, but no virus.
Unculturable positives fall under true positives and are evidence that viral culturing must be done when research relies on actual virus being present, such as is the case with viral load studies and viral transmission studies.
“I would say the evidence of a viral RNA as evidence of infection, not just exposure, even if the person is past the point of ‘active SARS-COV-2 infection’.”
I take exposure to mean that you have been infected but may not have shown any symptoms. You were exposed to the virus, not merely to someone infected with the virus.
Governments like blanket vaccinations because they’re easier to police.
Pharma corps likes them because they’re lucrative.
We’re long past the point where any of this has to make sense.
Thank you so much for this post. I am in Canada and there is NO recognition of a natural SARS 2 infection as conferring natural immunity. It’s vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate !!!. It’s considered selfish and harmful to family, friends and community to NOT be vaccinated. Myself, mother, husband, and 2 sons contracted COVID in January and I have been very hesitant to be vaccinated with an experimental “emergency” product when we have some natural immunity now. Afraid to be vaccinated when we have antibodies already and will react to the injection differently. It’s going to be a long uphill battle I think…., caught between basic immune system biology/ science and fear/ money !!.
Be strong. Fight for your right to just say NO!
Exactly. Lines drawn in the sand. Heads up.
The covid virus is aptly described by Shakespeare’s play, “Much Ado About Nothing.”
That, however, does not describe the harms proceeding from responses to the covid virus, which were extensive and deadly and tyrannical and corrupt. Obviously, the corruption extended to the vaccines.
I have heard it alleged that early treatment of high risk patients for covid with antivirals is impractical and impossible in the real world. If you could somehow get a public health plan together, assuming that antivirals worked, what would that plan look like? Suppose that you could set guidelines for gp’s, hospitals, and care homes to encourage early treatment. What would you tell them?
Is there any danger that widespread use of antivirals would lead to a resistant strain of this or any other virus? How strain dependent is the activity of antivirals?
Have there been any reports of corona viruses becoming resistant to antivirals like HCQ and ivermectin?
Vaccine resistance is a far greater problem based on recent experience.
You know that the immune system continues to correct itself and adapt, with every new exposure.
Can you develop a new antiviral?
The covid vaxx death numbers are very concerning. Between 9,000 and 50,000 deaths for around 150,000,000 covid vaccines in the US. (The 9,000 figure is from VAERS and the 50,000 figure is from a bag of deaths of unknown causes.) That’s between 60 and 300 deaths per million from the jab.
Compare with the average from other kinds of vaccinations at 1 death per million.
“You know that the immune system continues to correct itself and adapt, with every new exposure.”
The problem underlying all of this stuff is that so many immune systems are incompetent due to vitamin D and zinc deficiencies. So incompetent immune systems end up causing all kinds of problems. Whether they adapt or not, incompetent immune systems cause problems. Immune systems adapt to the S-protein produced by mRNA jabs and from the incompetent immune systems you get an immune mis-reaction with clotting issues, G-B Syndrome, Graves Disease, thrombic cytopenia, etc.
Even with incompetent immune systems, antivirals function well. Supplementing with zinc and vitamin D works well to improve immune functionality if the immune system is incompetent due to deficiencies. And get sun exposure during peak vitamin D periods.
Vaccines really only benefit pharma, ultimately.
So why do you have to choose? Take D and the vaccine. If you have a vaccine, subsequent infection (often a more mild case) would provide improved, hybrid immunity? If not, the infection can be a more severe, with more complications.
I know, I know, you don’t think that SARS-COV-1 is real (or novel) and that COVID-19 is not any danger – so there is no reason to take the vaccine at all, let alone if you’ve been infected. You know what I think is the most dangerous part of this whole issue? Thinking that we know more than we do (‘That a little knowledge is apt to puff up, and make men giddy, but a greater share of it will set them right, and bring them to low and humble thoughts of themselves’, 1698).
You know what else causes things such as G-B Syndrome etc.? Covid-19 (and other viral infections)
Covid is really no big deal if you get enough sun and supplement with zinc if you’re an older man.
Why risk the jab? What does it offer? If you’re very high risk from covid, you’re also not going to benefit from the jab. In most of the west, we have herd immunity, so risk is low in toto.
I get it that pharma pays you to push their vaccines, but I don’t wanna buy them–even if they’re free.
I was taken in initially by the panic-mongering, but I saw thru it and ditched it.
No, I’m not going to ditch my due diligence and simply beleeeeve what you and other wascawy wabbits tell me.
Sorry but I think what you are saying is not correct.
I do not know of any good evidence that older men who get ‘enough’ sunlight and zinc ‘is no big deal’. What is ‘ enough ‘ and what is ‘no big deal’? These are undefined terms that have no scientific basis.
“In most of the West, we have herd immunity”. Not clear if you mean now or always have done. All you need to know is that ICUs throughout the world have been receiving torrents of sick patients with multiorgan failure who have come in successive waves. This hardly fits with your statement.
The following is what I remember from reading various papers in the last year or so.
“Enough” sunlight is exposure that creates from 15-20,000 IUs of vit. D. At least twice a week in non-winter months. In the winter, if you can’t vacation for a week in a sunny clime, you have to supplement. Obese people will definitely need to supplement year round because white fat is a sponge for vit. D.
Older men have a problem with zinc deficiency because the prostate tends to soak up zinc when you get older. Even eating red meat and pork regularly might not provide enough zinc.
The dieticians and immunologists have done quite a few studies in the last 15 years about the impact of vit. D and zinc deficiency on the immune system, including a tendency to increase IL-6 levels inappropriately. There are quite a few studies showing correlation between those deficiencies and high morbidity/mortality from covid, although those two problems also correlate with age. So it looks like dosing covid with vit D and zinc has to also be studied. What do you know? Somebody has collected studies about vit D.
h/t Steve Kirsch
Unfortunately, I don’t think that anyone has focused on zinc by itself, although doctors who treat covid with HCQ generally add zinc (including Didier Raoult now).
“No big deal” means asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic (like an occasional cough). You get one point in your pedantic column. 😉
I missed your comment about herd immunity.
There have been waves of covid–it is true. And there will likely be more waves. And people will age and develop incompetent immune systems and we will see more covid deaths in the winter and perhaps we saw lots of “covid” deaths that were actually due to influenza in the fall/winter of 2020.
That doesn’t change the fact that we have achieved herd immunity. Over 70% of Americans and Britons had been exposed to the covid virus by about Dec. 2020. Before the vaccines were rolled out.
We _know_ that about 40% of us had preexisting immunity since about 40% are asymptomatic. So there must be some immunity that isn’t being caught, like cross-reactive mucosal immunity (IgA). There was about 11% of the US population that had PCR- or seriologically-confirmed exposure and likely we had about 6x that that was not confirmed based on studies of the rate of PCR-confirmed cases to antibody testing sampling where antibodies were found at 7x the number of PCR-confirmed numbers.
From my particular vantage point, covid deaths in my county peaked in Dec. 2020, so cases must have peaked about 4 weeks prior, although the statistics show a case peak in early Jan. 2021. I expect that cases are mostly unculturable positives at that point and lagged the actual infection peak by 6 weeks.
So herd immunity looks to have arrived. It won’t stop all cases and deaths, but the pandemic-level numbers aren’t there any more.
asdgamer, you’re absolutely right. Kestin: “All you need to know is that ICUs throughout the world have been receiving torrents of sick patients with multiorgan failure who have come in successive waves.”
That is what they want us to know, and nothing more. Transparancy, valid and useful information (where I live nobody gets to know the ct-value of the pcr-test, it probably even isn’t registred) are not helpfull when you aim at fear-mongering.
Fact is that these ‘torrents’ happen to be 80 y. old on average with very specific comorbidities. I’ve seldom seen a disease making it so easy to identify the group at risk. Cross-immunity has been firmly established already bij the end of the summer of 2020 – there was no reason to suppose it had no relevance -, the importance of vitamine D and zinc for the wellfunctioning of the immunesystem is, well, it is such an open door that it is a crying shame one has to repeat that over and over again.
Covid19 is endemic since winter 2020 in our – western/northern hemispere – world.
These ‘torrents’ are created by a dramatic unhealthy lifestyle. Don’t blame the ‘messenger’.
I live in the Netherlands; the number of ICU beds has been downscaled by our liberal government by 50% in the last decade; had we had covid10, we would have had no problem whatsoever in coping with it in terms of healthcare capacity. The same goes for other western European countries.
The effective R value for the US is 1.44 and for the UK 1.29 on July 11th. It is hard to see how this is compatible with claiming herd immunity has arrived. The R value should be rapidly falling if this is the case as the virus is running out of fuel.
Re your previous reply, happy with one point and to be a pedant. Before going into medicine, I was a mathematician. Woolly thinking and imprecision were the enemies, both seen widely in this debate.
I cannot comment on the ICU policies in the Netherlands, but having worked as a consultant in ICU for over 30 years, and recently retired, the idea that the 80 year olds with co-morbidities all got into ICU is totally wrong. The local large teaching hospital had a Do Not Resuscitate order on anyone over 70 years. They were never considered for ICU. The UK NHS coped with a fairly ruthless system of triage, not by admitting people to ICU.
Regarding woolly thinking–since the R-value is ultimately based on current positive PCR results and exposure is likely waay behind the spread curve by about six weeks, you might examine your own logic.
In my county, cases have dropped to below 1% of the peak and haven’t moved and we are not along the southern border. So there’s likely some problem with widely variable values for geographical distribution.
If you look at covid tracker, you find that the hotspots are along the southern border of the US. So even an increasing R-value isn’t necessarily evidence against my claim of the US generally having achieved herd immunity. Immigrants comprise the vast majority of the new cases, most likely, in the US.
So what you seem to be saying now is that herd immunity has arrived for the US as long as do not count the parts along the southern border!! You will have to come up with a bit better that herd immunity has arrived in the Us with an effective R value of 1.44. You might just as well argue that herd immunity has arrived in my village, therefore it has arrived everywhere.
I would suggest this is more than woolly thinking, but just plain ordinary speculation, especially if you are using phrases like “most likely”.
You’re British, so you don’t understand US immigration issues. We effectively have no enforcement along the southern border. Borders need to be enforced for public health reasons as well as for political and labor reasons.
The bulk of the US population has immunity to covid.
It’s very silly to claim that immigrants bringing covid with them somehow means that the bulk of the indigenous population doesn’t have herd immunity.
I still think it pretty tenuous to be claiming the whole of the US has herd immunity with an effective R value of 1.49 just on the basis that this value is caused by immigrants. Dare I say it that this is speculation(I will refrain from using the word silly as you do). What do you think is the effective R value for the indigenous population?
The effective R value has been increasing since early June. I assume you can correlate this with immigration flows to corroborate your theory.
Mole hills are scary. To June bugs.
Shock! My county saw a 100% increase in covid hospitalizations in the last two weeks! That’s right, they went from an average of 1 per day to 2 per day.
Math is hard. My hats off to you for earning a degree in math. In my training, I did experimental physics. In the experimental physical sciences, we learn to look for systematic error and to question our assumptions about the physical world. That also applies to engineering, I believe. Analytical thinking is required in the experimental physical sciences. At least it was when I was in training. Perhaps things have changed.
The Rio Grande Valley is seeing a 9-fold increase in cases among illegals which the Border Patrol has managed to catch and test.
Then those same illegal immigrants are shipped on commercial transport into other states.
The facts are being created by nefarious politicians. Let’s not let ourselves be fooled.
Why do modern slaves keep assuming PCR label “COVID” is a “new disease”?!
Great comment on the math behind why, “An important sentence from the paper sticks out: “Not one of the 2579 previously infected subjects had a SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 1359 who remained unvaccinated throughout the duration of the study.” Those numbers appear high enough with respect to the lower bound of the infection rate (1.2%) to have enough statistical power. You’d expect to find at least 31 cases for the null hypothesis. It seems quite improbable to get 0 results unless previous infections provide very strong protection.“
Sebastian, is it true the Sweden started diagnosing C19 primarily by symptoms instead of PCR results this past November? Thoughts?
In Sweden PCR has always been used to confirm the diagnosis.
Do you know what cycle threshold is used in Sweden or at least in your hospitals?
Does Sweden use qualitative, quantitative, or a mix of PCR?
What I miss in this whole vaccine discussion is the very important point, that nobody, who gets vaccinated, is thoroughly informed about the fact, that he/she is part of an ongoing trial (human live experiment, so to speak), as the vaccines only have Emergency Approval.
Qatar published the results of a great, large 43,0333 person study in the Lancet of an antibody-positive cohort. Thats right, they gave an antibody test to people that recovered from Covid and then tracked them. The good news is it seems to match the Cleveland Clinics study.
“Efficacy of natural infection against reinfection was estimated at 95.2% (95% CI: 94.1–96.0%). Reinfections were less severe than primary infections. Only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal. “
Med stort interesse läser jag din forskning.
Jag har tittat på det senaste video av Dr. Sucharid Bhagdi.
Får jag be dig om din expertise ang det Dr. Bhagdi säger re vaccineringen? Hag hittar inte de senaste amerikanska o danska studier.
Tack så mycket på förhand.
Sweden is looking not so bad these days regarding how it handled the pandemic…
Here’s a datapoint about who is getting covid.
At a hospital in my county, most of the covid patients have been vaccinated already. In my county, about half the population has been vaccinated. There’s no mention of the age of the covid patients, but my wife says that a lot are middle-aged based on what she sees.
Dr. Rushworth, what are you seeing in your hospital? Or any of you other docs?
I haven’t seen any covid patients in a while. There are currently only 30 people in total being treated for covid in all the hospitals in Stockholm (which has a population of 2.4 million people)
Hey! Are unvaccined people causing new variants of covid like some media sources claim?
It’s especially the vaccinated who are spreading the new variants, based on the CDC’s report about the July Barnstable County outbreak. Possibly also those who weren’t exposed to alpha and are unvaccinated are also spreading the new variants. Those who were exposed to alpha are presumably immune and aren’t spreading anything.
Not just new variants, they also attract meteorites closer to the planet, increasing the danger of collision!
Sebastian Rushworth, it would be helpful to all, I think, if you could please comment on the study on reinfection (amongst unvaccinated vs vaccinated) cited today by the CDC. Thanks in advance!
You have to consider waning immunity from vaccines versus natural immunity.
Just finished reading your book ” Covid : Why most of what you know is wrong” I found it very informative and alot of what you wrote confirmed most of my suspicions about the pandemic. The last chapter was the real confirmation to me that , they over exaggerated it and want to speed up vaccine ( limited date)to end the so called “crisis” and be the heroes. I’m just now curious as to how much percentage of people they need vaccinated to say it’s over ?and does that included those who have gotten Covid and recovered naturally . If that so They will continue to force vaccine to correct their wrong.
Hello Sebastian, I am confused by this new study in the BMJ “Risk of thrombocytopenia and thromboembolism after covid-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 positive testing: self-controlled case series study” https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1931
They find significantly increased risk for several primary and secondary events after vaccination, yet seem to compare it with significantly more risk for these events after infection with SARS-CoV2.
As I read the description of the cohorts (“We included all people aged ≥16 years who had first doses of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 mRNA vaccines AND any outcome of interest. “, see even graphic https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/374/bmj.n1931/F1.medium.jpg), these infections are a subgroup in the vaccinated population. At least it is not made clear that the infections happened among (yet) unvaccinated persons, which makes a big difference as (“breakthrough”-)infection after vaccination could have worse outcomes concerning vascular events than in infections without prior vaccination! – which is the bridge to the topic of your article.
So the conclusion should be that according to UK patient data, AZ and Pfizer Covid vaccines pose an increased risk for these negative events, especially so in breakthrough infections. Would you agree with that?
Have you seen the study from Israel, the biggest of it’s kind, that compared immunity from vaccine vs from having had covid-19? If so, do you have any comments? No flaws in the study?
Dr Rushworth, have you seen this? Any thoughts?
“Many doctors had covid during 2020…”
How do we know that?
Sorry if it’s already been discussed in the comments; I have not read all of them yet.
Vi vägrar dessa injektioner mRNA mot covid och väntar på NOVAVAX.
Men det verkar också vara ett nytt experiment, inte als som vi trodde ett beprövat vaccin.
Kan någon förklara skillnaden, biverkningar och hur länge det håller och är det ofarligare med novavaxx,
om man nu blir tvingad till att vaccinera sig.
Tack för Info.