Tag Archive for: CovidNaturalImmunity

There Was No Pandemic Mastermind

Estimated Reading Time: 5 minutes

The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

 

There is a lot of celebratory football-spiking going on in COVID response-skeptic social media circles.

When two groups of people are diametrically opposed to one another on a singular issue, and the beliefs of one of those groups is validated by events, the other group may just wish to slink away and “put everything behind them.”

I think this is happening with the COVID-19 pandemic. After years of misleading, politically-driven information campaigns designed to increase vaccine uptake, the CDC has finally admitted something that everyone knew, but most couldn’t say: that SARS-CoV-2 infection-acquired immunity protects against severe disease upon reinfection just as well or even better than vaccination.

The problem wasn’t just the messaging on protective immunity. From pushing damaging and unsustainable lockdowns to contriving a false consensus on masks to massively inflating risks of COVID-19 in children and schools, the CDC’s record has been utterly dismal.

After the reality-mugging of the last two and a half years, I’m sure many people in the CDC and other government agencies would like to quietly move on, much as the rest of the world already has.

But that can’t happen just yet. Some very tough and pointed questions need to be asked about the decisions that led to shutdowns and mandates and who made, influenced, and benefited from those decisions. The pandemic exposed a dysfunctional, politicized and risk-averse health bureaucracy with little incentive to act beyond its own naked self-interests. A bright and continuous spotlight on the systemic failures of government agencies is only the first step to meaningful reform. But it has to happen.

The temptation to place the blame for these failures on a single person or a small, yet powerful group of people will be irresistible. The concept of an evil mastermind or a sinister cabal of deep-state Illuminati pulling all the strings to shut down the world, hurt working-class people, and keep poor children out of school has been a reflexive way for many people to make sense of the messy world we’ve lived in since March 2020.

There are some problems with this way of thinking. The fact that most Western governments acted in a very similar manner—initially trying to reassure the public, then panicking and issuing lockdowns and other damaging policies and blaming the people when they didn’t work—raises an important question. How could a single person or group of people orchestrate all that so quickly?

When people are angry about so much needless destruction and waste, they want to put a face to that anger, to identify a target. They need someone to blame, someone to put on trial, condemn and cancel. It’s much more difficult to put institutions, systems, or culture on trial, and much less satisfying.

There were certainly many people who took advantage of pandemic chaos in rather dubious ways. They stockpiled masks or drugs to resell at huge profits, were compromised by ties to pharmaceutical companies, or gained notoriety by feeding the media’s insatiable appetite for sensationalized predictions of doom. Those representing special interests lined up to use the crisis to their advantage, and when they were successful, lobbied for more. This misbehavior should certainly not be ignored.

Yet if all the blame for the disastrous pandemic response is successfully put on one person or a group of people, it ensures there will be a scapegoat and only that. They might be put on trial, demonized, and canceled, a process that many of us would enjoy watching. But the systems and culture that incentivized them to behave badly will remain in place.

The CDC has already started the process of rebranding itself in light of its admitted failures. Predictably, it involves some cosmetic reorganization yet otherwise increases institutional power and reach. With these superficial changes, the ossified, dysfunctional culture will continue to balloon and lumber on, consuming more and more resources with an ever-decreasing net benefit, waiting to be exposed again by another crisis. Rinse and repeat.

Accepting the CDC’s faux contrition and bogus pledge of reform would be a mistake. The organization is in need of a serious overhaul. The conflict of interest that results when government organizations make policy recommendations and fund research to support those recommendations needs to be removed by separating both functions. Positions should not be guaranteed for life, but subject to periodic renewal, and easier to terminate. The power of permanent bureaucrats to micromanage national health policy should be minimized as much as possible.

Most skeptical readers will read the above and say, “Yeah, right. Not gonna happen,” and I would tend to agree with that. In fact, I think the problem is even more intractable than just institutional reform. After all, as many people in the CDC and other government agencies liked to remind us during the pandemic, they only make recommendations. They didn’t force the federal government, states, and cities to implement and enforce mandates. All of those places did so on their own, unfortunately with great energy and enthusiasm. For many aspiring totalitarians, CDC recommendations were merely a convenient foil for increasing their own power and influence.

Perhaps the most important question is, where would leaders get the idea that all of this behavior was, not only acceptable but commendable?

The answer is—they got the idea from us. The public long ago accepted that government organizations like the CDC have assumed responsibility for their well-being, during normal times and in times of crisis. If the CDC can’t protect us and provide the absolute certainty we demand during times of crisis, then what are they good for? An excellent question.

The pandemic has shown that government agencies cannot, in fact, do those things very well at all. Even if they could protect people and provide them with absolute certainty, they wouldn’t be incentivized to do so. Instead, in a crisis government agencies will follow the path of least resistance, in this case providing an illusion of safety, security, and control for politicians and the public. All one had to do was believe the illusion. Because of the absolute terror of the unknown and complete ignorance of the risks of severe disease and death, most people were more than willing to take comfort in CDC recommendations and subsequent government mandates without the slightest hint of skepticism or protest. A pervasive safety-at-all costs culture enabled all of it.

By all means, we need to take a very long and hard look at the leaders and bureaucrats that took the easiest, yet the most damaging path of lockdowns and mandates. We need to expose all of their corruption, incompetence, and hypocrisy. It’s going to be a huge task that will take a considerable amount of time, and it has to happen.

Yet ultimately, when looking for someone to blame for the disastrous pandemic response, the most important place we need to look is in the mirror.

 

Steve Templeton is Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology at Indiana University School of Medicine – Terre Haute. Formerly CDC/NIOSH. Immunology of Infectious Disease.

*****

This article was published by the Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

Natural Immunity Beats Vaccine Immunity in Fighting Covid-19, Study Says

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

Naturally acquired immunity against Covid-19 infection lasts longer than vaccine-acquired immunity and is nearly 100-percent effective against severe infection, a new study from Qatar finds.

“While current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines had a critical role in reducing COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths, their rapidly waning immune protection, particularly against the Omicron … variant, limits their role in shaping the future of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology compared to other vaccines,” reads the study, a preprint version of which was posted on medRxiv.

That being the case, the researchers decided to investigate the role natural immunity is likely to play in restraining Covid-19 in the coming years. They sought to answer the following questions: “1) When infected with a pre-Omicron variant, how long does protection persist against reinfection with pre-Omicron variants? 2) When infected with a pre-Omicron variant, how long does protection persist against reinfection with an Omicron subvariant? 3) When infected with any variant, how long does protection persist against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19?”

They reviewed the relevant data on Covid-19 infections in the entire population of Qatar (about 2.9 million people), comparing the outcomes of individuals who had previously been infected with Covid-19 to the outcomes of those who had been neither infected nor vaccinated (the “infection-naïve”). While the population of Qatar is “internationally diverse,” they pointed out, it is also “predominately young and male.” However, based on analysis of the data they gathered on individuals aged 50 and older, they believe their findings also apply to countries with older populations.

Individuals who had been infected with a pre-Omicron variant of the coronavirus were considerably less likely (1.7 percent) than those who were infection-naïve (9.6 percent) to become reinfected with a pre-Omicron variant. Overall, pre-Omicron infection was 85.5-percent effective against pre-Omicron reinfection, though it slowly waned over time. “Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 due to pre-Omicron reinfection,” the researchers found, “was 98.0%.”

Pre-Omicron infection was considerably less effective in preventing reinfection with one of the highly contagious Omicron subvariants. Nearly seven percent of previously infected individuals contracted an Omicron subvariant, while over 10 percent of infection-naïve individuals came down with one. Pre-Omicron infection, in fact, was just 38.1-percent effective against Omicron infection. Nevertheless, it was still 88.6-percent effective in keeping the infection from becoming severe.

Prior infection with any variant, pre- or post-Omicron, was astoundingly effective at keeping future infections of any variant from threatening their hosts. For the first 14 months after the initial infection, effectiveness at preventing severe infection was approximately 100 percent, after which it slowly dropped to a still-impressive 97.3 percent. “Effectiveness of primary infection with any variant against reinfection with any variant was 69.4%,” the authors wrote.

While the study found that the protection against reinfection provided by natural immunity falls over time, “this waning in natural immunity mirrors that of vaccine immunity, but at a slower rate,” they noted. “Vaccine immunity may last for only a year, but natural immunity … may last for 3 years.” When it comes to Omicron subvariants, natural immunity may last more than twice as long as vaccine immunity.

“Despite waning protection against reinfection, strikingly, there was no evidence for the waning of protection against severe COVID-19 at reinfection,” the researchers observed. This, too, is similar to vaccine immunity — but, of course, without any of the harmful side effects.

The authors suggest that Covid-19 “may exhibit a similar pattern” to the common cold, which is also caused by coronaviruses. Colds can induce short-term reinfection protection but “life-long immunity against severe reinfection,” so even if “viral evolution and immune invasion” cause “periodic (possibly annual) waves of infection” with Covid-19 variants, “the lasting immunity against severe reinfection will contribute to a pattern of benign infection. Most primary infections would occur in childhood and would likely not be severe. Adults would only experience periodic reinfections, also not likely to be severe.”

In other words, as the non-alarmists have long argued, letting the virus work its way through the population is the only long-term solution to its dangers — dangers that have already significantly diminished and will continue to wane over time. But try telling that to the mask-and-vax crowd that still holds sway in so many cities and countries.

*****

This article was published by The New American and is reproduced with permission.

I Am Against Pandemic Misinformation

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes

Editors’ Note: The author accurately describes a dangerous and deadly failure of the government health agencies buttressed by a politically aligned media. The denial and non-recognition of natural immunity to the SARS CoV-2 pandemic as the very significant incidence of severe and  fatal reactions to the Covid vaccines is revealed (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)) will be a permanent stain on the government health agencies (think Anthony Fauci), the medical profession, the political class and Big Pharma. Misinformation about this viral pandemic has been the rule rather than the exception.  

 

Podcaster Joe Rogan has caused a firestorm for having what is deemed improper information about the pandemic on his show. I have no idea what Rogan or his guests said since I do not have time to listen to podcasts and Rogan barely registered on my radar until this brouhaha. I do know there is a tremendous amount of disinformation around with one paramount point of disinformation that supersedes all.

First, there is the question as to what people consider disinformation. I know that Neil Young does not know what Rogan said. He read an article about Rogan and thusly based his hysterical reaction. Does anyone believe Joni Mitchell (who I consider a musical goddess) or Graham Nash or the rest of CSN&Y then sat down in their posh surroundings and spent hours analyzing Rogan’s podcast before bandwagoning with Young? Everyone believes it is a miracle David Crosby is still alive after what he has done to his body for over fifty years. Should he really be opining on Covid for others?

There has clearly been a gigantic piece of misinformation during the pandemic that has been promulgated by the U.S. government and replicated by the Mainstream Media which has cost millions if not billions of dollars, wasted lots of people’s time and potentially exposed them to physical harm.  That is the complete denial of natural immunity as protection against further infection from Covid-19 and its variants.

Let us break down the last paragraph. My family had Covid relatively early – July 2020 – after which two things caused me to pause. The first was the CDC or some version of medical establishment not tracking the natural immunity numbers.  One could get all the daily information they wanted for new cases, deaths, and positive tests for Covid. But the numbers did not account for how many healthy people had mild cases, thus did not know they had Covid, so their natural immunity status was totally ignored.

I was also surprised the medical establishment (CDC, Fauci, etc.) was not telling people who had Covid that they were protected against further illness. It worked that way with everything else I previously had, including measles, mumps, and chickenpox in terms of immunity. It seemed that way because doctors kept telling me that.

Then we got our Covid shots, a double dose of Pfizer. We did it because unlike the rest of the scared sheep of the world, the Beautiful Wife and I decided not to lose a year or two of our lives locked up in our home, afraid of life. We not only experienced our normal activities like restaurants and concerts but did international travel, including Africa, that some people thought was off-the-boards dangerous. Being vaccinated protected us against unexpected new rules in place when we arrived somewhere. It was cheap insurance.

We had discussions with people, and they would pooh-pooh the idea that our natural immunity had durability. I asked what they were reading because more and more studies had come out that were ignored by the “authorities.” Everyone became an authority on the issue of Covid, or at least they thought as much. The looks of disdain regarding the issue of natural immunity were a regular occurrence. Study after study came out addressing the durability of natural immunity and for other Covid related diseases. But they were roundly ignored by the mainstream media and the Biden Administration. They are in denial that something other than vaccinations would end the pandemic.

Yes, the vaccinations have been a medical miracle and saved a multitude of lives. As wonderful as the vaccines are the protection of having the disease and surviving is far superior protection.

The fascinating part of this is that the script has been flipped. People who two years ago before anyone heard of Covid-19 would at the proverbial drop of a hat attacked “Big Pharma” were now telling everyone they had to get their vaccinations or they could not go anywhere, do anything, and/or might lose their jobs. This is really a WOW moment. What happened here? As soon as the pandemic is over are they going to flip the switch and go back to attacking “Big Pharma?” Are they going to rethink comments about those initially considered frontline heroes? Those heroes may certainly have natural immunity even if some choose not to get vaccinated. Are they still considered heroic?

Natural immunity is real and should not be ignored.  There are over 100 million Americans that we know of who have had Covid, and they have survived. That should be celebrated, tested and then they should not be forced to get vaccinations. The current facts show that Omicron has driven out Delta totally, and 75% percent of people who are dying are unvaccinated but 25% have had vaccinations. If we had tested people, we would know that most likely not one had previously had Covid. It is not even considered.

There is a lot of misinformation around about Covid. There is a lot of denial of the history of how diseases like this work and that natural immunity are the most durable and best protection against this dreaded disease. While people want to point fingers at the Joe Rogans of the world, the real culprits are the medical establishment unwilling to tell people they are better off with their natural immunity than forcing them to get shots they do not need. 

That is by far the biggest lie of this pandemic saga.

P.S. This issue isn’t over. Buffy (from Berkeley, CA) Wicks has submitted a bill to the CA State Assembly to require every worker in California to be vaccinated. The ignorance and denial go on. We will see whether this bill passes. It is a second run at this.

 

 

Biden’s Mandate Goes to The Supreme Court

Estimated Reading Time: 5 minutes

President Joe Biden, or more likely his handlers that pull the strings, imposed a controversial mandate on large and small employers to force vaccination for the Wuhan virus. Having been unable to get legislation through Congress, he decided to use Executive edict, thereby essentially writing legislation, which is the job of Congress.

This Presidential overreach has now gone before the Supreme Court and early indications are that it is not going well for the Administration.

The conservative majority on the court seems skeptical that law can essentially be written by Biden himself, avoiding Congress, by ordering OSHA, an agency that is a regulatory body for workplace safety, to enforce a medical mandate. It also seems that at least some justices do not believe OSHA has the power, under current law, to be imposing a mandate for vaccinations.

It is also becoming increasingly clear, to even those with little medical training, that those individuals who have been vaccinated both get and spread the virus. If that is true, what is the purpose of a mandate, even if the President has the authority to impose one? Listening to some of the comments from the judges, it is not clear they are well informed on a variety of virus issues. Some dialogue indicated that some were blissfully unaware that the vaccinated were spreading and becoming ill. Some unvaccinated individuals have already had the virus, and thus have more robust protection than vaccinated people. But the government only seems to recognize antibodies and T cells that result from vaccines and ignore those same cells and immune system mechanisms if created naturally. This is absurd.

There appears to be no logical medical reason or legal authority for imposing such a mandate. Rather it is largely a political move to satisfy the Democrat Party base, which ran on the lofty proposition that they could control the virus because they “had a plan” and the other guy supposedly did not. How is that working for ya?

Well, the plan is failing on a number of levels and it is obvious to anyone who is still reasonably alert. It is once again a central planning hammer, of one size, fits all medicine. The medical profession has moved from treating the patient to groveling before public health officials and politicians. 

Beyond the profound constitutional questions of avoiding the Congress and assuming police powers that rightfully belong to the states, the mandate has created additional collateral damage that goes well beyond violating the function of the Executive under the Constitution. Besides a serious blow to medical ethics,  they have recruited corporations to violate basic rights instead of the government doing it directly. And it would seem that some corporations, many highly beholden for subsidies and bailouts, are more than willing to play along with the attack on liberty.

Mandates and their enforcement violate personal liberty and the right to medical privacy. It introduces the question: how far into employee private affairs can an employer go, as a condition of employment? Since the vaccines do not stop the transmission of the virus to others, it is hard to argue a private mandate is in the general health interest of the workforce. However, it could be argued that vaccines reduce the severity and therefore the chance, and expense, of hospitalization. Since private companies subsidize healthcare and are concerned about a fully functioning workforce, they would have some legitimate interest in reducing potential health costs and absenteeism.

How far can you go in that direction? Smoking increases potential health care costs. So do drinking, bad driving,  a bad diet, and abortions. Does a company have a right to dictate these kinds of personal choices to employees? Where did my body, my life go to? Do you mean a society that endorses the idea that minors can undergo sex-change operations without parental consultation because “we all have personal autonomy with our bodies”, will allow employees to have private choices circumscribed by employers because it might reduce potential costs? Are we now serfs living on the manor, subject to the rules of the prince?

What if the vaccines are shown to have serious side effects that show up in the future? May an employee, forced by the condition of employment to take an experimental drug, sue the employer for damages? Should employers even be interfering in lifestyle and medical questions like this? Perhaps in the form of incentives such as gym memberships or reduced health insurance premium payments, they might wish to incentivize their workforce towards certain behaviors. But mandates, that if violated, result in termination?

Moreover, vaccines are not the ONLY way to reduce the severity of the virus and potential cost. Could employers demand that certain medications and therapeutics be taken by employees because taking them reduces the severity and the chance of hospitalization? Could you imagine Bank of America mandating that ivermectin be taken if an employee develops Covid, because it has been shown to reduce the severity, and thereby likely reduce costs? There would be justifiable outrage. Medication is a choice that should be made by the patient and his doctor.

It has also demonstrated that the Federal Government, by providing payments to medical companies and others, can use fear of financial retribution to coerce private companies to do their bidding. It can do this to defense contractors and others with direct contact with the Federal Government. In fact, since most large companies and universities, and even local schools receive at least some funding from the Federal Government, this use of financial intimidation sets another ugly precedent. That which the Federal government subsidizes, it should control.

Some of our corporations have now snuggled into bed with the Federal Government, such as the auto companies, airlines, and the big banks, all of which received bailouts of one form or another, that the relationship would likely bring a gleam to the eye of Benito Mussolini.

Such a wide range of medical companies may receive Medicare or Medicaid payments, it would seem to include the entire industry. Does it follow that this extends to employees who are not officers in the corporation? Does it extend to patients?

How else can one explain, for example, the Mayo Clinic dismissing 700 nurses, during a huge surge in the pandemic with the rapid spread of the Omicron variant? Could it be because they might get Medicare money, research money, and the like? It seems illogical, and just plain stupid, to fire medical workers when you have a surge in critically ill patients to care for. That is certainly not putting the patient’s interest first. It is putting money and the government first. This has tarnished the Mayo Clinic’s reputation with both its staff and its clients. In addition, imagine the cost that must be absorbed to re-hire and train new nurses up to the superior standards found at the Mayo clinic. Who eats those costs?

And, it begs this question: why do so many highly trained medical personnel choose not to be vaccinated?

Likewise firing military personnel when we face significant challenges from China, Russia, and Iran hardly seems the right thing to do to enhance combat readiness. However here, the government has more authority because they run the armed services, one of the few real responsibilities given to the Federal government by the Constitution. In addition, people voluntarily serve and agree to certain rules. That said, there are multiple examples now, of Naval ships having to abort their missions and stay in port because their crew of 100% vaccinated sailors are experiencing an outbreak of the virus. Just because you might have the power to coerce things in the military does not necessarily mean it is the correct policy.

Biden has repeatedly divided the country by attacking those who have chosen not to vaccinate, some on religious grounds, some on medical grounds, and many who have already had the virus, and thus have protection more thorough and longer-lasting than offered by the vaccine. He repeats the big lie that the unvaccinated are the cause of the continuation of the pandemic.

This is one of those rare occasions where the failure of a medical procedure is blamed on those who did not have it. You would think at some point the Administration would see the sheer idiocy of their policies. But, that may be wishful thinking.

We certainly hope the Supreme Court will block the Administration from further unconstitutional edicts, but our worry is they can’t entirely stop the Administration from wreaking damage on schools, universities, private companies, and others, fearful that money, if not law, will rule.

Genuine Facts About Omicron, Delta, Naturally Acquired Immunity, and Vaccines

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

Given the recent outbreak of the Omicron variant and much still unknown about it, the facts surrounding the Delta variant provide a cautionary tale of how misinformation about SARS-CoV-2 variants provides cover for people who have caused widespread harm and countless deaths.

Government officials and media outlets have often blamed the Delta variant—and are preemptively blaming the Omicron variant—for:

While the Delta variant is much more transmissible than earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants, its mutations don’t materially compromise the naturally acquired immunity that develops when people catch and recover from Covid-19. Though mass media has led people to believe just the opposite, at least 20 studies conducted throughout the pandemic have found evidence that such immunity is potent and lasting.

In contrast, the current crop of Covid-19 vaccines initially provides strong immunity against Delta and earlier variants, but this appears to start waning a few months after vaccination and drops dramatically by six months. The exact reasons for this are not yet proven, but three major possibilities rooted in empirical facts include the following:

  1. The vaccines are injected into muscles, which produces little-to-no immunity in the upper respiratory tract where the SARS-CoV-2 virus first infects people.
  2. The vaccines target only one area of the virus called the “Spike protein,” while naturally acquired immunity targets the entire virus.
  3. The vaccines trigger an immune reaction to only a few Spike variants, while natural naturally acquired immunity attacks a diverse array of Spike variants.

Data and studies on the Omicron variant are just beginning to pour in, but genetic and immunological research suggests Omicron will be more of the same but with greater transmissibility, a lower death rate, and faster vaccine waning. In other words, it seems ideally suited to mitigation via naturally acquired immunity.

However, the higher transmissibility of Omicron requires much better measures to protect people who are highly vulnerable to C-19. This has been a staggering failure of the authorities responsible for C-19 policies.

Taken together, the thoroughly documented facts below show that the horrors commonly blamed on variants are ultimately due to inept policies and actions. Yet, policymakers and public opinion shapers are failing to learn from their errors and continuing down the same destructive paths.

Ph.D. biostatician Dr. Rodney X. Sturdivant, the Director of the Statistical Consulting Center at Baylor University, critically assessed this research and stated, “People will learn more about Covid immunity and vaccines from this article than if they watched and read everything published by most major media outlets since the outset of the pandemic.”

Mutations & Naturally Acquired Immunity

During the very first week of the Covid-19 pandemic in March 2020, a molecular biology journal reported that the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19 “does not mutate rapidly for an RNA virus because, unusually for this category, it has a proof-reading function” in its genome. Throughout the pandemic, science journals have repeatedly confirmed this profoundly important fact.

However, the vast bulk of media outlets have never mentioned it, and U.S. government agencies have virtually ignored it except on a website that stores copies of academic papers.

The upshot of this genetic proof-reading mechanism, as explained in the March 2020 paper, is that once a vaccine for C-19 is developed, it “would not need regular updates, unlike seasonal influenza vaccines.” Implicit in this statement is that the vaccine would trigger a broad immune response that mimics naturally acquired immunity. This involves more than just a few types of antibodies but a diverse array of antibodies, B cells, and two types of T-cells called CD4+ and CD8+.

Such is the case with a wide variety of vaccines for diseases like rubella, mumps, measles, poliosmallpox, and yellow fever. Like naturally acquired immunity, these vaccines commonly provide lifelong protection against these diseases.

Short-lived immunity, on the other hand, typically occurs with diseases like the common cold and flu because the viruses that cause them mutate quickly. As explained in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, “all viruses mutate, but influenza remains highly unusual among infectious diseases” because it mutates very rapidly, and thus, “new vaccines are needed almost every year” to protect against it.

Even still, naturally acquired immunity against strains of the flu can be lifelong. For a remarkable example, a study published by the journal Nature in 2008 found that survivors of the 1918 flu pandemic still had immune B-cells that actively produce “highly functional, virus-neutralizing antibodies” that guard against this disease roughly 90 years later. Moreover, scientists were able to extract these B cells from the subjects’ blood and use them to generate monoclonal antibodies, which had “exceptional virus-neutralizing potency and protected mice from lethal infection.”

As expected for a virus with a genetic proofreading mechanism, at least 20 studies have found evidence that naturally acquired immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is potent and durable. These studies span from early in the pandemic all the way up through the period of Delta variant dominance:….

*****

Continue reading this article and its scientific citations at  Just Facts Daily.