Natural Immunity; Hospital Administrators Caught and more

See the source image

Natural Immunity Longer Lasting Than Protection From COVID-19 Vaccines: Dr. Robert Malone

September 6, 2021 Updated: September 7, 2021

The immunity conferred by recovering from COVID-19 is better than the protection afforded by COVID-19 vaccines, a prominent vaccine inventor says, citing in part a recent study from Israel.

Israeli researchers found that people in the country vaccinated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot were 13 times more likely to contract the Delta variant of the CCP virus and 27 times more at risk of symptomatic disease, compared to those who had recovered from COVID-19.

“It’s now been shown in that paper and others that the breadth of that immune response in terms of T and B cell memory populations is more diverse and more long-lasting than the breadth of immune response elicited by the spike-based vaccines alone,” Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the class of vaccines based on messenger RNA, said on Epoch TV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

While antibodies reduce over time, T cells, a type of white blood cells that protect against infection, and B cells can last for a lifetime.

Federal health authorities acknowledge natural immunity exists but have continued to claim that the protection from vaccines is better, pointing to a different set of studies, including one from Kentucky published by state and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) researchers.

Authorities continue to urge everybody, regardless of prior infection, to get a vaccine.

Some other scientists, though, say the growing body of evidence on natural immunity must play a larger role in policy discussions on vaccination amid the pandemic.

“Natural immunity is pretty darn good. We would be best to focus our efforts on people who are both unvaccinated AND have not recovered from prior infection,” Dr. Vinay Prasad, a professor at the University of California–San Francisco’s Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, wrote on social media over the weekend.

The Israeli study, Malone said, “seems to indicate that the breadth and durability of the immune response was superior with the natural infection in recovery.”

“There’s also evidence that there’s a significant—depending on the timeframe—six- to 20-fold improvement in protection from infection and disease associated with the natural immunity acquired from prior infection compared to that conferred by the vaccine.”

Malone says the newer data is a key piece in what he described as a social contract between members of the public and government health agencies.

The public “is faced with a situation where they had been told that natural immunity was not as protective, that they can’t rely on that; that if you’ve been previously infected, you should still get both doses of vaccine; that this vaccination would provide broad durable protection, it would protect you and it would protect your elders from you potentially spreading disease to them,” he said.

The CDC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The agency has told The Epoch Times in the past that it doesn’t comment on papers that aren’t authored by the agency and that officials “continually evaluate the science that leads to our guidance, and if it needs to be changed, we will base that on our own research and studies.”

Zachary Stieber

Zachary Stieber
REPORTER
Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter.
Jan Jekielek

Jan Jekielek
SENIOR EDITOR
Jan Jekielek is a Senior Editor with The Epoch Times and host of the show, “American Thought Leaders.” Jan’s career has spanned academia, media, & international human rights work. In 2009 he joined The Epoch Times full time and has served in a variety of roles, including as Website Chief Editor. He is the producer of the award-winning Holocaust documentary film “Finding Manny.”
See the source image

Dr. Monica Gagliano is responsible for this research along with the University of Western Australia, where she takes sound science to a new level. This research concludes that plants emit and also react to certain external sounds. To hear them, a frequency of 220 Hz should be used to make it audible to humans. It has also been determined that the same sound is continuous, ie never stops.ㅤ
Therefore, it is important to make it clear that plants have their own vibration that allows them to generate these types of sounds. Plants are living organisms that internally have a multitude of nerve movements, fluids, and microorganisms that lead to the production of sounds that are heard at specific frequencies.
Gagliano, among many activities performed for his research, recorded the vibration of his sunflower plant with a microphone attached to its leaves. In addition to treating this melody as a discovery, the sound is so deep and beautiful that it sounds like a heavenly effect.

See the source image

See the source image

BREAKING: Stanford expert says data now proves its time to end ‘panic’ over COVID and open countryside

Posted April 24, 2020 in Politics , Source: thehill,

As Democrats and their sycophantic cheerleaders in the mainstream media criticize protesting Americans who want their elected leaders to open up their states and their economies, one Stanford University researcher says that’s exactly what we should be doing.

Carefully and “thoughtfully,” of course, but definitely opening things back up. And what’s more, Dr. Scott W. Atlas thinks that, based on empirical evidence, total lockdowns weren’t good policy to begin with.

In an op-ed for The Hill Friday, Atlas — who has been studying the virus’ behavior and the policies implemented to ostensibly slow its spread — writes:

The tragedy of the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be entering the containment phase. Tens of thousands of Americans have died, and Americans are now desperate for sensible policymakers who have the courage to ignore the panic and rely on facts. Leaders must examine accumulated data to see what has actually happened, rather than keep emphasizing hypothetical projections; combine that empirical evidence with fundamental principles of biology established for decades; and then thoughtfully restore the country to function.

He lays out five basic facts about the virus that he says should guide the reopening policies set forth by governors and the Trump administration:

Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people are not at significant risk of dying from COVID-19.

“The recent Stanford University antibody study now estimates that the fatality rate if infected is likely 0.1 to 0.2 percent, a risk far lower than previous World Health Organization estimates that were 20 to 30 times higher and that motivated isolation policies,” he writes.

Fact 2: Protecting people who are older and at greater risk of contracting the virus eliminates hospital overcrowding.

Again, that’s because younger people just aren’t susceptible to the virus or, at least, the most serious infections caused by the virus.

And, for what it’s worth, “Even early WHO reports noted that 80 percent of all cases were mild, and more recent studies show a far more widespread rate of infection and lower rate of serious illness,” Atlas writes.

Fact 3: Developing ‘herd immunity’ for our country is not possible while keeping people locked down.

That’s only going to prolong our problem, Atlas says. What’s more, it will make these dingbats in the mainstream media and their Democrat allies look like savants and prophets; in truth, saying there will be “a second wave” while keeping people isolated is a self-fulfilling prediction.

Atlas notes:

Indeed, that is the main purpose of widespread immunization in other viral diseases — to assist with population immunity. In this virus, we know that medical care is not even necessary for the vast majority of people who are infected. It is so mild that half of infected people are asymptomatic, shown in early data from the Diamond Princess ship, and then in Iceland and Italy. That has been falsely portrayed as a problem requiring mass isolation. In fact, infected people without severe illness are the immediately available vehicle for establishing widespread immunity.

Fact 4: People who need medical treatment but can’t get it due to hypothetical projections (that have consistently been wrong) are dying.

One of the biggest ironies is that, during the coronavirus epidemic, hospitals are laying off hundreds of thousands of workers and many are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy because they’ve been told to clear out their wards and keep them clear so they can handle the ‘coronavirus surge’ — that never came (and isn’t coming).

So-called ‘elective surgeries’ that aren’t really elective have been postponed. But worse, Atlas says, the data show that people who had life-threatening conditions were never diagnosed:

Most states and many hospitals abruptly stopped “nonessential” procedures and surgery. That prevented diagnoses of life-threatening diseases, like cancer screening, biopsies of tumors now undiscovered and potentially deadly brain aneurysms. Treatments, including emergency care, for the most serious illnesses were also missed. Cancer patients deferred chemotherapy. An estimated 80 percent of brain surgery cases were skipped. Acute stroke and heart attack patients missed their only chances for treatment, some dying and many now facing permanent disability.

Fact 5: We know who the vulnerable among us are and we can continue to protect them without keeping the country on lockdown.

Exhibit A: See Sweden.

But beyond that, Atlas notes we can and should continue to protect those vulnerable populations — older Americans, people with pre-existing conditions and known comorbidities — without subjecting the vast majority of the country to stay-at-home restrictions.

“The appropriate policy, based on fundamental biology and the evidence already in hand, is to institute a more focused strategy like some outlined in the first place: Strictly protect the known vulnerable, self-isolate the mildly sick and open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions,” Atlas writes. “Let’s stop underemphasizing empirical evidence while instead doubling down on hypothetical models. Facts matter.”