https://www.rtvslo.si/4d/arhiv/174809174?s=mmc
*
Dr. Alojz Ihan: prebolevniki z naravno imunostjo so bolje zaščiteni pred Omicron različico kot cepljeni, ker imajo odportnost na več komponent koronavirusa: 30.11. 2021
https://rumble.com/vq0lfb-ste-odgovorni.html
*
https://thepulse.one/2021/11/08/a-list-of-106-peer-reviewed-studies-affirming-the-power-of-natural-covid-immunity/
*
*
British Medical Journal: imunost na koronavirus obstaja že od prej, cepivo morda ni potrebno
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563
Covid-19: Do many people have pre-existing immunity?
* * *
Čeprav je doslej veljalo, da gre pri covid-19 za novi virus, na katerega človeška bitja še nismo odporna, nove raziskave kažejo, da to ne drži povsem. Protitelesa so namreč prisotna pri večjem številu ljudi, kot se je predvidevalo …
Priznana avtoriteta na področju medicine, British Medical Journal, je v preteklih dneh predstavil precej revolucionarne izsledke … Vsaj šest različnih študij je v zadnjem času pokazalo na prisotnost T-celic oz. protiteles virusu SARS-CoV-2 pri 20 do 50 odstotkih ljudi, ki niso bili v stiku z virusom. Podobne celice so bile opažene že v krvi darovalcev, ki so svojo kri v ZDA darovali med leti 2015 in 2018, študijo pa so izvedli tudi na Nizozemskem in ugotovili, da T-celice vsebuje »predpandemijska« kri kar dveh od desetih ljudi. Tudi v Nemčiji so T-celice našli pri tretjini darovalcev, ki niso bili v stiku z okužbo, podobni izsledki pa prihajajo še iz Singapurja, Velike Britanije in Švedske.
Vsaj šest različnih študij je v zadnjem času pokazalo na prisotnost T-celic oz. protiteles virusu SARS-CoV-2 pri 20 do 50 odstotkih ljudi, ki niso bili v stiku z virusom.
Znanstveniki opozarjajo, da gre za majhne in ne nujno reprezentativne študije, ki človeškega imunskega odziva ne prikažejo celostno, a so vseeno dovolj povedne, da pokažejo, da je bilo naše razumevanje koronavirusa napačno. To dodatno potrjuje dejstvo, da so bile študije, ki so pokazale na podobne rezultate, izvedene neodvisno in na različnih celinah. Raziskovalci so tako mnenja, da gre pri opaženih T-celicah za imunost, ki izhaja iz prehlada, tega pa lahko povzročijo različni tipi koronavirusom. »Dokazali smo, da gre za resnični imunski spomin, ki je delno pridobljen iz virusa prehlada,« je izsledke povzela ena od avtoric študije, Daniela Weiskopf.
Koronavirus kot črna skrinjica, ki skriva vedno nove uganke
Tovrstna hipoteza nakazuje, da smo morda imuniteto prebivalstva podcenili, obsežna zapiranja javnega življenja pa morda sploh ne bi bila potrebna. Večji izbruhi okužb s koronavirusom se namreč pojavljajo na lokacijah, kjer je hkrati opažena nizka prisotnost protiteles v krvi prebivalcev, zato raziskovalci sklepajo, da bodo tudi v prihodnje pandemiji »podvržena« le nekatera območja. Še vedno pa v primeru koronavirusa obstaja mnogo neznank. Izpostavljenost virusu namreč ni enaka okužbi, hkrati pa tudi okužba ne privede vselej do bolezni, ki tudi ni ključna za tvorbo protiteles.
Ob starih protitelesih je ključno tudi ustvarjanje novih, kar se doseže s t.i. čredno imunostjo (ang. herd imunity).
Ob starih protitelesih je ključno tudi ustvarjanje novih, kar se doseže s t.i. čredno imunostjo (ang. herd imunity). Slednje ni mogoče zagotoviti, če se javno življenje povsem ustavi, zato imajo države, ki niso sprejele tako restriktivnih ukrepov, med njimi Švedska, drugačne krivulje okužb od držav, ki so se hitro odločile za popolno ustavitev. Raziskovalci tako poudarjajo, da so morda za razumevanje covid-19 ter rešitev iz začaranega kroga pandemije ključne prav raziskave T-celic in razvoja protiteles. O tem, kakšno vlogo imajo, bo bolj znano po testiranju cepiv proti koronavirusu, ko se bo izkazalo, ali je cepivo pri posamezniki z že obstoječimi T-celicami sploh potrebno.
* * *
*
*
Naučnici trenutno istražuju moguće imunološke odgovore na SARS-CoV-2, uz pretpostavku da veliki broj ljudi već ima imunitet na ovaj virus.
Odgovori javnog zdravlja širom sveta temelje se na pretpostavci da je virus ušao u ljudsku populaciju bez prethodno postojećeg imuniteta. Međutim, niz studija koje su zabežile T-ćelije koje reaguju na SARS-CoV-2 i kod ljudi koji nisu bili zaraženi, sada otvaraju nova pitanja o stvarnoj prirodi epidemije.
Najmanje šest studija potvrdilo je postojanje antitela na SARS-CoV-2 kod 20 do 50 odsto ljudi koji, koliko je poznato, nisu bili u kontaktu s virusom.
U istraživanju krvi od donatora u SAD čiji su uzorci prikupljani između 2015. i 2018. godine, kod 50 odsto su pronađene vrste T-ćelija koje reaguju na SARS-CoV-2. Slična studija sprovedena je i u Holandiji na uzorcima prikupljenim davno pre pandemije, gde su antitela na SARS-CoV-2 pronađena kod dvoje od deset ljudi koji nisu bili izloženi virusu.
U Nemačkoj su antitela reaktivna na SARS-CoV-2 uočena kod davaoca krvi koji su negativni na virus. U Singapuru je analiza uzoraka uzetih od ljudi koji nisu bili u kontaktu sa SARS-om ili COVID-19 pokazala da je u 12 od 29 slučajeva potvrđena reaktivnost na SARS-CoV-2, kao i kod sedam od 11 ljudi koji su bili negativni na virus. Reaktivnost na SARS-CoV-2 je takođe uočena i u Velikoj Britaniji i Švedskoj, kod ljudi koji nisu prethodno bili izloženi virusu.
Rezultate ovih studija, iako nevelikog obima, teško je zanemariti, iako još uvek ne pružaju precizan uvid u ranije stečeni imunološki odgovor na SARS-CoV-2.
Naučnici su uvereni da su na tragu utvrđivanja porekla tog imunološkog odgovora.
Danijela Vajskof, jedna od autorki studije, ističe da se pretpostavlja je da je reč o imunitetu proizašlom iz običnih prehlada koje takođe uzrokuju korona virusi. Do sličnog zaključka došli su i naučnici u Singapuru, ali su napomenuli da reaktivnost T-ćelija možda potiče i od nekih drugih korona virusa, možda i od onih životinjskih.
Ova pretpostavka, koja zahteva dodatna istraživanja, mogla bi da dovede do revidiranja načina na koji bi trebalo utvrđivati osetljivost stanovništva i pratiti opseg širenja pandemije.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5N0uEC7r8o
It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g. influenza and other viruses. This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19. Most of the passengers were elderly and were in an ideal situation of transmission on the ship. However, 75% did not appear to be infected. So even in this high-risk group, the majority are resistant to the virus.
A study in the journal Cell shows that most people neutralise the coronavirus by mucosal (IgA) and cellular immunity (T-cells), while experiencing few or no symptoms 14.
Researchers found up to 60% SARS-Cov-2 reactivity with CD4+T cells in a non-infected population, suggesting cross-reactivity with other cold (corona) viruses.15
Most people therefore already have a congenital or cross-immunity because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus.
The antibody formation (IgM and IgG) by B-cells only occupies a relatively small part of our immune system. This may explain why, with an antibody percentage of 5-10%, there may be a group immunity anyway. The efficacy of vaccines is assessed precisely on the basis of whether or not we have these antibodies. This is a misrepresentation.
Most people who test positive (PCR) have no complaints. Their immune system is strong enough. Strengthening natural immunity is a much more logical approach. Prevention is an important, insufficiently highlighted pillar: healthy, full-fledged nutrition, exercise in fresh air, without a mask, stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts.
Vir: https://www.aier.org/article/open-letter-from-medical-doctors-and-health-professionals-to-all-belgian-authorities-and-all-belgian-media/?fbclid=IwAR0hvCN3S6zmIy2pnG0kyeUJtUG0eZZ8QEUC-ze_0yQ3a4-PUmM7p68uGLk
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected controls - july 2020
23 bolnikov, ki so preboleli SARS 1, imajo spominske T celice, ki se odzivajo na N protein SARS 1 celo 17 let po izbruhu SARS 1 leta 2003. In te T spominske celice dajejo navskrižno imunost tudi na N protein novega koronavirusa SARS CoV-2. Nobeno cepivo ne more dati tako učinkovite in dolgotrajne imunosti.
*
Tisti, ki prebolijo COVID-19 bodo imeli imunost dolgo časa, morda nekaj let, ugotavlja študija:
Immunity to the novel coronavirus may last eight months or longer, according to a new study authored by respected scientists at leading labs, which found that individuals who recovered from the coronavirus developed “robust” levels of B cells and T cells (necessary for fighting off the virus) and “these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time.”
KEY FACTS
Researchers collected blood samples from 185 patients between the ages of 19 to 81 who had tested positive for the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) early in the pandemic and discovered that most had enough immune cells to combat the virus and prevent reinfection.
In addition, these antibodies were “durable,” showing remarkably slow rates of decline that were consistent with many years, and potentially even decades, of protection.
Although the study is a preprint that has not yet been peer-reviewed, the New York Times refers to it as “the most comprehensive and long-ranging study of immune memory to the coronavirus to date.”
CRUCIAL QUOTE:
“That amount of memory would likely prevent the vast majority of people from getting hospitalized disease, severe disease, for many years,” said Shane Crotty, a virologist at the La Jolla Institute of Immunology.
KEY BACKGROUND:
According to New York Times reporter Apoorva Mandavilli, the vast majority of individuals (more than 90%) who had been infected with the coronavirus will be “protected from reinfections for a very long time,” and vaccines (“which generally provide stronger, longer-lasting protection”) could produce an even longer duration of immunity. “We probably will not need to vaccinate people every year as we had feared,” writes Mandavilli. The novel coronavirus may be “terminated fast enough that not only are you not experiencing any symptoms, but you are not infectious,” said Dr. Alessandro Sette, an immunologist at the La Jolla Institute of Immunology and co-author of the study. The Times report notes that scientists recently discovered that survivors of SARS, which was also caused by a coronavirus, still carry important immune cells 17 years after being infected. Researchers are also hopeful that studying antibodies may provide a blueprint for developing drugs to prevent or treat Covid-19.
TANGENT:
A recent study (also not peer-reviewed) originating from Imperial College London found that immunity to Covid-19 may decline over time, as levels of protective antibodies reportedly fell rapidly after infection. However, according to Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunologist at the University of Arizona, there is some emerging evidence that reinfections with common cold coronaviruses are a “result of viral genetic variations” and those concerns may not be relevant to SARS-CoV-2.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/11/17/coronavirus-immunity-may-last-years-possibly-even-decades-study-suggests/?sh=201009394185
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html
*
Covid infection confers immunity for at LEAST 6 months, and highly likely much, much longer - for ~100% of people exposed. Another large study finds precisely the same thing: 100 % natural immune protection from symptomatic COVID-19 within 6 months of first infection.
https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(20)30781-7/fulltext
*
dr. Michael Yeadon Twitter 9.1. 2021-
Look, I can’t say it more plainly. The evidence from several independent sources implies at least 30% prior immunity & around 20% from recent infection & survival. In my experiences opinion we’re at HI (herd immunity) in U.K. So I’m horrified at the idea that 80% are to be vaccinated.
https://twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1347866320134696960
I recall the story in the autumn that “antibodies are falling, fear that immunity is, too”. Nonsense. Misunderstanding about what these data tell us. The body does not maintain high levels of serum antibodies against infective agents, of such agents continue to circulate.
SAGE took the view that since SARS-CoV-2 was a new virus that they believed there wouldn’t be any immunity at all in the population. So, I think that’s the first thing. I remember hearing that and I puzzled, because I already knew – because I read the scientific literature that SARS-CoV-2 was 80% similar to another virus you may have heard of called SARS that moved around the world a bit in 2003, and more than that: it’s quite similar, in pieces of it, to common cold-causing coronaviruses.
So, when I heard that there was this coronavirus moving across the world I wasn’t as worried as perhaps other people were, because I figured that since there are four common cold-causing coronaviruses, I figured that quite a lot of the population we’ve been exposed to one of those viruses, and would probably have a perhaps substantial protective immunity. And just to explain why I was so confident everybody knows the story of Edward Jenner and vaccination, and the story of cowpox and smallpox. And that the old story was that milkmaids had very, uh, clear complexions: they never suffered from things like smallpox, that if it didn’t kill you would leave your skin permanently scarred. And the reason that they had the protection was that they were exposed to a more benign, related virus called cowpox.
Edward Jenner came up with the idea that if it’s cowpox that saves the fair maid – he reasoned that if he could give another person an exposure to the cowpox, he would be able to protect them from smallpox. Now, he did an experiment that you can’t do now – and he never should have done it – but apocryphally, or really, or maybe you’re ill, we’re not sure. Edward Jenner acquired some of the liquid from a person infected with cowpox. Relatively mild pustules that then go away. And he got some of this and he – he scraped it into the skin of a small boy and a few weeks later, he obtained some liquid from some poor person that was dying of smallpox and infected the boy. And, lo and behold, the boy did not get ill and that gave birth to the whole field of what’s called vaccination. And vax, the vaccine’s “vac.” It comes from “vaccus,” the Latin name for cow. So, we are really familiar with the principle of cross immunization.
*
Direktorica sežanskega zdravstvenega doma, ga. Ljubislava Škibin, ki je tudi družinska zdravnica in zdravnica medicine dela, iz izkušenj, ki so jih dobili na terenu, meni, da je v kraških občinah od 30 do 40 % ljudi Covid-19 »že prebolelo.« Treba pa bi bilo razčistiti epidemiološko sliko s krvno analizo na protitelesa, pravi: “To je pot, ki smo jo ubrali tudi v podjetjih, kjer smo teste naredili pri okoli 2000 zaposlenih.” Pomisleke epidemiološke stroke, da se lahko protitelesa pojavijo z zamikom, pozna. A odgovarja: “Pri nas smo imeli mogoče le dva primera zamika, da so se protitelesa pojavila kakšen dan pozneje, kot je bil pozitiven bris. A za tem stojim. Nisem imunolog ali epidemiolog, nikogar ne učim, povem le našo izkušnjo, ki se mi zdi odlična,” je dodala.
https://andraz-tersek.si/cakajoc-godota-popravek-cakajoc-na-sodisce-da-presodi-in-odloci/?fbclid=IwAR1W7ghxRwtSx1u0neKgJwqir8PnGnAedB4oj3P7IUdeL7qGvLoc6AUpZQw
*
FB: 23.2. 2021
Dr. Hooman Noorchashm’s #ScreenB4Vaccine plan is coming into view by many as a potentially important way to protect the vast subset of Americans who have already been naturally infected with COVID-19 and are thus immune.
In the below video, Noorchashm, an accomplished surgeon and patient safety advocate, argues that at least a fraction of these millions of already infected Americans — especially the elderly, frail and those with serious cardiovascular comorbidities — are at risk of being harmed by a dangerous exaggerated immune response triggered by the COVID vaccine.
One concern is the possibility that some people who get vaccinated will experience disease enhancement, a condition that could cause them to develop more severe symptoms when exposed to the wild virus than if they hadn’t been vaccinated.
Pathogenic priming is another concern, now confirmed by researchers at Harvard Medical School, Boston General Hospital and elsewhere.
Noorchashm raises a third concern: that viral antigens may linger in antigen-presenting cells or elsewhere leading to multi-organ immunopathology in people who receive the COVID vaccines.
*
Epidemiologist: We Could Have Reached Natural Herd Immunity in 6 Weeks
In an interview with Alliance for Natural Health International, epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski, Ph.D., says shielding the most vulnerable from a virus, while letting the infection run its course through healthy populations, is the fastest way to achieve herd immunity.
Why do governments persist with lockdowns, or the threat of lockdowns, given a growing body of evidence showing that lockdowns don’t save lives? Will lockdowns that were meant to only ‘flatten the curve’ now be sidelined because COVID vaccines are considered the panacea?
This week on Speaking Naturally, we interview Knut Wittkowski, Ph.D. He is an eminent scientist with a long track record as a biostatistician and epidemiologist. He was one of the earliest to call out the folly of lockdowns. His main recommendations to shield or treat early the most vulnerable, while letting the infection run its normal course through healthy populations — stated as early as March 2020 — subsequently became the basis of the Great Barrington Declaration.
ANH-Intl founder and scientific director, Rob Verkerk Ph.D., caught up with Wittkowski a year on, asking whether he felt censored as a scientist, where we were in the epidemic, what role vaccines may or not play, what concerns we should have over new variants — and what solutions he felt might help us navigate out of our current predicament.
On censorship
Wittkowski doesn’t feel censored. But like many other scientists who haven’t parroted the mainstream narrative, he also doesn’t feel heard.
Is COVID just a bad flu?
Wittkowski:
“The virus hasn’t behaved differently from any other respiratory disease virus. If we had not had the capability to sequence the virus in January, and have identified — ooops! — it’s not influenza, it’s corona, we wouldn’t even have noticed. It would have been just another flu.
“So people got very confused and fearful about it. Especially after having seen…a lot of older people dying in nursing homes.”
Lockdowns were intended to the flatten the curve, right?
Wittkowski:
“The idea of flattening the curve — well, I was never convinced — but I understand why politicians would resort to that after having seen the hospital system in Italy having been under severe duress. But a month later, in the U.S., on April 17 [2020], the then director of the CDC, Robert Redfield presented data at the White House — and the data that this was the third flu that year — there was the one of influenza B, then of influenza A, then of COVID. And hospital admissions — or people showing up at hospitals — had already ceased — was down to normal levels.
Wittkowski goes on to propose that if the vulnerable had been shielded and the virus had been allowed to be exposed, naturally acquired herd immunity would have been reached in around six weeks.
What lockdowns did was treat everyone in the same way so that people with vulnerabilities have an equal chance of being exposed — so those who are most vulnerable become more heavily infected and consequently “they are the people who die.”
Wittkowski says “Lockdowns are not saving lives, they’re costing lives. Every respiratory disease … virus epidemic … every one one of them, ends with herd immunity. There is no other way for an epidemic to end. So it’s not an invention — a strategy — it’s just the way nature regulates respiratory disease epidemics.”
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/rob-verkerk-knut-wittkowski-herd-immunity/?itm_term=home
*
Test T-celic je pokazal, da ima 40-60% naravno imunost na koronavirus SARS CoV-2 zaradi preteklih okužb z drugimi koronavirusi. Dr. John Lee, profesor patologije UK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btWfAXQ8wYg
*
1. Multiple lines of research indicate that immunocompetent people display “robust” and lasting cellular (T cell) immunity to SARS-CoV viruses [1], including SARS-CoV-2 and its variants [2]. T cell protection stems not only from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 itself, but from cross-reactive immunity following previous exposure to common cold and SARS coronaviruses [1,3-10]. Such immunity was detectable after infections up to 17 years prior [1,3]. Therefore, immunocompetent people do not need vaccination against SARS-Cov-2.
2. Natural T-Cell immunity provides stronger and more comprehensive protection against all SARS-CoV-2 strains than vaccines, because naturally primed immunity recognises multiple virus epitopes and costimulatory signals, not merely a single (spike) protein. Thus, immunocompetent people are better protected against SARS-CoV-2 and any variants that may arise by their own immunity than by the current crop of vaccines.
https://off-guardian.org/2021/05/05/covid-vaccines-necessity-efficacy-and-safety/
*
*
https://dokumentarac.hr/featured/dobre-vijesti-blagi-c0vid-19-potice-trajnu-zastitu-antitijelima/
Najnovije istraživanje s Medicinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta Washington pokazalo je da oni koji su preboljeli blagi oblik bolesti razvijaju stanice koje mogu doživotno stvarati antitijela
Mjesecima nakon oporavka od blažih oblika C0VIDA-19, ljudi još uvijek imaju imunološke stanice u svom tijelu koje izbacuju antitijela protiv virusa koji uzrokuje bolest C0VID-19, tvrde u studiji koju je proveo tim istraživača s Medicinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta Washington u St.Louis-u. Takve stanice mogle bi trajati cijeli život i cijelo vrijeme izbacivati antitijela.
Nalazi objavljeni 24. svibnja 2021. godine u časopisu Nature sugeriraju da blaži slučajevi C0VIDA-19 ostavljaju zaražene s trajnom zaštitom antitijelima i tvrde da će kod njih ponovljeni napadi bolesti vjerojatno biti vrlo neuobičajeni.
“Prošle jeseni bilo je izvještaja da antitijela nestaju ubrzo nakon infekcije virusom koji uzrokuje bolest C0VID-19, a glavni mediji su to protumačili da imunitet ne traje dugo“, rekao je stariji autor Dr. sc. Ali Ellebedy, izvanredni profesor patologije i imunologije, medicine i molekularne mikrobiologije. „Ali to je pogrešno tumačenje podataka. Normalno je da razina antitijela opada nakon akutne infekcije, ali ne pada na nulu; ona se poravnava. Ovdje smo pronašli stanice koje proizvode antitijela kod ljudi 11 mjeseci nakon prvih simptoma. Te će im stanice živjeti i stvarati antitijela do kraja njihovih života. To je snažan dokaz za dugotrajni imunitet.“
Tijekom virusne infekcije imune stanice koje stvaraju antitijela brzo se množe i cirkuliraju u krvi, visoko podižući razinu antitijela. Jednom kada se infekcija riješi, većina takvih stanica odumire, a razina antitijela u krvi opada. Mala populacija stanica koje proizvode antitijela, zvane dugovječne plazme, migriraju u koštanu srž i tamo se nastanjuju, odakle neprestano izlučuju nisku razinu antitijela u krvotok kako bi se zaštitile od novog susreta s virusom.
Ključ za utvrđivanje dovodi li preboljevanje C0VIDA-19 do dugotrajne zaštite organizma antitijelima, shvatio je Ellebedy, leži u koštanoj srži. Da bi otkrio nalaze li se u onima koji su se oporavili od blažih oblika C0VIDA-19 dugotrajne plazmatske stanice koje proizvode antitijela posebno ciljana na SARS-CoV-2 koji uzrokuje C0VID-19, Ellebedy se udružio s koautoricom Izv. prof. Iskrom Pušić, dr. med., i s koautoricama Izvr. prof. dr. sc. Rachel Presti, dr. med. i Doc. dr. sc. Jane O’Halloran, dr. med., s kojima je već surađivao na projektu praćenja razine antitijela u uzorcima krvi preživjelih od COVIDA-19 .
Tim je već upisao 77 sudionika koji su davali uzorke krvi u intervalima od tri mjeseca, počevši otprilike mjesec dana nakon početne infekcije. Većina sudionika imala je blage oblike C0VIDA-19; samo njih šest je bilo hospitalizirano.
Uz Pusićevu pomoć, Ellebedy i kolegice dobili su koštanu srž od 18 sudionika istraživanja, sedam ili osam mjeseci nakon početnih infekcija. Pet ih se vratilo četiri mjeseca kasnije i dalo je drugi uzorak koštane srži. Za usporedbu, znanstvenici su također dobili koštanu srž 11 ljudi koji nikada nisu imali C0VID-19.
Kao što se i očekivalo, razina antitijela u krvi sudionika preboljelih C0VID-19 brzo je pala u prvih nekoliko mjeseci nakon infekcije, a zatim se uglavnom poravnala, s tim da su neka protutijela bila uočljiva i 11 mjeseci nakon infekcije. Nadalje, 15 od 19 uzoraka koštane srži onih koji su imali C0VID-19 sadržavali su stanice koje proizvode antitijela, posebno ciljane na virus koji uzrokuje C0VID-19. Takve stanice mogle su se naći četiri mjeseca kasnije kod pet osoba koje su se vratile kako bi dale drugi uzorak koštane srži. Nitko od 11 ljudi koji nikada nisu imali COVID-19 nije imao takve stanice koje proizvode antitijela u koštanoj srži.
“Ljudi s blagim oblicima C0VIDA-19 uklanjaju virus iz svog tijela dva do tri tjedna nakon infekcije, tako da ne bi bilo virusa koji pokreće aktivni imunološki odgovor sedam ili 11 mjeseci nakon infekcije“, rekao je Ellebedy. “Te se stanice ne dijele. One miruju, borave u koštanoj srži i luče antitijela. To rade otkada se infekcija riješila i to će raditi u nedogled.“
Ljudi koji su zaraženi i nikada nisu imali simptome također mogu imati dugotrajni imunitet, nagađaju istraživači. No, tek treba istražiti hoće li i oni koji su podnijeli ozbiljniju infekciju biti zaštićeni od budućeg napada bolesti, rekli su.
“Moglo bi ići u bilo kojem smjeru“, rekao je prvi autor Dr. Jackson Turner, predavač patologije i imunologije. „Upala igra glavnu ulogu u ozbiljnom C0VIDU-19, a previše upale može dovesti do oštećenih imunoloških odgovora. Ali s druge strane, razlog zašto se ljudi stvarno razboljevaju je često zato što u tijelu imaju veliku količinu virusa, a imati puno virusa može dovesti do dobrog imunološkog odgovora. Dakle, nije jasno. Moramo ponoviti studiju na osobama s umjerenim do teškim infekcijama kako bismo shvatili je li vjerojatno da će biti zaštićene od ponovne infekcije.“
Ellebedy i kolege sada proučavaju inducira li i cijepljenje dugovječne stanice koje proizvode antitijela.
Turner JS, Kim W, Kalaidina E, Goss CW, Rauseo AM, Schmitz AJ, Hansen L, Haile A, Klebert MK, Pusic I, O’Halloran JA, Presti RM, Ellebedy AH. “Infekcija SARS-CoV-2 inducira dugovječne plazma stanice koštane srži u ljudi” (engl. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature. 24. svibnja 2021. DOI: 10.1038 / s41586-021-03647-4
Ovu su studiju podržali Nacionalni institut za alergije i zarazne bolesti Nacionalnog instituta za zdravstvo (NIH), brojevi potpora U01AI1419901, U01AI150747 i 5T32CA009547 i brojevi ugovora HHSN272201400006C, HHSN272201400008C i 75N93019C00051; Norveško vijeće za istraživanje, grant broj 271160; i Nacionalna poslijediplomska škola Sveučilišta u Oslu iz biologije infekcija i antimikrobnih sredstava, broj potpore 249062. U ovoj su studiji korišteni uzorci dobiveni iz biološkog spremišta COVID-19 Medicinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Washingtonu, podržanog od NIH / Nacionalnog centra za unapređenje translacijskih znanosti, broj potpore UL1 TR002345 .
1500 fakultetskih liječnika Medicinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Washingtonu također je medicinsko osoblje dječjih bolnica Barnes-Jewish i St. Louis. Medicinski fakultet vodeća je ustanova u medicinskim istraživanjima, poučavanju i njezi pacijenata, a SAD News & World Report neprestano je svrstava među vodeće medicinske škole u zemlji. Zahvaljujući povezanosti s dječjim bolnicama Barnes-Jewish i St. Louis, Medicinski fakultet povezan je s BJC HealthCare.
Izvor: https://medicine.wustl.edu/news/good-news-mild-covid-19-induces-lasting-antibody-protection/
*
McCullough went on: “We’ve had 111 million people in the world who’ve gotten this infection. If there was a chance for double and triple infections in the same person, we would have seen it by the millions. If you look in the literature, maybe you can find a hundred cases where someone says ‘maybe I got reinfected.’ Almost always it’s a misinterpretation of one of these PCR tests which is commonly false positive. One of the false narratives out there is that you can get the infection twice. It’s a false narrative. The FDA and the sponsors knew that. Of course they excluded COVID-recovered patients. They know you can’t get it again.”
*
For example, a recent SIREN study conducted in the UK at the Public Health England (PHE) involving over 20,000 healthcare professionals has discovered that immunity derived by natural COVID-19 infection is stronger and more effective at warding off the novel coronavirus than the vaccine developed by Oxford-AstraZeneca.
A U.S.-based vaccine company, MERK, also announced on Jan. 25th that they will stop developing vaccines for the coronavirus since natural infections are better than vaccines in producing results leading to herd immunity.
The Great Barrington Declaration – a statement authored by three highly qualified epidemiologists from the universities of Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford – also declared similar findings while calling for an end to the widespread lockdown policies.
“(A)s immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls.” the authors wrote.
Preliminary findings by scientists at Public Health England (PHE) showed that reinfections in people who have COVID-19 antibodies from a past infection are rare - with only 44 cases found among 6,614 previously infected people in the study.
Between June 18 and Nov. 24, scientists found 44 potential reinfections - two “probable” and 42 “possible” - among 6,614 participants who had tested positive for antibodies. This represents an 83% rate of protection from reinfection, they said. (SIREN study)
https://snapsurvey.phe.org.uk/siren/ SIREN študija
https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2021/03/11/the-siren-study-answering-the-big-questions/
*
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03647-4
*
*
https://maribor24.si/globalno/pfizer-in-moderna-bi-lahko-nudila-dozivljenjsko-imunost
*
*
Good news: Mild COVID-19 induces lasting antibody protection
People who have had mild illness develop antibody-producing cells that can last lifetime
*
Prof. Jerala: Cepiva bi lahko dala dolgoročno imunost: https://www.facebook.com/rtvslo.si/videos/146229887497355
*
Študija junij 2021: SARS-CoV-2 izzove močne adaptivne imunske odzive ne glede na resnost bolezni
Stine SFNielsenLine KVibholmIdaMonradRikkeOlesenGiacomo SFrattariMarie HPahusJesper FHøjenJesper DGunstChristianErikstrupAndreasHolleuferRuneHartmannLarsØstergaardOle SSøgaardMariane HSchleimannMartinTolstrup
aDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Aarhus University Hospital, DenmarkbDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, DenmarkcDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, Denmark dDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Aarhus University Hospital, DenmarkMetode
Vključili smo 203 ozdravljene bolnike, okužene s SARS-CoV-2 na Danskem med 3. aprilom in 9. julijem 2020, vsaj 14 dni po okrevanju simptomov COVID-19. Udeleženci so imeli različne stopnje bolezni, od asimptomatske do hude. Zbrali smo plazmo, serum in PBMC za analizo odziva specifičnih protiteles SARS-CoV-2 z analizo Meso Scale, vključno z drugimi sevi koronavirusov, tekmovanjem ACE2, IgA ELISA, zmogljivostjo nevtralizacije psevdovirusov in analizo celic CD8+ T s pretočno citometrijo dekstramerjev. Imunološki rezultati so bili primerjani med skupinami po resnosti znotraj kohorte in 10 predpandemičnimi negativnimi kontrolami SARS-CoV-2.
Ugotovitve
Poročamo o širokih seroloških profilih v kohorti, pri čemer smo odkrili vezavo protiteles na druge človeške koronaviruse. Pri 202 (>99 %) udeležencih so bila ugotovljena specifična protitelesa SARS-CoV-2, pri 193 (95 %) posameznikih pa je bila ugotovljena nevtralizacija SARS-CoV-2 in blokada interakcije med beljakovinsko bodico in receptorjemACE2. Ugotovljena je bila pomembna pozitivna korelacija (r=0,7804) med titri protiteles za blokiranje spike-ACE2 in nevtralizacijsko močjo. Poleg tega so bili za SARS-CoV-2 specifični odzivi celic CD8+ T jasni in količinsko opredeljivi pri 95 od 106 (90 %) posameznikov s HLA-A2+.
Tolmačenje
Virusni površinski protein spike je bil opredeljen kot glavna tarča nevtralizacijskih protiteles in odzivov T celic CD8+ . Na splošno je imela večina bolnikov močne adaptivne imunske odzive, ne glede na resnost bolezni.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352396421002036
*
Odzivi človeških IgG in IgA na COVID-19 mRNA cepiva
Sklepi
Če povzamemo, longitudinalna serologija prejemnikov cepiva COVID-19 mRNA izpostavlja pomembna vprašanja, povezana z imunostjo in spremljanjem odzivov na cepivo. Ohranjanje antigenu specifičnega IgG v serumu po cepljenju je, upajmo, pozitiven kazalnik učinkovite dolgotrajne imunosti in klinični kazalnik odzivnosti cepiva [27]. Podatki kažejo, da cepiva COVID-19 mRNA poleg IgG sprožijo tudi antigensko specifični IgA, ki je lahko pomemben pri preprečevanju prenosa in tudi okužbe [28,29]. Rdeči specifični IgA v serumu upada bistveno (p < 0,002) hitreje kot rdeči specifični IgG, vendar je "recall" odziv tako za IgG kot za IgA (čas do najvišje ravni v serumu po drugem/spodbujevalnem odmerku) bistveno (p < 0,03) krajši od primarnega odziva.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249499
*
*
*
*
Rasto Fikfak: No in sedaj je Ihan postavil še laž nad lažjo, ne da bi navedel klinične študije. Kliničnih študij o tem, kako dolga je imunost po ceplenju ni, oziroma ni dokazana imunost, daljša od 4 mesecev. Zakaj? Ker enostavno ni na vojo dovolj časa, da bi to dokazali. Medtem ko imamo študije prebolelih na kitajskem iz 2019, ki dokazujejo, da je imunost dolga vsaj nekaj let, če ni celo doživljenjska. Tale Ihan je baraba nad barabami. Ihan dobro ve, da sta v našem telesu prisotni dve vrsti imunskih telesc. Ene so aktivni vojaki, drugo so spomnske celice. Iam zavestno in namerno zavaja.
https://www.icandecide.org/ican_press/ican-demands-that-cal-osha-recognize-natural-immunity/
ICAN wrote to the Chief of California’s OSHA to request that, to the extent that CAL OSHA’S recommendations will allow less stringent mask rules for fully vaccinated individuals, those less stringent mask rules also be applied to those who have had COVID- 19.
ICAN’s attorneys outlined for CAL OSHA why restrictions on the rights and civil liberties of those have had COVID-19, beyond the restrictions placed on the fully vaccinated, are not supported by the existing science. To support the argument, ICAN attached a declaration from Dr. Peter McCullough justifying why natural immunity is just as good as, if not better than, immunity induced from a COVID-19 vaccine.
In addition, ICAN explained that there have been concerns raised by medical professionals that vaccinating those recently infected can lead to serious injury or death by causing antigen specific tissue inflammation in any tissues harboring viral antigens.
An estimated 33.5 million individuals in the United States have had a reported case of COVID-19 and the CDC estimates that there have been over 114 million infections. Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine recently called the failure to lift restrictions on those that had COVID-19 as “one of the biggest failures of our current medical leadership.”
Hopefully CAL OSHA will acknowledge the science and put the interests of individuals before the profits of big pharma.
*
Prof Sucharit Bhakdi: https://www.bitchute.com/video/l96xxnMTJnF0/?fbclid=IwAR2ntusV29UhdxjqiOyINRy5K_wBJVGN2Ez78fELYL-FGzmfibGvliSDmYc
Imunski sistem ima spomin na druge koronaviruse in hitro naredi protitelesa.
*
Dr David Bauer - Francis Crick Institute admits that those who take the injection will destroy their immune system
You can watch more here from AJ should you wish: https://banned.video/watch?id=60f89c07b4c876043c591c8a
*
Poročilo Pfizerja: protitelesa po cepljenju so hitro padla: https://s21.q4cdn.com/317678438/files/doc_financials/2021/q2/Q2-2021-Earnings-Charts-FINAL.pdf
*
*
https://www.revijazamojezdravje.si/naravno-prebolevanje-covid-19-verjetno-nudi-trajno-imunost/?fbclid=IwAR28TxcA1v78YSeHD08PJu38f1cflnNmAmj2J0Ev9sYbaQefO_DvEY-JsF8
*
*
A rise in vaccinated people becoming infected with coronavirus has cast doubt over the lasting efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines, according to new research. One study found that the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine against symptomatic infection almost halved after four months, and that vaccinated people infected with the more infectious Delta variant had as high viral loads as the unvaccinated. https://on.ft.com/3kbEmrN
*
*
Mihael Simič FB 23.8. 2021: NARAVNA IMUNOST na kovid traja pri meni že 11 mesecev. današnji rezultat je pokazal 30,12 IU/mL protiteles, pri čemer je prag imunosti 0,80 IU/mL. naravna imunost je vsekakor kvalitetnejša in daljša od imunosti, ki jo obljubljajo s cepivi! sledite me za nove rezultate krvnih preiskav na protitelesa, vsaka dva meseca, ki bodo razkrila resnico o naravni imunosti
*
https://www.magicus.info/ostalo/hitna-sluzba/prirodno-steceni-imunitet-traje-dozivotno-stoga-nema-potrebe-za-cijepljenjem-onih-koji-su-preboljeli-koronu-dr-edwards-dr-yeadon-i-dr-w#.YSOrFzEYL2Q.facebook
*
New Evidence Points to Antibodies as Reliable Indicator of Vaccine Protection
When Dr. Anthony Fauci spoke recently at a White House briefing about the need for COVID-19 booster shots, buried in his slideshow of charts and data points was a little-noticed scientific paper that offers evidence for a reliable way to predict how much protection a COVID-19 vaccine offers.
The study appeared on a preprint server earlier this month without much fanfare, but many interested in the future of COVID-19 vaccines had been eagerly awaiting the results.
The researchers were looking for markers in vaccinated patients’ blood that would indicate protection against COVID-19, what’s known as “correlates of immunity.” What the team of scientists found were neutralizing antibodies — proteins made by the immune system that are known to disarm the coronavirus.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.09.21261290v1
Abstract
Background In the Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) trial, estimated mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy against coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) was 94%. SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurements were assessed as correlates of COVID-19 risk and as correlates of protection.
Methods Through case-cohort sampling, participants were selected for measurement of four serum antibody markers at Day 1 (first dose), Day 29 (second dose), and Day 57: IgG binding antibodies (bAbs) to Spike, bAbs to Spike receptor-binding domain (RBD), and 50% and 80% inhibitory dilution pseudovirus neutralizing antibody titers calibrated to the WHO International Standard (cID50 and cID80). Participants with no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Cox regression assessed in vaccine recipients the association of each Day 29 or 57 serologic marker with COVID-19 through 126 or 100 days of follow-up, respectively, adjusting for risk factors.
Results Day 57 Spike IgG, RBD IgG, cID50, and cID80 neutralization levels were each inversely correlated with risk of COVID-19: hazard ratios 0.66 (95% CI 0.50, 0.88; p=0.005); 0.57 (0.40, 0.82; p=0.002); 0.41 (0.26, 0.65; p<0.001); 0.35 (0.20, 0.60; p<0.001) per 10-fold increase in marker level, respectively, multiplicity adjusted P-values 0.003-0.010. Results were similar for Day 29 markers (multiplicity adjusted P-values <0.001-0.003). For vaccine recipients with Day 57 reciprocal cID50 neutralization titers that were undetectable (<2.42), 100, or 1000, respectively, cumulative incidence of COVID-19 through 100 days post Day 57 was 0.030 (0.010, 0.093), 0.0056 (0.0039, 0.0080), and 0.0023 (0.0013, 0.0036). For vaccine recipients at these titer levels, respectively, vaccine efficacy was 50.8% (−51.2, 83.0%), 90.7% (86.7, 93.6%), and 96.1% (94.0, 97.8%). Causal mediation analysis estimated that the proportion of vaccine efficacy mediated through Day 29 cID50 titer was 68.5% (58.5, 78.4%).
Conclusions Binding and neutralizing antibodies correlated with COVID-19 risk and vaccine efficacy and likely have utility in predicting mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy against COVID-19.
Trial registration number COVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04470427
*
https://fee.org/articles/harvard-epidemiologist-says-the-case-for-covid-vaccine-passports-was-just-demolished/?fbclid=IwAR2LjinoSz2HTI-TR2iD_vifFNxJ53g51YnixWs9QISItnQhRruNVPzhfAE
Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections
Abstract
Background: Reports of waning vaccine-induced immunity against COVID-19 have begun to surface. With that, the comparable long-term protection conferred by previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing three groups: (1)SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals who received a two-dose regimen of the BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine, (2)previously infected individuals who have not been vaccinated, and (3)previously infected and single dose vaccinated individuals. Three multivariate logistic regression models were applied. In all models we evaluated four outcomes: SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic disease, COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. The follow-up period of June 1 to August 14, 2021, when the Delta variant was dominant in Israel. Results: SARS-CoV-2-naive vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naive vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naive vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.
Prevod:
Pojavila so se poročila o upadanju imunosti proti COVID-19, ki jo je povzročilo cepljenje. Ob tem ostaja nejasna primerljiva dolgoročna zaščita zaradi predhodne okužbe s SARS-CoV-2.
Metode: Izvedli smo retrospektivno opazovalno študijo, v kateri smo primerjali tri skupine: (1) posameznike brez okužbe s SARS-CoV-2, ki so prejeli dva odmerka cepiva BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2, (2) predhodno okužene posameznike, ki niso bili cepljeni, ter (3) predhodno okužene in cepljene posameznike z enim odmerkom. Uporabljeni so bili trije multivariatni logistični regresijski modeli. V vseh modelih smo ocenili štiri izide: okužbo s SARS-CoV-2, simptomatsko bolezen, hospitalizacijo, povezano s COVID-19, in smrt. Obdobje spremljanja od 1. junija do 14. avgusta 2021, ko je v Izraelu prevladovala različica Delta.
Rezultati: Pri cepljenih osebah, ki niso bile prej okužene s SARS-CoV-2, je bilo tveganje za prebojno okužbo z različico Delta 13,06-krat (95 % CI, 8,08 do 21,11) večje kot pri predhodno okuženih osebah, ko se je prvi dogodek (okužba ali cepljenje) zgodil januarja in februarja 2021. Povečano tveganje je bilo pomembno (P<0,001) tudi za simptomatsko bolezen. Ko so dopustili, da se okužba zgodi kadar koli pred cepljenjem (od marca 2020 do februarja 2021), so se pokazali dokazi o pojemajoči naravni imunosti, čeprav je bilo pri neokuženih cepljenih proti SARS-CoV-2 tveganje za prebojno okužbo 5,96-krat (95 % CI, 4,85 do 7,33) večje, tveganje za simptomatsko bolezen pa 7,13-krat (95 % CI, 5,51 do 9,21) večje.
Pri cepljenih proti SARS-CoV-2, ki niso prej okuženi, je bilo tudi večje tveganje za hospitalizacije, povezane s COVID-19, v primerjavi s tistimi, ki so bili predhodno okuženi.
Zaključki: Ta študija je pokazala, da naravna imunost zagotavlja dolgotrajnejšo in močnejšo zaščito pred okužbo, simptomatsko boleznijo in hospitalizacijo, ki jo povzroča različica Delta SARS-CoV-2, v primerjavi z imunostjo, povzročeno s cepivom BNT162b2 v dveh odmerkih. Posamezniki, ki so bili predhodno okuženi z virusom SARS-CoV-2 in so prejeli en odmerek cepiva, so pridobili dodatno zaščito pred različico Delta.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full.pdf+html
*
*
Direktor klinike, interventni pulmolog dr. Aleš Rozman je gostoval v oddaji Odmevi na Tv Slovenija in je spregovoril o vprašanju, ki bega mnoge: Zakaj polno cepljenji še vedno lahko zbolijo?
Kot že vemo je delta različica precej bolj kužna in pred njo ni varen niti cepljen. Tukaj pa je treba poudariti, da so tisti, ki so bili cepljeni, še vedno bistveno bolj zaščiteni od necepljenih, je dejal Rozman.
So prebolevniki bolj odporni na delta različico kot cepljeni?
Rozman je dejal, da imajo v bolnišnici trenutno več cepljenih kot prebolevnikov in razložil, zakaj je temu tako.
''Pri prebolevanju virusa gre za imunost, ki jo s tem pridobimo in je večplastna. Pri cepljenju pa smo se zanašali zgolj na to, da smo merili nivo protiteles v krvi. Ta je pri cepljenih osebah resnično večji, kot pri tistih, ki so covid-19 preboleli,'' je dejal in dodal, da to ni celotna zgodba imunosti ter gre tu tudi za sluznična protitelesa, ki se izločajo.
Nam cepivo nudi možnost, da dobimo stopnjo imunosti?
''Tu gre za celične imunske organizme in pa tudi zato, da smo pri prebolevanju dobili imunost preko drugega vstopnega mehanizma, to je prek dihal in ne preko injekcije. Se pravi neka naravna imunost vendarle primarno izvira iz prebolevanja bolezni''.
Se pri cepljenih odpornost zmanjšuje?
''Verjetno, da se zmanjšuje. To je odvisno od posameznika do posameznika.''
Tisti, ki so se cepili med prvimi zbolevajo pogosteje. Zakaj je temu tako?
''Iz nedavnih izraelskih podatkov je razvidno, da imajo tisti, ki so bili cepljeni na samem začetku, ko je bilo cepivo dano v uporabo, v tem trenutku manjšo odpornost in pogosteje zbolevajo od tistih, ki so bili cepljeni nekaj mesecev kasneje. Tudi angleški primer nekako kaže na to, da čim kasnejši je bil drugi odmerek, bolj smo proti delta varianti zaščiteni. Vsekakor pa je potrebno vzeti v račun, da je delta varianta nekoliko drugačna od tiste, za katero je bilo cepivo razvito.''
Zakaj se v bolnišnicah bolje ne pripravijo na to, kar prinaša jesenski val?
Na vprašanje, zakaj v bolnišnicah niso bolje pripravljeni na jesen, pa je dejal, da so se vse bolnišnice pripravile kolikor je to le možno. Tukaj težavo predstavlja predvsem kader, saj se mladi vse težje odločajo za poklice, ki se tičejo zdravstva - velik razlog so tudi prenizke plače.
Ali bi se morali cepljeni prav tako redno testirati za izpolnjevanje pogoja PCT?
Tatjana Lejko Zupanc, infektologinja in predstojnica infekcijske klinike je dejala, da je prepričana, da bo sčasoma potrebno tudi to, da se bodo morali cepljeni testirati za izpolnjevanje PCT.
''Če bo začelo število primerov naraščalo, zlasti, če bomo ugotovili, da so bili prenosi od cepljenih oseb na druge,'' je dejala Lejko Zupančeva.
*
Waning of BNT162b2 vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in Qatar
(še ni strokovno pregledana študija)
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND Waning of vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 disease is a concern. This study investigated persistence of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine effectiveness against infection and disease in Qatar, where the Beta and Delta variants have dominated incidence and PCR testing is done at a mass scale.
METHODS A matched test-negative, case-control study design was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against any severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 disease, between January 1, 2021 to August 15, 2021.
RESULTS Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any infection, asymptomatic or symptomatic, was negligible for the first two weeks after the first dose, increased to 36.5% (95% CI: 33.1-39.8) in the third week after the first dose, and reached its peak at 72.1% (95% CI: 70.9-73.2) in the first five weeks after the second dose. Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating ≥15 weeks after the second dose, reaching diminished levels of protection by the 20th week. Effectiveness against symptomatic infection was higher than against asymptomatic infection, but still waned in the same fashion. Effectiveness against any severe, critical, or fatal disease increased rapidly to 67.7% (95% CI: 59.1-74.7) by the third week after the first dose, and reached 95.4% (95% CI: 93.4-96.9) in the first five weeks after the second dose, where it persisted at about this level for six months.
CONCLUSIONS BNT162b2-induced protection against infection appears to wane rapidly after its peak right after the second dose, but it persists at a robust level against hospitalization and death for at least six months following the second dose.
*
A George Mason University (GMU) law professor who sued the school over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate was granted a medical exemption by the school on Tuesday. The Washington Examiner reports Todd Zywicki, the law professor at the Fairfax, Virginia, school said he had COVID-19 and defeated it, therefore his natural immunity, he argued, should prevent him from having to get the vaccination. GMU had a mandate requiring all attending students to be inoculated by Aug. 1. Faculty and staff had a deadline of Aug. 15 to be vaccinated. Those who did not comply with the mandate had to show a reason for a medical or religious exemption.
Profesor prava je s tožbo dosegel izjemo od obveznega cepljenja, ker je marca 2020 prebolel COVID-19 in ima naravno imunost, ki je boljša, kakor tista od cepljenja. To kaže izraelska študija in drugih 14 študij.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9B_WfI-_io
A George Mason University (GMU) law professor who sued the school over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate was granted a medical exemption by the school on Tuesday.
The Washington Examiner reports Todd Zywicki, the law professor at the Fairfax, Virginia, school said he had COVID-19 and defeated it, therefore his natural immunity, he argued, should prevent him from having to get the vaccination.
GMU had a mandate requiring all attending students to be inoculated by Aug. 1. Faculty and staff had a deadline of Aug. 15 to be vaccinated. Those who did not comply with the mandate had to show a reason for a medical or religious exemption.
According to University Business, Zywicki claimed the vaccine mandate enforced by the school was excessive since he already had natural immunity through antibodies he acquired after he successfully recovered from the virus. His attorneys revealed Zywicki took six tests to prove those antibodies were still active in his immune system.
"I am gratified that George Mason has given me a medical exemption to allow me to fulfill my duties this fall semester in light of unprecedented circumstances," Zywicki said. "I speak for tens of millions of Americans in the same circumstances I am in, and I call on leaders across the country to develop humane and science-based approaches as opposed to one-size-fits-all policies."
Zywicki's attorneys said in a press release that GMU will not pursue disciplinary action against their client. He will be allowed to conduct regular office hours and go to in-person events as long as he maintains six feet of social distancing. Zywicki, however, must submit to COVID-19 testing once a week.
A GMU spokesperson told the Examiner there was no settlement agreement with Zywicki, and wouldn't comment on any employee's medical accommodation, citing "state policy regarding personnel information and confidentiality of health information."
"His litigation had no impact on the consideration of his request for a medical exemption from the vaccination requirement," the spokesperson said. "Mason encourages everyone, including those who previously had COVID-19, to get vaccinated, and will continue to take the steps necessary to protect the Mason community from COVID."
Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, told CBN News in late June that medical experts got it wrong when they dismissed natural immunity to the virus.
"It's one of the biggest failures of our medical establishment to dismiss natural immunity," he told CBN News, pointing to two new studies that show its efficacy. "It works. It's durable. You may not need the vaccine and it's probably long-lasting. It's probably life-long."
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said last week that a new study showed unvaccinated people were twice as likely to get reinfected with COVID-19.
"These findings suggest that among persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, full vaccination provides additional protection against reinfection," the CDC said. "To reduce their risk of infection, all eligible persons should be offered vaccination, even if they have been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2."
But in a U.S. News & World Report op-ed published earlier this month, Makary said an Israeli study showed natural immunity is 6.7 times greater than for vaccinated people.
*
Vojaški uslužbenci z naravno imuniteto vložili tožbo proti ministrstvu za obrambo, FDA in HHS zaradi obveznega cepljenja COVID
Dva aktivna pripadnika oboroženih sil ZDA sta 17. avgusta vložila tožbo proti Ministrstvu za obrambo ZDA, Upravi ZDA za hrano in zdravila (FDA) ter Ministrstvu ZDA za zdravje in socialne zadeve v svojem imenu in v imenu 220 000 aktivnih pripadnikov, ki morajo dobiti cepivo COVID, čeprav so preboleli COVID in pridobili naravno imunost na SARS-CoV-2.
Glavna tožnika v tožbi, štabni narednik Daniel Robert in štabna seržantka Holli Mulvihill, trdita, da ameriški obrambni minister Lloyd Austin ni upošteval lastnih predpisov ministrstva za obrambo in je oblikoval povsem novo opredelitev "popolne imunosti", ki jo je mogoče doseči le s cepljenjem.
V tožbi je navedeno, da obstoječi vojaški zakoni in predpisi nedvoumno določajo izjemo, ki jo tožnika zahtevata v skladu z vojaškim predpisom 40-562 ("AR 40-562"), ki dokumentiranim preživelim osebam po okužbi zagotavlja domnevno zdravstveno izjemo od cepljenja zaradi naravne imunosti, pridobljene kot posledica preživetja okužbe.
V skladu z vojaškimi predpisi (AR 40-562, ¶2-6a.(1)(b):
Dokaz o imunosti na podlagi seroloških testov, dokumentirane okužbe ali podobnih okoliščin." (1 ) "Splošni primeri zdravstvenih izjem vključujejo naslednje ... Dokaz o imunosti na podlagi seroloških testov, dokumentirane okužbe ali podobnih okoliščin.
Glede na tožbo je 24. avgusta v intervjuju za Fox News dr. admiral Brett Giroir, pomočnik sekretarja HHS, izjavil: "Še vedno ni podatkov, ki bi kazali, da je imunost po cepljenju boljša od naravne imunosti. Menim, da sta obe zelo zaščitni."
Vendar je Austin istega dne izdal obvestilo, v katerem je predpisal cepljenje celotne vojske in v katerem je zapisal: "Cepljenje se izvaja v vseh oboroženih silah:
"Osebe s predhodno okužbo s COVID-19 se ne štejejo za popolnoma cepljene."
Tožniki trdijo, da je Austin v tem obvestilu ustvaril nov izraz in koncept, ki je v nasprotju z jasnim jezikom lastnih predpisov ministrstva za obrambo, dolgoletno imunološko prakso, medicinsko etiko in pretežno težo znanstvenih dokazov v zvezi s tem posebnim virusom.
Tožniki trdijo, da je Austin, ki ni zdravnik, spremenil predpis ministrstva za obrambo, ne da bi predložil "najmanjši dokaz, ki bi to podpiral".
Prav tako trdijo, da je Austin spremenil predpis, ne da bi opravil zahtevani postopek sprejemanja predpisov, s čimer je kršil pregled Zakona o upravnih postopkih.
Po navedbah v tožbi naj bi se Pfizerjevi poskusi faze 3 - namenjeni preverjanju dolgoročnih stranskih učinkov - končali šele leta 2023 in da je "proizvajalec sredi te faze 3 nepojasnjeno razkril obe kohorti, člani skupine s placebom pa so dobili možnost, da vzamejo cepivo, če so to želeli".
Tožniki trdijo, da je Uprava za hrano in zdravila (FDA) dovolila podjetju Pfizer, da je študijo spremenilo iz zaslepljenega preskušanja s placebom v odprto opazovalno študijo.
Robert in Mulvihill sta 30. avgusta vložila zahtevo za izdajo nujne začasne odredbe o zadržanju mandata, v kateri sta od sodišča zahtevala, naj ministrstvu za obrambo prepreči cepljenje njiju in drugih oseb, ki lahko dokažejo, da so že imele COVID.
Tožnika trdita, da bosta, če jima ne bo odobreno zahtevano sodno varstvo, utrpela neposredno telesno škodo, ker bosta prisiljena v cepljenje proti virusu, na katerega sta že imuna.
V svoji zahtevi so tudi navedli, da pooblastilo pomeni neusklajen fizični poseg najhujše vrste - z novo tehnologijo mRNA, ki sploh še ni bila preizkušena na ljudeh, ki so pridobili naravno imunost na virus in imajo jasno in nedvoumno pravico do izjeme, ki jo zahtevajo v skladu z lastnimi predpisi ministrstva za obrambo.
Cepiva lahko nekaterim povzročijo telesno škodo.
V tožbi je tudi navedeno, da bi lahko cepiva COVID povzročila morebitno telesno škodo, vključno s škodo, ki bi jo povzročil spike (beljakovinska bodica).
Tožniki so navedli, da sistem poročanja o neželenih dogodkih pri cepivih (VAERS) Centra za nadzor in preprečevanje bolezni, ki vsebuje poročila o neželenih dogodkih za vsa cepiva, ki so jih dajali v ZDA od 1. julija 1990, kaže na znatno povečanje neželenih dogodkov od uvedbe cepiv COVID.
V skladu s tožbo je agencija FDA, preden je decembra 2020 uvedla cepiva COVID z dovoljenjem za uporabo v nujnih primerih, v sistemu VAERS za vsa predhodna cepiva zabeležila skupno 5 039 smrtnih primerov in 12 053 trajnih invalidnosti. V tednu, ki se je začel 13. avgusta, pa je VAERS samo za cepiva COVID prikazal 13.068 poročil o smrti in 1.031.100 poročil o resnih neželenih učinkih.
Tožniki so navedli, da imajo pravico do svobode pred nezaželenim fizičnim posegom in neprostovoljnim cepljenjem proti virusu, ki statistično ne predstavlja nobene nevarnosti za ljudi z naravno imunostjo, ter da si pridržijo zagotovljene, kodificirane in temeljne pravice do informiranega soglasja. Trdijo, da prisilno cepljenje skupine ljudi z naravno imunostjo ne bo prineslo nobene koristi ter bo povzročilo znatno in nepopravljivo telesno škodo in/ali smrt.
Mary Holland, predsednica in glavna svetovalka organizacije Children's Health Defense, je pohvalila glavna tožnika, Roberta in Mulvihilla, da sta se uprla mandatu vojske.
"Postavljata ključna vprašanja, ki jih morajo rešiti sodišča - o medicinskih izjemah za naravno imunost in o tem, ali so bili klinični poskusi, ki so bili podlaga za Pfizerjevo dovoljenje, zadostni," je dejala Hollandova.
Hollandova je pojasnila:
"Primer tožnikov je izjemno močan, saj temelji na dokazani naravni imunosti. Ne le, da predpisi vojske predvidevajo domnevno izvzetje takšnih posameznikov, ampak tudi znanost in zdrava pamet zahtevata izvzetje takšnih ljudi v vojski in zunaj nje. Ugotovljeno je, da je naravna imunost na COVID-19 veliko močnejša od imunosti, pridobljene s cepljenjem, in da so osebe z naravno imunostjo bolj izpostavljene tveganju poškodb, če so cepljene. Žalostno je, da je treba tako relativno preprosto zadevo rešiti na zveznem sodišču, vendar smo veseli, da sta tožnika Robert in Mulvihill vložila tožbo. Upamo, da bo sodišče na podlagi trdnih pravnih načel odločilo v njuno korist."
Holland je dejal, da je obveznost cepljenja za vse pripadnike ameriške vojske "vprašanje nacionalne varnosti" in izjemnega pomena za vse Američane. "Ti tožniki postavljajo izzive, na katere se morata vojaško vodstvo in zvezna vlada odzvati na odprtem sodišču," je dejala.
Cepljenje oseb z naravno imunostjo na COVID ni znanstveno podprto
Kot je 30. avgusta poročal The Defender, se zdi, da naravna imunost zagotavlja dolgotrajnejšo in močnejšo zaščito pred okužbo s SARS-CoV-2, simptomatsko boleznijo in hospitalizacijo zaradi različice Delta v primerjavi z imunostjo, ki jo z dvema odmerkoma cepiva povzroči podjetje Pfizer-BioNTech.
V največji resnični opazovalni študiji, ki je primerjala naravno imunost, pridobljeno s predhodno okužbo s SARS-CoV-2, z imunostjo, povzročeno s cepivom, ki jo zagotavlja Pfizerjevo cepivo mRNA, so ljudje, ki so ozdraveli po COVID, veliko manj verjetno kot nikoli okuženi, cepljeni ljudje zboleli za Delta, razvili simptome ali bili hospitalizirani.
Študija, ki je bila 25. avgusta objavljena kot predtisk na medRxiv, je pokazala, da je bilo pri ljudeh, ki niso bili nikoli okuženi s SARS-CoV-2, vendar so bili cepljeni januarja in februarja, od šest- do 13-krat več možnosti, da se bodo okužili z različico Delta, kot pri necepljenih ljudeh, ki so bili predhodno okuženi s SARS-CoV-2.
Raziskovalci so ugotovili, da je bilo povečano tveganje pomembno tudi pri asimptomatski bolezni.
"To je šolski primer, kako je naravna imunost resnično boljša od cepljenja," je za Science povedala Charlotte Thålin, zdravnica in raziskovalka imunologije v bolnišnici Danderyd in na inštitutu Karolinska.
Nedavna izraelska študija je potrdila prednost naravne imunosti. Podatki ministrstva za zdravje o valu izbruhov COVID, ki se je začel maja 2021, so pokazali 6,72-krat višjo raven zaščite pri osebah z naravno imunostjo v primerjavi s tistimi s cepljeno imunostjo.
Junija je študija klinike v Clevelandu pokazala, da cepljenje oseb z naravno imunostjo ne poveča njihove ravni zaščite.
Klinika je preučevala 52 238 zaposlenih. Od teh jih 49 659 ni nikoli imelo virusa, 2 579 pa jih je imelo COVID in ozdravilo. Od 2.579 oseb, ki so bile predhodno okužene, jih je 1.359 ostalo necepljenih, medtem ko jih je bilo 22.777 cepljenih.
Med 1.359 predhodno okuženimi osebami, ki so ostale necepljene, se v času trajanja študije ni nobena okužila z virusom SARS-CoV-2.
Kot je poročal The Defender, so decembra 2020 singapurski raziskovalci v študiji ugotovili, da so nevtralizirajoča protitelesa (en del imunskega odziva) pri posameznikih, ki so ozdraveli od prvotnega SARS-CoV-1, v visokih koncentracijah prisotna 17 let ali več.
Pred kratkim sta Svetovna zdravstvena organizacija in Nacionalni inštitut za zdravje (NIH) objavila dokaze o trajnih imunskih odzivih na naravno okužbo z virusom SARS-CoV-2.
Dr. Anthony Fauci iz NIH je marca 2020 v elektronskem sporočilu [str. 22] Ezekielu Emanuelu izrazil svoje mnenje, da "bi bila njihova odpornost po okužbi precejšnja".
Ameriški inštitut za ekonomske raziskave je poročal, da se zdi, da ključne organizacije za spodbujanje agende cepiva COVID ne le "podcenjujejo" naravno imunost, temveč jo morda poskušajo povsem "izbrisati".
Dr. Marty Makary, profesor na Medicinski fakulteti Univerze Johns Hopkins in glavni urednik revije MedPage Today, je dejal, da obvezno cepljenje "vsakega živega, hodečega Američana" ni znanstveno podprto.
V intervjuju za U.S. News & World Reports je Makary dejal, da ni znanstvene podpore za obvezno cepljenje ljudi, ki imajo naravno imunost - to je imunost zaradi predhodne okužbe s COVID. Ni nobenih podatkov o kliničnih rezultatih, ki bi podpirali dogmatično trditev, da se morajo osebe z naravno imunostjo "cepiti".
Makary je pojasnil:
"V vsakem mesecu te pandemije sem z drugimi javnimi raziskovalci razpravljal o učinkovitosti in trajnosti naravne imunosti. Govorili so mi, da lahko naravna imunost pade s pečine, zaradi česar bodo ljudje dovzetni za okužbe. Toda zdaj smo tukaj, več kot leto in pol po kliničnih izkušnjah z opazovanjem okuženih bolnikov, in naravna imunost je učinkovita in močna. To pa zato, ker pri naravni imunosti telo razvije protitelesa proti celotni površini virusa in ne le proti beljakovini s konico, ki je bila izdelana iz cepiva."
Makary je dejal, da bi morali namesto o cepljenih in necepljenih govoriti o imunskih in neimunskih osebah.
Cepljenje oseb, ki so prej prebolele COVID, bi lahko povzročilo veliko škodo
Številni znanstveniki so opozorili, da bi cepljenje ljudi, ki so že imeli COVID, lahko povzročilo poškodbe ali celo smrt.
Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, kirurg in zagovornik varnosti bolnikov, je znanstveno dokazano, da ko je oseba naravno okužena z virusom, antigeni tega virusa v telesu vztrajajo še dolgo po tem, ko se razmnoževanje virusa ustavi in klinični znaki okužbe izzvenijo.
Ko cepivo ponovno aktivira imunski odziv pri nedavno okuženi osebi, so tkiva, v katerih se zadržuje virusni antigen, tarča imunskega odziva, ki jih vname in poškoduje, je dejal Noorchashm.
"V primeru SARS-CoV-2 vemo, da virus naravno okuži srce, notranjo sluznico krvnih žil, pljuča in možgane," je pojasnil Noorchashm. "To so torej verjetno nekateri od kritičnih organov, ki bodo pri nedavno okuženih vsebovali trajne virusne antigene - in po reaktivaciji imunskega sistema s cepivom je mogoče pričakovati, da bodo ta tkiva usmerjena in poškodovana."
Colleen Kelley, izredna profesorica za infekcijske bolezni na Medicinski fakulteti Univerze Emory in glavna raziskovalka kliničnih preskušanj 3. faze cepiv Moderna in Novavax, je v intervjuju za Huffington Post povedala, da so poročali o primerih, ko so osebe, ki so prej imele virus, po cepljenju doživljale hujše stranske učinke.
Dr. Dara Udo, zdravnica za nujno in takojšnjo oskrbo v Westchester Medical Group, ki je prejela cepivo COVID leto dni po preboleli bolezni, je imela zelo močan imunski odziv, zelo podoben tistemu, ki ga je doživela, ko je imela COVID.
Udo je v članku, ki ga je objavil časopis The Hill, pojasnila, da okužba s katerim koli organizmom, vključno s COVID, aktivira več različnih vej imunskega sistema, nekatere na močnejši način kot druge, in da bi ta osnovna aktivacija zaradi okužbe ali izpostavljenosti v kombinaciji s cepljenjem lahko povzročila prekomerno stimulacijo imunskega odziva.
Dr. J. Patrick Whelan je v javni vlogi, predloženi agenciji FDA, izrazil podobno zaskrbljenost, da bi lahko cepiva COVID, namenjena ustvarjanju imunosti proti beljakovini spike SARS-CoV-2, povzročila mikrovaskularne poškodbe možganov, srca, jeter in ledvic na način, ki se trenutno ne ocenjuje v preskusih varnosti teh potencialnih zdravil.
Tožba ima 15 strani: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/military-vaccine-mandate-complaint.pdf
*
https://www.regionalobala.si/novica/prebolevniki-bistveno-bolj-zasciteni-kot-cepljeni-je-to-dokoncni-udarec-za-cepilne-potne-liste-
*
Drosten, ideoloski vodja lockdowna in kreator nemske ter svetovne plandemije pravi sedaj takole:
"In order to build up long-lasting immunity, vaccinated people should also become infected, according to the recommendation of star virologist Christian Drosten.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://amp.heute.at/s/star-virologe-drosten-empfiehlt-geimpften-corona-infektion-100161615&fbclid=IwAR3C_3yG6aRCZcyVPBhxtvpR4jpPI2ECwRLQ5w3yIsDW_0UgUBlUYrbeYmI
*
Zelo zanimiv odgovor Ministrstva za zdravje (Avstrija) glede imunosti:
"Imuniteta pri virusnih boleznih dihal je zapletena in jo je težko opredeliti s testi in vitro.
Spoštovani dr,
Zahvaljujemo se vam za vaše sporočilo.
Zakonske pravice do prejema kopije zadevnega dokumenta ni mogoče določiti v skladu s členom 5 UIG, saj gre za del upravnega akta, vi pa nimate pravice do vpogleda v spis. To niso okoljske informacije.
Ad (1) Imuniteta pri virusnih boleznih dihal je kompleksna in jo je težko opredeliti s testi in vitro.
To pomeni, da še vedno ni konkretne mejne vrednosti za protitelesa, ki bi omogočala zanesljive izjave o obsegu in trajanju imunosti.
Čeprav obstajajo parametri, na podlagi katerih je mogoče do določene mere določiti zaščito, ni jasno, kako visoki morajo biti ti parametri in kako dolgo ta zaščita traja.
Poleg tega določanje protiteles ne omogoča sklepanja o možnem času bolezni.
Ad (2) Celična komponenta ima nedvomno zelo pomembno vlogo pri odpornosti proti SARS-CoV-2. Vendar trenutno ugotovitev/dokaz celičnega imunskega odziva proti SARS-CoV-2 ni priznana kot dokaz pretekle okužbe s SARS-CoV-2 in ne ustreza dokazu o majhnem epidemiološkem tveganju (glej pravilo 3-G). Na tem področju je stanje znanstvenih podatkov še vedno zelo nejasno in ni mogoče podati splošnih izjav o vrsti in trajanju morebitne zaščite pred ponovno okužbo. Poleg tega standardizacija testnih preskusov za ugotavljanje celične imunosti proti virusu SARS-CoV-2 še ni dosegla stopnje zrelosti, ki bi omogočila jasne specifikacije. Na tem področju trenutno potekajo intenzivne raziskave, BMSGPK pa intenzivno spremlja tudi nacionalne in mednarodne ugotovitve. Takoj ko bodo na voljo zanesljive ugotovitve, bodo seveda vključene v priporočila in dokumente v zvezi s tem.
S spoštovanjem,
Zvezno ministrstvo za socialne zadeve, zdravje,
Nega in varstvo potrošnikov
S5 Krizna enota COVID-19
s5@gesundheitsministerium.gv.at
Ministrstvo za socialne zadeve.at
*
https://hr.n1info.com/znanost/moderna-zastita-od-covida-pada-protokom-vremena-potrebna-je-booster-doza/?fbclid=IwAR0fALxKsQMgIRrIipCOSb5l8amkJuo5ZSIt-mzXA-HbAWzSN5OCgWMMudw
*
https://odysee.com/@FactsMatterwithRomanBalmakov:c/pfizer-says-vaccine-efficacy-weakens:e
*
*
*
*
https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-15-studies-that-indicate-natural-immunity-from-prior-infection-is-more-robust-than-the-covid-vaccines
Horowitz: 15 studies that indicate natural immunity from prior infection is more robust than the COVID vaccines
*
Dve študiji kažeta na zmanjšano imunost po dveh mesecih
Medtem pa študiji iz Izraela in Katarja, v sredo objavljeni v medicinski reviji New England Journal of Medicine, nakazujeta, da imunost po cepljenju s cepivom Pfizerja popusti po dveh mesecih, čeprav da je zaščita pred hudim potekom bolezni še naprej močna. O tem poroča celo CNN. Izraelska študija je zajela 4800 zdravstvenih delavcev in pokazala, da se raven protiteles po dveh odmerkih cepiva hitro zmanjša, zlasti pri moških, osebah, starejših od 65 let, in pri osebah z oslabljenim imunskim sistemom. Študija še omenja, da je zaščita močnejša pri prebolevnikih. V študiji iz Katarja so proučevali dejanske okužbe med visoko precepljenim prebivalstvom zalivske države, kjer so večinoma cepljeni s Pfizerjevim cepivom.
*
Naravna imunost in imunost po cepljenju: dr. John Campbell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bamaEMftg4&t=1s
*
Vaccinating people who have had covid-19: why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101
*
US, Natural infection, Feb 2020 to May 2021 0 – 17 26.8 / 73 37% 18 – 49 60.5 / 138 44% 50 – 64 20.4 / 62 32% 65+ 12.3 / 54 23% Total 120.3/ 328 37% Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abf4063
Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection
N = 254 blood samples post infection N = 51 long term follow up Antibodies against SARSCoV- 2 spike and receptor binding domain (RBD) declined moderately over 8 months Memory B cells against SARS-CoV-2 spike increased between 1 month and 8 months after infection. Proportion of subjects positive for CD4+ T cells (92%) remained high at 6 to 8 months after infection. The different types of immunememory each had distinct kinetics, resulting in complex interrelationships over time CONCLUSION Substantial immune memory is generated after COVID-19 About 95% of subjects retained immune memory at ~6 months after infection Circulating antibody titers were not predictive of T cell memory CDC Still recommends a full vaccination dose for all the immune response from vaccination is more predictable antibody responses after infection vary widely by individual June, Peter Marks, Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research We do know that the immunity after vaccination is better than the immunity after natural infection generally the immunity after natural infection tends to wane after about 90 days
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j8ziaOpl7o&t=1724s
proof of natural immunity shown by a positive PCR test result for COVID-19, lasting for 180 days after the date of the positive test Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255670v1.full.pdf
Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel
Vaccination was highly effective
*
Individuals whose livelihoods and liberties are being deprecated and deleted need access to the scientific literature as it pertains to this virus. They should send a link to this page far and wide. The scientists have not been silent; they just haven’t received the public attention they deserve. The preparation of this list was assisted by links provided by Paul Elias Alexander and Rational Ground’s own cheat sheet on natural immunity, which also includes links to popular articles on the topic.
1. One-year sustained cellular and humoral immunities of COVID-19 convalescents, by Jie Zhang, Hao Lin, Beiwei Ye, Min Zhao, Jianbo Zhan, et al. Clinical Infectious Diseases, October 5, 2021. “SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies, and also NAb can persist among over 95% COVID-19 convalescents from 6 months to 12 months after disease onset. At least 19/71 (26%) of COVID-19 convalescents (double positive in ELISA and MCLIA) had detectable circulating IgM antibody against SARS-CoV-2 at 12m post-disease onset. Notably, the percentages of convalescents with positive SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses (at least one of the SARS-CoV-2 antigen S1, S2, M and N protein) were 71/76 (93%) and 67/73 (92%) at 6m and 12m, respectively. Furthermore, both antibody and T-cell memory levels of the convalescents were positively associated with their disease severity.”
2. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections, by Sivan Gazit, Roei Shlezinger, Galit Perez, Roni Lotan, Asaf Peretz, Amir Ben-Tov, Dani Cohen, Khitam Muhsen, Gabriel Chodick, Tal Patalon. MedRxiv, August 25, 2021. “Our analysis demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant for a symptomatic disease as well…. This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”
3. Shedding of Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Despite Vaccination, by Kasen K. Riemersma, Brittany E. Grogan, Amanda Kita-Yarbro, Gunnar E. Jeppson, David H. O’Connor, Thomas C. Friedrich, Katarina M. Grande, MedRxiv, August 24, 2021. “The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant might cause high viral loads, is highly transmissible, and contains mutations that confer partial immune escape. Outbreak investigations suggest that vaccinated persons can spread Delta. We compared RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) data from 699 swab specimens collected in Wisconsin 29 June through 31 July 2021 and tested with a qualitative assay by a single contract laboratory. Specimens came from residents of 36 counties, most in southern and southeastern Wisconsin, and 81% of cases were not associated with an outbreak. During this time, estimated prevalence of Delta variants in Wisconsin increased from 69% to over 95%. Vaccination status was determined via self-reporting and state immunization records.”
4. Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals, by Nabin K. Shrestha, Patrick C. Burke, Amy S. Nowacki, Paul Terpeluk, Steven M. Gordon, MedRxiv, June 5, 2021. “Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before.”
5. Large-scale study of antibody titer decay following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 infection, by Ariel Israel, Yotam Shenhar, Ilan Green, Eugene Merzon, Avivit Golan-Cohen, Alejandro A Schäffer, Eytan Ruppin, Shlomo Vinker, Eli Magen. MedRxiv, August 22, 2021. “This study demonstrates individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine have different kinetics of antibody levels compared to patients who had been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with higher initial levels but a much faster exponential decrease in the first group.”
6. Discrete Immune Response Signature to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination Versus Infection, by Ellie Ivanova, Joseph Devlin, et al. Cell, May 2021. “While both infection and vaccination induced robust innate and adaptive immune responses, our analysis revealed significant qualitative differences between the two types of immune challenges. In COVID-19 patients, immune responses were characterized by a highly augmented interferon response which was largely absent in vaccine recipients.”
7. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans, by Jackson S. Turner, Wooseob Kim, Elizaveta Kalaidina, Charles W. Goss, Adriana M. Rauseo, Aaron J. Schmitz, Lena Hansen, Alem Haile, Michael K. Klebert, Iskra Pusic, Jane A. O’Halloran, Rachel M. Presti, Ali H. Ellebedy. Nature, May 24, 2021. “This study sought to determine whether infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces antigen-specific long-lived BMPCs in humans. We detected SARS-CoV-2 S-specific BMPCs in bone marrow aspirates from 15 out of 19 convalescent individuals, and in none from the 11 control participants…. Overall, our results are consistent with SARS-CoV-2 infection eliciting a canonical T-cell-dependent B cell response, in which an early transient burst of extrafollicular plasmablasts generates a wave of serum antibodies that decline relatively quickly. This is followed by more stably maintained levels of serum antibodies that are supported by long-lived BMPCs.”
8. Longitudinal analysis shows durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection with persisting antibody responses and memory B and T cells, by Kristen W. Cohen, Susanne L. Linderman, Zoe Moodie, Julie Czartoski, Lilin Lai, Grace Mantus, Carson Norwood, Lindsay E. Nyhoff, Venkata Viswanadh Edara, et al. MedRxiv, April 27, 2021. “Ending the COVID-19 pandemic will require long-lived immunity to SARS-CoV-2. We evaluated 254 COVID-19 patients longitudinally from early infection and for eight months thereafter and found a predominant broad-based immune memory response. SARS-CoV-2 spike binding and neutralizing antibodies exhibited a bi-phasic decay with an extended half-life of >200 days suggesting the generation of longer-lived plasma cells. In addition, there was a sustained IgG+ memory B cell response, which bodes well for a rapid antibody response upon virus re-exposure.”
9. Incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 infection among previously infected or vaccinated employees, by N Kojima, A Roshani, M Brobeck, A Baca, JD Klausner. MedRxiv, July 8, 2021. “Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 were associated with decreased risk for infection or re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 in a routinely screened workforce. The was no difference in the infection incidence between vaccinated individuals and individuals with previous infection. Further research is needed to determine whether our results are consistent with the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants.”
10. Single cell profiling of T and B cell repertoires following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine, by Suhas Sureshchandra, Sloan A. Lewis, Brianna Doratt, Allen Jankeel, Izabela Ibraim, Ilhem Messaoudi. BioRxiv, July 15, 2021. “Interestingly, clonally expanded CD8 T cells were observed in every vaccinee, as observed following natural infection. TCR gene usage, however, was variable, reflecting the diversity of repertoires and MHC polymorphism in the human population. Natural infection induced expansion of larger CD8 T cell clones occupied distinct clusters, likely due to the recognition of a broader set of viral epitopes presented by the virus not seen in the mRNA vaccine. Our study highlights a coordinated adaptive immune response where early CD4 T cell responses facilitate the development of the B cell response and substantial expansion of effector CD8 T cells, together capable of contributing to future recall responses.”
11. mRNA vaccine-induced T cells respond identically to SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern but differ in longevity and homing properties depending on prior infection status, Jason Neidleman, Xiaoyu Luo, Matthew McGregor, Guorui Xie, Victoria Murray, Warner C. Greene, Sulggi A. Lee, Nadia R. Roan. BioRxiv, July 29, 2021. “In infection-naïve individuals, the second dose boosted the quantity and altered the phenotypic properties of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells, while in convalescents the second dose changed neither. Spike-specific T cells from convalescent vaccinees differed strikingly from those of infection-naïve vaccinees, with phenotypic features suggesting superior long-term persistence and ability to home to the respiratory tract including the nasopharynx. These results provide reassurance that vaccine-elicited T cells respond robustly to emerging viral variants, confirm that convalescents may not need a second vaccine dose, and suggest that vaccinated convalescents may have more persistent nasopharynx-homing SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells compared to their infection-naïve counterparts.”
12. Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection, Jennifer M. Dan, Jose Mateus, Yu Kato, Kathryn M. Hastie, et al., Science, January 6, 2021. “Understanding immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 is critical for improving diagnostics and vaccines, and for assessing the likely future course of the COVID-19 pandemic. We analyzed multiple compartments of circulating immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 in 254 samples from 188 COVID-19 cases, including 43 samples at ≥ 6 months post-infection. IgG to the Spike protein was relatively stable over 6+ months. Spike-specific memory B cells were more abundant at 6 months than at 1 month post symptom onset. SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells declined with a half-life of 3-5 months. By studying antibody, memory B cell, CD4+ T cell, and CD8+ T cell memory to SARS-CoV-2 in an integrated manner, we observed that each component of SARS-CoV-2 immune memory exhibited distinct kinetics.”
13. Persistence of neutralizing antibodies a year after SARS-CoV-2 infection, by Anu Haveri, Nina Ekström, Anna Solastie, Camilla Virta, Pamela Österlund, Elina Isosaari, Hanna Nohynek, Arto A. Palmu, Merit Melin. MedRxiv, July 16, 2021. “We assessed the persistence of serum antibodies following wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infection six and twelve months after diagnosis in 367 individuals of whom 13% had severe disease requiring hospitalization. We determined the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S-IgG) and nucleoprotein IgG concentrations and the proportion of subjects with neutralizing antibodies (NAb).”
14. Quantifying the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 reinfection over time, by Eamon O Murchu, Paula Byrne, Paul G. Carty, et al. Rev Med Virol. 2021. “Reinfection was an uncommon event (absolute rate 0%–1.1%), with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time. Only one study esti- mated the population‐level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients; the estimated risk was low (0.1% [95% CI: 0.08–0.11%]) with no evidence of waning immunity for up to 7 months following primary infection. These data suggest that naturally acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post‐infection. However, the applicability of these studies to new variants or to vaccine‐induced immunity remains uncertain.”
15. SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positivity protects against reinfection for at least seven months with 95% efficacy, by Laith J. Abu-Raddad, Hiam Chemaitelly, Peter Coyle, Joel A. Malek. The Lancet, July 27, 2021. “Reinfection is rare in the young and international population of Qatar. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months.”
16. Natural immunity against COVID-19 significantly reduces the risk of reinfection: findings from a cohort of sero-survey participants, by Bijaya Kumar Mishra, Debdutta Bhattacharya, Jaya Singh Kshatri, Sanghamitra Pati. MedRxiv, July 19, 2021. “These findings reinforce the strong plausibility that development of antibody following natural infection not only protects against re-infection by the virus to a great extent, but also safeguards against progression to severe COVID-19 disease.”
17. Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel, by Yair Goldberg, Micha Mandel, Yonatan Woodbridge, Ronen Fluss, Ilya Novikov, Rami Yaari, Arnona Ziv, Laurence Freedman, Amit Huppert, et al.. MedRxiv, April 24, 2021. “Similarly, the overall estimated level of protection from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for documented infection is 94·8% (CI:[94·4, 95·1]); hospitalization 94·1% (CI:[91·9, 95·7]); and severe illness 96·4% (CI:[92·5, 98·3]). Our results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals.”
18. Immune Memory in Mild COVID-19 Patients and Unexposed Donors Reveals Persistent T Cell Responses After SARS-CoV-2 Infection, by Asgar Ansari, Rakesh Arya, Shilpa Sachan, Someshwar Nath Jha, Anurag Kalia, Anupam Lall, Alessandro Sette, et al. Front Immunol. March 11, 2021. “Using HLA class II predicted peptide megapools, we identified SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive CD4+ T cells in around 66% of the unexposed individuals. Moreover, we found detectable immune memory in mild COVID-19 patients several months after recovery in the crucial arms of protective adaptive immunity; CD4+ T cells and B cells, with a minimal contribution from CD8+ T cells. Interestingly, the persistent immune memory in COVID-19 patients is predominantly targeted towards the Spike glycoprotein of the SARS-CoV-2. This study provides the evidence of both high magnitude pre-existing and persistent immune memory in Indian population.”
19. Live virus neutralisation testing in convalescent patients and subjects vaccinated against 19A, 20B, 20I/501Y.V1 and 20H/501Y.V2 isolates of SARS-CoV-2, by Claudia Gonzalez, Carla Saade, Antonin Bal, Martine Valette, et al, MedRxiv, May 11, 2021. “ No significant difference was observed between the 20B and 19A isolates for HCWs with mild COVID-19 and critical patients. However, a significant decrease in neutralisation ability was found for 20I/501Y.V1 in comparison with 19A isolate for critical patients and HCWs 6-months post infection. Concerning 20H/501Y.V2, all populations had a significant reduction in neutralising antibody titres in comparison with the 19A isolate. Interestingly, a significant difference in neutralisation capacity was observed for vaccinated HCWs between the two variants whereas it was not significant for the convalescent groups.”
20. Highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, by Nina Le Bert, Hannah E. Clapham, Anthony T. Tan, Wan Ni Chia, et al, Journal of Experimental Medicine, March 1, 2021. “Thus, asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2–infected individuals are not characterized by weak antiviral immunity; on the contrary, they mount a highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response.”
21. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell memory is sustained in COVID-19 convalescent patients for 10 months with successful development of stem cell-like memory T cells, Jae Hyung Jung, Min-Seok Rha, Moa Sa, Hee Kyoung Choi, Ji Hoon Jeon, et al, Nature Communications, June 30, 2021. “In particular, we observe sustained polyfunctionality and proliferation capacity of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. Among SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells detected by activation-induced markers, the proportion of stem cell-like memory T (TSCM) cells is increased, peaking at approximately 120 DPSO. Development of TSCM cells is confirmed by SARS-CoV-2-specific MHC-I multimer staining. Considering the self-renewal capacity and multipotency of TSCM cells, our data suggest that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are long-lasting after recovery from COVID-19, thus support the feasibility of effective vaccination programs as a measure for COVID-19 control.”
22. Antibody Evolution after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination, by Alice Cho, Frauke Muecksch, Dennis Schaefer-Babajew, Zijun Wang, et al, BioRxiv, et al, BioRxiv, July 29, 2021. “We conclude that memory antibodies selected over time by natural infection have greater potency and breadth than antibodies elicited by vaccination. These results suggest that boosting vaccinated individuals with currently available mRNA vaccines would produce a quantitative increase in plasma neutralizing activity but not the qualitative advantage against variants obtained by vaccinating convalescent individuals.” Newer version reads: “These results suggest that boosting vaccinated individuals with currently available mRNA vaccines will increase plasma neutralizing activity but may not produce antibodies with breadth equivalent to those obtained by vaccinating convalescent individuals.”
23. Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals, by Carmen Camara, Daniel Lozano-Ojalvo, Eduardo Lopez-Granados. Et al., BioRxiv, March 27, 2021. “While a two-dose immunization regimen with the BNT162b2 vaccine has been demonstrated to provide a 95% efficacy in naïve individuals, the effects of the second vaccine dose in individuals who have previously recovered from natural SARS-CoV-2 infection has been questioned. Here we characterized SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral and cellular immunity in naïve and previously infected individuals during full BNT162b2 vaccination. Our results demonstrate that the second dose increases both the humoral and cellular immunity in naïve individuals. On the contrary, the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose results in a reduction of cellular immunity in COVID-19 recovered individuals, which suggests that a second dose, according to the current standard regimen of vaccination, may be not necessary in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.”
24. COVID-19 natural immunity: Scientific Brief. World Health Organization. May 10, 2021. “Available scientific data suggests that in most people immune responses remain robust and protective against reinfection for at least 6-8 months after infection (the longest follow up with strong scientific evidence is currently approximately 8 months). Some variant SARS-CoV-2 viruses with key changes in the spike protein have a reduced susceptibility to neutralization by antibodies in the blood. While neutralizing antibodies mainly target the spike protein, cellular immunity elicited by natural infection also target other viral proteins, which tend to be more conserved across variants than the spike protein.”
25. SARS-CoV-2 re-infection risk in Austria, by Stefan Pilz, Ali Chakeri, John Pa Ioannidis, et al. Eur J Clin Invest. April 2021. “We recorded 40 tentative re-infections in 14 840 COVID-19 survivors of the first wave (0.27%) and 253 581 infections in 8 885 640 individuals of the remaining general population (2.85%) translating into an odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.09 (0.07 to 0.13). We observed a relatively low re-infection rate of SARS-CoV-2 in Austria. Protection against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is comparable with the highest available estimates on vaccine efficacies. Further well-designed research on this issue is urgently needed for improving evidence-based decisions on public health measures and vaccination strategies.”
26. Anti-spike antibody response to natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population, by Jia Wei, Philippa C. Matthews, Nicole Stoesser, et al, MedRxiv, July 5, 2021. “We estimated antibody levels associated with protection against reinfection likely last 1.5-2 years on average, with levels associated with protection from severe infection present for several years. These estimates could inform planning for vaccination booster strategies.”
27. SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN), by Victoria Jane Hall, FFPH, Sarah Foulkes, MSc, Andre Charlett, PhD, Ana Atti, MSc, et al. The Lancet, April 29, 2021. “A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.”
28. SARS-CoV-2 Natural Antibody Response Persists for at Least 12 Months in a Nationwide Study From the Faroe Islands, by Maria Skaalum Petersen, Cecilie Bo Hansen, Marnar Fríheim Kristiansen, et al, Open Forum Infectious Diseases, Volume 8, Issue 8, August 2021. “Although the protective role of antibodies is currently unknown, our results show that SARS-CoV-2 antibodies persisted at least 12 months after symptom onset and maybe even longer, indicating that COVID-19-convalescent individuals may be protected from reinfection. Our results represent SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunity in nationwide cohorts in a setting with few undetected cases, and we believe that our results add to the understanding of natural immunity and the expected durability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immune responses. Moreover, they can help with public health policy and ongoing strategies for vaccine delivery.
29. Associations of Vaccination and of Prior Infection With Positive PCR Test Results for SARS-CoV-2 in Airline Passengers Arriving in Qatar, by Roberto Bertollini, MD, MPH1; Hiam Chemaitelly, MSc2; Hadi M. Yassine. JAMA Research Letter, June 9, 2021. “Of 9180 individuals with no record of vaccination but with a record of prior infection at least 90 days before the PCR test (group 3), 7694 could be matched to individuals with no record of vaccination or prior infection (group 2), among whom PCR positivity was 1.01% (95% CI, 0.80%-1.26%) and 3.81% (95% CI, 3.39%-4.26%), respectively. The relative risk for PCR positivity was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.17-0.28) for vaccinated individuals and 0.26 (95% CI, 0.21-0.34) for individuals with prior infection compared with no record of vaccination or prior infection.”
Articles in the popular media
Why COVID-19 Vaccines Should Not Be Required for All Americans, by Marty Makary, US News, August 21, 2021
Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital, by Meredith Wadson, Science, August 26, 2021
Natural infection vs vaccination: Which gives more protection? By David Rosenberg, Israeli National News, July 13, 2021.
Flu survivors still immune after 90 years, by Ed Yong, National Geographic, August 17, 2008.
Rescind Vaccine Mandates: Open Letter to Medical Societies, Hospitals, Clinics, and Other Healthcare Facilities, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, August 31, 2021.
University Vaccine Mandates Violate Medical Ethics, By Aaron Kheriaty and Gerard V. Bradley, Wall Street Journal, June 14, 2021.
Immunity to the Coronavirus May Last Years, New Data Hint, by Apoorva Mandavilli, New York Times, November 17, 2020.
COVID-19 induces lasting antibody protection, Tamari Bhandara, Washington University School of Medicine, May 24, 2021.
The World Health Organization Oversold the Vaccine and Deprecated Natural Immunity, by Jeffrey Tucker, Brownstone Institute, August 29, 2021.
Why Does the CDC Recognize Natural Immunity for Chicken Pox but Not Covid? By Paul Elias Alexander, Brownstone Institute, September 17, 2021.
Rand Paul and Xavier Becerra Square Off on Natural Immunity, with Devastating Results, by Brownstone Institute, October 2, 2021.
Lockdowns, Mandates, and Natural Immunity: Kulldorff vs. Offit, by Brownstone Institute, October 6, 2021.
Hospitals Should Hire, Not Fire, Nurses with Natural Immunity, by Martin Kulldorff, October 1, 2021.
The Strange Neglect of Natural Immunity, by Jayanta Bhattacharya, Brownstone Institute, July 28, 2021.
Is there evidence that natural exposure immunity to COVID virus is similar or superior to vaccine-induced immunity, and should we force/mandate these vaccines on our healthy military and police?
https://trialsitenews.com/is-there-evidence-that-natural-exposure-immunity-to-covid-virus-is-similar-or-superior-to-vaccine-induced-immunity-and-should-we-force-mandate-these-vaccines-on-our-healthy-military-and-police/
*
*
Vaccinating people who have had covid-19: why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101?s=09
*
https://www.logicno.com/hrana-zdravlje/covid-vakcina-i-imunitet-stada-promjenjena-definicija.html
*
Po cepljenju ni N -protiteles. S cepljenjem ni mogoče doseči čredne imunosti: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=gnB8Tep92Us&feature=youtu.be#dialog
*
Researchers in The Netherlands and Germany have warned that Pfizer-BioNTech’s coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine induces complex reprogramming of innate immune responses that should be considered in the development and use of mRNA-based vaccines.
*
*
Biological, epidemiological, and clinical evidence that previous COVID-19 infection reduces the risk for reinfection
Ameriško ministrstvo za zdrvje potrjuje, da nimajo niti en primer necepljenega prebolevnika covid-19, ki bi okužeil druge
*
Študija, objavljena v Lancetu: imunost po cepljenju prične upadati po dveh mesecih: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmSslcBBNJQ
*
https://karinrizner.si/resnica-o-kovidu-19/naravna-imunost-po-prebolelosti/
*
Infection-induced immunity protects better against reinfection with novel SARS-CoV-2 variants: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.24.21266735v
Increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 Beta, Gamma, and Delta variant compared to Alpha variant in vaccinated individuals
*
*
Celična imunost daje dolgotrajno zaščito: https://www.svkatarina.hr/clanak/stanicni-imunitet-dugotrajno-stiti-osobu-od-covid-19/2313
Prof. dr. sc. Dragan Primorac bio je gost u emisiji "Dobro jutro, Hrvatska" na HRT-u, a tema razgovora bio je koronavirus - četvrti val, broj novozaraženih te može li se preko oboljenja doći do lijeka za Covid-19. Istaknuo je i važnost liječenja mezehimalnim matičnim stanicama, a poseban naglasak stavljen je na dostupnost testa za određivanje stanične imunosti na SARS-CoV-2.
Ova ekskluzivna metoda za ispitivanje staničnog imuniteta uvedena prije nekoliko dana u Hrvatskoj, u Specijanoj bolnici Sv. Katarina. Pojednostavljeno govoreći, svima koji žele znati (oni koji su preboljeli i oni koji su cijepljeni) jesu li su zaštićeni od COVIDA-19, što im bilo koja dosadašnja pretraga ne može reći (posebice ako nemaju mjerljiva protutjela) preporuča se napraviti navedeni test za utvrđivanje staničnog imuniteta. Test je jednostavan, za obradu uzorka vadi se krv u našoj bolnici, a naručiti se možete putem e-mail info@svkatarina.hr ili kontakt broja 01 2867 400.
*
*
Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections as Compared with Primary Infections
*
2.12. 2021
*
Pfizer’s Clinical Trial data strongly indicates their Covid-19 Vaccine causes the recipient to develop Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
*
Povzetek
Ozadje
Vzrok avtoimunosti, ki ni znan, se raziskuje z drugega zornega kota, tj. z okvaro imunskega "sistema", da bi pojasnili vzrok avtoimunosti.
Metodologija/osnovne ugotovitve
Ponavljajoča se imunizacija z antigenom povzroči sistemsko avtoimunost pri miših, ki sicer niso nagnjene k spontanim avtoimunim boleznim. Prekomerna stimulacija celic CD4+ T je privedla do razvoja celic CD4+ T, ki inducirajo avtoprotitelesa (aiCD4+ T), ki so bile podvržene reviziji celičnih receptorjev T (TCR) in so sposobne inducirati avtoprotitelesa. Celica aiCD4+ T je bila inducirana z de novo revizijo TCR, ne pa z navzkrižno reakcijo, in je nato prekomerno stimulirala celice CD8+ T, ki so postale antigensko specifični citotoksični limfociti T (CTL). Ti CTL so lahko še naprej zoreli z navzkrižno predstavitvijo antigena, nato pa so povzročili avtoimunsko poškodbo tkiva, podobno sistemskemu eritematoznemu lupusu (SLE).
Zaključki/pomembnost
Zdi se, da je sistemska avtoimuniteta neizogibna posledica prekomerne stimulacije gostiteljevega imunskega "sistema" s ponavljajočo se imunizacijo z antigenom do ravni, ki presega samoorganizirano kritičnost sistema.
*
UK Government admit that the vaccines have damaged the natural immune systems of the double jabbed. The British government has spilled the beans about that fact that once you get double jabbed, you will never again be able to acquire full natural immunity against Covid variants - or possibly any virus. So let’s watch the ‘real’ pandemic begin now! In its Week 42 “COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report,” the U.K. Health Security Agency admitted on page 23 that “N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who acquire infection following two doses of vaccination.” It goes on to explain that this antibody drop is basically permanent. What’s this mean? We know the vaccines do not stop infection or transmission of the virus (in fact, the report shows elsewhere that vaccinated adults are now being infected at much HIGHER rates than the unvaccinated).
What the British are saying is they are now finding the vaccine interferes with your body’s innate ability after infection to produce antibodies against not just the spike protein but other pieces of the virus. Specifically, vaccinated people don’t seem to be producing antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, the shell of the virus, which are a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people. In the long term, people who take the vaccine will be far more vulnerable to any mutations in the spike protein that might come along, even if they have already been infected and recovered once, or more than once. The unvaccinated, meanwhile, will procure lasting, if not permanent, immunity to all strains of the alleged virus after being infected with it naturally even just once. Read it for yourself.. Page 24.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1027511/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
*
Vsem tistim, ki še naprej pripisujejo odpravo okužbe s SARS-CoV-2 prej obstoječim navzkrižno reaktivnim celicam T kot pa prirojeni imunosti. dr. Vanden Bossche
*
Vlada Združenega kraljestva priznava, da cepiva škodujejo naravnemu imunskemu sistemu tistih, ki so bili cepljeni dvakrat. Vlada Združenega kraljestva je priznala, da po dvojnem cepljenju nikoli več ne boste mogli pridobiti popolne naravne imunosti proti različicam Covida - ali morda kateremu koli drugemu virusu. Zato opazujmo, kako se zdaj začne "prava" pandemija! Ministrstvo za zdravje Združenega kraljestva v poročilu o nadzoru cepiva COVID-19 v 42. tednu na strani 23 priznava, da so "ravni protiteles N nižje pri ljudeh, ki se okužijo po dveh odmerkih cepljenja". Nadalje navaja, da je ta padec protiteles v bistvu trajen. Kaj to pomeni? Vemo, da cepiva ne preprečujejo okužbe ali prenosa virusa (poročilo na drugem mestu namreč kaže, da je verjetnost okužbe cepljenih odraslih zdaj veliko večja kot pri necepljenih). Britanci zdaj ugotavljajo, da cepivo moti sposobnost telesa, da po okužbi tvori protitelesa ne le proti beljakovini spike, temveč tudi proti drugim delom virusa. Zlasti se zdi, da cepljeni ljudje ne tvorijo protiteles proti beljakovini nukleokapsida, ovojnici virusa, ki je ključni del odziva pri necepljenih ljudeh. Dolgoročno so cepljeni veliko bolj dovzetni za kakršne koli mutacije v beljakovini spike, tudi če so bili že enkrat ali večkrat okuženi in ozdravljeni. Po drugi strani pa necepljeni pridobijo trajno, če ne celo trajno imunost za vse seve domnevnega virusa, potem ko se z njim vsaj enkrat naravno okužijo.
Ocene seropozitivnosti za protitelesa N bodo podcenjevale delež populacije, ki je bila predhodno okužena, ker (i) je pri krvodajalcih potencialno manjša verjetnost, da bodo izpostavljeni naravni okužbi kot starostno usklajeni posamezniki v splošni populaciji, (ii) zmanjševanja izpostavljenosti N protiteles sčasoma in (iii) nedavnih opažanj Agencije za zdravstveno varnost Združenega kraljestva (UKHSA), da so ravni protiteles N nižje pri posameznikih, ki so se okužili z virusom po dveh odmerkih cepljenja.
*
T-cells from common colds can provide protection against COVID-19 - study
*
Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs
https://www.authorea.com/users/455597/articles/552937-innate-immune-suppression-by-sars-cov-2-mrna-vaccinations-the-role-of-g-quadruplexes-exosomes-and-micrornas?fbclid=IwAR3HfuwO-7RaEzDP9J5b_NmlAno3o5LrZAKc4Kacc6tciQAlL2r15oNXkBo
*
Sep 20, 2020
