There was a study in Nature last year that looked at SARS survivors 17 years later and found they still had T-cell memory response to that coronavirus. Their immune systems responded to covid-19 as well. They seemed to think that bode well for dealing with variants.

Link - https://www.nature.com/article...

that's a good study. thanks for sharing that.

this is a thoughtful response. thank you.

I did not say genes were edited, but I like the info you shared.

None of your information contradicts my salient point: ie, that people who possess a documented, natural immunological response as a result of prior covid-19 infection should have equal social standing as the vaccinated. Dozens of international studies have demonstrated this.

Uh, I parroted nothing I'm aware of, i quoted published studies from experts and shared my thoughts.

im grasping at straws? What does that mean? Someone not wanting to get a vaccination makes them an antivaxxer? I think skepticism towards the NEED for a vaccination from something they already have immunity from, and that they are not at risk from anyways, makes them an informed human capable of cogent thought. not an antivaxxer.

your point about preferring immunity from some shots vs the virus is of course logical. But a lot of people already had the virus, and already have an immunological response. And there's shittons of people out there at basically no risk from covid - those who are young, not compromised, and not obese. so why should they be __forced__ to take shots for something they're not at risk from? That violates their autonomy, which is ethics 101. Getting their shots should be an option for them if they want, sure, but to mandate it? To deny them work, flights, school, business? Bullshit.

Another shopworn antivax lie for pointing out that natural immunity makes no profit? Uh, by lie you mean true, right?

Did you even read the parent post?

Actually, we should not be mandating vaccines for ANYONE. Do you know why Mengele was considered a war criminal? Because his patients didn't have a choice. Think about that long and hard.

The mass push is justified by what? Children are not at risk from covid. Nor are college students. Nor are the 32 million prior infections. The push should be for the 65+ crowd, the compromised, and the obese.

Btw ... you don't understand why someone would be reluctant to inject new, emergency-use-only MRNA gene-treatment technology into their children, upon which no long-term studies have been done, to protect them from something they aren't at risk from? Seriously?

Until long term studies have been done, we should not be mandating vaccines for populations that aren't at risk, such as children and college students.

And we should absolutely consider prior infection as equal to vaccination. Science is clear on that.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru...

It’s frustrating to me that any discussion of vaccines gets me immediately annihilated as an “anti vaxxer.” I’m not anti anything, other than anti-bullshit.

For example with covid, study after study has shown that if you’ve already had covid, you don’t NEED a vaccine. Your body’s natural immunological response is strong against reinfection. yet this is nowhere in the headlines, and nowhere in the discussions of “vaccine passports.” All I hear is, “everybody vaccinate, everybody vaccinate, you can only take your mask off if you vaccinate” and that’s bullshit. Previously infected individuals possess natural immunity just as strong as vaccination, and children have basically 0 death rate from covid, they do not NEED to vaccinate against covid. You know who NEEDS to vaccinate? old people. And compromised people. And probably obese people, since according to the CDC they account for 78% of the hospitalizations. That’s not body shaming, that’s fact. This paragraph isn't anti-vax, it's fact.

But even as I type that, chance are you’re lining up to call me a troll, an anti-vaxxer, etc. If you are, you’re the asshole, not me. I’m the one with science.

A large-scale (5 million) study by Denmark using PCR tests, found a 0.65% reinfection rate, and researches gave an 80% efficacy to natural immunity following infection. Compare that to the Johnson&Johnson vaccine, which has a 67% efficacy. Or the minimum efficacy for vaccines in the US, 50%. It was published in the Lancet in March ’21. Fact. There was no degredation in effectiveness over time, either. Fact.

Denmark’s study also examined 48 published scholarly articles that found reinfection rates to be less than 1%. The researchers noted that “most of these peer-reviewed articles report that reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is a rare event occurring in less than 1% of COVID-19 cases.” Fact.

A commentary on that study, also published in the Lancet, said, "When looking at natural immunity, we identified three cohort studies: one peer-reviewed article of reinfections in residents in two nursing care homes and two preprint articles, one that followed up 43000 individuals in Qatar and found an estimated 95% protection against reinfection, and one of over 20000 health-care workers in the UK that found an 83% lower risk of reinfection for at least 5 months after the first infection."

Facts.

The government of Iceland, intelligently, is accepting proof of prior infection as equal to proof of vaccination. Finally, some intelligent people.

That UK study referenced, which was published in the Lancet in April ’21, tracked 25,661 public health workers and found they had an 84% lower risk of reinfection after having covid-19. Fact. Researchers wrote "This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.”

In a commentary of that study, published in the same journal, another researcher noted, "the findings of the authors suggest that infection and the development of an antibody response provides protection similar to or even better than currently used SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.”

Elsewhere the author states, "natural infection protects robustly from asymptomatic and symptomatic reinfection."

Where are those headlines?

As well, regarding T cell immunity in addition to antibodies, a study from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology and published in Science on Jan 6 2021, found that “the immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had durable memories of the virus natural infection induced a strong response, and this study now shows that the responses last.”

Also, a study published in Nature on July 2020 found that survivors of the 2003 SARS virus retained immunologic T cell memory 17 years after infection, and it also protected them from covid-19. The researchers noted, “We then showed that SARS-recovered patients (n=23) still possess long-lasting memory T cells reactive to SARS-NP 17 years after the 2003 outbreak, which displayed robust cross-reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 N.” They state elsewhere, “These findings demonstrate that virus-specific T cells induced by betacoronanvirus infection are long-lasting, supporting the notion that COVID-19 patients will develop long-term T cell immunity. Our findings also raise the intriguing possibility that long-lasting T cells generated following infection with related viruses may be able to protect against, or modify the pathology caused by, SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

These are facts.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist at the Brigham and Women's Hospital, and a member of the CDC’s vaccine-safety advisory committee until they pulled him off for expressing his view that the pause of J&J’s vaccine would do more harm than good amongst the elderly, had this to say:

“Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should. COVID vaccines are important for older high-risk people, and their care-takers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Nor children.” Fact. Oh and Twitter censored him for that.

And so the fact that my body possesses documented natural antibodies as a result of my prior covid infection sure as hell better be accounted for as equal to any vaccination in whatever "vaccine passport" program that gets implemented.

Natural immunity's biggest problem is that it doesn't make politicians powerful or CEOs rich.

here's my sources:
Danish study: https://www.thelancet.com/jour...
England Study: https://www.thelancet.com/jour...
England Study Commentary: https://www.thelancet.com/jour...
Nature study: https://www.nature.com/article...
La Jolla study: https://www.nih.gov/news-event...

In addition to people that have been vaccinated, they should also include people that have already had covid-19. People that have had covid possess natural immunity in the form of antibodies and t-cell memory. Reinfections are rare, and the immunological response does not degrade over time (so far).

A recent large-scale study by Denmark found re-infection rates to be 0.65% in a cohort of 11,727 people that previously had covid, with no degradation in effectiveness of protection after 6 months.

The researchers estimated an 80% efficacy rating for naturally acquired immunity. (“In summary,” the researchers wrote, “we found that protection against repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection is robust and detectable in the majority of individuals, protecting 80% or more of the naturally infected population who are younger than 65 years against reinfections within the observation period.”) The minimum efficacy for a vaccine in the US is 50%.

Denmark’s study also examined 48 published scholarly articles that found reinfection rates to be less than 1%. The researchers noted that “most of these peer-reviewed articles report that reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is a rare event occurring in less than 1% of COVID-19 cases.”

That’s promising data for people that have had covid-19.

As well, regarding T cell immunity in addition to antibodies, a study from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology and published in Science on Jan 6 2021, found that “the immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had durable memories of the virus natural infection induced a strong response, and this study now shows that the responses last.”

Regarding variants, a study published in Nature on July 2020 found that survivors of the 2003 SARS virus retained immunologic T cell memory 17 years after infection, and it also protected them from covid-19. The researchers noted, “We then showed that SARS-recovered patients (n=23) still possess long-lasting memory T cells reactive to SARS-NP 17 years after the 2003 outbreak, which displayed robust cross-reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 N.” They state elsewhere, “These findings demonstrate that virus-specific T cells induced by betacoronanvirus infection are long-lasting, supporting the notion that COVID-19 patients will develop long-term T cell immunity. Our findings also raise the intriguing possibility that long-lasting T cells generated following infection with related viruses may be able to protect against, or modify the pathology caused by, SARS-CoV-2 infection.” In other words, natural immunity protected against another coronavirus (which was 80% similar to the original.) Variants tend to be >99% similar. And the protection lasts, well, so far 17 years.

So in addition to people that have been vaccinated, they should include people that have already had covid-19.

Sources:
Denmark study: https://www.thelancet.com/jour...
La Jolla study: https://www.nih.gov/news-event...
Nature study: https://www.nature.com/article...