Updated: Sep 2, 2021
Has anyone heard of long-term risks associated with natural immunity? No? Neither have we. Natural immunity doesn’t come with a price tag, financial or otherwise. There’s no price we have to pay: no antibody dependent enhancement (“ADE”), no prion disease or infertility, for example.
During an interview with The Highwire Dr. Mike Yeadon discussed a “list of lies” told by governments about Covid. Almost everything we have been told about this virus and the response to it has been a lie.
One lie is that the PCR is a reliable test of infection and another is because the virus is novel there is no prior immunity to it.
By Rhoda Wilson
As for no prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2 Dr. Yeadon said, “In the first three weeks [of the ‘pandemic’] I worked out that was not true.”
He checked scientific resources and “realised it was something like 80% similar to SARS 2003 and maybe 60% similar to common cold causing coronaviruses. I thought, ‘there will be a lot of people who will have been exposed to one or other of those,’ and I knew that meant lots of people will have prior immunity. That is: they’ve encountered something similar, they’ve overcome the virus, and, with stable respiratory viruses, if you overcome them, you will be left with very durable, strong immunity: [both] T-cell and antibody, and I knew that. And, I know that the [government] scientific advisors know that too.”
People who had been exposed to SARS in 2003 were asked to volunteer for a study. The study was to determine if those who had survived SARS had immunity and, if so, what kind. Long-term immune protection involves several components and one of them, and probably the best, is the different types of T cells which help recognize and kill pathogens. The study found that every participant had robust T-cell immunity 17 years later, so “it’s probably going to be life-long. I think that’s what’s going to happen with SARS-CoV-2.,” said Dr. Yeadon.
The study also tested if the participants’ immunity recognised SARS-CoV-2, and they did. SARS and SARS-CoV-2 are about 80% genetically similar. In other words, the gap, or difference, between the two viruses is about 20%. The study proved the human immune system easily breaches that gap. If you’re immune to one of the viruses you’re immune to the other. So, how big is the gap between SARS-CoV2 variants?
When SARS-CoV-2 replicates it makes mistakes in its genetic sequence, a “typographical error” or “typo” if you like. This is called a variant. The governments, its advisors and legacy media give the impression that there are “variants of concern”: “Kent variant”, “South African variant”, “Indian variant”. The SARS-CoV-2 variant that is most different from, or with the biggest gap to, the Wuhan strain is only 0.3% different to the Wuhan virus. So, if two viruses – SARS and SARS-CoV-2 – differ by 20% and the immune system has no difficulty recognising it, “there’s no chance that a 0.3% variant can escape human immunity,” said Dr. Yeadon. A study has tested this: cells taken from persons who had recovered from SARS-CoV-2 were challenged with every variant the scientists had and, sure enough, the T-cells responded.
Results from a study by the University of Oxford indicated that, by July 2020 (a year ago), some parts of the United Kingdom had reached herd immunity from coronavirus. And, a significant portion of the population had “innate resistance or cross-protection from exposure to seasonal coronaviruses”, making the proportion vulnerable to coronavirus infection much smaller than previously thought. Professor Sunetra Gupta stated, “The principle of protection from exposure to related viruses, and indeed any kind of pathogen, is one that we’ve known for a very long time … we knew about this cross protection even before we knew that diseases were caused by germs. It’s a very old idea.”
In October 2020, The Great Barrington Declaration was launched. At the time of writing over 58,502 medical professionals and public health scientists have signed it to declare they had “grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing Covid-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection”. The Declaration states amongst other things, “We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine.”
Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at John Hopkins School of Medicine, recently stated “It appears that natural immunity is better against the Delta variant. When you get infected with Covid, your body’s immune system develops antibodies to the entire surface of the virus. Not just the slight protein that the vaccines give you, but the entire surface. And so, you get a more diverse antibody portfolio in your system.”
In January 2021, even Public Health England (“PHE”) recognised that natural immunity lasts longer than the “vaccines”. As a result of PHE’s SIREN study experts said previous infection gives 94% protection against symptomatic reinfection and 83% reduced risk for all infections.
At the start of the year, Sir Patrick Vallance said “70% or more protection would be needed to reach herd immunity.” But in mid-April the Office for National Statistics released a survey which showed 60%-70% of the UK population had antibodies to Covid. As of 9 August, 89% of the UK adult population had received at least one Covid injection with, apparently, an efficacy of 90%+. Curiously Vallance doesn’t seem to be highlighting that, using his own estimation, herd immunity in the UK was reached months ago either by “vaccine” or naturally acquired. And it’s not only their own data they are not considering. They seem to be ignoring evidence coming from other countries as well. For example, numbers presented to the Israeli Health Ministry showed people who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the Covid injections than those with natural immunity.
Although there may be a few mentions of natural immunity buried on a government website somewhere – for example: travel advice for Iceland where travel is also permitted for those who have “previously recovered from Covid-19 infection” – largely, despite the science, the UK government, its advisors and legacy media do not want to talk about it. They are gaslighting our natural immune systems and our natural immunity. If the government is hell-bent on mass testing for Covid, why are they not so keen on mass testing for natural immunity and reporting the daily data on it? More to the point, should Government be focusing resources more on illnesses that affect larger portions of the population, cancer for example?
By June 2020, three months after the first “lockdown” began, 2.1 million patients were awaiting crucial screening for breast, cervical and bowel cancer because of the ‘pandemic’. There are more than 166,000 cancer deaths in the UK every year, that’s more than 450 every day. One in two, 50% of, people in the UK under the age of 60 will be diagnosed with some form of cancer during their lifetime and 38% of cancer cases are preventable. Only 50% of people diagnosed with cancer in England and Wales will survive their disease for ten years or more. If the government put the same resources into Cancer that it has into Covid, it would save far more lives.