Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

Reference [1] is applicable to how our body handles an immune response to the viral infection in general: i.e. whether naturally acquired, or through controlled vaccination. Natural infections were, naturally focused upon, in order to understand the baseline dynamics of viral infection.

Reference [2] is...it says just as much about the efficacy of vaccination as the efficacy of natural immunity:

> The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated.

Read reference [3] to understand why natural immunity doesn't cut it. Note that widespread natural immunity causes the same positive selection pressure as widespread vaccine deployment, and:

> Finally, our work suggests that immune evasion requiring one to two mutations occurs within months, raising the prospect that this phenomenon will further shorten the duration of natural immunity...

The paper goes on to provide (under Discussion) a series of strategies for developing a vaccination system that takes into account modelled viral evolution. Can't come up with strategies like that for natural immunity, apart from: "periodically re-infect individual"...which is exactly what vaccines do, in a controlled manner.

Reference [4] and [5] are research tabulating mutations the virus is undergoing to counter both natural acquired and vaccine-mediated immune responses. It is not an indictment against vaccines, but just like paper [3], provide strategies on how to update vaccines. That updates will be required is not a surprise to anyone. Viral evolution has long been known of, and no one expected the emergency COVID-19 vaccines to be effective until the end of time.

Reference [6]...did you read it? It's about vaccines which protect the host(keep them alive), but still keep them infectious (capable of transmission). None of the COVID-19 vaccines do that...

I just looked it up. Where I'm staying the tests are 57e, you do it yourself, and get a result within 20mins which is valid for 24h. That definitely is a high cost.

No. Stop it. It's not simple enough. Stop this crazy obsession.

Adverse reaction are real. Here's a woman who has had her legs amputated[1] a few days after receiving the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine. Stated cause: she contracted COVID. More cases like it, blood clots, heart inflammation, sudden death. You all know this is happening, don't you?

Close your eyes and sweep it under the rug. Keep ignoring the uncomfortable and unfortunate. Keep dismissing it as minimal harm.

You'd make the Nazis proud. When the Germans committed crimes against humanity the general population simply didn't know about it. They didn't notice millions of people were taken forcefully out of their homes. Rounded up and brought somewhere. Simply no idea what was happening. No of course they knew, they just suppressed it. To protect themselves and their fragile, fear-filled, state of mind.

It sounds drastic, but this is the path you're on. Too committed to this narrative. Unable to evaluate the situation for what it is. The vaccine is not necessary and neither entirely safe. You have been listening to the fear porn for too long. The numbers don't add up, left and right. The reality is much more mundane.

The number of COVID death in China to this day is 4,636 [2]. People outside of risk groups have nothing to worry, will experience no to mild symptoms, before acquiring natural lasting immunity. Death rates around the world are barely moving, in many countries dead on average. The studies are worthless, when the larger, population-wide scale tells a different tale. People just aren't dying en masse - there's nothing to support this madness, or inject everybody with spike protein on annual basis, you truly are too daft to realize that? Do you think someone that does not have symptoms of illness, can be considered ill?

Spin it however you want, ignore the inconsistencies, inject yourself with whatever calms your mind, but DO NOT force it onto others and for your own sake DO NOT continue to take booster shots.

[1] https://www.ibtimes.sg/who-jummai-nache-minnesota-womans-bot... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/china/

This line of thinking assumes you can reliably separate people that have had covid from those that haven’t. In the real world requiring vaccines for everyone means vaccination of people that thought they had covid but didn’t.

Which I suspect may be the underlying reason studies are showing the vaccines are more effective than getting covid.

We can cherry pick papers all day long to support or refute the idea that having had Covid19 is equivalent/better/worse than getting the vaccine. Anyone being honest can see that the jury is still out on the issue. But I can state 2 things with certainty. 1) having had it does offer some degree of immunization. 2) there is a lot of evidence that those spike proteins do damage. Given that, I dont know why some people lump previously infected folks in with anti-vaxxers. It's not even close to the same thinking.