Natural immunity

[Scott777]

I can assure you I didn't think it was a cold and the big bad wolf took my next door neighbour  98, a guy I played golf  with  and one of my oldest friends  both 60  years old .
Wasn't very convenient for them but there you go the pubs open and I'm going for a drink .

Understood, it was not a cold for everyone.  But for those who were mildly affected, they probably did think it was.

[Streetwalker]

It seems to me that most people had Covid early on, and thought it was a cold.  Only fearmongering made people think Covid must be the big bad wolf.  Big pharma have made billions out of fear.  How convenient.

I can assure you I didn't think it was a cold and the big bad wolf took my next door neighbour  98, a guy I played golf  with  and one of my oldest friends  both 60  years old .
Wasn't very convenient for them but there you go the pubs open and I'm going for a drink . 

[Scott777]

Surely older people pick up colds less than children because they have greater immunity gained from a lifetime of catching colds. So that ought to mean they have greater immunity to covid too - if cold immunity protects from covid, that is.  We know that covid tends to have much more severe symptoms in older people but are they more susceptible to initial infection? I haven't seen any info on that.

Earlier in the pandemic they were saying about 40-50% of people infected with covid virus develop no symptoms but the virus still replicates in them and they can infect others. I've also read that a smaller proportion of people (around 10%) are naturally immune to the covid virus and don't get infected. They can only spread the virus by contamination - e.g. clothing, hair.

It seems to me that most people had Covid early on, and thought it was a cold.  Only fearmongering made people think Covid must be the big bad wolf.  Big pharma have made billions out of fear.  How convenient.

[HDQQ]

Further to that there is a report in Today's Telegraph which reckons there were plenty of people who never could get Covid. Something I raised in 2020 and seem to remember being poo pood over.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/10/common-cold-might-have-given-britons-protection-covid-pandemic/

Large numbers of Britons were already protected from coronavirus before the pandemic began because of previous exposure to common colds, a groundbreaking new study suggests.
Researchers at Imperial College found that half of people living with an infected person in the second wave - before vaccines were available - were carrying high levels of memory T-cells from colds that may have stopped them picking up the virus.
The study helps explain why some people never get infected, and also sheds light on why older people - who are less likely to pick up colds - are more susceptible, while children - who suffer many colds every year - are more protected.

Surely older people pick up colds less than children because they have greater immunity gained from a lifetime of catching colds. So that ought to mean they have greater immunity to covid too - if cold immunity protects from covid, that is.  We know that covid tends to have much more severe symptoms in older people but are they more susceptible to initial infection? I haven't seen any info on that.

Earlier in the pandemic they were saying about 40-50% of people infected with covid virus develop no symptoms but the virus still replicates in them and they can infect others. I've also read that a smaller proportion of people (around 10%) are naturally immune to the covid virus and don't get infected. They can only spread the virus by contamination - e.g. clothing, hair.

[Sheepy]

Lies, we put it up here months ago
Rise in non-Covid virus that can leave children struggling to breathe (msn.com).

[Scott777]

I have said often that the only way any of this could be proved is to blood test everyone, then to treat us all as individuals. It seems to me that those advocating no vaccination are actually asking for this without recognising just how impossible this was, certainly at the start.

Would anyone advocating no jabs have the courage to stand in front of even a room full of people and be responsible for that decision? Hindsight is so wonderful. We had certain facts and certain evidence of how other countries were not coping. Based on that, decisions were made. We cannot expect the impossible from those who do have the responsibility. Did all those people die of a common cold? Give me strength!

If there's a non-invasive test for T-cells, B-cells, etc, then I would take it.  I won't stick a rod up my nose just to prove that I'm not diseased, or a public health risk.

Being unvaccinated is not necessarily a decision.  I could not make a decision with the lack of clinical trials that we have.  Being unvaccinated is the absence of a decision.  You don't need to decide or do anything to be unvaccinated.

[Sheepy]

I guess this is the same as your article, Barry, which I could not read.  Just to be clear, this is peer-reviewed research.  However, Sky can't resist promoting big pharma anyway, but saying 'get jabbed anyway' is NOT based on any science, so people must recognise the difference.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-t-cells-from-common-colds-can-protect-against-coronavirus-infection-study-finds-12512900

The scientists have told you that it will in the shorter-term look like the jab has made a difference the long-term effects are something completely different.  

[Scott777]

I guess this is the same as your article, Barry, which I could not read.  Just to be clear, this is peer-reviewed research.  However, Sky can't resist promoting big pharma anyway, but saying 'get jabbed anyway' is NOT based on any science, so people must recognise the difference.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-t-cells-from-common-colds-can-protect-against-coronavirus-infection-study-finds-12512900

[Streetwalker]

Another article saying previously Covid infected people do not need vaccines.
JoG and SW take note.
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

I mean, it's difficult sorting the wheat from the chaff, but logic has always said we are immune after infection. Logic was beaten by Pfizer telling us we all need that jab.

Well it doesn't say we don't need the  vaccine it says its would be better to vaccinate the uninfected first which makes sense when trying to protect the greatest number of people .

[T00ts]

I have said often that the only way any of this could be proved is to blood test everyone, then to treat us all as individuals. It seems to me that those advocating no vaccination are actually asking for this without recognising just how impossible this was, certainly at the start.

Would anyone advocating no jabs have the courage to stand in front of even a room full of people and be responsible for that decision? Hindsight is so wonderful. We had certain facts and certain evidence of how other countries were not coping. Based on that, decisions were made. We cannot expect the impossible from those who do have the responsibility. Did all those people die of a common cold? Give me strength!

[Barry]

Another article saying previously Covid infected people do not need vaccines.
JoG and SW take note.
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

Not one of over 1300 unvaccinated employees who had been previously infected tested positive during the five months of the study. Researchers concluded that that cohort "are unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination." In Israel, researchers accessed a database of the entire population to compare the efficacy of vaccination with previous infection and found nearly identical numbers. "Our results question the need to vaccinate previously infected individuals," they concluded.

I mean, it's difficult sorting the wheat from the chaff, but logic has always said we are immune after infection. Logic was beaten by Pfizer telling us we all need that jab.

[Barry]

Further to that there is a report in Today's Telegraph which reckons there were plenty of people who never could get Covid. Something I raised in 2020 and seem to remember being poo pood over.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/10/common-cold-might-have-given-britons-protection-covid-pandemic/

Large numbers of Britons were already protected from coronavirus before the pandemic began because of previous exposure to common colds, a groundbreaking new study suggests.
Researchers at Imperial College found that half of people living with an infected person in the second wave - before vaccines were available - were carrying high levels of memory T-cells from colds that may have stopped them picking up the virus.
The study helps explain why some people never get infected, and also sheds light on why older people - who are less likely to pick up colds - are more susceptible, while children - who suffer many colds every year - are more protected.

[Barry]

But you are not properly comparing vaccines with natural immunity, because you have ignored T-cells and B-cells.  Come on, Mr Gwent, you can do better than that.  😉

Mike Yeadon quoted a study where people exposed to SARS nearly 20 years ago gave blood samples recently. They showed T cell immunity to the original SARS AND to Sars-Cov-2 almost 20 years later.
I've already posted the video in the conspiracy theories section, because it might be and might not be. With this pandemic, yesterdays conspiracy theories have turned into todays truth.

[Scott777]

I found this more recent study just now

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34982375/

This paper says studies of Immunoglobulin levels  show the antibodies that confer natural immunity in patients who have caught the disease seem to disappear within 4-6 months and vaccination is suggested as the only viable way to maintain immunity

This is a lot longer than the time period suggested in the articles Roger pointed me at, but this is from 2022 and possibly benefits from greater experience.

But you are not properly comparing vaccines with natural immunity, because you have ignored T-cells and B-cells.  Come on, Mr Gwent, you can do better than that.  😉

[johnofgwent]

Be precise.  Does the journal say natural immunity only lasts 60-90 days, or is it only referring to antibodies?

I found this more recent study just now

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34982375/

This paper says studies of Immunoglobulin levels  show the antibodies that confer natural immunity in patients who have caught the disease seem to disappear within 4-6 months and vaccination is suggested as the only viable way to maintain immunity

This is a lot longer than the time period suggested in the articles Roger pointed me at, but this is from 2022 and possibly benefits from greater experience.