The nation’s most politically powerful infectious disease physician, Dr. Anthony Fauci, has insisted vaccines provide immunity against COVID-19 that is superior to natural immunity derived from infection.
However, researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease he has directed since 1984 have published a preprint study contradicting that claim. They found that while the mRNA vaccines target COVID’s spike protein, natural immunity recognizes the whole of the virus, providing superior protection, Just the News reported.
That protection includes the development of antibodies against one of the most crucial structural components of SARS-CoV-2, the nucleocapsid protein that envelops the RNA core.
During the “blinded” phase of Moderna’s 30,000-adult COVID vaccine trial, only 40% of the participants who received the vaccine developed anti-nucleocapsid antibodies.
The figure was more than twice as high – 93% – for participants who were given the placebo.
Significantly, the researchers found that a placebo recipient with a mild infection had a 71% chance of developing the antibodies, compared to 15% for a vaccine recipient.
The Fauci-led NIAID’s Biostatistics Research Branch collaborated in the study with Moderna, Seattle’s Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the medical schools of Baylor, Cornell, Harvard and the University of Maryland.
Just the News noted that in January, vaccination promoter and funder Bill Gates criticized the COVID-19 vaccines he had championed, pointing out the short duration of their effectiveness.
The next month, Gates acknowledged what vaccine scientists such as Dr. Robert Malone had been saying for some time, that the omicron variant had “done a better job” of conferring broad-spectrum immunity around the world than the vaccines.
n November, Fauci and Centers for Disease Control Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky were among the defendants in a class-action lawsuit against President Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate filed by federal employees who argued they had natural immunity from a previous infection that affords protection superior to the vaccines.
The evidence to back that claim includes more than 150 studies compiled by former government health adviser Dr. Paul Elias Alexander, Dr. Harvey Risch of the Yale School of Medicine and others.
“We should not force COVID vaccines on anyone when the evidence shows that naturally acquired immunity is equal to or more robust and superior to existing vaccines. Instead, we should respect the right of the bodily integrity of individuals to decide for themselves,” Alexander writes for the Brownstone Institute.
He is a former assistant professor at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, in evidence-based medicine and research methods; a former adviser to WHO-PAHO in Washington, D.C., and a former senior adviser for COVID pandemic policy at Health and Human Services.
Alexander charges that public health officials, the medical establishment and establishment media are “misleading the public with assertions that the COVID-19 shots provide greater protection than natural immunity.”
He notes the CDC’s Walensky claimed in a statement published in October 2020 in the British journal The Lancet that “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection” and “the consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future.”
But for more than a century, it’s been known that natural immunity confers protection against a respiratory virus’s outer coat proteins. And there is strong evidence for the persistence of antibodies.
Somehow, he says, the CDC recognizes natural immunity for chicken-pox, measles, mumps and rubella but not for COVID-19.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact email@example.com.