I was vaccinated against COVID last April. I got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. I’ve always been biased in favor of the J&J vaccine, not only because it was a single-dose vax but also because the Biden administration seemed biased against it. They ridiculously decided to pause the vaccine due to a one-in-million risk of severe blood clots.
Never mind the risk of myocarditis in young males—am I still young? I’m 41 years old—from the mRNA vaccines that’s actually higher than the risk of blood clots from the J&J vaccine, the Biden administration went ahead with the pause. It was a terrible decision, and it literally caused a surge in vaccine hesitancy, destroying the chance of achieving Biden’s goal of a 70% vaccination rate by last Independence Day.
I did the right thing and got vaccinated, but I’ve resisted getting any boosters. In fact, I decided months ago that going forward, I’m relying on natural immunity to protect me. Why not? I’m not in a high-risk age group. I may not be in the best shape, but I ride my Peloton almost daily. I’d like to think that if I got COVID (if I haven’t already, who knows?) I’d be okay. I’m willing to take to the risk.
It’s no surprise that the Biden administration likes to pretend that natural immunity isn’t a thing and seems to have actively campaigned against it.
The war against natural immunity hasn’t stopped.
A new study claims that “Antibodies induced by the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines may be better at neutralizing the virus and it’s [sic] variants than having natural immunity, according to new research,” reports IFLScience. “The results suggest that even after recovering from COVID-19, the vaccine likely remains the best way to protect yourself against reinfection, particularly against new and more infectious variants.”
IFLScience concedes, however, that the study “cannot confirm that vaccines are more effective outside of laboratory conditions.” Nevertheless, the results of the study were published in Scientific Reports.
Color me unconvinced.
Here at PJ Media, we’ve not been afraid to point out the facts about natural immunity. In fact, as Paula Bolyard noted last year, “there’s lots and lots and lots of science showing that [natural immunity is] superior to double-vaxxing.”
Last month a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that natural immunity was superior protection from reinfection than vaccination. It found out that “natural immunity was 2.8 times as effective in preventing hospitalization and 3.3 to 4.7 times as effective in preventing Covid infection compared with vaccination.”
Shouldn’t that have ended the debate? Why are people still claiming that vaccination is better protection from reinfection than natural immunity?
Well, the answer is obvious. Despite their own study proving that natural immunity is better protection than vaccination, the CDC still recommended that “vaccination remains the safest strategy for averting future SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations, long-term sequelae, and death.”
It’s almost as if they disavowed their own study. Not to mention scores of others that reached the same conclusion.
“The CDC study and [Johns Hopkins University’s study] confirm what more than 100 other studies on natural immunity have found: The immune system works,” Dr. Marty Makary of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine wrote in the Wall Street Journal last month. “The largest of these studies, from Israel, found that natural immunity was 27 times as effective as vaccinated immunity in preventing symptomatic illness.”
It’s time for the Biden administration to follow the science, not the politics, acknowledge the benefits of natural immunity, and let people decide for themselves whether vaccination is right for them based on their risk level.
That’s the way it should be.