Natural Immunity Is REAL! Why Do “Experts” Not Harp On Its Successes?

Do you remember way back in March, April, and May of 2020 when Dr. Anthony Fauci repeatedly touted our need for “herd immunity?” It seemed that in every interview he did on every television network, he claimed we would not be able to beat COVID-19 until we achieved “herd immunity.”  When the timeline for the rollout of vaccines for COVID-19 began to unfold, Fauci went silent about natural immunity. Since then, I’ve never heard any “positive” words regarding natural or herd immunity come out of his mouth. It’s as if he learned something negative about that and didn’t relate it to us for fear of embarrassment on his part for harping on it for months.

After a recent study was released, it appears that Fauci stopped promoting natural/herd immunity as a plus for some sinister reason. Could it be because he has a stake in the vaccine production and distribution — and the money?

I’m asking a question, not making an allegation. However, when it comes to information conundrums among politicians and so-called medical experts whose “facts” and “evidence” presented to us don’t align with actual facts, there’s always a dollar sign somewhere in the circumstances that point directly to them.

The Study

A new Israeli study on coronavirus immunity suggests that people who were previously infected with the virus benefit from significantly stronger and longer-lasting immunity than the immunity provided by vaccination alone.

The study, a retrospective observational study conducted by Maccabi Healthcare Services, Tel Aviv University, Ashdod University Hospital, compared Israelis from three groups: people who had received the vaccine and were never infected (SARS-CoV-2 naïve), people who were previously infected and did not receive the vaccine, and people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and then vaccinated after recovering.

Researchers found that natural immunity is stronger and longer-lasting than vaccination but also noted that a single dose of vaccine likely could offer additional protection from the Delta Variant to those who recovered from SARS-CoV-2.

For the study, researchers analyzed anonymized Electronic Health Records, a database covering records for 2.5 million people in Israeli, spanning March 1, 2020, to August 14, 2021.

The study grouped the subjects into categories based on vaccination status and previous infection, correcting for demographic factors including age, sex, location of residence, and the timing of infection or vaccination.

In the first analysis, which only compared natural immunity to vaccinated immunity among the SARS-CoV-2 naïve, two cohorts of 16,215 people each were studied, with equal representation of age, sex, location, and time of infection or vaccination.

This model showed 256 total cases of infection, 238 were ‘breakthrough infections’ of the vaccinated and COVID naive, while 19 were reinfections among the unvaccinated, previously infected group. Adjusting for comorbidities, vaccinated COVID-naïve people had a 13 times greater risk of infection than the previously infected.

Of 199 symptomatic cases, 191 were among the vaccinated, just 8 were among the previously infected. After adjusting for comorbidities, researchers found the vaccinated were 27 times more likely to suffer a symptomatic case of the virus in comparison to the risk previously infected people had of having symptomatic reinfection cases.

A total of nine hospitalizations were reported, eight of them among the vaccinated COVID-naïve group, with one among the previously infected. No deaths were reported in either cohort.

The researchers also compared two groups – each including 14,029 people – one in which the subjects had been previously infected but never vaccinated, and one in which they were infected and then later vaccinated with a single dose.

This model found that vaccination with a single dose of the vaccine cut the risk of reinfection nearly in half, with the previously infected vaccinated group having a 0.53 risk factor compared to the unvaccinated recovered group.

However, the vaccine appeared to make slightly less of an impact in cutting the risk factor for symptomatic illness.

Sixteen of the recovered-and-vaccinated cohort reported symptomatic reinfection, compared to 23 subjects in the unvaccinated cohort. One unvaccinated patient was hospitalized, while none of the recovered-and-vaccinated patients were hospitalized.

Considering comorbidities, the study found that recovered-and-vaccinated subjects had a 0.65 risk factor, or 65% the risk of the unvaccinated recovered subjects, for developing a symptomatic case of the virus.

The authors concluded that when studying the effects of the Delta Variant, “natural immunity affords longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”

But, they added, a single dose of the vaccine appears to boost the protection enjoyed by the previously infected.

“Notably, individuals who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant. The long-term protection provided by a third dose, recently administered in Israel, is still unknown.”

The researchers suggested that the stronger and longer-lasting protection enjoyed by the previously infected “could be explained by the more extensive immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 proteins than that generated by the anti-spike protein immune activation conferred by the vaccine,” while adding “this remains a hypothesis.”

The study appears to corroborate the data collected by Israel’s Health Ministry earlier this year which compared the likelihood of reinfection during the fourth wave of the pandemic to the likelihood of breakthrough infections among the vaccinated.

The data presented to the Health Ministry in July found that the vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely than the previously infected to be diagnosed with the virus. However, no distinction was made between vaccinated patients who were COVID-naïve or previously infected, nor were comorbidities accounted for.

A previous study, conducted in Cleveland, Ohio, found that there is likely little to no benefit for recovered SARS-CoV-2 patients receiving vaccines against the coronavirus.


One would think with the extensive historical examples of the medical “experts” like Dr. Anthony Fauci that originally touted natural immunity was the panacea we all needed, some of these experts would be lauding this study and its results. When I first read it, I expected a bunch of “I told you so’s” from those claiming to be the ones who promoted herd/natural immunity as our “necessary objective.” That has not happened and I don’t think it will.

Why is that? One can only speculate. But, in the context of the way this played out from the beginning, it is not a far reach to conclude there must be “a” or “some” reason(s) for these experts and mainstream media to ignore it. What could those reasons be?

Here’s one logical reason for the ignoring of such studies:

The international big pharmaceutical companies involved in the vaccine production against covid-19 collectively earned more than 24.5 billion euros in the first half of 2021, driven by the high demand for the drug.

According to data compiled by Efe, the pharmaceutical companies Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson (J&J), parent of Janssen, achieved a net profit of 24.5 billion euros in this period, which represents an increase of 66% compared to 2020.

The last to present results on Thursday was Moderna, which earned about 3.4 billion euros as of June, thanks to its vaccine sales, which were just under 5 billion.

The US company, which had lost 203 million euros in the same period of 2020, invoiced 5.3 billion during the first six months, after the sale of 302 million doses.

The pharmaceutical company raised its sales forecasts for this year to 16.9 billion euros and expected to deliver between 800,000 and 1 billion doses, which has demonstrated an efficacy of 93% in the six months after the second injection.

Pfizer earned a net profit of 8.8 billion euros so far in 2021, up 53% year-on-year, while its turnover amounted to €28.2 billion, up 68%.

Does anything jump out at you in that story other than the obvious massive profits for these companies? Did you notice the profit amounts are reported in euros and not dollars? Why do you think that is the case?

The answer is very obvious: this news report came from a newspaper in Madrid — NOT a U.S. outlet. Spain’s currency is euros as are other European countries. No U.S. mainstream media published these profit details of these pharmaceutical companies. 

There WERE reports of there being profits. But none made it a big deal. Why not? Because the “customer” for these Pharma giants was and is The United States Government.

We’re not saying there was any irregularity in all of this. But there are far too many unexplainable occurrences in this pandemic and its details to believe that no one has a personal financial stake in maintaining the furor in COVID-19 and all its mysteries for MORE profits.

We’ll leave this rabbit trail we’ve gone down, but not before we ask this question: Besides our government spending billions of taxpayer dollars on “COVID Insanity,” what are the costs involved and for whom?

The answer is simple: the lives of millions of people around the world who decided to trust what these experts had to say — even when much of the instructions given have proven to be wrong and, at least in part, have resulted in deaths, many of which could have been prevented.

Saddest of all is that we may NEVER know the truth — if we don’t already.

To Download Today’s (Monday, August 30, 2021) Show, click on this link:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.