CDC admits natural immunity more protective than vax, yet hypes ICU, other perils for unvaxxed kids
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • 4 years ago • 146 commentsBy: Greg Piper (Just The News)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Natural immunity from COVID-19 is broad and durable. The lowest risk group for COVID complications should get vaccines — and boosters, for those authorized — regardless of their health.
These statements came out of the CDC two days apart, illustrating the agency's mixed messaging as ongoing research fails to show a meaningful effect on viral transmission from COVID interventions, especially in children.
They have also exposed a potential rift between the agency's researchers and its social media team, which proclaim the gospel of vaccines and boosters even for research that is more circumspect.
The CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report last week found that COVID recovery became more protective against reinfection and hospitalization than "recent" vaccination alone once the Delta variant became dominant.
"The report finally acknowledges what many have suspected for a long time — that surviving COVID-19 provides excellent natural immunity not only [to] repeat infection but also to hospitalization and death for the delta variant of COVID-19," University of Southern California clinical medical professor Jeffrey Klausner and UCLA Health senior resident Noah Kojima wrote this week in The Hill.
"The pattern of improved protection after natural infection makes sense," they explain, because natural infection exposes the body to "all parts of the virus" while vaccines target COVID's spike protein.
This feds' recognition means "it is time to update vaccination policies and school or work-entry requirements across federal and state or county governments," they wrote.
The study's findings undercut another agency's social media team. The FDA recently tweeted a slick in-house video featuring Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks, who claimed that people who recovered from COVID and then got vaccinated are still vulnerable without boosters.
'Really misleading' tweet
The CDC's portrayal of a severe pediatric COVID study led by one of its Atlanta-based researchers is "really misleading," a Stanford Medical School professor told Just the News.
Before COVID vaccines were "approved for most children, nearly 1 in 3 of 2,200+ children hospitalized w/ COVID-19 were admitted to the ICU or put on a ventilator," the agency tweeted Jan. 31, recommending vaccines for children 5 and up and boosters for 12 and up.
It shared a link to a study in the American Academy of Pediatrics' journal, "Risk Factors for Severe COVID-19 in Children," which reviewed 14 months of data from the start of the pandemic from the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network.
Most of it is hidden behind a $25 paywall, including the percentage of kids on ventilators, but the abstract only specifically identifies "children at potentially higher risk" as beneficiaries of vaccines.
The CDC's tweet drew immediate criticism on Twitter for mischaracterizing the study, which is about a hospitalized subset with "extremely high existing risk ratios," according to Matt Shapiro, an occasional writer for National Review. The biggest COVID risk factors it identified included chronic lung disease, neurological disorders and "airway abnormality."
Stanford Med's Jay Bhattacharya, a coauthor of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration, shared a copy of the full study with Just the News. It shows the "invasive mechanical ventilation" percentage of hospitalized children in the study is 5.3%, or 122, and the death rate 0.5%, or 12.
Bhattacharya emphasized the study analyzed "the alpha wave" of COVID and its purpose is to "identify correlates of bad outcomes among these hospitalized kids." Those with "severe pre-existing conditions," more than half the study population, are more likely to suffer ICU admission, ventilation or death.
The CDC's tweet falsely leads parents to think "1/3rd of all kids who get COVID before the vax ... will be hospitalized and have severe disease," he wrote in an email. "The randomized trials in kids did not establish that vax prevents severe disease in children. The CDC's assertion that it does is not based on the randomized trial evidence."
Asked to respond to criticism of its portrayal of the severe pediatric COVID study, a CDC spokesperson referred Just the News to another spokesperson who has not responded. The lead author of the study, CDC researcher Rebecca Woodruff, referred Just the News to media relations but has not answered whether she was banned from talking to reporters.
This wasn't the first time the CDC's tweets have been faulted by highly credentialed medical experts.
Harvard Medical School's former dean, among others, challenged its purported finding of a COVID-diabetes link in children, which the agency used to promote masking and vaccines despite several study limitations disclosed by the CDC's COVID and diabetes researchers.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky has shown similar seesawing, sometimes undermining COVID conventional wisdom while also promoting disputed research.
Months before she took over the agency, Walenksy questioned the purpose of PCR testing for recovered individuals in a Health Affairs essay promoting less sensitive rapid antigen tests.
She asked "what possible prevention purpose" PCR tests could serve by returning positives in those who "pose no risk of further transmission" and flagging "non-infectious individuals as candidates for isolation and quarantine." They routinely send up "false alarms" and risk "undermining public confidence" in testing.
Under fire in December for cutting in half the recommended isolation and quarantine time for infected people, Walensky warned that PCR tests can register positives for up to 12 weeks after an infection clears. The FDA told Just the News that PCR tests for COVID nonetheless remain the "gold standard."
But Walensky also repeatedly promoted a study that found schools without mask mandates were 3.5 times more likely to have COVID outbreaks. Critics noted it failed to control for vaccination status or even use the same time period for different schools.
Tags
Who is online
387 visitors
One of the great lessons of 2021 was that we don't trust anyone solely based on their "credentials."
One of the great lessons of 1964 was "don't trust anyone over 30". We guess we didn't learn that one.
Didn't learn it? The boomers became the least trustworthy!
So, you're saying we shouldn't trust anyone over 65? Guess that means you can't trust Trump either.
Don't judge anyone by what they say, go by their actions. Thus Trump proved himself and it's Joe Biden than deserves all the outrage.
I am.
Not really.
Oh, really. I do judge the Orange God King in Exile by his actions. And others as well.
Then where is the appreciation for all he did?
The same place where all my appreciation for Biden is.
They knew well before the vaccines were introduced that natural immunity was king. They lied once again.
They told us not to wear masks, then to wear masks. Then these morons showed up on TV and told us two masks is better than one. Now they tell us cloth masks are worthless.
There are serious questions being raised by experts on the MRNA vaccines. 1100 adverse side effect studies are in peer review as we speak. The vaccine data Pfizer is being forced to release after a court order is going to create a dumpster fire.
Prepare your butts, some are going to be sick they forced their children to take them.
Is this supposed to be good news? I can’t believe I have to explain how dumb this is.
To have natural immunity from Covid, you have to get Covid.
And then you have to survive it. It’s killed almost six million people. The mRNA vaccines have killed zero people.
And even if you survive Covid, there is a good chance you will be sick for weeks, even months with what is known as “Long Covid.” They see scarring in the lungs that is worse than what they see in smokers. It also damages organs all over the body.
You have an excellent chance of avoiding ALL of that by just getting vaccinated and wearing a mask.
And oh yeah, by the way, natural immunity fades just like it does with vaccines. So you can get Covid . . . Again. But your chance of getting it again diminishes a lot if you are also vaccinated.
Even the CDC doesn't make that assertion. But, I agree, immunity relies on survival.
Nothing is totally safe for everyone but there's a higher chance of dying in a car accident on the way to get the vaccine than dying from the vaccine itself. The smart thing to do is get the vaccine so if you do catch Covid it will be less severe. Being vaccinated doesn't preclude natural immunity, you can have both, When a vaccinated person catches covid they still gain the natural immunity so it's a win, win.
I'm not in total disagreement. Urged my parents to get it. My mom died of a pulmonary embolism shortly thereafter. Vaccine related? Who can say? Timing may have just been a coincidence. No one in my house is vaccinated. We all had it around the turn of the year. Only one of us had any symptoms, nothing approaching severe.
Don't get me wrong, I have had a healthy friend get severely ill from covid. But in the majority, comorbidities are the issue, vaccinated or not. And, I continue to have issues with the flexibility of the definition of "effective" the CDC has had concerning the vaccine. It was touted as something to prevent infection. Failing in that, it was touted as something that is effective in preventing severe illness and death.
Last I looked, right around 1800 vaccinated people had died in Massachusetts since July. That's around 40% of deaths in that time. From November 23 to Feb. 2, 1,237 fully vaccinated people died in Massachusetts. With the vaccinated, we are told that there were underlying comorbidities. When an unvaccinated person dies, nobody pays attention to the fact that the person was 500 lbs. Not diminishing the virus, or attempting to convince a person to not get vaccinated. I'm just not jumping on the wagon. I still wonder how New York had 55k+/- deaths in the first two months of the pandemic...20 something since...Remdesivir was known to have negative effects on the kidneys. Inducing a coma? Also known to negatively effect the kidneys. Now comes covid. Let's not only induce a coma, let's give them a drug that is known to harm the kidneys...double whammy for the kidneys. How many people died from covid, and how many died from the renal failure, induced by the coma and remdevisir?
Truth. RSV still putting more kids in hospitals than covid, and killing more. Yet, we aren't shutting schools down for RSV.
The common cold is the same family of virus, no known cure.
The various flu strains require annual flu shots.
Is it? I’m no expert, but I think they classify rhinoviruses and coronaviruses in different families. I don’t know what the consequences of that are, though - beyond the apparent fact that coronaviruses seem to be way more deadly.
Yes amongst others... (from wiki)
Well over 200 virus strains are implicated in causing the common cold, with rhinoviruses , coronaviruses , adenoviruses and enteroviruses being the most common.
Where were you when we were roundly being criticized for making this same statement two years ago?
A little late, but welcome to the party..
Those are still different families of viruses, even if we refer to an illness as a “cold.”
Who the hell is "we", you got a mouse in your pocket?
Where were you posting anything prior to November 2021?
I've been here spouting the same facts all along.
True, if it's mild and passes, it was a cold.
If it's more severe and lingers with fevers or infections it's the flu.
We are for the most part our own diagnosticians and doctors.
and have no idea what we had or the level of temporary immunity we will have for an unknown period of time.
Sorry my friend, although death is relatively rare from the Covid vaccines, it does happen...
from December 14, 2020, through January 31, 2022. During this time, VAERS received 11,879 preliminary reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine...
That comes from the CDC....
Yes it does but those ... at the end of your sentence intentionally avoid the data that 'comes from the CDC' that states, in BOLD:
The data that 'comes from the CDC' also states that the documented deaths were after the Janssen [J&J] vaccine which is NOT an mRNA vaccine.
I fully well expect people to go to the link and read the data themselves and not accept your limited report...
If you read the whole thing it clearly says that mRNA (Pfizer & Moderna) both have had adverse reactions that have cost people their lives... Particularly myocarditis and pericarditis, which although death is rare it has happened...
So yeah that data comes from the CDC...
Prove it NWM. Post a block quote from the link you posted that cites the numbers of deaths from the mRNA vaccines.
From your CDC link:
That was all you posted, which you used to intentionally imply that over 11,000 people died from Covid vaccines. Here's what is states after that:
There are also 3 studies linked after that, ALL of which are about the deaths from the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 vaccination.
I’m aware of VAERS, but there are some issues with it that aren’t necessarily obvious at first glance. During the time that the vaccines were authorized for emergency use (Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are now fully approved) literally anyone could report an adverse reaction because they wanted full data, even if it might include irrelevant data. There was very little vetting of submissions. Even a patient could submit the report. They don’t have to be a medical professional. So reporting a death after the vaccine, doesn’t mean the death was caused by that vaccine.
But more focused on your reply to my comment, I specifically said the mRNA vaccines have caused zero deaths. That excludes the J&J vaccine, which has caused a handful of deaths, largely via seizures, I think. To my knowledge, no death has been found to have been caused by the mRNA vaccines.
And heck, even if it were a few at this point, like the J&J vaccine, it is still far outpaced by Covid, and they have given out billions of doses.
That whole page addresses vaccines in general but focusses on the many
side effects associated with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine not mRNA products from Pfizer & Moderna.
I see where there are 11,000 plus cases where someone put the vaccine ( no input as to which vaccine )
as contributing to the cause of death.
My personal experience is that MEs and coroners haven't a fucking clue and for personal reasons have fucked up the data
willfully and ignorantly.
I was the executor for my ex wife in NC and my Brother IN law in AZ and was told that under no circumstances
would they list COVID as a contributing factor.
Absent foul play, all people found dead in the own homes die of natural cause. Period.
Hence my BIL who refused a ventilator and checked himself out of a COVID unit died 2 weeks later from "natural cause".
It's all politics.
Btw, with all of the side effects associated with J&J Covid vaccine, it turns out that they stopped making
their vaccine in favor of "focusing on a more profitable vaccine" while admitting they have millions of doses in
inventory and reduced demand.
Johnson & Johnson plant pauses Covid vaccine production, report says (cnbc.com)
Yes, we had almost an entire year of NO VACCINE, so a huge number of people got Covid, why is that a surprise to you?
I don’t understand you think it was a surprise to me.
How about we start with "I can't believe". You sit there and bitch about people getting Covid like they had a choice! There was a year of people getting the virus where there was "no vaccine". So stop with your ranting about getting a vaccine when it wasn't even available. People have natural immunity from this period, accept it and move along.
Yeah, I don’t know where you’re getting that, either.
Um . . . I didn’t rant about getting a vaccine. Are you sure you’re replying to the right person?
Why wouldn’t I accept it? I have no idea what that means.
Maybe you should be the one to move along. You replied to my comment - mostly with non sequiturs. I haven’t commented to you about anything.
Yeah, I don’t know where you’re getting that, either
Um . . . I didn’t rant about getting a vaccine. Are you sure you’re replying to the right person?
Simply copying and pasting doesn’t explain anything. It still looks to me like you are trying to pick a fight where there is none to be had. Didn’t you want to “move along?”
Yes, I did however when people post things that make no sense I am inclined to comment. You will agree that there was an entire year where Covid was infecting people and the options provided by the CDC were limited. You will agree that being infected with Covid and survived you now(or then) have natural immunity. You then go on to tout the benefits of a vaccine that wasn't available when people contracted Covid. Many people including myself saw no need for the vaccine if you already had natural immunity. Many claims where made as absolute that are turning out to no longer apply.
Due to age and pre-existing conditions I got my vaccines and booster. But, I stopped buying everything else that the CDC, NIAID, NIH, Fauci, and Collins have been trying to sell for well over a year. The emails between Fauci and Collins are damning, too.
There's far too much medical evidence proving that lockdowns, masking, punitive measures against our children in school, and other mandates have been beyond ridiculous. "Follow the science" ... except for natural immunity.
What exactly is the definition of "natural immunity"? Are we talking about something you are born with or is it acquired through having recovered from a disease?
The second one, I think.
Isn’t it fascinating how the “science” keeps changing to suit Democrats’ political objectives? Kind of like the “science” in 2020 said you could shop in person but had to vote by mail? (And notice the “science” behind mail voting is not being revised at all).
Surgeon general warns of pandemic's "devastating" impact on youth mental health
http:// hill.cm/SkCEwoI
Especially when the school threatens the kids with trespassing for not wearing a mask.
Amazing isn't it? And to think that back in 2010 Obama's department of education made it almost impossible for schools to suspend violent students.
Such logic from the left!
That is the same school district that moved a kid who sexually assaulted one student to another school only to have another sexual assault.
It's also the same group of people who called the Minneapolis and Kenosha riots "peaceful protests".
What scum!
true. liberals and independents witness first hand the devastating effects on the weakest minds here daily.
Seeing the homeless camps and people shitting on the street in NYC and LA, the D.C. Mayor bringing back a Nazi tradition of demanding to see peoples papers. And even as I mentioned in 14.1 .
I can see how liberal policy and tactics have an effect on kids.
And yet you still support all of it.