Watch LIVE

Horowitz: Israeli government data shows natural immunity from infection much stronger than vaccine-induced immunity

Op-ed
Angela Weiss/AFP/Getty Images

Everything the public health "experts" said about the shortcomings of infection-induced immunity actually appears to hold true for the vaccines. If you speak to any man on the street, they will tell you, based on every censored article they read online, that vaccines are stronger than infection in terms of immunity. New data from Israel, the epicenter of mass vaccine hysteria, demonstrates just the opposite.

Israel's channel 13 reports very preliminary data showing that the resurgence of COVID infections in Israel is being driven almost exclusively by those who never had prior infection – whether they are vaccinated or not. In fact, 40% of the 7,700 new cases since May 1 in this very heavily tested and traced country were among those who were fully vaccinated.

Israel National News reports that this data was presented to the Israeli Health Ministry and yielded the following breakdown of breakthrough infections of those vaccinated vs. those with prior infection:

With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.

With over 60% of their respective populations now fully vaccinated, Israel and the U.K. are perfect case studies demonstrating that vaccines are not playing the predominant role in slowing down the viral spread. If you compare all of the European countries by recent cases per million to vaccination rates, you will find zero correlation, and in fact, eastern European countries with low vaccination rates seem to have fewer cases.

Dr. Ryan Cole, a Mayo Clinic-trained pathologist who runs the largest independent laboratory in Idaho, explained to me how infection-induced immunity is much deeper and broader. "A natural infection induces hundreds upon hundreds of antibodies against all proteins of the virus, including the envelope, the membrane, the nucleocapsid, and the spike," said Dr. Cole, who has spent the past 16 months examining and culturing SARS-CoV-2 specimens. "Dozens upon dozens of these antibodies neutralize the virus when encountered again. Additionally, because of the immune system exposure to these numerous proteins (epitomes), our T cells mount a robust memory, as well. Our T cells are the 'marines' of the immune system and the first line of defense against pathogens. T cell memory to those infected with SARSCOV1 is at 17 years and running still."

However, in vaccine-induced immunity, according to Cole, "we mount an antibody response to only the spike and its constituent proteins." He explains how this produces much fewer neutralizing antibodies, and "as the virus preferentially mutates at the spike, these proteins are shaped differently and antibodies can no longer 'lock and key' bind to these new shapes."

It is simply criminal for the global governments to suggest that those with deeper and broader natural immunity should risk the side effects of a vaccine that is now expected to wane in effectiveness. Much of the focus now is on scaring people about the "Delta variant," but it could very well be that the vaccine effectiveness was bound to wane (unlike what they predicted with natural infection) over time, regardless of the mutations. Some Israeli health officials are hypothesizing that the vaccine-induced immunity might wane after six months, which is why Pfizer is already pushing for a third dose, without learning any lessons from all of the needless deaths and side effects people have just incurred in return for questionable immunity.

Contrast that with immunity from infection, which has been shown to be impervious in every study. Irish researchers recently published a review of 11 cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID patients who were followed up with over 10 months. They found the reinfection rate to be just 0.27% "with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time."

Moreover, the only study (from Qatar) analyzed that estimated the population‐level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients with supporting evidence of reinfection estimated the risk at 0.1%. Most importantly, the study found no evidence of waning of immunity for over seven months of the follow-up period. The few reinfections that did occur "were less severe than primary infections" and "only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal."

Despite the endless search by the media to find cases of severe reinfection, they have failed to find it. Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and vice chief of medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, told me in an interview that "there has never been a confirmed second infection beyond 90 days with similar or worse cardinal symptoms and confirmed PCR/Antigen/Sequencing test" in a case where the patient already had a well-documented case with acute illness. He notes that most database studies that attempt to quantify reinfection "are not sufficiently reliable to declare recurrent cases" and usually contain a false positive PCR on one or more occasions.

McCullough is of the top five most published medical researchers in the U.S., and his paper in the American Journal of Medicine in August 2020 about treatment protocol for COVID remains the most downloaded and used paper during the pandemic from that journal.

The media has focused incessantly on antibody levels and the observation that they often drop months after the infection; however, as with other viruses, that does not indicate waning immunity. "Yes, our antibody levels drop over time, however, scientifically, the memory B cells that make antibodies have been proven to be present in our lymph nodes and bone marrow," explained Dr. Cole. "They are primed and ready to produce a broad array of antibodies upon viral pre-exposure. It would be physiologically, energetically impossible to maintain high antibody levels to all the pathogens we are constantly exposed to, and we would look like the 'swollen Stay-Puft marshmallow man' of lymph nodes, constantly, if the immune system were required to do that."

Already in April, researchers from Tel Aviv University concluded that their research "puts into question the need to vaccinate recent previously-infected individuals." Unfortunately, it appears that the Israeli government did not listen.

Thus, dealing with variants like "Delta" by focusing solely on risk-fraught injections with questionable effectiveness is the most counterproductive strategy ever. The U.K.'s very thorough data updated last week shows just a 0.2% case fatality rate for Delta, and only 0.03% for those under the age of 50, lower than any other variant. If it's more transmissible, it's less deadly. Natural infection is the only phenomena that will ultimately burn out all variants, and the entire focus should be on getting seniors and other vulnerable people early treatment the minute they feel symptoms and even a prophylactic regimen of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine when appropriate.

Just imagine if all of the trillions spent on lockdowns and vaccines had been used for cheap anti-viral and anti-inflammatory treatments to be used outside the hospitals. It's the only thing that hasn't been tried, because there is nothing to be gained but saving lives.
Most recent
All Articles