There’s now zero doubt—it decreases the risk of hospitalization and death from a COVID reinfection by way more than the jab. This should be game over for the vaccination program, yet this study was funded by the Gates Foundation. What’s the ulterior motive? Story at a Glance A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found natural immunity is “at least as high, if not higher” than that provided by two mRNA injections, and “provides strong, lasting protection against the most severe outcomes of the illness.”
Overall, infection-acquired immunity decreased the risk of hospitalization and death from a COVID reinfection by 88 percent for a minimum of 10 months. For comparison, previous studies have shown the efficacy of two COVID shots wanes to BELOW zero by the sixth month, meaning the effectiveness becomes negative, making you more prone to infection than you were before.
However, the study was funded by the Gates Foundation and appears to have been spun to facilitate the deployment of vaccine mandates.
U.S. Medicare data show the COVID jab increases the all-cause mortality risk among the elderly rather than lowering it.
Analysis of data from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) in the UK reveals the shots increase all-cause mortality for all age groups, and it’s only getting worse over time, all while doing nothing to reduce deaths from COVID specifically. For over two years, I and many others have argued that natural immunity acquired from COVID-19 infection is likely to be far more protective than the COVID jab. Our arguments, despite being based on published research,1 were widely dismissed as dangerous misinformation and a right-wing conspiracy theory….