A newly published study has confirmed that natural immunity provides longer-lasting protection against the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) than the so-called immunity provided by COVID-19 vaccines.
The study, published April 20 on the JAMA Network Open, was titled “Rates of COVID-19 Among Unvaccinated Adults With Prior COVID-19.”
“We found that, before the emergence of the [post-vaccine] omicron variant, natural immunity provided a similar degree of protection against COVID-19 infection as mRNA vaccination,” said study author Dr. Ari Robicsek, the chief medical analytics officer for Providence Health and Services, a not-for-profit Catholic health system.
The study was conducted by a team of expert clinicians and scientists from Providence’s research network. It examined data from over 120,000 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 at 1,300 testing sites under the Providence health system between October 1, 2020 to November 1, 2021.
The researchers found that prior COVID-19 infection was 85 percent protective against reinfection and 88 percent protective against COVID-19 infection requiring hospitalization. This strong protection against reinfection remained strong up to nine months following the initial infection.
The natural immunity afforded to patients by a prior COVID-19 infection likely remains strong for longer than nine months, but this is just as far out as the researchers were able to study. (Related: STUDY: 99% of people with previous COVID-19 infection develop natural immunity that lasts over a year.)
The researchers noted that their findings are in line with prior studies investigating natural immunity against COVID-19 reinfection. The previous studies they cite found that protection associated with natural immunity was between 80.5 percent to 100 percent effective at preventing reinfection.
This level of protection is similar to the level of protection supposedly provided by the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. But the researchers noted that the vaccine-associated “protection” is only against mild forms of COVID-19. Furthermore, this protection has been shown to wane quickly just six months after vaccination.
Data’s implications important for reforming health policies regarding vaccination
The Providence study is one of the largest of its type that looks into the strength of natural immunity, especially when compared with the so-called immunity the experimental, deadly and ineffective COVID-19 vaccines give to people. It is also unique not only in its scale but also in its extensive follow-up period, lasting nearly a year, and the inclusion of only unvaccinated individuals who experienced symptomatic COVID-19 infections.
The researchers noted that the study shows how important it is to connect researchers with large-scale data from healthcare institutions and the influence a massive, interconnected health system like Providence can have in understanding specific public health challenges, such as understanding the benefits of natural immunity.
“This data is key to helping us understand the strength and longevity of natural immunity and allows us to compare the effectiveness of a prior infection with mRNA vaccines,” said Dr. Amy Compton-Philips, chief clinical officer for Providence. “The results provide new insight into the length of protection following an initial infection among the unvaccinated population and could have important implications for vaccination guidelines and public health policy.”
Learn more about the ineffectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at Vaccines.news.
Watch this clip from InfoWars as host Harrison Hill Smith talks about how the mainstream media admits the vaccines don’t work and natural immunity is better at protecting against COVID-19.
This video is from the InfoWars channel on Brighteon.com.
