I’m at an interesting age. COVID’s lethality, when you’re 69, is beginning to be significant enough at around 1% to be worth considering, and that rate is beginning to increase rapidly into the 70s, which is also significant as the virus becomes endemic. And that’s why I and Mrs G made the calculus that the short terms risks of vaccination seemed low enough to get double-jabbed back in May.
More than many, I was aware of the theoretical possibility of serious long-term side effects, but life is, after all, full of uncertainties.
Since then, an interesting mix of information is querying the wisdom of our decision. In the first place, the vaccines are rapidly losing their ability to prevent infection and transmissibility, and slowly (or maybe not so slowly) declining in their ability to prevent more serious COVID infection.
The theoretical risk of antibody dependent enhancement seems to be a real thing now, and may perhaps explain why some fully vaccinated individuals are getting severe infections and dying at all ages.
The policy of giving boosters, against FDA advice and without a very clear evidence base, seems at best a stop-gap, given that presumably immunity will decline even if the ongoing genetic variants don’t bypass them entirely. It looks as though people will be on a treadmill of vaccination every five months, with Pfizer and Co guessing what variants to code for in their ongoing (and almost infinitely lucrative) vaccine programme. An arms race with variants seems permanently on the cards for the vaccinated.
On the other hand, natural infection provides, as all the studies now show, superior and probably permanent immunity to the whole virus, and in all likelihood to every variant it will ever evolve. That’s good news for those who’ve had the bug and have refused vaccination, and makes it seem a useful plan for vaccinated folks like us to refuse boosters, try and catch COVID whilst we have some protection, take our chances with ADE and, if we don’t die, gain permanent immunity and thumb our nose at Bill Gates and all his angels.
That is, it seemed a useful plan until the latest official UK government vaccine surveillance report was published, which buried in a footnote mentions briefly:
N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who acquire infection following two doses of vaccination.
“N antibodies” is a term for certain antibodies produced by natural infection, but not after vaccination, which means their titre can be used to distinguish those with post-infection immunity from those vaccinated. Though it is un-referenced, this footnote suggests that if we catch COVID after being vaccinated, the vaccination may actually block the production of natural immunity. This is a known mechanism, and here is a full discussion.
Now far be it from me to echo Dr Mike Yeadon’s belief that the whole vaccine program has been set up to reduce what globalists see as world overpopulation by killing us in droves through the vaccines. Likewise, it may not, as many have suggested, be the case that we are being deliberately addicted to a lifetime of regular vaccinations to control us. But the discovery of the reality of this “original antigenic sin” is, at least, one more sign that rushing a vaccine programme through in 6 months without proper long-term studies, and then using bribery and blackmail to insist that everyone gets vaccinated, is not so much about Warp Speed as warped science and even more warped ethics.
So our family calculus now has to take on board not only the medical issues we considered before, and the near-certainty that refusing to qualify for a digital identity will eventually put us beyond the pale of society or even (as seems the case in Lithuania), beyond access to all but the most basic foodstuffs, but also the possibility that we’ll remain super-susceptible to COVID until we get old enough for it to kill us for sure at some stage. Thanks, The Science.
Yet the calculus in all circumstances needs to include the providence of our God, and like David at another time of national crisis we’d rather fall into the hands of God than the hands of man. Refusing the mark of the beast was always going to carry a cost, after all.
I got double jabbed, whilst still having some reservations, after I had watched and listened for a while. I’m 70 and healthy. I’ve turned down the a booster for the time being. I’m in no rush. It can wait. My wife took the booster on the grounds that she was more vulnerable, being in the previously ‘shielded’ population.
Like you, it seemed to me, and it still does, that a natural infection would be the best next step. I note the risk of original antigenic sin. At present it sounds more possible than probable. And even if it proves relevant, it is not clear to what extent natural immunity might be compromised. It might still be worth having.
Getting the infection sooner rather than later seems best, but achieving it is not so easy given the low prevalence. Failing that, I may eventually have to get on the booster treadmill.
I have a number of Christian, medically trained friends who subscribe to an ‘end-time’ interpretation of what is happening. I have my doubts about that and think that many aspects of Preterism have something to commend them, including an historic (pre-AD70) understanding of the mark of the beast. Even so, I can appreciate a symbolic attribution of the ‘the mark’ to the lies, deception and control that characterize the world today.
Keep taking the Vitamin D.
We seem to be on more or less the same page.
As well as Vit D, I have a standby supply of Zinc, Vit C and Quercetin (with some aspirin to follow), for when something strikes me down (though it won’t work for giant hailstones, I suppose). All according to the aaps treatment guide.
When I wrote to my GP to change my NHS dermatology appointment to private, wishing to get seen before I die, I put out feelers about the possibility of agents like the dreaded ivermectin and doxycycline. That was partly because the surgery is participating in the government trial of ivermectin – which (as I mentioned to him) seems designed to fail. Sadly I got no reply at all to that part: it’s not even worth discussing with a retired colleague, it seems.