So I came across this interview from yesterday with the Surgeon General of the United States, Vivek Murthy. “Surgeon General” sounds pretty important so one would assume he knows what he’s talking about. But, as is the way of the mainstream media these days, this guy states things as “facts” that are patently untrue, or at the very least much less certain than he presents them, and gets away with it unchallenged. Worse yet, regular folks watch this sort of propaganda and then actually believe they “know” something about the coronavirus. A quick look (caps mine for emphasis):
Question: Do the antibodies that result from contracting the coronavirus offer more immunity than the vaccine?
Murthy: "What we know is that there are two ways that you can get protection. The vaccine is the one that has been STUDIED THE MOST AND THE MOST RELIABLE ONE. We know that when you get the infection, you can get some degree of protection. What we’re less clear about is how long that protection lasts…But here’s what the research has told us VERY CLEARLY. If you get infected, and THEN you get a dose of vaccine, you boost your antibody levels, your protection up to incredible levels so you are even MORE protected. If you compare people who have had a previous infection and those who got the vaccine and those who didn’t, what you find is that those who are not vaccinated AFTER their infection are MORE THAN TWICE AS LIKELY to get reinfection with COVID compared to those who got the vaccine."
First, an anal-retentive grammar observation. When you have two things to compare, one is MORE than the other, not MOST. "Most" is used when comparing more than two things. Comparative vs. superlative and all that sort of thing (sorry, it’s an illness of mine). Second, how can he say that vaccine is the “most reliable” (in providing long-lasting immunity) right after saying it is the “most studied”? By definition he’s saying we haven’t “studied” natural immunity as much, therefore we have less data on it, and as such cannot possibly know that the vaccine “protection” is the “most reliable one”. Third, the very idea that we don’t have an understanding of naturally acquired immunity is absurd. We’ve got 100 years of understanding about infection-mediated immunity. But just like decades of scientific understanding about the lack of efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of respiratory viral infection went out the window in early 2020, so too, apparently, has our prior knowledge about the human body’s ability to mount and maintain an immune response to a viral infection. So those three observations (OK, maybe not the more vs. most thing) are important in recognizing the power of the language used and how most casual observers would just hear it and internalize it. Pay attention to the language. This goes on ALL THE TIME. Just like “We know masks are a game-changer.” or “The virus is now targeting the unvaccinated.” or “The virus is seeking out the young.” or some other such nonsense which is “stated” as a fact and then everybody “knows” it to be true. But now to the really important concern with old Vivek.
Dr. Murthy states quite clearly and emphatically that if you get infected and THEN get vaccinated, you are MORE protected. He then states with general-like authority that those who are not vaccinated AFTER their infection are MORE THAN TWICE AS LIKELY to get reinfection…” Go back and read his answer to the question above, or better yet go watch the video for yourself here: https://www.foxnews.com/media/...
Listen to his words. He says “But here’s what the research has told us VERY CLEARLY.” I see a wrong that must be righted. To the Batpoles!
I recently wrote in greater detail (“Natural Immunity Better Than Vax?” on 8/31/21) about the research recently released on this very issue. For a deeper dive into the data go read that post in “Dr. Steve’s Blog” on our website, but for these purposes, let’s look at some data from that study. When comparing those who were previously infected but never vaccinated with those never infected but fully vaccinated, the data show:
“257 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were recorded, of which 238 occurred in the vaccinated group (breakthrough infections) and 19 in the previously infected group (reinfections).” That means that fully 92% of COVID infections were in those fully vaccinated vs. those infected but never vaccinated. The authors found a 13 fold INCREASED risk for infection in those fully vaxxed vs. those previously infected but never vaxxed.
“As for SYMPTOMATIC SARS-COV-2 infections during the follow-up period, 199 cases were recorded, 191 of which were in the vaccinated group and 8 in the previously infected group.” That means that fully 96% of all symptomatic COVID cases were in the fully vaxxed. The authors found a 27 fold INCREASED risk of symptomatic infection in those fully vaxxed vs. those previously infected but never vaxxed.
“Nine cases of COVID-19-related hospitalizations were recorded, 8 of which were in the vaccinated group and 1 in the previously infected group…” That means fully 89% of COVID hospitalizations occurred in the fully vaxxed. Wait, I thought we've been told repeatedly that those who were vaxxed might still get infected and might pass it on, but certainly would not end up in the hospital. I realize 8 cases is a tiny amount, but you can bet your Aunt Sally's Pecan Pralines (shout out I Love Lucy) that if those numbers were reversed and 89% of those hospitalized were unvaxxed it would be every headline everywhere, 24/7. Come to think of it, that IS all we've heard for the last few months - that 95% of those in the hospital are unvaxxed which is why this is now a "pandemic of the unvaccinated". So what exactly is going on here? In an actual scientific study 89% of hospitalizations in Israel are in the fully vaccinated, but here in the good ole' US, it's just the opposite. Things that make you go "HMMM". (shout out Arsenio)
In any event, it certainly doesn't sound like the vaccine is the "MOST RELIABLE", Or is it just me?
But here’s the most important data in reference to Murthy’s assertion that those who were infected and THEN vaxxed were the best off. Again, I go into a bit more detail in my post on this topic, but what the data actually show is “Examining previously infected individuals to those who were both previously infected and received a single dose of the vaccine, we found that the latter group had a significant 0.53-fold decreased risk for reinfection, as 20 had a positive RT-PCR test, compared to 37 in the previously infected and unvaccinated group. SYMPTOMATIC DISEASE was present in 16 single dose vaccinees and in 23 of their unvaccinated counterparts. One COVID-19-related hospitalization occurred in the unvaccinated previously infected group. No COVID-19-related mortality was recorded.”
Notice how the risks previously noted comparing getting infected or symptomatic were 13 and 27 TIMES greater for the vaxxed vs the naturally infected, and this one is only 0.53 TIMES (less than 2 times greater risk). Also notice that for SYMPTOMATIC disease the difference is not statistically significant (16 vs. 23). Be very aware of the language. Murthy CLEARLY STATES those not vaccinated after infection are “MORE THAN TWICE AS LIKELY” to get reinfection. Now I’ve been told many times that I’m not an immunologist or virologist or named Fauci, or a “General” for that matter, but I’m pretty sure 37 isn’t quite twice 20, let alone “MORE THAN TWICE”. So it appears the good doctor has problems with both grammar and math. Or maybe just problems with the truth. Oh well, moving on…
But here’s the kicker: “We conducted a further sub-analysis, compelling the single-dose vaccine to be administered after the positive RT-PCR test. This subset represented 81% of the previously-infected-and-vaccinated study group. When performing this analysis, we found a similar, though NOT SIGNIFICANT, trend of decreased risk of reinfection…” So when the researchers looked SPECIFICALLY at those who were infected and THEN vaccinated (EXACTLY what Murthy references in his answer above), the data show no real decrease in infection. In fact the authors conclude “Individuals who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 SEEM to gain additional protection from a subsequent single-dose vaccine regimen. Though this finding corresponds to previous reports24,25, WE COULD NOT DEMONSTRATE SIGNIFICANCE IN OUR COHORT.” So Murthy goes on national television and flat-out lies. What he said is patently, provably, mathematically untrue. Yet he says it, you hear it, and then you "know" it. A single vaccine after being infected is the best, because an "expert" said so. So go get you vaccine!!
Remember when we were being told that vaccines were “95% effective”? This is the same exact kind of research so why hasn’t it gotten the same type of press telling those previously infected they have nothing to worry about and don’t need the vaccine as opposed to this INSANE drive to get every living thing vaccinated? And does any of this data seem to support Murthy’s position that the research “VERY CLEARLY” shows us the benefits of vaccination after infection? By the way, let me be clear - this is not an attempt to dissuade anybody from getting vaccinated. I couldn't care less whether you get vaccinated or not - you do you. But it is an attempt to get those of you who have fallen into this mass psychosis we call COVID to wake the hell up and recognize how you're being manipulated.
So Surgeon General Vivek Murthy is either an idiot in that he doesn’t know of what he speaks, or he is a liar in that he knows the truth but purposefully misrepresents the facts to further an agenda. The choice is yours. The same holds true for Fauci, Walensky, Biden or any other "expert" or talking head who gets airtime from certain media outlets. Either way, I’d think twice before I believed I “knew” something about this virus because one of these scoundrels told me so.
There are other lies told by Dr. Murthy in this interview but I’ve already droned on too long. The takeaway is the same as always. We are being lied to every day, all the time. Please stop listening to the “experts” and the idiots in the media. None of them have our best interests at heart. But if you are going to consume mainstream media concerning COVID, please pay attention to the language and just notice the natural incongruities of what you're being told. Almost nothing you are being told is true. Or just tune in next time, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel for our next exciting episode when I'll take on another arch villian. "BIFF, BAM, POW!!"