International survey of unvaccinated ‘control group’ reports findings – Truth Unmuted

(by Dr. Rachel Nicoll | The Daily Skeptic) – It is clear that many are waking up to the realization that much of the government’s narrative about the pandemic was incorrect and that many of the preventive measures against COVID-19 did more harm than good. Both UK Prime Ministerial candidates have recently admitted that the lockdowns were a mistake. In particular, many of the unsuspecting public who submitted to vaccines are now beginning to question their necessity. Vaccines have not lived up to the claims of manufacturers and governments, and few in mainstream science seem to have anticipated the frequent mutations that render early vaccines largely useless. More now they are beginning to question the unexpected, and sometimes fatal, conditions that some of the vaccinated mysteriously develop shortly after vaccination. Others simply have “vaccine fatigue” and can’t be bothered to take more shots.

Also, there are those who know something about immunology and can see that the natural immunity from having contracted the virus gives them excellent protection (not just antibodies but also longer-lasting T-cell immunity) against many future variants. They have also long recognized that the spread of a highly infectious virus cannot be stopped, as was recognized in the UK’s evidence-based pandemic plan, capriciously abandoned by Boris Johnson and his “expert” advisers. They can also see that the means recommended by these experts to avoid the virus (masks, confinement, social distancing) have not worked, and now we are seeing the results of the ‘Zero Covid’ policy in China, where successive cities are turning to place in confinement Meanwhile, news is beginning to emerge of the success of natural remedies and banned drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which can protect against the infection and prevent it from becoming serious.

Interestingly, the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which provided the official recommendations on lockdowns, masks and social distancing throughout the pandemic, slavishly followed in the UK and elsewhere, have now quietly changed their guidance to advocate for personal responsibility stating that “People can use information about the current level of impact of COVID-19 in their community to decide which prevention behaviors to use and when.” They now recommend the individual risk assessment and risk-based countermeasures that many of us have been advocating since the start of the pandemic, as the elderly and those with comorbidities have always been at much greater risk than healthy children and young adults. In fact, much of the CDC’s revised guidelines could have been cut and pasted from Barrington’s Great Declaration. It’s a shame that many of us have been attacked, terminated and fired from our jobs for saying this in the first place.

Although there was a lot of talk early in the pandemic about achieving “herd immunity” through infection or vaccination, we no longer hear about it, as it has become clear that vaccination does not generate herd immunity; achieving herd immunity through infection would invalidate the vaccine deployment. Of course, since vaccinations were introduced, it has become impossible to assess the natural immunity of the herd, but there is no reason to suppose that it would not have been achieved in the absence of vaccines; there is a lot of evidence of pre-existing immunity from other coronaviruses.

It is not clear how many of us are completely unvaccinated; figures range from 5 million (official government sources) to more than 23 million (other sources). This matters, because more than 23 million represent around 35% of the UK population, which is not a substantial proportion. Interestingly, this 35% is exactly the same proportion as the official number of unvaccinated people worldwide. So much so that the unvaccinated are a tiny and insignificant minority! We can all remember how governments around the world have tried to stigmatize the unvaccinated as pariahs over the last 18 months because of their “selfishness” in refusing the vaccine, thereby putting others at risk of passing on the COVID-19. However, all the evidence indicates that vaccination does not prevent the transmission of COVID-19, a point that even vaccine manufacturers now acknowledge. The CDC has also tacitly acknowledged this by stating that “prevention recommendations no longer differ based on a person’s vaccination status because advanced infections occur.” It even reluctantly allows for natural immunity by stating that “people who have had COVID-19 but are not vaccinated have some degree of protection against serious illness from their previous infection.” And who, after at least two and a half years of exposure to a highly transmissible virus, has not had COVID-19, even asymptomatically? So why bother getting vaccinated?

So what are the experiences of the unvaccinated? A recent study led by Dr. Rob Verkerk of the Alliance for Natural Health International, who evaluated the survey results of 18,500 completely unvaccinated respondents to a UK-based Cooperative Control Group International survey, found that reasons to avoid vaccination against COVID-19 included mistrust of health authorities, governments or the pharmaceutical industry, insufficient evidence of safety or efficacy, and concerns about possible injury or adverse reactions. More than 70% relied on natural remedies for prevention and treatment, while two-thirds also used off-patent generics and repurposed drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, sales of which do not provide revenue for the world’s major pharmaceutical companies .

So were these unvaccinated people all covid free? No, and this was neither expected nor desired: you cannot build up natural immunity without contracting the infection. Among those who contracted COVID-19 during the reporting period, only 0.4% reported hospitalization (as inpatients or outpatients). As this was an international cohort, it is not possible to compare this figure with national hospitalization rates, which are often not available. However, a rate of 0.4% is low enough to suggest that unvaccinated people have not placed a significant additional burden on healthcare systems. Although there have been many media headlines mentioning the “pandemic of the unvaccinated”, the actual evidence for this was always thin on the ground and has since completely evaporated. This is particularly so when you consider that anyone who contracts COVID-19 within two weeks of vaccination is labeled as “unvaccinated”. In contrast, a recent study showed that, in the UK, there is an increasing number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths among vaccinated older people.

Additionally, the vast majority of hospitalized Control Group respondents reported not using natural remedies or repurposed medications in the hospital, reflecting the general belief that these products do not work and should not be used in a hospital setting. sanitary This meant that any ongoing benefits they might have experienced from these remedies were immediately reduced. Although not mentioned by the authors, another factor that may have affected disease severity in this cohort of individuals who believed in self-care was the likely lower incidence of comorbidities (obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, etc.), which have been found. to predict more serious illnesses.

Disturbingly, respondents reported a high incidence of mental health problems. Much of this is likely due to the legalized dismissal from jobs for not being vaccinated (peaking at 29% of respondents in Australia and New Zealand), the personal hate campaigns experienced by many and being a target of government victimization (57% to 61% in Australia, New Zealand, Western and Southern Europe and South America). Other useful data from the survey included the fact that those who reported never wearing masks or face masks also experienced the lowest incidence of suspected or confirmed COVID-19, again indicating that masks are ineffective to stop a virus.

This document was originally placed with the ResearchGate preprint server, but was removed because “the content may expose [ResearchGate] to damage, potential legal liability, or [was] breaching [its] Terms”. Fortunately, the team of Dr. Verkerk and the Control Group Cooperative persevered and the analysis and interpretation, in a revised and even expanded form, have now been successfully revised and published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research, much bolder. The Natural Health Alliance has provided an excellent commentary on this study.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.