News
Featured Image
 shutterstock.com

(LifeSiteNews) – As establishment politicians back away from their restrictive COVID-19 policies, there are signs that some voices in the medical establishment are opening up about evidence-based scientific conclusions they were previously inclined to ignore or deny.

On February 28, Medscape UK published an article by Sheena Meredith discussing a January 25 study out of Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) and other studies pointing to the strength of natural immunity to COVID from prior infection.

The OHSU study found that “SARS-CoV-2 infection before or after vaccination gives a significantly larger boost to the neutralizing antibody response compared with two doses of vaccine alone,” and while the authors touted “hybrid” immunity from both infection and vaccination, Meredith notes that their data revealed that antibodies from natural infection were “at least 10 times more potent” than those from vaccination.

Meredith notes that “many authorities” to acknowledge as much tend to only give a “short-lived” acknowledgement to natural immunity, while continuing to urge the COVID-recovered to get vaccinated, despite “increasing evidence that immunity derived from natural infection with COVID-19 gives powerful protection on its own.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Urge U.S. Senate to vote down abortion defender Ketanji Brown Jackson
  Show Petition Text
7797 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 9000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

Joe Biden’s pick to replace the retiring Justice Stephen Breyer on the U.S. Supreme Court is abortion defender D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first black woman nominated to the nation's highest court ever.

By choosing Brown Jackson, Biden is fulfilling two campaign promises at the same time: first, to use every tool at his disposal to defend and promote the killing of the most innocent; and, second, to make the nation’s highest court more "diverse."

Of course, Biden could have achieved "diversity" by different means (and, as a "Catholic," he should have), but, as throughout the rest of tenure in office, he has chosen to pursue the deadly path of promoting abortion.

And, make no mistake: Planned Parenthood and NARAL are ecstatic about Brown Jackson.

SIGN and SHARE this petition which urges all U.S. Senators to reject abortion activist Brown Jackson's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Unlike most previous nominees to the Supreme Court, Brown Jackson has a judicial history of supporting abortion - which should be enough to cause Senators to reject her.

In the 1990s, she wrote an amicus brief defending a Massachusetts law that banned protests outside of abortion clinics. Thankfully, the law was ruled unconstitutional in 2000, but it shows how Brown Jackson intends to use the law to silence free speech so that the killing can continue without protest.

Pro-lifers are unanimous in their opposition to Brown Jackson, while the pro-abortionists are undivided in their zeal for her nomination.

SIGN and SHARE this petition which urges all U.S. Senators to reject abortion activist Brown Jackson's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Carrie Severino, president of the pro-life Judicial Crisis Network, warned of an imminent free speech threat, stating that in her "buffer-zone" amicus brief, Brown Jackson "repeatedly disparaged the peaceful and often prayerful clinic protesters as engaging in ‘in-your-face’ and ‘chaotic’ activity that somehow fell short of ‘pure speech.’"

And, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List stated her organization's opposition to Brown Jackson's nomination, saying: "She is on record opposing the free speech rights of pro-life advocates pleading to save lives outside abortion centers and supporting the false claim that abortion is ‘health care.’"

But, the country's top abortion groups are celebrating Brown Jackson’s appointment.

Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson wrote in a tweet addressed to Jackson: "We can’t wait to see the fantastic work you will do and will be here to support you along the way,"

And, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Mini Timmaraju agreed.

"Judge Jackson … has a demonstrated record of defending and upholding our constitutional rights and fundamental freedoms — including reproductive freedom," Timmaraju said. "We are confident that she will be a voice for justice, equity, and freedom on the Court in the decades to come."

Thank you for SIGNING and SHARING this petition which urges all U.S. Senators to reject abortion activist Brown Jackson's nomination to the Supreme Court.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Biden announces Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Stephen Breyer on Supreme Court' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/biden-announces-ketanji-brown-jackson-to-replace-stephen-breyer-on-supreme-court/

'Pro-life groups warn about Biden’s Supreme Court nominee' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-life-groups-warn-about-bidens-supreme-court-nominee/

'These Republicans could help Biden install his far-left Supreme Court pick' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/these-republicans-could-help-biden-his-left-wing-supreme-court-pick/

**Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

  Hide Petition Text

The conservative Brownstone Institute has compiled 150 research studies finding that COVID immunity from prior infection “is equal to or more robust and superior to existing vaccine,” yet the federal government has been heavily invested in the narrative that natural immunity is unreliable and the vaccines are the only true protection against COVID.

Last September, White House COVID czar Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted that “I don’t have a really firm answer to you on” why those who have already had COVID should get vaccinated for it, but it was “something that we’re going to have to discuss.” Many Americans assumed such discussions were already well underway.

In January, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) released data from California and New York cases spanning May to November 2021 showing that, while the vaccinated had lower rates of first-time infection by a factor of 6.2 in California and 4.5 in New York than unvaccinated residents without natural immunity, the unvaccinated with natural immunity had infection rates 29 times lower in California and 4.7 times lower in New York. Those who had both vaccination and prior infection had lower rates still. Further, in California, the naturally-immune were less likely to be hospitalized than the vaccinated (New York did not provide hospitalization data).

By contrast, studies have found that vaccine-induced COVID protection wanes around six months (or potentially sooner). Last October the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) announced it was expanding emergency-use authorization for booster shots six months after the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and two months after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, whereas an October Yale study projected that natural immunity would last three times longer at 17 months.

Despite such evidence, which Meredith discusses at length in her article, she notes that policymakers are hesitant to acknowledge the protection of natural immunity. She quotes University of California-San Francisco infectious disease specialist Monica Gandhi as agreeing that urging the COVID-recovered to get vaccinated “is not based on data. There’s something political going on around that.”

“It also raises ethical questions over and above those of mandates and certifications generally,” Meredith adds. “Is it justified to pressure people with pre-existing infection-acquired immunity to take a vaccine they neither want nor need? How can such individuals give proper informed consent, especially when they may be also at a higher than average risk of side-effects? Is it equitable to give unnecessary doses when vaccines have yet to be equally shared on a global level?”

Acknowledging that additional COVID protection is simply unnecessary for many Americans is particularly relevant to the question of whether they should be pressured or coerced to vaccinate, particularly in light of the fact that many Americans continue to harbor serious reservations as to the COVID vaccines’ safety, stemming in large part from the rushed nature of their creation. The Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed initiative developed and released the shots in a tenth of the time vaccine development usually takes and a quarter of the time it took the previous record-holder, the mumps vaccine, yet their advocates have done little to address the concerns of the hesitant.

During a COVID-19 vaccine hearing held by US Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) last month, attorney Thomas Renz presented medical billing data from the Pentagon’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) showing that 2021 saw drastic spikes in a variety of diagnoses for serious medical issues over the previous five-year average, including hypertension (2,181%), neurological disorders (1,048%), multiple sclerosis (680%), Guillain-Barre syndrome (551%), breast cancer, 487%), female infertility (472%), pulmonary embolism (468%), migraines (452%), ovarian dysfunction (437%), testicular cancer (369%), and tachycardia (302%).

In a statement to left-wing “fact-checking” outlet PolitiFact, the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division spokesperson Peter Graves confirmed the existence of the records but claimed that a conveniently-timed “data corruption” glitch made the pre-2021 numbers appear far lower than the actual numbers of cases for those years, which PolitiFact took at face value.

Nevertheless, President Joe Biden declared that “we will never give up on vaccinating more Americans” in his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, despite the above information and setbacks to his efforts to mandate COVID-19 vaccines on private businesses, federal employees, and healthcare workers.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

0 Comments

    Loading...