Featured Image
President Donald TrumpVideo frame from

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 

(LifeSiteNews) — Facing growing skepticism from his voter base for promoting experimental COVID-19 vaccines developed through his much-touted “Operation Warp Speed,” former President Donald Trump spoke out against totalitarian vaccine mandates, saying Americans shouldn’t be “forced” to get the shots and that those who have natural immunity “don’t need the vaccine.”

“People have to have their freedoms,” Trump told FOX News host Sean Hannity during an interview Thursday night. “Why are they forcing people to take the vaccine?”

Characteristically referring to COVID-19 as “the Wuhan virus” and “the China virus,” quipping “we’ve got plenty of names,” Trump explained that anyone who has already overcome the virus does not need to take a vaccine and should not be forced to do so.

“When you have [COVID], you don’t need the vaccine. You become immune,” the former president said, adding that people who have recovered from the virus develop “a natural immunity.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who many see as a likely Republican contender for the presidency in 2024, has similarly promoted natural immunity, remarking during a Gainesville, Florida stop last month, “The ones that have recovered have very strong immunity. That’s very clear from every study that’s been done.”

Statements from top Republicans promoting individual choice and a recognition of natural immunity contradict the narrative propounded by public health officials and the mainstream press.

As pressure mounts to reach a nearly 100% vaccination rate in the United States, an increasing number of businesses require vaccination as a condition of employment, and major cities have enacted ordinances requiring proof of vaccination to access public dining and recreational venues. 

Meanwhile, many who have contracted and overcome COVID-19 over the past year — including healthcare professionals who have spent the past 18 months treating patients infected with the virus — have increasingly been faced with a choice to take an experimental COVID-19 jab or lose their jobs, with no consideration given to their naturally acquired immunity.

The resistance among government officials, employers, and public health officials in recognizing natural immunity comes amid growing evidence that natural immunity is more robust and durable than vaccinated immunity.

A study out of Israel, which compared the memory B-cells of both naturally exposed and individuals vaccinated with the Pfizer shot, found that those who had been naturally exposed to COVID-19 developed significantly tougher immunity than those who had gotten the double-dose mRNA shot. 

The discovery led Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and biostatistician who serves on scientific advisory committees to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), to remark that since previous COVID infection “provides better immunity than vaccines,” mandatory vaccinations “are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical.”

Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical.

— Martin Kulldorff (@MartinKulldorff) August 27, 2021

In recognizing the significance of the Israel study, Politifact noted that a study by Rockefeller University backed up the Israeli researchers’ work, finding that the memory B cells produced by the body in response to natural infection with COVID-19 are more robust. 

According to Politifact’s summary of the study, the memory B cells produced by naturally infected people “continue to evolve over the months, while the vaccination-driven memory B cells stopped changing after about two months.”

Natural immunity was also found to be stronger than vaccinated immunity in defending against new variants, with “the naturally occurring memory B cells [delivering] better protection.”

The evidence supporting natural immunity has not stopped a growing push to censor viable alternatives to vaccination.

Last month, according to The Blaze, Instagram took action to block search results for the hashtag “natural immunity

The Blaze reported that dozens of users noticed the hashtag was being blocked, with British actor and entrepreneur Francis Boulle writing on Twitter, “So instagram have blocked the hashtag #naturalimmunity as if there is no such thing. Insane. Go test it for yourself.”


Similarly, the promotion of benign drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, found to be useful in early treatment of COVID-19 when part of a multi-drug sequence, have been routinely and systematically censored from public discussion.

The widespread promotion of vaccination without recognizing natural immunity or early treatment therapeutics has led to suspicion that the pharmaceutical companies involved in manufacturing the COVID-19 injections have a financial interest in sidelining vaccine alternatives.

In late July, mRNA COVID-19 drug manufacturer Pfizer projected $33.5 billion in vaccine revenue for 2021, while Johnson and Johnson expected a 17.2% profit increase deriving from a $2.5 billion anticipated global profit from its single-shot jab. Fellow COVID injection manufacturer Moderna has projected $14 billion in its vaccine revenue, leading to criticism that its mRNA jabs are kept out of reach of the poor.

Reuters reported that Pfizer and Moderna, which together expect to bring in roughly $50 billion in vaccine sales, anticipate cashing in on upcoming booster jabs.

In Trump’s Thursday interview on Fox News, he alluded to a potential conflict of interest fueling the push for vaccination, saying, “Remember this, the drug companies make a lot of money. And they like it.”

Last week, undercover investigative journalists with Project Veritas caught three Pfizer scientists admitting that natural immunity is stronger than vaccine immunity while suggesting the company is concealing the relevant data in a bid to maximize profits.