Never said I was an expert, and I was the one who labeled my story anecdotal before you did.
What advice did I give? I said, " If you don't have natural immunity, yes, some vaccine is recommended".
My whole family came down with COVID at once. I am not jabbing my young, healthy children with an experimental mRNA virus with no long-term studies available given it has only been in circulation for less than 2 years. Tell me why I should if you think you know better. If their health got them through an initial infection without any complications, why shouldn't I think their health and the fact they now have antibodies, and a deeper B and T-cell memory of the virus, is sufficient?
I am not on FB, so I don't know what you mean "essentially facebook COVID reporting."
Here's just one medical paper citing long-Term persistence of antibodies in people who had SARS in 2003-4. Do your own searches on 2003 SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. You'll find more than enough to say it's legit, and not FB reporting.
Here are some papers about persistence of antibodies, or immunity in the form of B and T-cell immunity in SARS-COV-2 or COVID-19 subjects:
The CDC, the so-called experts, have been wrong so many times on COVID I have lost count. They ignored natural immunity throughout the entire epidemic. I still test over 15 in an IgG antibody test (over 15 is considered a positive in the test). Last test result was 113 a whole year after infection.
I said I didn't trust that the persistence of the mRNA and spike protein was temporary after vaccination. The CDC had up on its site that the mRNA and spike protein did leave the body shortly after vaccination. How come they deleted that statement from their current page? Check the archives to see it before they deleted it. They didn't note why this important point was quietly removed so we could understand the edit. I can only assume it was proven incorrect, which is astonishing, since there were studies in Japan about biodistribution that should have raised the call for more studies, but instead it was buried or stigmatized as anti-science. Anti-science is deciding not to test if a hypothesis is true or false, and just ignoring it.
SAR-CoV 2003 infected individuals still test positive for antibodies 19 years after. I know it's not the exact same virus as COVID-19, but nonetheless it is a coronavirus and natural immunity is persistent. Also natural immunity is based on being exposed to the whole virus, not a select set of the spike proteins. I'll go with natural immunity on this one; I'm not advising people seek to get COVID, but if you have, your choice to vaccinate should be based on this as a factor along with your age, health, and doctor's advice.
What advice did I give? I said, " If you don't have natural immunity, yes, some vaccine is recommended".
My whole family came down with COVID at once. I am not jabbing my young, healthy children with an experimental mRNA virus with no long-term studies available given it has only been in circulation for less than 2 years. Tell me why I should if you think you know better. If their health got them through an initial infection without any complications, why shouldn't I think their health and the fact they now have antibodies, and a deeper B and T-cell memory of the virus, is sufficient?
I am not on FB, so I don't know what you mean "essentially facebook COVID reporting."
Here's just one medical paper citing long-Term persistence of antibodies in people who had SARS in 2003-4. Do your own searches on 2003 SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. You'll find more than enough to say it's legit, and not FB reporting.
Here are some papers about persistence of antibodies, or immunity in the form of B and T-cell immunity in SARS-COV-2 or COVID-19 subjects:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35150319/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258900422...
The CDC, the so-called experts, have been wrong so many times on COVID I have lost count. They ignored natural immunity throughout the entire epidemic. I still test over 15 in an IgG antibody test (over 15 is considered a positive in the test). Last test result was 113 a whole year after infection.
I said I didn't trust that the persistence of the mRNA and spike protein was temporary after vaccination. The CDC had up on its site that the mRNA and spike protein did leave the body shortly after vaccination. How come they deleted that statement from their current page? Check the archives to see it before they deleted it. They didn't note why this important point was quietly removed so we could understand the edit. I can only assume it was proven incorrect, which is astonishing, since there were studies in Japan about biodistribution that should have raised the call for more studies, but instead it was buried or stigmatized as anti-science. Anti-science is deciding not to test if a hypothesis is true or false, and just ignoring it.
SAR-CoV 2003 infected individuals still test positive for antibodies 19 years after. I know it's not the exact same virus as COVID-19, but nonetheless it is a coronavirus and natural immunity is persistent. Also natural immunity is based on being exposed to the whole virus, not a select set of the spike proteins. I'll go with natural immunity on this one; I'm not advising people seek to get COVID, but if you have, your choice to vaccinate should be based on this as a factor along with your age, health, and doctor's advice.
[1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20021386v...