Dr. Tell You To Get Vaccinated Even Though You Have Covid-19 Antibodies.?

Friday, March 5, 2021

My wife had Covid-19 in early February. No hospitalization.

I had chills for a couple of the days she was sick, but that's all.

I got a Covid-19 Anti-body test (LabCorp testing company) last week. Result = POSITIVE, meaning I have had Covid-19.

---------------

Went to my doctor for checkup yesterday. (My doctor since 1998)

She tells me I should get a Covid-19 vaccination when it's available to Under-65 ages.

I told her "No Thanks, I have natural anti-bodies. I do not want to double up, and mix God-made w/man-made antibodies."

She replies, "The natural anti-bodies will not protect you nearly as well as the vaccine. You need to be vaccinated, Mr. CWM."

She then became upset and told me that God gave scientists the knowledge to improve on natural immune responses.

----------------

QUESTIONS for those who have Covid-19 anti-bodies, and have informed your doctor:

Did your doctor try to push the vaccine on you anyway?

-or-

Did your doctor say, "Great! You don't need to be vaccinated. At least not as long as you have the Covid-19 antibodies in your system." ?

-CareWeMust

Especially given your mild reaction to the virus, why would you want to take an emergency use vaccine or even if it was fully approved?

You already know you will not get that sick.

Doctors just know what they are told.. Id rather rely on 20+ year history of ivermectin or h202
c19ivermectin.com...

For those that wanted the vaccine, it would have made a ton of sense to tell anyone who already had the virus to wait. Studies out there are conclusive, you have immunity for at least 6 months, maybe longer.

a reply to: carewemust

Your doctor is partially right.

The first thing is that studies have shown that the natural antibodies 'wear' off in effectiveness in a few months, so, there's that.

Also, the natural antibodies may be more specific in the strains of Coronavirus they work against and may not help that much as strains mutate over time.

The COVID-19 vaccines all produce antibodies to particular parts of the viral coat which are unlikely to change as much (without invalidating the virus). That was part of the design because they wanted vaccines that didn't become useless against the virus in a month or so, so they had to look for targets that had some genomic stability.

Well, from the research I have done on antibodies from getting the virus, they are pretty darn good at giving a person immunity, over six months so far and still strong. Also the B cell memory works great against future infections. You can still get a mild case, just like the vaccines, but are only active for a few days and they say there is very low risk of transmitting the disease. Plus, the immune system seems to figure out how to fight all sorts of mutations getting it naturally.

If you get a no symptom disease, it still builds up B cell immunity but does not make antigens, that is not as good as when you get a little sick from it and it causes antigens to form. This is all from official real research, not anti-vax sites. I am not anti-vax, but I have problems with hyper immune response from vaccines, so I cannot take this shot. My wife is going to get the Johnson one but has done her own research and would like to know if she already has natural immunity....but there are not any antigen tests given around here that I can find. Not on the net anyway. I should call a few places, but it doesn't make any difference to me, it does for the wife though. She was pretty sick in late march and went to the ER but they had no covid tests so that was a waste of two hundred bucks copay for the ER.

If you have antigens from a prior infection, you do not need the vaccine from what I have read in places. At least till the immunity fades which so far has been proven to last for at least seven months.

The doctor is not well informed if she thinks the vaccines are superior to a natural immunity that already has antigens being made. God did not make this vaccine.

a reply to: carewemust
Did you tell her that getting the vaccine within 90 days of having had Covid is harmful?

So say other doctors.

Also: “Do No Harm”

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Your doctor is partially right.

The first thing is that studies have shown that the natural antibodies 'wear' off in effectiveness in a few months, so, there's that.

Also, the natural antibodies may be more specific in the strains of Coronavirus they work against and may not help that much as strains mutate over time.

The COVID-19 vaccines all produce antibodies to particular parts of the viral coat which are unlikely to change as much (without invalidating the virus). That was part of the design because they wanted vaccines that didn't become useless against the virus in a month or so, so they had to look for targets that had some genomic stability.

Weird. I like my doctors to be 100 % right

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Thank-you for responding. It's confusing when the CDC website and the doctors are pushing the vaccine on those who have already had Covid-19. In fact, you have to really dig to find out that fewer than 12 people have been suspected of Contracting Covid-19 twice. And the news media never talks about natural antibodies/immunity.

But the media is quick to point out when a new Covid-19 variant arrives. There are 4 in Chicago, and health officials aren't sure if the current vaccines will protect people against them.

There's something not right about this entire Covid-19 saga we're going through. It feels like there are sinister plans being carried out, using this virus as a cover...or justification.

a reply to: chr0naut

Your research indicates that the current vaccines also work against the known variants? If so, that's a good thing.

The FDA told the vaccine manufacturers last week that they are free to adjust the formulas without testing them, in order to combat the Covid19 variants that appear.

a reply to: rickymouse

Your wife can probably get an antibody test by contacting her physician. But it seems like the natural antibodies last more than 7 months. People were contracting Covid-19 12 months ago, yet fewer than a dozen people in the entire country have contracted the disease twice. The CDC says the known incidences are "very rare".

originally posted by: slatesteam
a reply to: carewemust
Did you tell her that getting the vaccine within 90 days of having had Covid is harmful?

So say other doctors.

Also: “Do No Harm”

I didn't know that until seeing your post tonight.

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Your doctor is partially right.

The first thing is that studies have shown that the natural antibodies 'wear' off in effectiveness in a few months, so, there's that.

Also, the natural antibodies may be more specific in the strains of Coronavirus they work against and may not help that much as strains mutate over time.

The COVID-19 vaccines all produce antibodies to particular parts of the viral coat which are unlikely to change as much (without invalidating the virus). That was part of the design because they wanted vaccines that didn't become useless against the virus in a month or so, so they had to look for targets that had some genomic stability.

Weird. I like my doctors to be 100 % right

Good luck with that.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut

Your research indicates that the current vaccines also work against the known variants? If so, that's a good thing.

The FDA told the vaccine manufacturers last week that they are free to adjust the formulas without testing them, in order to combat the Covid19 variants that appear.

Have you ever noticed that there is a new Fluvax every year?

Do you imagine that there is a full process initiated to recertify and retest for perhaps 18 months to two years before releasing the latest Fluvax?

There is precedent on vaccines where the changes are small and incremental, and to keep track with mutations of a pathogen.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: slatesteam
a reply to: carewemust
Did you tell her that getting the vaccine within 90 days of having had Covid is harmful?

So say other doctors.

Also: “Do No Harm”

I didn't know that until seeing your post tonight.

I’m here to help

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut

Your research indicates that the current vaccines also work against the known variants? If so, that's a good thing.

The FDA told the vaccine manufacturers last week that they are free to adjust the formulas without testing them, in order to combat the Covid19 variants that appear.

Have you ever noticed that there is a new Fluvax every year?

Do you imagine that there is a full process initiated to recertify and retest for perhaps 18 months t two years before releasing the latest Fluvax?

There is precedent on vaccines where the changes are small and incremental, and to keep track with mutations of a pathogen.

So the efficacy of the flu shot isn’t between 10-30 percent every one of those years?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Your doctor is partially right.

The first thing is that studies have shown that the natural antibodies 'wear' off in effectiveness in a few months, so, there's that.

Also, the natural antibodies may be more specific in the strains of Coronavirus they work against and may not help that much as strains mutate over time.

The COVID-19 vaccines all produce antibodies to particular parts of the viral coat which are unlikely to change as much (without invalidating the virus). That was part of the design because they wanted vaccines that didn't become useless against the virus in a month or so, so they had to look for targets that had some genomic stability.

Weird. I like my doctors to be 100 % right

Good luck with that.

You’re right probably. I won’t believe anything ever again if it’s sold by “medical authority”

a reply to: carewemust

This only proves how politically brainwashed a lot of doctors truly are.

I have witnessed the same left wing brainwashing at Peace Health Medical group in my area.

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut

Your research indicates that the current vaccines also work against the known variants? If so, that's a good thing.

The FDA told the vaccine manufacturers last week that they are free to adjust the formulas without testing them, in order to combat the Covid19 variants that appear.

Have you ever noticed that there is a new Fluvax every year?

Do you imagine that there is a full process initiated to recertify and retest for perhaps 18 months t two years before releasing the latest Fluvax?

There is precedent on vaccines where the changes are small and incremental, and to keep track with mutations of a pathogen.

So the efficacy of the flu shot isn’t between 10-30 percent every one of those years?

Yes, but in the case of the Fluvax, it doesn't have the specificity of an mRNA vaccine, but is usually a 'killed' mutated virus taken from a cultured colony of what is assumed to be the latest strain.

So the Fluvax tracks the current strains, but often the specifics of the changes are fairly broad and are unknown until a genomic assay can tell us what the differences are. The thing is, the Fluvax has been approved in principle and reduced testing is allowed because the disease it immunizes for keeps changing.

These changes, combined with the usual lead time of 28 days before a vaccine really begins to elicit a strong antibody response, mean that if you hang around waiting for minor changes to be approved, you could end up with a near useless vaccine that only works for older strains.

So, the approval process for a modified existing vaccine is shorter, and we do have good safety of these new vaccines because we can see how they have performed historically, and which assures us that the 'threat' of new mods to the vaccine confers very little risk in practice.

there is a study from austria saying that allmost all infected people are still immune after one year and still ongoing.

wake up, please. it's not about the virus. if it was, there would have been fact based conversation.
instead, they ban and delete critics and run 24/7 propaganda in the media!

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut

Your research indicates that the current vaccines also work against the known variants? If so, that's a good thing.

The FDA told the vaccine manufacturers last week that they are free to adjust the formulas without testing them, in order to combat the Covid19 variants that appear.

Have you ever noticed that there is a new Fluvax every year?

Do you imagine that there is a full process initiated to recertify and retest for perhaps 18 months t two years before releasing the latest Fluvax?

There is precedent on vaccines where the changes are small and incremental, and to keep track with mutations of a pathogen.

So the efficacy of the flu shot isn’t between 10-30 percent every one of those years?

Yes, but in the case of the Fluvax, it doesn't have the specificity of an mRNA vaccine, but is usually a 'killed' mutated virus taken from a cultured colony of what is assumed to be the latest strain.

So the Fluvax tracks the current strains, but often the specifics of the changes are fairly broad and are unknown until a genomic assay can tell us what the differences are. The thing is, the Fluvax has been approved in principle and reduced testing is allowed because the disease it immunizes for keeps changing.

These changes, combined with the usual lead time of 28 days before a vaccine really begins to elicit a strong antibody response, mean that if you hang around waiting for minor changes to be approved, you could end up with a near useless vaccine that only works for older strains.

So, the approval process for a modified existing vaccine is shorter, and we do have good safety of these new vaccines because we can see how they have performed historically, and which assures us that the 'threat' of new mods to the vaccine confers very little risk in practice.

All I heard was “yes, but the Covid vaccines weren’t even researched nearly as much nor for as long as the flu shot”

Next?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: slatesteam
a reply to: carewemust
Did you tell her that getting the vaccine within 90 days of having had Covid is harmful?

So say other doctors.

Also: “Do No Harm”

I didn't know that until seeing your post tonight.

A health nut I follow on IG posted after his wife collapsed and started convulsing with siezures.

Hit her head in the kitchen on the way down.

Her doctor told him she shouldn’t have had the vaccine as she had recently had Covid.

Also: just spit-balling here....

could it be since apparently “we’ve all had the virus” maybe even recently without our knowledge, some folks might shirk the shot if this info were being megaphoned like every other dubious facet of this pandemic?