It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CDC has no record of ANYONE with natural immunity spreading covid

page: 4
58
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: network dude
They no longer acknowledge natural immunity as one of the functions gained through the fauci research and development program.





False.

Here’s the CDC’s actual position, as of last month:

“ Available evidence shows that fully vaccinated individuals and those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 each have a low risk of subsequent infection for at least 6 months. Data are presently insufficient to determine an antibody titer threshold that indicates when an individual is protected from infection.

The immunity provided by vaccine and prior infection are both high but not complete (i.e., not 100%).“

www.cdc.gov...



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

So there are provisions for the previously infected in the mandates? Can you link to them?



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

Natural Immunity lasts much longer than 6 months. From Jan 2020 thru Aug 2021 (20+ months) VERY FEW Covid-19 recoverees in the USA contracted Covid-19 again, according to Fauci's bosses the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Source: www.cdc.gov...

Common sense says that 20 month window of immunity will be expanded the next time the CDC revisits the subject. There's no money in it for them, so they don't look that frequently. About every 6 months it appears.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: MDDoxs

originally posted by: Thenail
a reply to: network dude

Great thread . Great point . Amazing with the thousands of media formats that this is the only one with this information it seems like . Common sense must prevail , I am so tired of these Glazi’s


Poor quality thread, poor quality points, shameful news source. Network Dude is capable of so much better…. Unfortunately, common sense is lacking these days.


That is not an argument. That is just weak whataboutisms from someone who has no argument.

How many test results have you seen of COVID in people who weren't vaxxed and previously tested positive. Out of those people, how many of them spread COVID to others?

You do not have the data, you are arguing based on faith because you believe data exists that supports your argument, but you cant point to it, or you would. You are arguing from a religious faith based point of view, not a scientific one, or you would follow the data we have, and wait for data that supports your hypothesis before arguing others are wrong who have more data supporting their arguments than you have supporting yours. The only support for your argument is based on FAITH in the system, not based on the merit of objective data you present. If you recognized this from day 1, you would not have fallen for bad arguments because you would have waited to be presented with lots of data before reaching conclusions.

The fact so many people cannot recognize the difference between merit based arguments and faith based arguments is why we are here. Most dont even want to see the proof. A lot of people think they are much smarter than they are. They think they just need to know the answers, and can get those answers from experts, but they are not interested in why those answers are correct. They think the responsibility of clarification falls to the expert, and not them for spreading BS that was propaganda from the start. This is one reason why so many people thin they know things that just aren't true. They arent looking for the truth, they are looking for the right answer, and lack the foundation to know when they are close.

Those are the people that follow Q, CNN, MSNBC, Fauchi, they are all the same people. They dont need proof, they want faith to worship. Low IQ people who want to sound smart and are scared to death some virus they dont understand is going to kill them. Because they never possessed the intellect to think anything other than what they were told from day 1.
edit on 24-11-2021 by TrollMagnet because:

edit on 24-11-2021 by TrollMagnet because: typo



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

It is also the cdc's stance that the pcr tests shows positive results when the flu is present.
Do you understand the implications here?

We shouldn't even be talking about covid.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: 1947boomer

It is also the cdc's stance that the pcr tests shows positive results when the flu is present.


Is it?

I feel a link is required for that claim.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Mandroid7

Is that the case? My daughter tested positive for the flu and negative for Covid two weeks ago.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I have known about this for since. Those conclusions have been recognized by many health agencies worldwide for quite a while already. In Europe they are even stating the US's health agencies are not correct for not recognizing natural immunity as real, I read about this on the BMJ site and another European medical science site.

We need new and intelligent people running our countries health agencies, I do not know how they choose the heads of these agency, but I think it is based on their ability to BS more than their ability to be rational.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes. It was posted directly on their site.
I will look for the change of testing request. I did a thread on it. I'll see if I can find it.
It is legit..too legit to quit

Numbers via testing with the pcr test are bunk



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes. It was posted directly on their site.
I will look for the change of testing request. I did a thread on it. I'll see if I can find it.
It is legit..too legit to quit

Numbers via testing with the pcr test are bunk


Are you sure you aren't confusing it with this story.

khn-org.cdn.ampproject.org... a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16377789532877&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A %2F%2Fkhn.org%2Fnews%2Farticle%2Ffact-check-cdc-pcr-covid-test-distinguishes-from-flu-eua-request-withdrawal%2F



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: network dude

I found this on the CDC website from August:


In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections. Do you want to win the clottery?


Im coming up on 2 years since I was sick. I was sick once, for 2 months, all the while working 12 hour shifts in the cold. Jan/Feb 2020. Haven't been sick since. No injections accepted. No mask wearing except on very rare occasions



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Here's the thread.
Check the cdc link

thread



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: ScepticScot

Here's the thread.
Check the cdc link

thread


That is the story as above and the CDC didn't say that the test confused Flu with Covid.

It's replacing tje old test with one that can identify both to avoid the need for separate tests.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

You make a choice. You can be sick from one or the other. Covid goes away. The special sauce in the injections doesn't.

As for this statement: “ Available evidence shows that fully vaccinated individuals and those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 each have a low risk of subsequent infection for at least 6 months." Multi injected and previously infected non injected should not even be in the same sentence.

Those who abstained from the injection, and had long covid are good for well over 6 months. They are good for at least 5 years and possibly up to 17. Those who did not abstain from the injections, are...Well... Stained.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I've said many times that it is not about the vaccines. It is about putting a system in place to better track our movements.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot




CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.



Differentiation being the key word here.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: ScepticScot




CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.



Differentiation being the key word here.


I think the key part is it doesn't say that it test 's positive for Flu so the claim made was wrong.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem

That's nice, good for you.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: ScepticScot




CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.



Differentiation being the key word here.


I think the key part is it doesn't say that it test 's positive for Flu so the claim made was wrong.


Well then, were going to have to agree to disagree on this one.



In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.


As in the new tests need to be able to differentiate between covid and the flu.

As in..the pcr currently does not



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: ScepticScot




CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.



Differentiation being the key word here.


I think the key part is it doesn't say that it test 's positive for Flu so the claim made was wrong.


Well then, were going to have to agree to disagree on this one.



In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.


As in the new tests need to be able to differentiate between covid and the flu.

As in..the pcr currently does not




We cannot agree to disagree but your claim that the CDC said Flu cases show as positive results is incorrect.

That isn't really a matter of opinion as they didn't say that.



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join