According to today’s Washington Post, “South Africa will suspend use of the coronavirus vaccine being developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca after researchers found it provided “minimal protection” against mild to moderate coronavirus infections caused by the new variant [B.1. 351] first detected in that country.” Switzerland decided to ban it too. Some other European countries are still using the A-Z vaccine, but only in those below certain age limits.
Why would you start vaccinating your population with a vaccine for a viral strain that is being outcompeted by another strain that is resistant to the vaccine?
Are governments trying to use up the supply they purchased before its efficacy is completely gone?
While, according to the La Jolla Institute of Immunology, “T cells try to fight SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, by targeting a broad range of sites on the virus. By attacking the virus from many angles, the body has the tools to potentially recognize different SARS-CoV-2 variants.” Here is the entire paper.
The point to take away is that the immunity derived from getting a mild case of the disease is likely to be much more broad and robust than the immunity you will get from a vaccine.
Why do I say “a mild case”? Because I believe almost everyone would have only a mild case if their Vitamin D level was adequate and they were given appropriate treatment.
Ivermectin use in many countries in Latin America has drastically reduced death rates.
We need to rethink our Covid-19 strategy.
Update 2/7/21: from the WaPo:
The coronavirus variant that shut down much of the United Kingdom [yet another strain, B.1.1.7]–Nass] is spreading rapidly across the United States, outcompeting other strains and doubling its prevalence among confirmed infections every week and a half, according to new research made public Sunday.
The report, posted on the preprint server MedRxiv and not yet peer-reviewed or published in a journal, comes from a collaboration of many scientists and provides the first hard data to support a forecast issued last month by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that showed the variant [the UK variant, not the South African variant] becoming dominant in the United States by late March…
The CDC forecast shows that, with a steady rate of a million vaccinations a day, infections will most likely continue to decline even in the presence of the more transmissible variant.
But the decline will be much more gradual than if the variant had not taken hold, according to the CDC’s forecast… [i.e., protection against the B.1.1.7 variant will be measurably less–Nass]
The new study only looked at data through the end of January, but the percentage of infections in Florida involving B.1.1.7 may have risen from a little less than 5 percent to approximately 10 percent in just the past week, Kristian Andersen, an immunologist at Scripps Research Institute and a co-author of the new study, said Sunday in an email.
Andersen is the first author of a Nature Medicine study published last March which told a whopper of a tale about how SARS-Cov-2 could not possibly have come from a lab. Which makes him a knave, a fool or a tool. I’d go with #s 1 and 3. Tools provide narrative, and he has already done that once. Let’s see where this narrative is going.