Natural Immunity Stronger Than Vaccine Alone

Video Description

A large well-run study from Israel confirms that people with a prior SARS2 infection have vastly stronger immunity to both subsequent infection as well as hospitalization as compared to people who had received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine (but had not had prior exposure).

A third group which had both prior infection and a single jab did somewhat better than either of the other two groups.

This argues conclusively that prior infection can be and should be a basis for vaccine exemption. As always, if the data changes, so will we.

But for sure, we can say that it’s not as simple as being either vaxxed or unvaxxed. There’s a third group in the mix and that’s people who have already had a SARS2 infection and recovered. They are a far safer group than the vaxxed in that they don’t get reinfected as much as the vaxxed, and they don’t go to the hospital nearly as often.

So the hyperbolic vaxxed crowd calling for the unvaxxed to suffer, or pay more, or even - in some grotesque examples - suffer and die is entirely misplaced, inappropriate, and vile.




This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

Nice summary of a very significant study and its implications. Well done!!

1 Like

I unsubscribed and unplugged from ALL social media platforms years ago. As it turns out, that decision was one of the best decisions I made for my mental and spiritual well-being in years. Personally, I would prefer NOT to give traffic to ANY social media conglomerate. I’m happy watching getting your information from your web site.

1 Like

When I wrote this, above: “So the hyperbolic vaxxed crowd calling for the unvaxxed to suffer, or pay more, or even – in some grotesque examples – suffer and die is entirely misplaced, inappropriate, and vile.”
I was thinking of this:

Wow, such hate. I have no idea what might have motivated the editorial staff at the Toronto Star to consider this a good idea to place above the fold on the front page, but it’s hate speech and that really is never in style.
To see what I mean, simply mentally replace the word “unvaccinated” above with “black people” or "Jews’ or “Muslims” or “Christians” or “homeless people” and see how it feels then. Not terribly subtle is it?
What, pray tell, did the unvaccinated actually do to any of the people making such vile statements? I mean not in theory, but in actual practice?
The answer, in nearly every case is “absolutely nothing.” At least not directly. I suppose we could make the case that the unvaccinated resisted the government’s heavy-handed attempts to get them vaccinated which then caused the government to petulantly order more lockdowns as a form of collective punishment that then meant the vaccinated couldn’t go out to Tim Horton’s on their old cadence.
In any case, there’s no place for hate speech, and the fact that the Editorial staff at the Tronto Star thought there was is a quite damning indictment of them and their lack of perspective or morals.
I would strongly suggest that the entire staff involved in this horrid issue deserves to be fired.


Considering that my immortality is assured and that the chances of being harmed by the disease is less than 20% and the spike protein Is the disease, I think I’ll just enjoy my sunset years watching the show.
Are you not amused? No, Not really. High blood pressure is more likely to take me out than this disease so I avoid the obvious lies.
EDIT: Congratulations on being censored.

"If you are not on somebodies watchlist you should be ashamed of yourself." Seanna Fenner, Asiertru Freya.
1 Like

We have accepted this basic concept for generations. Medical science has proven this for decades. Why is this even being presented as something just discovered?
There is no pandemic. 99.9% of the population will not be adversely affected. Of those who, according to PCR testing, get “infected”, 99% will not die. Those who are dying are predominantly those who are elderly, sick, and at heightened risk of dying anyway.
In order for it to be a pandemic the threat needs to be that anyone, at anytime can be infected and die. This is simply not the case. Can we all agree on this universal truth?
Because of this massive lie hundreds of millions of people have lost income. Those who can least afford to lose even a slight reduction in income have been affected the most. Millions are suffering and dying because of this lie. Please can we all agree that it is a lie?
At this point people are dying due to the lie and we are still calculating it in terms of pandemic only because TPTB are framing everything as “the pandemic”.
ICU’s are overflowing because private equity entities have bought them all up and done what they do to all industries, consolidate, restrict, defund, reduce labor, burry under debt, hire management to “streamline”, etc.
People are getting sick and dying in large part from negligence and they don’t all need to. Thats the issue and we should all grab pitchforks, take to the streets, and end this BS!

Chris I just got your heartfelt message on my email regarding Youtube censorship. I am an EXPERT in backing up entire Youtube channels. I’ve been writing up software and scripts to automatically download channels over the past 2-3 years. I have downloaded your ENTIRE youtube channel, including thumbnails, descriptions and other metadata.

Over the years, you have however posted many unlisted videos. Do you have a plan to restore these videos in case your Youtube channel gets deleted? I can help download and back them up if only I knew all their video URL’s or video ID’s. I’m going through the Peak Prosperity archive on this website and downloading whatever I can.

Let me know if your team is on this, if they’re backing up all your past work (including private/unlisted/deleted videos) in the event that the channel gets deleted. The same applies to Vimeo, which as you know is part of Big-Tech and hence the censorship game.

From now on, please post to Rumble and Odysee. Give Youtube a break. And send notifications to people via email that a new video is up.


You know, the Russians used to say of Izvestia (news) and Pravda (truth), that there was no truth in Izvestia and no news in Pravda.
“There is no pravda in Izvestia, and no izvestia in Pravda.”
And they also used to say, you never knew anything was true until it had been officially denied.
In the West everything is backwards.
Now you don’t know anything is false, to it has been officially hyped by MiniTruth, CNN, Goolag and youtube.
Youtube is irrelevant.
I trust what you say Chris. That’s all there is to it.


Anyone remember what the WHOs mortality rate was for an actual pandemic? As we all acknowledge, all logic and level headedness has been thrown out the window with the plandemic.

Chris, you asked why they studied one jab. My understanding is that even during the midst of the vaccine hysteria, many countries said if you’ve had Covid to only get one jab.
It would also be interesting to compare data from those with natural infection plus two jabs - especially when it comes to side effects of the second jab. I’m also curious if in this situation how immunity over time is affected.

So my big question is this:


If Real Covid is better than vaccine immunity and if the vaccinated can easily get Covid, will the Delta variant produce the vaunted herd immunity that gets us out of this?


Any reason to suspect the vaccine would weaken or attenuate the immunity one would have otherwise gotten through natural exposure to Covid?   The data in this study seems to make it clear there are cumulative benefits but what about longer term?  Wouldn’t it be cool to look for T-cell immunity in the jabbed-and-infected vs the infected?


Tony “The Science” will scoff at all of this and say, “Yeah but what about the Lamda variant?  Where’s your proof things will work out the same way there?  What about Gamma and Epsilon and Omega?  You ever hear of those Mr Armchair expert?”

 Anyway, Ive learned SO MUCH while the world has been going to hell.   Thanks for keeping us all company Chris!

“Why one jab”


Thats a $20,000 question for sure.  I like your explanation.  Another is that the previously infected got one jab and had such a horrible trip that they refused a second and there just weren’t enough people in the two jab group to make a real study.


Dave Fairtex has shared charts of Isreali vaccine uptake showing a consitent differential between the 1 jab and 2 jab groups and hypothesized that a bad reaction to the first kind of killed the mood for people.

I’m curious to see some data on people who were SARS2-naive and got vaccinated, but then got a breakthrough infection. Do they have the same level of protection as people who simply got the infection? How do they compare to people who got infected first, then got the jab? 

In other words, for people who have BOTH a jab and infection, what difference does the chronological order make, if any? 

If I understand correcctly, natural infection(recovered), plus vacinnation provide the best protection against COVID. Can a person still spread the delta varient if they are in that catagory? Is the early treatment protocol effective and recommended for a person who has had the virus (and a jab) and later is reinfected?

I would think it less likely to spread.
“Vaccination antibodies” are IgG, blood based antibodies.
“Recovered from infection” antibodies are probably IgG (blood based antibodies) as well as IgA (mucosal antibodies).
Since the disease is normally spread through the lungs via breath (mucosal tissues), the IgA antibodies protecting the mucosal lining of the nose and lungs (which exist after recovery from infection) would probably protect against lung infection. Thus, (after infection) you would be less likely to both get the disease and pass it on.
If you only got the vaccine you would have only IgG antibodies (and not IgA antibodies) and thus you could catch the disease through the unprotected mucosal linings of the nose and lungs and potentially spread it. The vaccine might protect against the more serious vascular infection (which is exactly what it is designed to do) but since it provides no IgA antibodies, it would not protect against catching or spreading the disease.
Accordingly, it seems that:

  1. vaccination alone - you can definitely get the disease and can spread it, but it is less likely to become severe since it is less likely to become a vascular problem.
  2. prior infection alone - you are unlikely to get the disease or spread the disease.
  3. vaccination and prior infection - you are unlikely to get the disease or spread it but if you get the disease you are even less likely to have a serious infection.
    This is exactly what real life experience is showing.

With the flu vaccine, annual jabs make people more susceptible to new flu strains, if not matched accurately with the following years flu variant (Veterans study a recent confirmation) and no clear mortality benefits (NHS study).
With this coronavirus, successful matching to new variants becomes almost a requirement for boosters etc, all within the waning (vaccine) antibody timeframe of 5-6 months. Not even mentioning increased reactivity to repeated shots, vaccine complications or ADE concerns. It seems like an attenuated exposure with ivermectin coverage, might be the best option. It seems to me that the vaccine is neither safe nor effective, but I am just a retired doc who has been suckered before.

1 Like

Has anyone seen the study that is claiming hospitalization is 2x with the delta? I’m wondering if there is anything to this since it seems to suggest the opposite of previous uk data.

I just sent an email to info@ to the same effect as this comment. Currently downloading max-quality for each of the 967 publicly listed videos. Happy to provide additional assistance if desired.

1 Like

Just a weeny advantage with getting the clot-shot and many, many known and acknowledged risks.

I have been thinking about the T-cells for quite some time. My understanding is that the antibodies fade, but the t-cells could last quite a long time (sars-1 for 10 + years and so on). So finally the t-cell test got approval in the US in March, but the company was sketchy. It is quite expensive (~$150 to $200). You either have to go to LapCorp (eew) or hire a mobile phlebotomist to come to you. I decided on the latter. However, the woman was so sketchy that I did not trust her to put a needle in my arm. (She kept not showing, saying her car broke down, etc.) I even got my doctor to call them directly to ask to draw the blood and they said no. The company name is “T-detect”.
If we could test people’s T-cells, we could do so much with that information. One example would be to truly study people who are both non-infected and not vaccinated with other groups. Also, I suspect most people at this point have been exposed and have t-cells.

1 Like