I put this together on the risk of RE-INFECTION...the predominant finding is that it is very rare and if at all...we are arguing no and it is always when we examine due to problematical PCR results

I share for this is one of the noble lies we were told to force us to mask and lockdown. Remember, what I share are my views as I try to make sense of junk garbage science around me, if it helps you

If this can help you, please use it.

Omicron is much more infectious yet much milder and non-consequential. But with everything, we keep an eye on it to ensure it goes true to form. We want it to be non-noxious.

We have looked at the published evidence and can conclude based on the existing body of evidence, that reinfections are very rare, if at all and based on typically a few instances with questionable confirmation of an actual case of re-infection e.g. we argue flawed PCR testing and interpretation of the results with the elevated sensitive cycle count thresholds greater than 24 which detects viral dust, fragments, old coronavirus, prior recovered infection etc. (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26). We have to continue examining this issue and be open either direction. However the in toto evidence points to a rarity or is very limited, and potentially unlikely happening. Based on science today.

Colson et al. did publish a very interesting paper on evidence of SARS-CoV-2 re-infection with a different genotype. They sought to show that the same patient was infected in April, cleared the virus, seroconverted, but was “re-infected four months later with a new viral variant. The two infections reflect the circulating strains in Marseille at the same time. It is the most comprehensive studied as it documented seroconversion following the first infection, showed drastically different viral genomes with 34 nucleotide differences, and ruled out errors of samples by techniques commonly used for forensic identifications.” This study deserves serious reflection.

However, A very recent study in Qatar (Lancet) found that “natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months”. Hall in Lancet reported same.

“The study in Austria also found that the frequency of re-infection from COVID-19 caused hospitalization in only five out of 14,840 (0.03%) people and death in one out of 14,840 (0.01%)”.

A very recent UK observational study by Lumley published in CID (July 2021) looked at the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and B.1.1.7 variant infection in healthcare workers by antibody and vaccination status. “Researchers analyzed records from Curative, a clinical laboratory based in San Dimas that specializes in COVID-19 testing and has during the pandemic been conducting routine workforce screening. None of the 254 employees who had COVID-19 and recovered became re-infected, while four of the 739 who were fully vaccinated contracted the disease…it should give confidence to people who have recovered that they are at very low risk for repeat infection and some experts including myself believe that protection is equal to vaccination”.

“Israel National News reports that this data was presented to the Israeli Health Ministry and yielded the following breakdown of breakthrough infections of those vaccinated vs. those with prior infection:

“With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

“By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave…Irish researchers recently published a review of 11 cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID patients who were followed up with over 10 months. They found the reinfection rate to be just 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time”.

Dr. Marty Makary of Johns Hopkins wrote “reinfection is extremely rare and even when it does happen, the symptoms are very rare or [those individuals] are asymptomatic”.

Dr. Peter McCullough (personal communication June 27th 2021) advises: “I have demanded that if any one proposes a recurrent case the following are fulfilled: 90 days between the two illnesses. The episodes have both cardinal signs and symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 testing with at least two or more concordant results (e.g. RT-PCR, antigen, sequencing). To my knowledge, this has never happened.  On one of the occasions the first or second episode was simply a false positive PCR or ambiently positive antibody result with no clinical syndrome”.

Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Harvey Risch (July 18th 2021) have suggested as another model for consideration para “People have suggested to require more than nominal PCR positivity and having signs/symptoms to establish reinfection.  So, PCR Ct<25 in both instances, antibody tests confirming the infections, symptoms both times, and separated by more than 90 days are some considerations that people have suggested”.

An important publication (pre-print) has come from Chertow et al. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1139035/v1

They report that (based on complete autopsies on 44 patients with COVID-19) SARS-CoV-2 is widely distributed, even among patients who died with asymptomatic to mild COVID-19, and that virus replication is present in multiple extrapulmonary tissues early in infection. Moreover, they “detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in multiple anatomic sites, including regions throughout the brain, for up to 230 days following symptom onset. Despite extensive distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in the body, we observed a paucity of inflammation or direct viral cytopathology outside of the lungs. Our data prove that SARS-CoV-2 causes systemic infection and can persist in the body for months.” This leaves us to ask if this is the long-COVID and can explain the real symptoms people are experiencing post infection and also why people test positive repeatedly. Is the system responding to the constant replication as if there is new repeat infection? This may help explain repeat positive test results.

Importantly, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recently (May 10th 2021 Scientific brief, WHO/2019-nCoV/Sci_Brief/Natural_immunity/2021.1) alluded to what has been clear for many months (one year now), which is that people are very rarely re-infected. The WHO is very late but better late than never. The key points they have stated in this briefing which stand out and warrants a mention (again we always knew this and tried informing the CDC and WHO of this across the last year) is that:

i) Within 4 weeks following infection, 90-99% of individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus develop detectable neutralizing antibodies.

ii) Available scientific data suggests that in most people immune responses remain robust and protective against reinfection for at least 6-8 months after infection (the longest follow up with strong scientific evidence is currently approximately 8 months).

iii) Studies aimed to detect immunological memory including the assessment of cellular immunity by testing for the presence of memory B cells, and CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, observed robust immunity at 6 months post-infection in 95% of subjects under study, which included individuals with asymptomatic, mild, moderate and severe infections.

iv) Current evidence points to most individuals developing strong protective immune responses following natural infection with SARS-CoV-2.

A very recent discussion on mild COVID-19 inducing lasting antibody protection, was based on a publication in Nature. The research showed that people who have had mild illness develop antibody-producing cells that can last a lifetime. “Months after recovering from mild cases of COVID-19, people still have immune cells in their body pumping out antibodies against the virus that causes COVID-19, according to a study from researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Such cells could persist for a lifetime, churning out antibodies all the while”.