Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]


Massive Israeli shows past infection provides much better (and longer) protection than vaccines


4 minute read

Even though the results of this study have been known for months now, health researcher Dr. John Campbell says many leading countries around the world appear to be ignoring it.  The study, completed by Maccabi Health Services in Israel looks at the data presented by 2.5 million people (over a quarter of the entire nation) from the beginning of vaccine rollout there.

The results and conclusions are quoted here:

Results SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.

Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.

In his typical understating style, Dr. John Campbell says these results don’t seem to be getting through to leading authorities “who are still following what I would consider to be a rather old-fashioned strategy”.

Here’s Campbell’s video presentation on this study and further studies including the Omicron variant.

From the notes of Dr. John Campbell shared in the video presentation above.

Natural immunity in Israel

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections…

Early vaccinees were demonstrated to be significantly more at risk than late vaccinees

Maccabi Healthcare Services

N = 2.5 million 26% of the population  Provides a representative sample of the Israeli population

Study comparing three groups SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals with 2 doses of Pfizer (n = 673,676) Previously infected, not been vaccinated (n = 62,883) Previously infected with one dose of Pfizer (n = 42,099)

If first exposure every (infection or vaccination) was in Jan or Feb 2021 – 13.06-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection compared to those previously infected

Evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated But SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees (i.e. vaccinated but no natural infection) 5.96-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection 7.13-fold increased risk for symptomatic disease

Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection, against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant


After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

More from this author


Trudeau gov’t still receiving COVID shots while throwing away $1.5 billion worth of expired jabs

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canada has contracted for delivery up to 90.8 million COVID vaccines by this December despite decreased demand from Canadians for the experimental shots.

Canada is still under contract to purchase shipments of the experimental COVID vaccines while at the same time throwing away $1.5 billion dollars worth of expired shots.   

According to information obtained April 8 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Liberal Health Minister Mark Holland revealed that Canada is still being forced under contract to purchase new vaccines even as the Department of Health has thrown away $1.59 billion worth of expired shots.

“As additional vaccines were authorized for use in Canada, manufacturers increased production capacity and demand from Canadians decreased,” Holland explained in a December 6 briefing note.   

“Overall wastage increased,” he wrote. “Additionally, as new formulations have been authorized for use to address variants of concern, wastage of older formulations has increased.”  

According to the briefing note, contracts with vaccine companies have compelled Canada’s Public Health Agency to continue to purchase the unwanted vaccines. The suppliers included Pfizer Canada, Novovax Incorporated and Moderna Inc. 

“The Public Health Agency does not intend to procure additional COVID-19 vaccines once firm contractual deliveries under existing Advance Purchase Agreements are completed at the end of the calendar year 2024 for messenger RiboNucleic Acid vaccines and in 2024 for non-mRNA vaccines,” said the note. 

While the note did not disclose how many more vaccines Canada is still on the hook for, a 2023 report from the Department of Public Works revealed it had contracted for delivery of up to 90.8 million doses by December 31, 2024.   

Since November 24, 2023, a total 52.9 million doses have been thrown away. The wastage cost Canadians $1.59 billion according to the Auditor General’s estimate that the shots cost about $30 per dose. 

“‘Up to date’ is the right way to think about vaccination now,” then-Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos told reporters June 30, 2022. “‘Fully vaccinated’ makes no sense now. It is ‘up to date.’” 

“We will never be fully vaccinated against COVID-19,” he claimed. “Like the virus, our immunity also evolves.” 

However, government research has revealed that the majority of Canadians are flat-out refusing a COVID booster injection. Data from the federal government’s COVID-19 vaccination: Vaccination coverage dashboard, shows that only 14.6 percent of Canadians, about 5.7 million, have had an “XBB.1.5 vaccine” COVID booster.  

Canadians’ decision to refuse the vaccine comes as a Statistic Canada report revealed that deaths from both COVID-19 and “unspecified causes” surged following the release of the so-called “safe and effective” vaccines. 

LifeSiteNews has published comprehensive research on the dangers of receiving the experimental vaccine, including heart damage and blood clots.    

The Trudeau government, with the help of the Department of Health, heavily promoted the COVID jabs, which were rushed to market.

In 2021, Trudeau said Canadians “vehemently opposed to vaccination” do “not believe in science,” are “often misogynists, often racists,” and questioned whether Canada should continue to “tolerate these people.”   

A recent study done by researchers at the Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest found that 17 countries have a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots and boosters.   

In October, LifeSiteNews reported how the Polyomavirus Simian Virus 40 (SV40), which is a monkey-linked DNA sequence known to cause cancer when it was used in old polio vaccines, has been confirmed by Health Canada to be in the Pfizer COVID shot, a fact that was not disclosed by the vaccine maker to officials.  

In November, officials with Canada’s Department of Health refused to release data concerning internal audits related to the COVID crisis that show “critical weaknesses and gaps” according to their own department memo.  

Continue Reading


Elon Musk-backed pro-freedom Ontario doctor takes on regulatory board in court battle

Published on

Ontario pediatrician Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Ontario physician Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill, with financial backing by Elon Musk’s X, is fighting the College of Physicians and Surgeons in court for punishing her for posts criticizing COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

Ontario physician Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill, who has received financial backing from Elon Musk’s social media company X, is still mired in a legal fight against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario after the regulatory board punished her for comments she made criticizing COVID-era policies.   

During an April 10 session at the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court, Gill challenged several cautions imposed by the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) over her comments made on X, formerly known as Twitter, in 2020. 

“The committee’s decisions were neither reasonable nor justified and they failed to engage with the central issues for which Dr. Gill was being cautioned,” Gill’s lawyer Lisa Bildy said during the Wednesday court hearing.  

Bidly argued that Gill had a “reasonable scientific basis” for her posts, adding the previous decision made against Gill targetted her for opposing the mainstream narrative.   

“The decision starts with the premise that doctors have to comply,” she said, warning that censoring doctors would have a “chilling effect” on free speech.   

One of Gill’s “controversial” posts read, “If you have not yet figured out that we don’t need a vaccine, you are not paying attention. #FactsNotFear.” 

“The Supreme Court of Canada has made it clear that regulated professionals have robust protections under the Charter when they express their opinions in the public square, as Dr. Gill has done,” Bidly said 

Gill, a Canadian physician who became well-known for speaking out against draconian COVID mandates in her home province of Ontario, was sanctioned by her medical college and forced into costly legal battles. After bringing notice to her case, billionaire Tesla owner Elon Musk threw his support behind Gill, vowing to aid her financially.

“As one of the first Canadian MDs to oppose lockdowns on Twitter in 2020 … I’ve been persecuted for four years solely due to my tweets. Please help a fellow Canadian! ~$300k in court-ordered costs due in four days,” Gill wrote on X on March 21, along with a screen shot of Musk’s August post promising to fund legal battles for those targeted for posting on X.  

A short while after Gill’s post, Musk replied, writing, “We will help.” 

Gill is a specialist practicing in the Greater Toronto area, and has extensive experience and training in “pediatrics, and allergy and clinical immunology, including scientific research in microbiology, virology and vaccinology.”  

Last September, disciplinary proceedings against her were withdrawn by the CPSO. However, last year, Gill was ordered to pay $1 million in legal costs after her libel suit was struck down, and recently she was told she must pay $300,000 by the end of March. 

The CPSO began disciplinary investigations against Gill in August 2020, with The Democracy Fund (TDF) noting she was the target of “an online campaign by other doctors, media and members of the public to generate complaints against her.”  

Gill has a large following on X and since mid-2020 has been active on the platform criticizing COVID mandates. She was one of the few Canadian doctors who spoke out strongly against the COVID dictates early on and would take to X regularly to share her views.  

Due to Gill’s social media posts, she has faced continued investigations as well as disciplinary actions by the CPSO. There have also been public complaints made against her, which the CPSO investigated.  

In late 2020, she took legal action against a group of some 23 doctors, academics, reporters and even the former president of the Ontario Medical Association, who she claimed had allegedly damaged her reputation as a “medical professional for unfairly attacking her anti-lockdown stance.”  

The result of the case, which is being reviewed by the Honourable Harriet E. Sachs, Frederick L. Myers and Sharon Shore, has not been announced as of yet.  

Continue Reading