Like others who have had Covid, I am pretty sure that my vaccination from God is about as good as the one Matt Hancock wants me to take but the Government seems desperate to make us think otherwise and the BBC is acting as its propaganda arm in this aim. Yesterday, it reported – as you can see below – that a new study showed that having Covid could protect folks for at least five months! Putting this 5-month figure in one’s mind is an utter deceipt.
The study of 21,000 healthcare workers indicates that having covid is a vaccine with an 84% protection rate. That is greater than having one dose of Pfizer and only 8% less than having two doses. So it is a pretty good vaccine. But it only lasts five months, right? Wrong!
The study of 21,000 healthcare workers is ongoing but what is being reported on are the results from the first five months. So it is likely that God’s vaccine is going to last a lot longer. The Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines which Matt Hancock wants us to take were launched after a study of only five months. Maybe their vaccines last longer but nobody knows! In some BBC reports, there was no clarification of this matter. In this one from its website, it is buried at the bottom of the website article underneath numerous warnings about how having Covid lasts as a protection for five months and folks should still put themselves under house arrest anyway.
Of course, with vaccines in short supply, this issue has tremendous policy implications. We could protect far more folks from Covid far more quickly and at far lower cost if we were to say that those who had already been vaccinated by God should not be vaccinated by Hancock until, say, the Hancock vaccine had been offered to all those over 40 or at risk from other factors like being morbidly obese. A serious government would take this on board. But we do not have a serious government or a seriously critical 4th Estate and so this study is being brushed under the carpet.
On the BBC TV news, they wheeled out a professor to dismiss these findings saying that immunity from having the disease could not hope to be as effective as immunity from a vaccine created by man. That may be the case but the study shows it is almost as effective and the consequence of dismissing and rubbishing this is to delay jabs for vulnerable folk who have no immunity because jabs are being given to those who are largely immune already. I suggest the professor and the BBC and Matt Hancock thus have, to use a phrase aimed at we sceptics, “blood on their hands.”
Rubbishing this study also justifies the house arrest of those who, largely, cannot catch the disease again and so cannot spread it.
This is madness. That the BBC is colluding in it is another reason why it is no longer fit for purpose. #DefundtheBBC
