Covid-recoverers at ‘Very Low Risk’ of Re-infection

People who have contracted COVID-19 and recovered should know that the risk for reinfection is very low, a doctor said after the publication of a study he worked on.

Researchers analyzed records from Curative, a clinical laboratory based in San Dimas, California, that specializes in COVID-19 testing and has been conducting routine workforce screening during the pandemic.

None of the 254 employees who had COVID-19 and recovered became reinfected, while four of the 739 who were fully vaccinated contracted the disease.

The big takeaway was that if you are not vaccinated, and were not previously infected, one, you have a very high risk of getting infected—24 percent of employees over a year tested positive. However, on the flip side, if you were vaccinated or previously infected, your risk was near zero,” Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, clinical professor of preventive medicine and medicine at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times.

Klausner and Dr. Noah Kojima of the University of California–Los Angeles’s Department of Medicine joined with Curative workers to analyze the records. They released a pre-print, or pre-peer-reviewed version of the study online last week.

Researchers found that of the 4,313 employees who weren’t previously infected or fully vaccinated, 254 became infected.

The findings add to the growing body of research that indicates that people who had COVID-19 and recovered enjoy a similar level of protection as those who have gotten a vaccine, following a study in the United Kingdom and one by Cleveland Clinic researchers.

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,” Klausner told The Epoch Times. “And we’re trying to update policy such that people who have recovered have the same privileges and access as people who are vaccinated.

According to federal guidance, vaccines should be administered to people irrespective of whether they’ve had COVID-19.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said officials are aware of evidence suggesting natural immunity among those who have been infected, but it hasn’t altered its recommendations to incorporate that evidence.

We do not comment on non-CDC authored papers. We continually evaluate the science that leads to our guidance, and if it needs to be changed, we will base that on our own research and studies,” a spokesman told The Epoch Times in an email last month.

The limitations of the new study, which has been submitted to a journal and is being peer-reviewed, include the possibility that employees could have tested positive for COVID-19 outside of the routine screening, or employee testing program.

The group plans to conduct more analysis on the Curative data.

Dr. David Boulware, professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, told The Epoch Times via email that the study “adds to the body of literature that generally healthy adults <65 years old with prior COVID-19 infection are generally not at risk of recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection in short term after initial symptomatic infection.

SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.

Boulware, who wasn’t involved in the research, noted that the median age of those tested was 29 years old and very likely included few people 65 years old or older, or many people without immune system problems.

Thus, this may not apply to elderly persons or persons with substantial co-morbidities—but does likely apply to adults 18–65 years of age without major medical problems,” he said, adding that because the follow-up time period of those studied was relatively short, the paper doesn’t give insight into longer-term protection.

Long term protection is more unknown, which is why persons with prior infection still are recommended to receive at least 1 vaccine dose, but there is not any urgency to receive the vaccine (and waiting ~3 months likely would be fine),” he said.

Klausner said that besides bolstering the idea of natural immunity, the study shows that vaccination in the workplace is important.

We need to continue to promote workplace vaccination requirements. Businesses have the authority and have the ability and have the legal power to require employees to get vaccinated,” he said. “And I think our study supports that benefit.

See more here: theepochtimes.com

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.

Comments (5)

  • Avatar

    Charles Higley

    |

    ““The big takeaway was that if you are not vaccinated, and were not previously infected, one, you have a very high risk of getting infected—24 percent of employees over a year tested positive. However, on the flip side, if you were vaccinated or previously infected, your risk was near zero,””

    One thing missing here. What about the 40–60% of the population with pre-existing immunity, having been exposed to closely related viruses in the past. Why is there nobody who considers everything at one time, the whole picture?

    Reply

    • Avatar

      barry paul robinson

      |

      One other thing missing is that there is no Covid19, never has been.

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Charles Higley

    |

    “The findings add to the growing body of research that indicates that people who had COVID-19 and recovered enjoy a similar level of protection as those who have gotten a vaccine”

    No, natural immunity is vastly superior to a experimental non-vaccine that can only elicit antibodies against one protein and set a person up with non-neutralizing antibodies that makes them more easily infected, sicker than normal, and more likely to die than normal.

    Natural immunity is the best and the jabs are not designed to do what they claim.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Mark Tapley

      |

      Hello Higley:
      How can it be determined who has been infected when there is no tissue sample to base this diagnosis on. The PCR test is not a diagnostic tool and as the inventor Mullis said. It can be used to show anything. We do not know at what cycle range the test was set.. Depending on the setting you can always get a positive. I saw a video of one nurse who said that all the patients currently in their covid ward were people who had already had the virus.

      The recent findings by the Spanish investigators have determined that over 99% of all four of the the blood toxin manufactures contents are graphene oxide. These same manufactures have stated that the “vaccines” offer NO immunity and prevent NO transmission. How could they when the virus is fake.
      Below is a video of Dr. Andrew Kaufman explaining that the virus is a hoax.
      https://www.bitchute.com/video/lBUfxyhVwHGH/

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Tom

    |

    The greatest risk to your life is now the injections (fake vaccines)…avoid them at all costs! Quite possibly, CoV-3 is on the way as it will be manufactured (literally) to create another fake pandemic installing fear in a stupid public who refuse to stand up for themselves. They have been working on CoV-3 since at least 2007.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via