I know there were no CDC or other studies to my knowledge, funded by or run by our governemnt directly. The fact that there wasn't is exactly my point, why wasn't there. CDC and NIH emply something like 30k employees, and I believe the budget is over 40B. Then there's the trillions that were spent additionally by our gov't. So no legitimate reason why say 50,000 people (previously infected), could have been brought in for a study, either by the gov, or subcontracted, starting in the summer of 2020 or earlier. Every 2 months full workups, including antibodies , t-cells, vitimin levels, blood, everything.I've not seen that, where did you?
It was studied and tracked, just not by official entities like the CDC. Or, if it was, there was no information that was shared, at least to my knowledge. As to the why, there are plenty of reasons we can throw at the wall, but I am not willing to play that game by and large.
One reason I will put forth, however, is that this stuff is hard to understand, and many HCPs will often take the easier way out and give the simplest option rather than take the time to educate. This is especially true, and somewhat expected, when you consider the urgency sensed in having to address this disease in a quick and efficient manner. Way easier for the public to understand, and the provider to say, mask/isolate/quarantine/vaccinate then it is to talk about interventions. Hell, when I came back to work in April 2020, I was often hearing from MDs/PAs/RNs who were telling me I was 'going to get it again' or that 'this was new yadda yadda', to which I could only respond with stuff about how the immune system works, resulting in (concerning) blank stares more often than not. To put that in perspective, some of these same people insisted on testing me again weeks later because my IgM and IgA antibodies were so high. I was like, "you understand that stuff but you don't get how that same stuff is protecting me bigly?"
So yea, tl;dr. Agencies want things to be simple and straightforward for the public to digest during a pandemic. Whether they get it right is another story.
We would have a good baseline and dataset to work from. And clearly a better idea of antibody duration accross the population. For something that was / is so devatating I'm at loss as to why this hasn't been done. Also, at that point in time, there wasn't a real thought that a Vaccine would be doable in short order.
Yet here we are, 1.5 years later, and we have to rely on studies out of Israel, Qatar, I believe cleveland clinic did one also, and I'm sure there are others. Indicating natural immunity is at least as good, if not multiple times better than the jab. All apparently ignored by our government.
Seems we are on the same page in concept here.
Last edited:





