Skip to content

Barack Obama Emerges from the Shadows to Spread Covid Vaccine Misinformation

    Former President Barack Obama emerged from the shadows to urge Americans to get vaccinated. We are now over two years into this Covid ‘pandemic.’

    The problem with his vaccine sales pitch? It spreads Covid misinformation. Watch:

    “And yet, despite the fact that we’ve now essentially clinically tested the vaccine on billions of people worldwide, around one in five Americans is still willing to put themselves at risk and put their families at risk rather than get vaccinated,” Obama claimed. “People are dying because of misinformation.”

    There is plenty of misinformation packed into this one line. First of all, getting the vaccine does literally nothing to stop the spread of Covid-19. It does not put your family “at risk” if you do not get the shot. That lie has been so completely obliterated that dishonest and corrupt “fact checkers” don’t even bother to fact check it anymore. It’s done.

    But just to bury this myth, let’s turn to one of the most comprehensive international studies ever performed on the subject. A Harvard study of 68 nations and 2,947 counties in the United States published in the European Journal of Epidemiology shattered the argument that the mRNA prophylactic therapeutic drugs marketed as “vaccines” do anything significantly to stop the spread of Covid-19. Here are their findings:

    At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.

    Critically, the claims that the vaccines slow the spread by hypothetically decreasing symptoms and thereby lowering transmission rate was also debunked. The correlation between vaccination rates and case rates was shown to be slightly positive.

    That doesn’t mean “good.” That means the higher the vaccination rate, the likelihood there will be a higher case rate. Correlation isn’t causation, but it shows that the vaccines are worse than useless against transmission.

    The second aspect of misinformation in Barack Obama’s pharmaceutical sales pitch is the existence of natural immunity.

    A comprehensive Johns Hopkins University study produced evidence that 99% of people with prior infections have natural immunity that lasts at least 650 days with no decrease in immunity.

    The chart shows that prior infections gave rise to three different types of important antibodies; about 95% of people with prior infections retained all three.

    Compare this natural immunity resiliency to how rapidly Covid protection fades with every vaccine shot.

    “Protection against BA.2 did not seem to wane any faster than protection against BA.1, and a booster shot brought the protection against symptomatic infection by either subvariant back to 30–60%,” Scientific American reports. “Surveillance data collected in the United Kingdom reveal a similar trend: vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 is less than 20% for both subvariants 25 weeks or more after a second dose, but rises to roughly 70% 2–4 weeks after a third dose.”

    If Johns Hopkins isn’t enough of a stamp of imprimatur, Dr. Anthony Fauci himself was once a true believer in natural immunity.

    Long before the Covid pandemic, on October 11, 2004, to be precise, Fauci appeared on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal. He expressed his professional opinion that if one had a prior infection to a virus, namely the seasonal flu, then one does not need to be vaccinated against it. Watch:

    “But she’s had the flu for 14 days,” the host said. “Should she get a flu shot?”

    Shockingly, Dr. Fauci had a recommendation: No. Because she had prior infection, and thus, natural immunity.

    “Well, no,” Fauci replied. “If she got the flu for 14 days, she’s as protected as anybody can be. Because the best vaccination is to get infected yourself.”

    In March, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky testified before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis. She was in virtual attendance to discuss the Omicron BA.2 subvariant, immunizations, boosters, and allegations the CDC allowed a teachers’ union to dictate guidance on reopening schools in early 2021.

    At the hearing, CDC Director Walensky admitted that natural immunity is real and that it does confer some protection against Covid-19. Watch:

    “We also know that in this country because of vaccines because of boosters and because of protection from prior disease, infection-induced immunity (natural immunity) that about 95% of people in this country have some level of protection,” she said.

    The CDC released a study in January called “COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations by COVID-19 Vaccination Status and Previous COVID-19 Diagnosis — California and New York, May–November 2021.” The findings that natural immunity provided protection superior to vaccinated immunity were reported by Agence France-Presse.

    “During America’s last surge of the coronavirus driven by the Delta variant, people who were unvaccinated but survived Covid were better protected than those who were vaccinated and not previously infected,” AFP reported.

    A CDC-sponsored database in partnership with Yale, Harvard, and Stanford universities shows that the overwhelming majority of Americans have natural immunity from prior infections. The covidestim database is supported by a cooperative agreement with the CDC and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists.

    The state-by-state breakdown of prior infections data taken directly from the covidestim database in late January can be seen in this graphic below:

    The great majority of U.S. states had prior infections ranging between 70% and 94%. Only Hawaii had prior infections data that fell below 50%. The prior infections average for all U.S. states was an incredible 78%. Thus, nearly four out of five Americans had some level of protection from omicron in late January.

    As Danish scientists confirmed in late February, the new subvariant BA.2 “can reinfect people who’ve previously had omicron, although it doesn’t appear to be all that common. They also agree that it’s more contagious than the original version of omicron, BA.1, which is still widely circulating around the world.”

    “Danish scientists confirmed Tuesday that the BA.2 subvariant can reinfect people who previously had its omicron predecessor, BA.1, though the risk of catching the virus again appears low,” NBC News reported.

    “The Statens Serum Institute in Copenhagen analyzed a randomly selected sample of 263 reinfection cases. Forty-seven people caught BA.2 less than two months after infection with BA.1, according to the study,” the report continued. “The majority of the people reinfected with BA.2 after BA.1 were younger than 20 years old and unvaccinated.”

    “The reinfection rate appears to be low given the high number of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests during the study period but still highlights the need for continuous assessment of length of vaccine-induced and/or natural immunity,” the study’s authors wrote.

    “The people reinfected had mild symptoms and none of them were hospitalized or died. The study also found that people reinfected with a BA.2 infection had a reduced viral load, indicating some crossover immunity from the first infection.”

    So, there you have it. There is no significant evidence that you need vaccination to protect yourself or anyone else from BA.2, especially if you have natural immunity from a prior infection to omicron or delta.


    Watch: Biden Refuses to Take Questions as Staff Scream at Reporters to Leave the President Alone

    "*" indicates required fields

    Who's your favorite former President?*
    This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

    OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion.