This article published by the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reports on two new studies by separate teams in Germany and the US which suggests that certain immune cells involved in the defense against the common cold can react when exposed to the SARS-CoV-2. The researches do not explore whether this cross-reactive immune response can affect clinical outcomes of COVID-19, scientists believe that this is the reason why some people have less severe responses to SARS-CoV-2 than others.
The German study shows that subjects who had no prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2 had helper T-cells which were capable of recognizing the new coronavirus. Lead researcher Leif Erik Sander says that these cells could have a protective effect. According to Sander, a recent bout with the common cold could lead to less severe COVID-19 symptoms.
Meanwhile, the US study explored the structural similarities between the novel coronavirus and the cold-causing coronavirus, in the hopes of discovering the mechanisms that allow the T-cells to respond. They found strong molecular evidence that the memory T-cells can “see” similar sequences between these two virus strains.
Editor’s Note: While Big Pharma hopes to convince us that the human body does not know how to defend against a novel virus like SARS-CoV-2, scientific evidence shows otherwise. The two researches mentioned by the SCMP are not the first to discover memory T-cells and cross-immunity.
In July, the idea of cross-immunity was already being proposed by Japanese researchers to explain the low death rate in Japan [read Why is Japan’s COVID-19 death rate mysteriously low?]. Moreover, Laura Spinney, in an article for The Guardian collates the ideas of various experts suggesting that COVID-19 immunity may be more commonplace than previously thought [see Why are some populations more affected by COVID-19 than others?].
Whether it is cross-immunity or true collective immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 that is causing the increase in asymptomatic cases and decline in infections in Sweden and Mumbai, it only points to the fact that our own immune system can neutralize the new coronavirus [to learn about Sweden, read Sweden is winning against the coronavirus, see Mumbai’s poorest may already have collective immunity against SARS-COV-2 to learn to understand the case of Mumbai].
Lockdowns, school closures, masking, social distancing – all these are but temporary, often times unnecessary, solutions. The healthier, most effective, most sustainable solution is still boosting one’s immune system and paying attention to the general health and the integrity of the human being.
Read Original Article
Read Online
Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.
Can you give us instead actual website links to the ORIGINAL sources , every time you cite sources and references of vital information and studies? What happens is that the links you provide only BRING US BACK to your WEBSITE, with discussions on the new specific articles being pursued by readers supposedly for validation .
For credibility and authenticity, media or even ordinary citizens would want to read actual original sources, not summarized versions back at your website.
What your website is doing is violating somehow two principles on accuracy and authenticity.
For one, we do not get to read the original sources for actual validation and authenticity, because the references you cite with their supposed original links only bring us back to your website with summarized discussions, again, on specific topics of interest.
Secondly, there is a tendency of possible perceptions of slight plagiarism from readers who may think your posts are copy and paste versions from the original, although you cite the source which is good.
Unfortunately, as a website with a clear advocacy stand, some readers will still see your positions as biased and lopsided. It is different with mainstream media, which projects objectivity and continues to be perceived as such by the public and are thus read and believed, although we do know, media is highly influenced and even blinded by the dominant propaganda and diktats of Big Business and Big Establishment.
This all the more drives our point that in order to convince a wider audience, we have to show more authenticity and originality with our facts. This is essentially how Big Pharma and Big Establishment operate as they drown their critics with their twisted dominant propaganda, and worse , propagate fake news carried supposedly by their critics , who end up discredited in the minds of the public.
This is the kind of social psy-ops conducted by Tavistock Institute and CIA-MI6 etc (5 Eyes intelligence) operations, which support all opposing groups to create confusion and distortions like the QAnon group, which present facts mixed with ridiculous conspiracy theories to a point they are discredited, thus any glimpse of truth is drowned and lost.
I believe inn your cause , but strategy, tactics and approaches are also important. As mass
communications guru Marshall McLuhan says the “Medium is the Message.” Thus, how we deliver our messages even when true are very vital to be heard, at the very least, and eventually believed, Thanx a lot.
Hello Michael,
Thank you for the constructive feedback.
All the articles on our website have a link to the original source. Even those that are linked within the Editor’s Note, and those that are referred to in Nicanor’s articles. We refer back to our website because we have everything archived here, and it allows us to remember which articles are connected. As you know, there are already thousands of articles on this scamdemic, and this is the only way we can keep track of them.
This is how each article is structured:
Summary
Editor’s Note
Link to Original Articles
Some of the articles cited might disappear from the original website, so we also keep a copy of the PDF of the original articles in our archive.
I checked on this article you commented on and saw that it was one of the older ones which didn’t have an easier-to-read formatting. We have updated it so you should be able to see the source article now.