WHO and it's biased role
Increasingly people are questioning the biased role of WHO in this current coronavirus pandemic. It is talking about and promoting covid-19 vaccine but is totally ignoring and not talking about natural immunity in infection protection. On one hand, WHO is stating that both natural infection and vaccines provide equal protection from covid-19 virus and on the other hand, it is aggressively advocating immunization for the masses. It is deliberately not giving any importance to natural infection and it's vital role in preventing second infection from the virus. This medical organization seems to be totally relying on only one step to control the pandemic, namely vaccination. Why?
Natural infection and antibodies
Scientific studies so far have clearly shown that natural antibodies provide the best and longer-lasting protection as compared to any of the currently available vaccines against covid-19. Despite all these peer-reviewed data and publications, WHO is not mentioning any of these studies in its advisories that releases from time to time on the pandemic. Medical fraternity are raising doubts on the impartial role of WHO. Dr Sanjay Rai, Professor, Department of Community Medicine, AIIMS, Delhi states candidly:
“Since the beginning of the pandemic, the WHO’s role has been doubtful. Its obsession with vaccines is questionable,”
WHO's technical briefs reveal this bias against natural immunity for covid protection. On 24 April 2020, it's technical brief mentioned that it refuses to provide immunity passports to those who have naturally got the infection. It's circular states:
“At this point in the pandemic, there is not enough evidence about the effectiveness of antibody-mediated immunity to guarantee the accuracy of an “immunity passport” or “risk-free certificate,”,”
This is a direct clue of its bias towards vaccine.
Also, read What is norovirus?
Equal immunity with natural infection and vaccines
As data started accumulating, studies showed that natural infection gives immunity equal to that with vaccines. Hence in its 10 May 2021 briefing, WHO said that natural immunity is also at par with that from vaccines. It's brief said:
"Though rarely reported to date, reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 can occur. Four large studies from the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Denmark estimated that infection with SARS-CoV-2 provided 80-90% protection from reinfection up to 7 months, and up to 94% protection against symptomatic disease,”
Despite this, it went on to conclude:
"Available tests and current knowledge do not tell us about the duration of immunity and protection against reinfection, but recent evidence suggests that natural infection may provide similar protection against symptomatic disease as vaccination, at least for the available follow-up period.”
Dr. Sanjay wants to know that with this background, why did not WHO say that vaccines are not needed for those who had the infection already. And on 27 November 2021, it said:
“Increasing COVID-19 vaccination coverage in all eligible age groups, but particularly in the old adults, health care workers and others with high risks of severe diseases should be prioritized by public health authorities.”
Why was there no mention of natural infection and antibodies in it. Why is it aggressively promoting vaccines and giving naturally produced antibodies a step motherly treatment??? Dr. Sanjay says:
“If everybody will be vaccinated, then the evidence in favour of the superiority of natural immunity will itself disappear. That’s really unfortunate.”
Dr Amitav Banerjee, Head, Department of Community Medicine, Dr DY Patil Medical College, Pune is in agreement with Dr. Sanjay's opinion. He adds:
“Real world population studies from Israel after the rollout of vaccination has established that such naturally acquired immunity is 13 times more robust than that induced by vaccines. Translating this in practice one can say that a person who has recovered from a natural infection has already received 13 boosters! Why can’t the WHO see this and include it into its advisories?”
Dr. Amitav says:
"common sense, science and social epidemiology is being overlooked by the WHO and the global policymakers, and models based on inert numbers from the West are being projected to Asian and African countries with different transmission dynamics.”
Other expert opinions
Professor Gobardhan Das, a well-known immunologist who is associated with the Special Centre for Molecular Medicine, Jawaharlal Nehru University, states:
“It looks WHO is confused. On one side they are saying both vaccine and natural immunity provides equal protection, on the other, they are not ready to agree to consider those who recovered from infection as already immunized. In fact, real study data indicates natural infection elicits far better immune responses and protection,”
WHO is creating a panic to promote vaccines. It better stop and reevaluate to whom it should listen and what it should say rather than having a kneejerk reflex and following the vaccine manufacturers whose data would be a biased one for ulterior motives...
Reference: Outlook
Comments
Post a Comment