No menu items!

Harvard epidemiologist says new scientific findings make Covid vaccination passports both incorrect and discriminatory

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff said research showing that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means that vaccine passports are unscientific and discriminatory because they disproportionately affect working-class people.

“Previous Covid disease (lots of working-class) provides better immunity than vaccines (lots of professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical,” observed Kulldorff, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, on Twitter.

Different studies, including one from Israel, show that natural immunity – gained by having had Covid-19 – offers better protection against a recurrence than vaccines.

Moreover, CDC’s own research shows that vaccinated people still get infected with Covid-19 and carry viral loads like unvaccinated people. These vaccines are either Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines such as Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or Vector vaccines such as Janssen/Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines.

“The high viral loads suggest an increased risk of transmission and raised concerns that, unlike other variants, vaccinated persons infected with Delta can transmit the virus,” said Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC.

These data suggest that vaccinated people still spread the virus in much the same way as unvaccinated people. So what is the point of using vaccine passports?

Vaccine passports are considered by some as immoral and a massive government overreach even in the absence of these findings. There is no historical parallel for governments to restrict the movements of healthy people for a respiratory virus in this way.

Moreover, the authorities’ justification for vaccine passports becomes scientifically incorrect in light of these new revelations.

Check out our other content