Open Letter Query to CDC:
Why Not Lift Restrictions on Those Who Already Had COVID-19, Parallel to Those Fully Vaccinated?
[Note: Change Links advises considering all material regarding COVID with a healthy dose of skepticism, but the questions raised here about why those who have contracted and recovered from COVID are not getting the same access as those who are fully vaccinated seems like a valid one on its merits. It is not tied up with denialism of COVID or of the efficacy of the vaccines, masking or socially-responsible physical distancing to prevent transmission, though some other material from the Informed Consent Action Network does dip into those waters.]
October 21, 2021
Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Royal Bldg. 21, Rm 12000, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA 30333
Ms. Sandra Cashman, Executive Secretary, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Royal Bldg. 21, Rm 10230, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA 30333
RE: US Dept Of Health and Human Services and the Centers For Disease Control And Prevention Reply Regarding Citizen Petition To Lift Restrictions On The Naturally Immune To The Extent Lifted On The Vaccinated
Dear Dr. Walensky and Ms. Cashman,
Thank you for your response on September 17, 2021 to the petition filed on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network (“Petitioner”), dated July 6, 2021. A copy of the petition, and the addendum, are appended as Appendix A (the “Petition”). A copy of your response is appended as Appendix B.
While your response is appreciated, it does not address any of the over 50 studies cited in the Petition which reflect that those previously infected with COVID-19 (the “naturally immune”) have superior protection from becoming infected with and transmitting SARS-CoV-2 than those vaccinated for COVID-19 (the “vaccine immune”). Critically:
- Your response does not contest any of the studies cited and data which collectively reviewed hundreds of thousands of naturally immune versus vaccine immune individuals and found that the rate of infection among the naturally immune (“reinfections”) is far lower than the rate among the vaccinated (“breakthrough cases”). (Infra § I.)
- Your response does not contest that, despite a world-wide hunt, there has never been a single documented case of reinfection resulting in further transmission, while, in contrast, there are numerous documented cases of breakthrough cases resulting in further transmission. (Infra § II.)
- Your response does not contest any of the studies and data cited which reflect that, consistent with the foregoing real-word data, the naturally immune have more robust and durable T cell and B cell immunity. (Infra § III.)
These three facts alone should suffice to lift restrictions on those naturally immune at least to the same extent as those vaccine immune.
The failure to do so is causing an incredible level of reputational harm to the CDC. It is the primary reason that national news outlets, with distribution to a majority of Americans, have regularly described the CDC as anti-science, political hacks, and far worse.
That in turn causes a loss of confidence in the CDC’s other important efforts that are unrelated to COVID-19. This loss of confidence is especially true for the science literate who, for example, can easily review the UK’s official government COVID-19 data from the past 7 months which reflects a probable reinfection rate of 0.025% (and a confirmed reinfection rate of 0.0026%) but a breakthrough rate of 23% of all Delta cases.
It is also true for those who, if nothing else, watched Dr. Walensky on national television state that the vaccinated should wear masks because “what [the COVID-19 vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”
While admitting this fact, the CDC continues to pretend that the human immune system has nothing to offer in terms of protection from the virus without a vaccine.
