What if we don’t need a vaccine for COVID-19?  All the experts have told us repeatedly that the only way to stop the spread of COVID is the development of a vaccine.  What if they were wrong?  Let me show you why we may not need a vaccine to get rid of COVID.

We must begin by explaining the purpose of the vaccine.  Here is an image from the CDC, Understanding How Vaccines Work.  It is a good read but I will give you a few highlights.

The vaccine will provide immunity to the virus.  But vaccines are not the only way to develop immunity.  This section, about how the body naturally completes the same process, is from the same CDC report.

The second way to build immunity is to become infected and recover.  Your body fights off the virus and develops the ability to fight the virus in the future.  So, there are two methods for an individual to develop immunity to a virus, infection recovery or vaccine. 

Next, instead of just considering immunity individually, we can look at virus spread from a macro view and discuss herd immunity.  The herd immunity concept is pretty simple.  If enough people become immune to a virus, it is unable to spread within the “herd.”  People with immunity become a BRAKE on infection because it cannot use them to spread to others.

Now, determining the threshold for herd immunity is not a simple process.  It is very convoluted, involves a lot of math, and different methods will give you different answers.  In the end, it is not a precise number; it is an estimate based upon the information at hand and the method used.

When COVID first began circulating, the typically accepted number for herd immunity was 60%.  60% of the population needed to be immune before the infection would lose the ability to spread.  At this point in time, that number has proven to be highly inaccurate.  If you want to read it, here is one thorough explanation about why the herd immunity number may be between 10-20%. 

You do not need to understand all of that science and math to see that the herd immunity percentage is not near 60%.  I can show you why the lower number is more likely to be correct with a bit of observation and a lot less math. 

We can begin by discussing one of the worst outbreak areas in the United States.  New York was the first big hot spot in the United States.  The infections rose at an alarming rate in New York, and especially in New York City.  Let’s look at a chart of the number of new COVID infections in New York over time.  The chart is provided by coronavirusbellcurve.com with data from Johns Hopkins.

And here is the chart of COVID deaths in New York. 

Both charts have that distinctive pattern.  Now, many people will tell you that the lockdowns are what stopped COVID from spreading and killing people in New York.  But I can show you why that is incorrect. 

Let’s begin with an extensive antibody study completed in New York back in April.  They tested large samplings of people for COVID fighting antibodies.  As we discussed above, you develop the antibodies by becoming infected and recovering.  The results of this study were stunning.  In New York City, over 20% of individuals had antibodies, and the number statewide in New York was 13.9%. 

Now, if you look back at the charts above, the number of new infections and deaths from COVID both declined to a very low level in New York.  There are two possible causes for this.

1. New York implemented lockdowns and a mask mandate and these measures acted as a brake on the spread of COVID.  Or,
2. New York reached the herd immunity threshold which acted as a brake on the spread of COVID.

By April, approximately 13.9% of New York State individuals had contracted COVID, recovered, and developed antibodies.  That falls right in line with the 10-20% needed for herd immunity suggested in the article above.  Think about that.  If that number (10-20%) is correct, it was herd immunity, not lockdowns, that stopped COVID from spreading in New York State.  If correct, the lockdowns accomplished nothing.  Well, except for causing additional damage.

So, how can we determine whether it was the lockdowns, or immunity, that was the brake on infection?  Well, we need a control group.  We need another location that we can use to compare to New York.  We need somewhere that had a significant outbreak like New York, but did not utilize a lockdown to “stop the spread.”  We can then compare results to see if there is a difference. 

But that is a challenging task.  You see, lockdowns were promoted very aggressively within political and media circles, so very few governments resisted that pressure.

Most countries gave in to that pressure and implemented lockdowns.  Here are two countries in Europe that had significant COVID outbreaks, implemented lockdowns, and had similar results to New York.  The following chart is the 7-day rolling average of daily deaths in Italy and the United Kingdom.  The chart is from ourworldindata.com.

Notice how similar those two charts are to the ones from New York.  And remember, the “experts” will tell you that the lockdowns stopped the spread in all three of these areas.  But are they correct? 

What about that control group?  What about a country that had a significant outbreak, but did not implement a lockdown?  Would they still be able to get the infection under control without lockdowns, or would it just continue to spread?

The following is the chart for Sweden.  Sweden did not lockdown.  They did not close all their schools.  They did not close restaurants, bars, or even nightclubs.  They kept gyms, hair salons, and most everything else open.  They did not restrict travel into the country.  They only limited gatherings to 50 people at a time.  And at this point, they are not even recommending mask use.  So, what happened?  Let’s look at the chart.

Does that look familiar?

How about all three of these European countries on one chart. 

Notice how the pattern is the same in all three countries and is the same in New York.

The four locations, New York, Italy, UK, and Sweden, all had significant outbreaks, and their charts look incredibly similar.  However, there is one giant difference.  Sweden did not utilize a lockdown.  But somehow, they had the same results.

The only honest conclusion is that the lockdowns and restrictions were not the brake on infection; it was the number of people with immunity.  Once enough people have immunity, the spread of infection will slow regardless of a lockdown, masks, or whatever.  To stop the spread, you must have spread.  There is no way 60% is correct for herd immunity against COVID because none of these countries are anywhere close to that number.

Now, this brings us back to the question of needing vaccines.  To stop a virus from spreading, we need enough people to be immune.  If that happens, the virus can simply disappear.  Now, is there any reason to think that this could happen with COVID without a vaccine?  Well, absolutely!

To explain how this could happen, we have to go back almost 20 years.  We all know this current virus as COVID-19, but it is more precisely SARS-CoV-2.  It has a cousin, SARS-CoV-1.  That coronavirus was the SARS outbreak from 2002.  If there is any virus similar to COVID, it is SARS.

Let me know if any of this sounds familiar.  This information is from the CDC regarding the SARS outbreak.

In November of 2002, there was a report of atypical pneumonia in China.

By February of 2003, there were reports of the virus coming from other countries in Asia.

As of March 17^th, there were 14 suspected cases in the US.

Doesn’t that seem extremely familiar?

SARS continued to spread around the world, and a lot of people died.  Although not anywhere close to as many with COVID.

Now, do you remember what happened with SARS-CoV-1? 

Well, it disappeared.  Yes, it just disappeared.

Don’t get to excited.  SARS-CoV-2, our COVID, is way more contagious than its cousin based upon the number of people infected.  Any theory that COVID would die as quickly as SARS would be unfounded.  However, does that mean that COVID will not just go away like SARS?  Absolutely not, COVID could just disappear, with or without a vaccine.

Let’s look at what is currently happening in the United States to show you how we may already be moving in that direction.  We instituted lockdowns in a majority of the country and have been opening back up over the last months.  My argument since March has been that lockdowns would not stop or reduce the number of COVID infections or deaths; they just delayed them.  The data is now backing that assertion up.  (Please read my recent article if you are not aware).  

Now, despite all the opening up.  Despite much of the country returning kids to school, and many colleges opening, the number of new infections continues to decline.  On September 7^th and 8^th, we had the lowest number of new daily infections in almost three months.  Here is the chart of new daily infections in the United States. 

Why are infections decreasing?  Shouldn’t infections be increasing with all the increased activity?  Well, no, not exactly.  You see, the number of people with immunity is also increasing, and that is creating a brake on infection spread.  You need spread to stop the spread.  As more people become immune by recovering from an infection, the virus loses its ability to spread.

Let’s look at some more data. 

Remember all the “experts” telling us that Arizona was going to kill us all by being so irresponsible, opening up and reducing restrictions.  Let’s look at their current chart. 

Hmmm, it seems that the same pattern we saw above in New York, Italy, UK, and Sweden took place in Arizona.  Most importantly, it looks like they now have a handle on the infection spread.  They ended their lockdown, reduced restrictions, and the infections are disappearing.  COVID is no longer increasing in Arizona; it is under control.  They have stopped the spread by having spread.

And Florida, remember the Chicken Little claims about how everyone was going to die?  And, how their poor decisions would lead to the rest of us dying?  Here is their current chart.

Seem familiar?  Does that graph seem like the ones from New York, Italy, UK, and Sweden? 

Again, Florida has gotten control of infection spread by removing the lockdowns and restrictions.  The virus is disappearing in Florida despite all the doom and gloom predictions.  Ask yourself why?  You have to have spread to stop spread.

And even now, the current Chicken Little claim is that college kids are going to kill us all.  But maybe, and I am just spitballing here, those college kids will move us closer to the objective of ending this virus.  Maybe they will help it disappear?  If at this point you are still listening to chicken little “experts” instead of examining the actual data right in front of your eyes, you need to ask yourself why.  The experts and their predictions have been wrong, over and over.  Their exaggerations have missed the mark repeatedly.

Despite all the doom and gloom, and attempts to terrify us all, the data is continuing to show that we are much closer to herd immunity than we are to the apocalypse.  And if we reach that level, this virus could disappear, just like its cousin did.  

The data tells the tale.  COVID is slowly going away.  Will it go away completely?  No one knows.  But, there is a reasonable chance that it merely dies off.  The real question is if that will happen quickly or slowly.

I ask again, what if we do not need a vaccine for COVID?

COVID is a bad virus.  But the COVID Boogie Man is a mythical monster created by green journalist and opportunistic politicians.  At some point, the data will reveal the truth. 

If you want more information about how we were all misled, about how the COVID Boogie Man came to be, please read and then share my book, The Fear-19 Pandemic.  There are reviews and a free sample available on Amazon.

Maybe most importantly, share this article.  At some point, people need to understand the difference between COVID and the COVID Boogie Man.