The end of the pandemic
Big words — but here is a possible way out, to be walked by each and everyone (as of May 02, 2021: 26 studies, 16 test results, 12 laboratories, (9 in continental europe, 3 in the UK) 37,5% of the results showing cross-immunity)
This is a translation (from german) of one out of seven articles about the problem with everything related to and caused by COVID-19 on my blog.
By now this article has ‘its own website’ (so far in german only):
Everyone is annoyed. From COVID-19, from the measures, from everything. And yet, we are (still) right in the middle of it all, the politicians outdo each other in gruesome-creepy Christmas-, Easter- and Whitsun-ruining, and there is no end in sight …
The pandemic just doesn’t want to go away — despite cross immunity
Which cross immunity?
(a detailed answer would be my article What would be the solution?
In short: The cross-immunity that you get from your children or from a ‘common winter cold’ [No — this is no denial, this is a quote from the ‘Drosten study’! — bottom last link in the below list] in the last few years! About 20% of the viruses that cause colds and mild flu are endemic corona viruses)
The immunity that, according to the studies listed below, exists in an average of just above 50% of the population, which could therefore be called herd-immunity, and which is COMPLETELY ignored by politics and the leading media in 2020:
- 39% Cross immunity
- Cross immunity in 70% of people without contact to SARS-CoV-2 (MedGenome, India and USA)
- Cross immunity in 20–50% of people without contact to SARS-CoV-2 (various universities, California, North Carolina, USA and Australia)
- Cross immunity in 81% of people without contact to SARS-CoV-2 (University of Tübingen)
- 13% cross immunity through antibodies (no longer included in the graphic above)(University College, London, England etc.)
- 51% cross immunity
(University of Singapore)
- Review article on cross immunity with 20% to 50%
(University of California, USA)
- Long-lasting T-cell cross immunity
(Karolinska University, Stockholm, Sweden)
- Cross immunity at 40–60% and wide target areas for T cell response
(Universities of California, North Carolina, etc., USA)
- Cross immunity in 35% of people without contact to SARS-CoV-2
(Max Planck Institute, Charité & TU Berlin, etc., Bernhard Nocht Institute, Hamburg, etc.)
The study results vary widely from 20% to 81%. This is not as unusual as it may seem, because there are epimiological explanations for this, see article What would be the solution?
However, I presume 80% to be the most likely value. Why? Isn’t that too optimistic? Well: 80% of those infected have no or hardly any symptoms. Why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE A WORKING IMMUNE RESPONSE!
How about a proof of your own immunity?
How would that work?
Not with a PCR test, that cannot tell whether you are currently infected or whether it was three months ago because it does not detect the virus, but rather gene sequences from it. (Apart from the twenty other problems [article in german only])
Not with an antibody test, that may not find any antibodies (IgM, IgG, IgA), as they may not have been formed at all (presumably a good, fast immune response of the T cells and / or a low viral load during the infection, or both), or disappeared already (as above or the infection was a long time ago or both).
Not with an antigene test, see PCR test, this one instead detects protein fragments and not genetic material, and is less accurate.
If you can prove cross-immunity in studies, there has to be laboratory technology for it …
Correct. There is. Assuming that the above studies are correct, such a test is worthwhile for ‘everyone’ ¹. Otherwise not, of course. (¹ = 80%)
Unlike the tests above, the immunity evidence currently² has no³ negative⁴ consequences yet⁵. Consequences like being PCR-positive or antigen-positive: the full program — quarantine, contact tracing, etc., or antibody-positive: you know you were sick once, but nothing more
( ² ³ ⁴ ⁵ it’s 2020, nobody knows what’s next)
What other consequences would the evidence of immunity have?
- You’d have a document that, if used well, should be sufficient⁶ to avoid the consequences of a positive PCR test (because of a hospital stay, or returning from a trip).
( ⁶ it’s 2020, you definitely have to try a court)
- You’d have a document which (in accordance with the current⁷ legal situation⁸ on the measles vaccination obligation in Germany) is legally⁹ identical¹⁰ to a vaccination certificate, as it proves immunity.
( ⁷ ⁸ ⁹ ¹⁰ it’s 2020, nobody knows what’s coming)
- You’d have a document which, in large, really large¹¹ numbers, should mean that politics can no longer ignore the issue of cross-immunity. And that politics could no longer reject the issue in its appearance as herd immunity as the wrong way, or as only achievable through vaccination.
( ¹¹ I mean really many!)
Not too bad for a start!
The first results
[UPDATES 30 dec 20/20 jan 21/16 feb 21/25 feb 21/10 may 21]:
By now I have seen 16 lab results, six showing cross-immunity, 10of them showing no cross-immunity (like mine below):
This sums up to 6/16 = 37,5% cross immunity with the people tested. Sample size still ‘anectdotal’.
Cross-immunity would look like this:
[UPDATE 02 APR 21]: or for real, like this:
And a gone-through SARS-CoV-2 Infection would look like this:
[UPDATE 10 may 21]:
and — with slightly different values — like these:
[UPDATES 31 jan 21/16 feb 21/02 apr 21]:
Since my own and 62,5% of the lab results I know of are ‘negative’¹, I had my own status cross-checked² with another lab technology (‘ELISpot’):
[ ¹ ‘negative’: colloquial in the sense of a) not the result I hoped for, but also b) not PCR-test-positive; ²pun intended]
[UPDATE 02 APR 21]:
Someone else, who happens to own a laboratory, has the idea of testing people for cross immunity:
Where, how, when, how expensive?
[UPDATE 10 may 21]:
The how-to now is pretty simple now. Here, on my website:
Here the others of the 22 studies I mentionned above are going to be presented and discussed.
United Kingdom 🇬🇧
Labor Dr. Dostal Wien
Information about the Test
[The laboratory does not carry out the test itself, but forwards the sample]
Costs: not provided, unknown
Lab4more Labor München 🇬🇧
Information about the Test [no Informationen provided]
Order form [PDF] (a little confusing! The test is on page 4, there is also an english form 🇬🇧 , but I haven’t found the test there)
Costs: not provided, approx. € 150
Information about the laboratories — and the fine print
Just reading the information available from the above Laboratories [some do provide english versions] you may ask yourself questions like:
- is this an LTT (lymphocyte transformation test) or an ELISpot test (enzyme-linked immuno spot test)?
- what’s the difference between the two?
- what exactly is the difference between the antibody test (and the difference between the IgA, IgG and IgM-anti-bodies?) and the new test that the laboratories carry out?
Before I try myself and make mistakes: a very good and readable explanation [again in german only, sorry] by the scientific publication Trillium Diagnostik.
So far, I have only given the contact details of five laboratories in Germany and one in Austria, as these are the only laboratories currently known to me that offer the test and describe it clearly enough. Lymphocyte-transformation-tests (amazing, which words you learn in 2020) in general are too unspecific and available for evidence of the Lyme disease. They are useless here.
To add a laboratory, please contact me via
tel: +49 3212–4882283
e-mail: klage-gegen-corona [@] email.de
NOTE (also to the trolls and [immune-system-]haters): of course I cannot be reached directly! The phone number only accepts voice messages. I will check them and the emails regularly (to be on the safe side with my finger on the delete key) and I will most likely not report back.