Former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has revealed that she has opted not to get the COVID-19 vaccine, having already tested positive for and recovered from the virus earlier this year.
Palin was a guest on Fox News’ late-night show “Gutfeld!” on Thursday where she explained to host Greg Gutfeld and his other guests why she has not gotten yet gotten the vaccine. It’s because of — and not in spite of — the science.
“I believe in the science and I have not taken the shot,” Palin explained, as the program’s guests discussed recent comments from the ever-unifying Don Lemon of CNN, who recently said it’s time to “shun” and “start shaming” the “stupid” people who have yet to get vaccinated.
“One, because the waitress never came back to ask me if I’m ready for that shot,” Palin joked. “But two, because I do believe in science and the Fauci-ism of the day back then was, if you’ve had COVID—I’ve had COVID—well then, Mother Nature was creating an immunity.”
While Newsweek reported that it “wasn’t clear exactly which comments” Palin was referring to, Dr. Anthony Fauci — director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases as well as the nation’s de facto coronavirus czar — did say in spring of 2020, long before a vaccine was even developed, much less available, that he’d be “willing to bet anything that people who recover are really protected against re-infection,” as Business Insider reported at the time.
Palin continued, “And even today, they say you’re 27 percent more immune —”
At this point, Dr. Drew Pinsky, who is, in fact, a medical doctor, jumped in to correct her, saying, “Twenty-seven times.”
“Yeah, OK, 27 times,” Palin continued. “So I want to ask the questions.”
Sarah Palin announces she is unvaccinated pic.twitter.com/yJTsk4dnNC
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 17, 2021
The research she and Pinksy were referencing, which The Hill noted has yet to be peer-reviewed, is an Israeli study conducted among 700,000 people which showed that those who had already recovered from COVID-19 were 27 times less likely to become re-infected, according to Newsweek.
On Sept. 10, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was asked about the study and eloquently declared, “I don’t have a really firm answer for you on that.”
“That’s something that we’re going to have to discuss regarding the durability of the response,” he continued, as reported by Reuters. “The one thing the paper from Israel didn’t tell you is whether or not as high as the protection is with natural infection, what’s the durability compared to the durability of the vaccine.
“So it is conceivable that you got infected, you’re protected, but you may not be protected for an indefinite amount of time,” Fauci said. “So, I think that is something that we need to sit down and discuss seriously because you very appropriately pointed out, it is an issue and there could be an argument saying what you said.”
Yet the discussion has been rather one-sided, hasn’t it?
While the Israeli study can certainly be taken with a grain of salt, it is both common sense and common knowledge that having recovered from a virus will equip humans with antibodies that can help ward off the virus in the future.
Before vaccination against chickenpox was widespread, for instance, contracting the virus was a normal part of childhood and it was commonly understood that, once children recovered from the disease, they could enjoy lifetime immunity.
The COVID-19 virus and subsequent vaccination against it are both still very, very new, and although Fauci has been elevated to the status of pandemic god for political reasons, he has undoubtedly told us many different and often conflicting things about the virus and measures that he thinks ought to be taken to treat and prevent it.
So it’s not surprising he’s waffling on the issue of natural immunity.
All personal criticism of Fauci and his agenda aside, this is at least in part because the virus is new and the supposedly infallible “science” is still being conducted. Fauci is not an infallible master of viruses, he’s the top White House coronavirus medical adviser and touting any evidence that natural immunity could be beneficial could interfere with the government’s efforts to vaccinate the vast majority of the U.S. population.
Yet all this does reveal that the natural immunity question is one that every sensible person has a right to consider, and Fauci is unable to solidly refute speculation that natural immunity could be enough.
Americans, like Palin, have a right to examine said science and make choices for themselves as to whether or not they believe it is expedient or desirable to take the vaccine. Since so many of Fauci’s predictions and declarations have proven themselves to be less than sound (at best), there’s a good chance he could end up being wrong about the efficacy of the vaccine, too, especially as it compares to natural immunity.
So Palin is absolutely right — we do not need to be shamed and shunned for our personal choices, we should shamelessly and sensibly own them, as she has done.