Only 30 Vermonters re-infected with symptomatic Covid

By Guy Page

About 30 Vermonters who contracted symptomatic Covid-19 symptoms have recovered and then suffered a second bout of symptomatic Covid-19, Health Commissioner Mark Levine said Tuesday.

To date, the total number of confirmed and probable cases of Covid-19 is 37,775. Using Levine’s figure of 30, less than 1 in 1,000 Vermonters with at least natural immunity have suffered symptomatic reinfection. By contrast, vaccine immunity has shown a higher rate of infection. To date there have been 134 hospitalizations and 59 deaths among the 4,881 cases of vaccine breakthrough since Jan. 1, 2021.

A 0.0008 natural immunity current Vermont reinfection rate cannot be positively claimed because it is not known how many of the 30 re-infected, naturally-immune Vermonters also may have been vaccinated.

state of Vermont

Vermont Health Commissioner Dr. Mark Levine

The question of likelihood of reinfection has become important as people who have already had Covid-19 argue their naturally-acquired immunity should exempt them from mandatory vaccination. The CDC claims that among Covid survivors, the unvaccinated are more than twice as likely to contract Covid again, based on a Kentucky study. Natural immunity supporters say it is sufficient and point to the vaccine’s adverse effects, as noted in the VAERS data.

At Tuesday’s press conference, Vermont Daily Chronicle asked Health Commissioner Mark Levine about Vermont’s experience with Covid-19 re-infection.

Vermont Daily Chronicle: How many instances have there been of a Vermonter having full-blown highly symptomatic Covid, recovering, and then at a later date redeveloping full-blown highly symptomatic Covid?

Dr. Mark Levine: What you’re referring to is called reinfection — someone who at one point in time has an infection, well over three months go by, and suddenly they present with a similar infection.

So let me tell you about the challenges of measuring it. First because the way you accurately measure it is to know the genetic sequence of the original virus, and then the genetic sequence of what came next – to see if it’s the same virus or if it’s a different genetic sequencing. We only have that data for the most recent part of the pandemic, because states haven’t been doing whole genome sequencing for more than several months, like since the summer time.

So I don’t have the precise number today. But the last time we reported on this number and looked at it, it was under 30. So under 30 cases, and I think we’re talking now 35,000 cases of Covid over time. So, very small number.

So, it is known that it can happen, this phenomenon of reinfection. But again, at least during the current pandemic, it doesn’t appear to be that common an event.

Chronicle: Just to clarify, are we talking about people who were really sick — I mean not just “tested positive” but didn’t have symptoms, therefore maybe bringing into doubt the testing, but people who were really sick both times?

Levine: I don’t think I’d have to qualify it with the word really sick, I would just say symptomatic because I don’t have a handle on every case. But the reason they got tested most likely was because they had symptoms on both occasions, but hard to tell you they were really sick.

Guy Page is publisher of the Vermont Daily Chronicle. Reprinted with permission.

Images courtesy of Pathnostics and state of Vermont
Spread the love

3 thoughts on “Only 30 Vermonters re-infected with symptomatic Covid

  1. Here’s another question for Dr. Levine:

    The CDC and FDA are recommending against the use of ivermectin for Covid-19, and Dr. Levine has said that ivermectin is “off the table.”

    However, in light of substantial evidence of safety and efficacy for this drug in early treatment of Covid-19, as given by the FLCCC group and as found by clinicians such as this doctor https://www.rokfin.com/stream/9390/Covid-ICU-Doctor-Quits-Over-Vaccine-Mandate (at the 10-minute mark in the interview) who states that any doctor will find similar positive results after the first ten patients, and in light of the fact that the very basis for science is not to accept authority but to test and experiment, and in light of the fact that the protocols used for early treatment are extremely safe, and in light of the fact that many doctors are actually using ivermectin and other safe treatments with good results, has Dr. Levine asked any physicians to test any version of widely-used (‘off-label’) early treatment protocols for Covid-19 to determine if something like the FLCCC protocol is valid, or is Dr. Levine simply taking the CDC and FDA on faith, in spite of the fact that numerous physicians are reporting excellent results with early treatment and this treatment could potentially save many lives? Other than going against the wishes and inclinations of the CDC and Dr. Fauci, would there be any reason not to ask physicians to try early treatment?

    Alternatively, we might simply ask Dr. Levine if he has canvassed Vermont doctors for early treatment protocols and results, since surely at least a few doctors are using early treatment for Covid-19, and has he made any attempt to determine if early treatment is a viable option for treating Covid-19, as numerous physicians across the country believe it is?

    In the above considerations, it should be noted that the question isn’t whether early treatment works in theory, or is approved, or which agencies bless early treatment (or not) or which papers say it works and which not-so-much, but the central question is, in actual clinical practice, are doctors finding that it works? If doctors are finding that it works, isn’t it common sense that “what works” trumps whatever anyone says about what works or what doesn’t work, even if those who say it doesn’t work are federal agencies?

    Or, is the above asking for too much plain common sense?

    • Correction: the FDA isn’t recommending against ivermectin; it has taken a neutral stance:

      “There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.” https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/

      So testing this drug that so many physicians say have helped their patients shouldn’t be off the table at all, and in fact we all know where there’s tons of evidence that the FDA and CDC have so far turned a blind eye toward: the FLCCC group website.

  2. Have been out straight with work so haven’t had time to to say welcome back. Many thanks for your interviews and reporting here on TNR – missed ya Guy – glad to see you back 😀

Comments are closed.