COVID Developments and News

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

https://www.chop.edu/centers-program...tem-and-health

"It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines"

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....24.21262415v1

"Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...nes/facts.html

"When an immune response begins, antibodies are produced, creating the same response that happens in a natural infection."

https://www.science.org/content/arti...-remains-vital

"The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine" " It’s the largest real-world observational study so far to compare natural and vaccine-induced immunity to SARS-CoV-2, according to its leaders." “It’s a textbook example of how natural immunity is really better than vaccination,”

Cherry picking quotes at it's finest. The articles go on to explain all the benefits of vaccines.

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Cherry picking quotes at it's finest. The articles go on to explain all the benefits of vaccines.

Not really, only the CDC tries to make the vaccine sounds as good or better, but its funny they even state its at least the essentially same.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

Not really, only the CDC tries to make the vaccine sounds as good or better, but its funny they even state its at least the essentially same.

But, in the end, I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

[MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires]

Originally Posted by wbradley

IF it was unequivocally agreed that natural immunity is stronger against the delta variant, would that not still make mass vaccination the best and quickest way out of the pandemic with the least casualties?

My point is, why criticize our best option?

because antivaxx people are nuts


as an aside, its hard to overstate the extent of the damage done by Andrew Wakefield since he pulled his stunt with MMR vaccine in the late 90s. world class piece of shit.

[MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

https://www.chop.edu/centers-program...tem-and-health

"It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines"

man it just so weird that you omitted this, which directly follows that excerpted text:

• The price paid for immunity after natural infection might be pneumonia from chickenpox, intellectual disability from Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), pneumonia from pneumococcus, birth defects from rubella, liver cancer from hepatitis B virus, or death from measles.
• Immunization with vaccines, like natural infections, typically induces long-lived immunity. But unlike natural infection, immunization does not extract such a high price for immunity; that is, immunization does not cause pneumonia, intellectual disability, birth defects, cancer or death.

At best your use of selective quotes is merely dishonest but taken in context with the rest of your posting history it's just more stupid antivax propaganda.

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

It's also true that the vaccine has almost 0% risk of putting you in the hospital, or killing you, or giving you long-term respiratory issues, or infecting your family or....

Seems like a good trade-off to me.

according to the CDC, that is not true.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...se-events.html

and when you factor in what is the odds of getting covid and then the odds of having complication if you get covid?

in 1.5yrs USA has about 41m cases or 12.5% of USA population.
If 100% of people get the vaccine that would be 8x the "Exposer" to the vaccine vs covid virus, so the risk would need to be 8x lower to be a wash. obviously this has a million variables and isn't the best direct comparison and timelines being a factor etc...

but if you are 100% guaranteed to get something with a .1% chance of complication, or a 10% chance of getting something with a 1% chance of complication the odds of having complications are the same. but if you are already exposed to one of those why add in the other exposer unnecessarily?

but the points of those sources and excerpts from previous post was that natural immunity is most likely as good if not better than vaccinated immunity, so if you have already gotten covid (41m cases USA) then why get vaccinated if you are as well protected if not better protected than anyone else who has acquired immunity from vaccination? or how about do an antibody test and if you are at a certain level of antibodies you do not need the vaccine?

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires

man it just so weird that you omitted this, which directly follows that excerpted text:

• The price paid for immunity after natural infection might be pneumonia from chickenpox, intellectual disability from Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), pneumonia from pneumococcus, birth defects from rubella, liver cancer from hepatitis B virus, or death from measles.
• Immunization with vaccines, like natural infections, typically induces long-lived immunity. But unlike natural infection, immunization does not extract such a high price for immunity; that is, immunization does not cause pneumonia, intellectual disability, birth defects, cancer or death.

At best your use of selective quotes is merely dishonest but taken in context with the rest of your posting history it's just more stupid antivax propaganda.

What relevance does that play? Did I suggest or mention intentionally getting Covid to acquire immunity? no, so that is all irrelevant. See post / points above. but cliff notes, If you already had covid and have natural immunity what is the point of the vaccine for that individual?

[MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires]

keep going with the bad faith arguments, very compelling

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I think its perfectly acceptable to have the "vaccine or tested weekly option". I also think it is reasonable to have the employee pay for their own tests.

I can't support this. Requiring weekly tests just means you find out someone's positive AFTER they've caused breakthrough infections in some of their coworkers.

Nope.

Maybe it would be acceptable if they paid for their own tests, the tests of anybody else in the office who started feeling unwell after contact with them and for the medical treatment of anyone in the office who contracts the disease.

Oh, and I almost forgot, it seems to me that given what we know about the virus, it is grossly negligent to willfully go out in public unvaccinated - so treble civil damages for any expenses and inconvenience their victims incur.

Naahhhh. Get vaccinated or go straight to Devil's Island.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

according to the CDC, that is not true.

I did say "near zero" which pretty much is what the CDC site says.

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

If you already had covid and have natural immunity what is the point of the vaccine for that individual?

I don't necessarily disagree with this. Typically we've treated diseases where you develop immunity from further infection this way.

I had Chicken Pox as a child so never received the vaccine for it. There is a small chance (just like with COVID-19) that you can have a secondary Chicken Pox infection with or without the vaccine, but it is relatively rare.

COVID does seem to have a much more likely secondary infection (I personally know two persons that had COVID twice, and one that had a mild case even though vaccinated).

[MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I did say "near zero" which pretty much is what the CDC site says.



I don't necessary disagree with this. Typically we've treated diseases where you develop immunity from further infection this way.

I had Chicken Pox as a child so never received the vaccine for it. There is a small chance (just like with COVID-19) that you can have a secondary Chicken Pox infection with or without the vaccine, but it is relatively rare.

COVID does seem to have a much more likely secondary infection (I personally know two persons that had COVID twice, and one that had a mild case even though vaccinated).

also worth remembering that childhood chickenpox also gives you significantly higher chance of shingles in later life

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by MyHybridBurnsGasAndTires

also worth remembering that childhood chickenpox also gives you significantly higher chance of shingles in later life

Yep, I did get that vaccine.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

What relevance does that play? Did I suggest or mention intentionally getting Covid to acquire immunity? no, so that is all irrelevant. See post / points above. but cliff notes, If you already had covid and have natural immunity what is the point of the vaccine for that individual?

A booster. Some people got COVID in 2020 and may not have lasting immunity. We have had many cases of people getting COVID twice. Some nurses too. If someone could demonstrate they have robust immunity through a positive antibody test or provides a copy of their PCR results showing they were positive within a certain window like maybe within six months then I’m fine with them not getting a vaccine. They would need to eventually retest in the future and get a booster if they lost immunity.

Like the article says, getting a vaccine would be that much better for their immunity than just relying on immunity from exposure.

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I did say "near zero" which pretty much is what the CDC site says.



I don't necessarily disagree with this. Typically we've treated diseases where you develop immunity from further infection this way.

I had Chicken Pox as a child so never received the vaccine for it. There is a small chance (just like with COVID-19) that you can have a secondary Chicken Pox infection with or without the vaccine, but it is relatively rare.

COVID does seem to have a much more likely secondary infection (I personally know two persons that had COVID twice, and one that had a mild case even though vaccinated).

Maybe we can find common ground on that, antibody testing to allow vaccine exemption?

You did say near zero, and it is near zero percent, but that is why I included exposure rate. since one would be drastically higher if it was 100% vaccination rate.


and if you included serious short term effects from vaccine it seems that is a much higher rate especially after 2nd shot.

I know several people that got covid after vaccination. In fact probably an equal number of people who got it after vaccination vs who weren't vaccination. and the outcome short and long term has been relatively the same for both groups, but that's just anecdotal obviously.

A common reoccurring sentiment I have heard over and over (again anecdotal) is after the 2nd shot that is the sickest I have ever been in my entire life. or last time I was this sick was back in 2002 when I had a serious case of the flu that knocked me out for over a week. The number of people I know that had serious short term Covid complications isn't even close to the number who had serious short term complications from the vaccine.

PS: I have encouraged anyone who wants to get the vaccine to get it, or anyone who is high risk group to look into getting it. by no means an anti vaxxer (which of whom rarely exists) anyone who is anti mandate is just labeled an anti vaxxer even if they support peoples rights to get the vaccine and support getting any vaccine in general. but if you have any alternative view that isn't the main stream view you are told to have in regards to covid/vaccine you are now a crazy conspiracist anti vaxxer.