To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

[Mofro261]

What are you talking about? I've been describing the UK data for months. When I ask are you capable of learning, what I mean is all your questions have been answered. And even after you get your answer you show up the next day and ask them all over again. Why is that?

He's guilty of propagating misinformation that is leading to people dying while trying to grasp at any alternative to getting vaccinated.

Skiborg= an accomplice to murder.

[Adolf Allerbush]

That's a different study. People are well protected after natural infection but there tends to be more variability with that protection vs full vaccination. The problem with yesterday's Israel study is its flawed conclusion natural infection is better.

I thought he was talking about the UK study, not the Israeli study? Yeah, I'm not claiming natural infection doesn't provide protection.

[jackattack]

He's guilty of propagating misinformation that is leading to people dying while trying to grasp at any alternative to getting vaccinated.

Skiborg= an accomplice to murder.

Without peer review, this conclusion is no less valid than all of skidumb’s pre-prints.

[SorryBro]

He's guilty of propagating misinformation that is leading to people dying while trying to grasp at any alternative to getting vaccinated.

Skiborg= an accomplice to murder.

Truth. It's sad that these "just asking questions" people don't care that they are hurting people.

[Skidog]

He's guilty of propagating misinformation that is leading to people dying while trying to grasp at any alternative to getting vaccinated.

Skiborg= an accomplice to murder.

nope...not even close...man did you graduate grade school...you cant even read I dont believe. never spread ANY misinformation... FIND IT ILL OWN IT....

[Skidog]

Truth. It's sad that these "just asking questions" people don't care that they are hurting people.

Im hurting nobody...im FULLY VAXXED...50 so no booster for me yet...and I am moderna so i guess im maybe I am killing people because I cant get a booster? Somehow they arent FDA approved at all yet...better lock myself in my house...

just keep ignoring prior infection immunity doesnt exist at all...you all know better than those silly Dr's saying that..

[MultiVerse]

Still no one addressing the actual results of the UK study..just picking and choosing pieces to argue...

Just ignore it...it'll go away...unlike me.

Why do you keep lying about everything? The conclusion in your article were not only discussed yesterday, they were also discussed here months ago:

"New research has found that people who have had COVID-19 and also received both doses of the Pfizer, Moderna, or AstraZeneca vaccines had higher levels of antibodies than people who had only acquired the virus or only been vaccinated."

Even though your article describes "new research," the results aren't new and you've yet to bring anything new to the discussion.

[Skidog]

Why do you keep lying about everything? The conclusion in your article were not only discussed yesterday, they also were discussed months ago:

"New research has found that people who have had COVID-19 and also received both doses of the Pfizer, Moderna, or AstraZeneca vaccines had higher levels of antibodies than people who had only acquired the virus or only been vaccinated."

HIGHER LEVELS...that doesnt refute shit....

What level is ACCEPTABLE...not higher? any idiot gets that if you were infected AND get the vax you have more antibodies..is prior infection ENOUGH? That is the question. There are quite a few places looking at it...Peer review takes time..just like FDA approval. Its doesnt completely discount the study findings.

Wasn't it argued by the great MU yesterday that antibodies alone arent the only indicator? So pick and choose when you want to use "antibodies" as your argument cause you know.. "get the shot" (which i did)

[frorider]

maybe you grossly overestimate your competence and how much people actually cared? Nah, never happen on the tgr.

Unless of course the press criticized you for holding a coffee cup, choice of suit color, or something similar. Then, my bad, you right.

Obviously the stakes were lower — it was a global corporation role not a saving lives role. But yeah it was something where a screw up could affect things like stock price. BTW we all know the TRG spraying meme…I don’t think I’ve nudged near that in 17 yrs here. In this thread though I had to explain why I felt that dude fucked up & my background for making a harsh judgement.

As a scientist of course I know the messy process by which the facts and conclusions evolve over time, and i agree it’s sad that the dumbass brigade choking America don’t get that, but nonetheless public speakers in the covid spotlight should be held to the same standard as any speaker in a sensitive role.

[MultiVerse]

HIGHER LEVELS...that doesnt refute shit....

What level is ACCEPTABLE...not higher? any idiot gets that if you were infected AND get the vax you have more antibodies..is prior infection ENOUGH? That is the question. There are quite a few places looking at it...Peer review takes time..just like FDA approval. Its doesnt completely discount the study findings.

Wasn't it argued by the great MU yesterday that antibodies alone arent the only indicator? So pick and choose when you want to use "antibodies" as your argument cause you know.. "get the shot" (which i did)

Again, what are you talking about? That's a direct quote from your own article. Have you considered the possibility you're simply incapable of understanding any of this, that it's beyond your intellectual capacity?

[MagnificentUnicorn]

just this particular vaccine. I don’t see a difference between this and the flu for a person in my current situation (had Covid, still had antibodies as of 2 months ago). Everyone can say whatever they want about it being tried and tested and true but those same people would never go out and buy a 1st year overhaul redesigned vehicle because you don’t know the long term effects. Granted we don’t know the long term effects of Covid either but it appears to mutate at a rate much like the seasonal flu (every year there’s a different variety that needs a new booster shot).

if you’re old, immuno-compromised, high risk/whatever else - by all means, go and protect yourself. I don’t see it as necessary for myself. However, when you start to bar those people in the same spot as me from participating in society, that’s where I start to have a problem. I’m not out running around spreading misinformation or saying it’s a democrat conspiracy; I just don’t think it’s a necessary risk due to already having antibodies. And now, I’m not going to be allowed to have a job because I won’t get a “life-saving vaccine” that needs a booster every year? I wasn’t stopped from having a job before for not having a flu vaccine… where does it stop?

I’d be willing to guess the people in the “know” on here are all 50+ and love telling the younger population how much better the good old day were when everyone just shut up and did their duty

It’s not the flu. It’s a novel coronavirus that’s killing a couple thousand people a day and creating life long disabilities in many thousands more that survive severe infection. This now includes a lot of people your age(30 something?) with no real comorbidities. We do know the long term consequences of severe Covid infection, the pulmonary fibrosis that you develop won’t heal, the damage to your kidneys will leave you with reduced renal function and possibly require dialysis. Your kidneys won’t heal after this. We know this because of past experience with damage like this from other causes. It’s real, the science is solid.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SumJongGuy]

Folks, there's an ignore feature available if you can't help but responding again to the same lame, rehashed, totally debunked reservations from the same ignorant or intentionally obtuse individuals..

[MagnificentUnicorn]

that quote is, its the study that is yet to be peer reviewed. I thought you understood this stuff? I fucking know its that Drs opinion....what makes his opinion any less relavent? He studied the shit?

As for the UK study itself I hope the peer reviews do come out as the study claims. I just don't think we can totally discount prior infection immunity. I don't know why you folks choose to ignore it completely.

He recommends getting the vaccine in the paragraph below the quote. I understand this stuff, your attempts at obfuscation are those of a simpleton.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jackattack]

Again, what are you talking about? That's a direct quote from your own article. Have you considered the possibility you're simply incapable of understanding any of this, that it's beyond your intellectual capacity?

He has not.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

my company is already under 100, luckily, and the owner is also foreign (Australian). We’ve already been told we’re not requiring the vaccine, so I don’t really have anything to worry about. You know, unless I want to go to the grocery store or local hardware shop and don’t have my vaccine passport handy.

Maybe it’s time to grow up and join society, none of us are as special as you think you are.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MontuckyFried]

Why do you keep lying about everything? The conclusion in your article were not only discussed yesterday, they were also discussed here months ago:

"New research has found that people who have had COVID-19 and also received both doses of the Pfizer, Moderna, or AstraZeneca vaccines had higher levels of antibodies than people who had only acquired the virus or only been vaccinated."

Even though your article describes "new research," the results aren't new and you've yet to bring anything new to the discussion.

And why does it have to all be such a contest about having teh most antibodies EVAR?!!!
Whether you got it and survived and thrived, got this brand of vaccine over another, got 20 boosters, whatever it may be. Shouldn't ANY combo or single item be better than nothing?

I mean, hell. Now it's not good enough to just be vaccinated any longer. Now it's "You got J&J? SSSSHHHSSSSSEEEEET. You know that's not as effective as 2x Moderna + Pfizer + all teh boosters, right? Do you want grandma to die, you murderer?"

There's just no winning. First it was division about masks or lockdowns, then it was division about vaccines, and now I'm seeing division about WHAT vaccines and boosters. There's just no end to people ripping each other apart over this stuff. Tribalism's out of control these days.

[MultiVerse]

^ What are you talking about? There's no division other than you guys repeatedly jumping to false conclusions. All of your talking points were discussed yesterday and the day before and the day before....

People here have explained over-and-over that all of the approved vaccines provide effective protection against severe disease and death.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I stated that right when I posted. I was clear. It doesnt mean it should be totally ignored. This isn't the only study saying these same things.

As I said, I hope the peer review sees the same things those that conducted the study saw.. Until then, without doubt, its not 100%.

But that NBC poll yesterday on vax rates? FACT... LOL.... least mines an actual medial study.

Again, the article you linked and the guy you quoted were talking about immunity after infection and also protecting yourself more by getting the vaccine. I’m not ignoring his opinion, I think it’s solid.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MagnificentUnicorn]

HIGHER LEVELS...that doesnt refute shit....

What level is ACCEPTABLE...not higher? any idiot gets that if you were infected AND get the vax you have more antibodies..is prior infection ENOUGH? That is the question. There are quite a few places looking at it...Peer review takes time..just like FDA approval. Its doesnt completely discount the study findings.

Wasn't it argued by the great MU yesterday that antibodies alone arent the only indicator? So pick and choose when you want to use "antibodies" as your argument cause you know.. "get the shot" (which i did)

Thanks for recognizing my stature, although I’m not sure anyone will agree when it comes from you.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Skidog]

Again, what are you talking about? That's a direct quote from your own article. Have you considered the possibility you're simply incapable of understanding any of this, that it's beyond your intellectual capacity?

nowhere does it say how effective prior infection immunity doesnt work. It says that prior infection + works "better". I never refuted that...

How EFFECTIVE that infection immunity is my question...is it "good enough"? We know more is better, but that does NOT mean prior infection might not be "enough"? why is this so hard to follow? Oh yeah #borg

[Skidog]

He recommends getting the vaccine in the paragraph below the quote. I understand this stuff, your attempts at obfuscation are those of a simpleton.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

RECCOMENDS...... does this mean EVERY persons infection immunity is EXACTLY the same? I mean im pretty sure the vax effects everyone differently. There is no "set" time that your antibodies remain with EITHER solution....least that we know yet...in fact ive seen reports that say its pretty close.

If I were infected prior I would personally still get the vaccine. This DOES NOT mean I think everyone should do the same as me.

[skaredshtles]

Hey... at least Skidummy is trying.

[MultiVerse]

Again, the article you linked and the guy you quoted were talking about immunity after infection and also protecting yourself more by getting the vaccine. I’m not ignoring his opinion, I think it’s solid.

+1. The article's thesis is stated in the title: If You’ve Recovered From COVID-19, You May Be Well Protected — Vaccines Can Add a Boost

It's anybody's guess what MontuckyFried and Skidog are so worked up about, people here have been saying the same thing since last year.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

^ What are you talking about? There's no division other than you guys repeatedly jumping to false conclusions. All of your talking points were discussed yesterday and the day before and the day before....

People here have explained over-and-over that all of the approved vaccines provide effective protection against severe disease and death.

And… there’s no way of knowing what level of protection you get from prior infection because it varies so much unlike a known like the vaccines that are incredibly safe.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Danno]

Whether someone is vaccinated or not is totally irrelevant to whether they're spreading bullshit and misinformation or not. Citation: all the yahoos on FoxNews, who are vaxxed, but whose audience eats up all the conspiracy anti-vax shit. So if you're being accused of spreading misinformation, responding with "I'm fully vaxxed" is not a defense to the charge.