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

[Mofro261]

Here we go again for the 50th time. None of this has changed in any of the 49 other times it's been posted.


https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/co...us-vaccination

If you've had COVID-19 before, does your natural immunity work better than a vaccine?




The data is clear: Natural immunity is not better. The COVID-19 vaccines create more effective and longer-lasting immunity than natural immunity from infection.




More than a third of COVID-19 infections result in zero protective antibodies
Natural immunity fades faster than vaccine immunity
Natural immunity alone is less than half as effective than natural immunity plus vaccination
The takeaway: Get vaccinated, even if you've had COVID-19. Vaccine immunity is stronger than natural immunity.




"Natural immunity can be spotty. Some people can react vigorously and get a great antibody response. Other people don't get such a great response," says infectious diseases expert Mark Rupp, MD. "Clearly, vaccine-induced immunity is more standardized and can be longer-lasting."




A third of infections don't get any protective antibodies
Some people who get COVID-19 receive no protection from reinfection – their natural immunity is nonexistent. A recent study found that 36% of COVID-19 cases didn't result in development of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The people had different levels of illness – most had moderate disease, but some were asymptomatic and some experienced severe COVID-19.




"Vaccine-induced immunity is more predictable than natural immunity," says Dr. Rupp. The COVID-19 vaccines provide great protection from severe disease, hospitalization and death.




Natural immunity fades more quickly than vaccine immunity
Natural immunity can decay within about 90 days. Immunity from COVID-19 vaccines has been shown to last longer. Both Pfizer and Moderna reported strong vaccine protection for at least six months.




Studies are ongoing to evaluate the full duration of protective immunity, including the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.




Real-world studies also indicate natural immunity's short life. For example, 65% of people with a lower baseline antibody from infection to begin with completely lost their COVID-19 antibodies by 60 days.




What about that Israeli study suggesting natural immunity is stronger? Infectious diseases expert James Lawler, MD, MPH, FIDSA, carefully evaluates the study design of the retrospective Maccabi Health System study in his Aug. 31 briefing. In the briefing, he identifies two concerning sources of error that were not corrected for: survivorship bias and selection bias.




Natural immunity alone is weak
One study compared natural immunity alone to natural immunity plus vaccination. They found that, after infection, unvaccinated people are 2.34 times likelier to get COVID-19 again, compared to fully vaccinated people. So vaccinated people (after infection) have half the risk of reinfection than people relying on natural immunity alone.




"Studies show that the vaccine gives a very good booster response if you've had COVID-19 before," says Dr. Rupp.




Furthermore, there is no country on the globe in which natural infection and natural immunity has brought the pandemic under control. In countries like Iran or Brazil very high levels of natural infection have not prevented recurrent waves of infection.

...

[The AD]

Here we go again for the 50th time. None of this has changed in any of the 49 other times it's been posted.

Yeah, whatever #BORG!!

[TBS]

Fun with numbers
From midnight to 1330 hrs Pacific Time, there have been on this thread:
- 42 posts from four accounts dedicated to Sophistry (Austin, Aspen, Deebased and SkiDog)
- 60 posts quoting the trolls and refuting their inane bullshit
- 70 posts about the actual thread topic

[Harry]

Fun with numbers
From midnight to 1330 hrs Pacific Time, there have been on this thread:
- 42 posts from four accounts dedicated to Sophistry (Austin, Aspen, Deebased and SkiDog)
- 60 posts quoting the trolls and refuting their inane bullshit
- 70 posts about the actual thread topic

Is this a poll or a study ?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mtuhockey33]

Fun with numbers
From midnight to 1330 hrs Pacific Time, there have been on this thread:
- 42 posts from four accounts dedicated to Sophistry (Austin, Aspen, Deebased and SkiDog)
- 60 posts quoting the trolls and refuting their inane bullshit
- 70 posts about the actual thread topic

0 evidence that people previously infected with Covid need to get a booster shot to participate in society when their antibodies work as well/if not better than those with the vaccine. “Super human immunity” is not a legitimate argument.

why the fuck are you inconsiderate assholes going out and getting a third shot when 1/3 of the worlds population doesn’t even have access to a 1st shot? I thought this was about helping the neighbors and keeping the virus under control? Doesn’t everyone need a life saving shot? Why is your 3rd shot more important than someone else’s 1st shot?!? Don’t you care about anyone else???

I love the disingenuous concern to vaccinate everyone that’s had Covid because we “need to gain immunity” and yet they’re out there taking away those precious vaccines from countries and people who could actually use them.

[TBS]

Is this a poll or a study ?

It’s a compilation

[Buster Highmen]

0 evidence that people previously infected with Covid need to get a booster shot to participate in society when their antibodies work as well/if not better than those with the vaccine. .

This is incorrect. No matter how many times you try to bring this up, it won't be valid.

[SorryBro]

0 evidence that people previously infected with Covid need to get a booster shot to participate in society when their antibodies work as well/if not better than those with the vaccine.

Wrong, just wrong. Please stop talking until you read Mofro's linked article.

Edit: Buster beat me to it.

[bennymac]

contrarian: "haha - you're gonna need a booster! Whadya got to say about that huh? checkmate"

Ok I'll take the booster. No problem.

contrarian: "Oh you'll take a booster will ya? what about other countries that need that booster huh? you selfish"

facepalm

[Skidog]

Holy shit I missed this gem. Congrats on the most transparently disingenuous post of the day. That’s hard to to do given the bullshit posted in this thread today. Way to prove to everyone you are just here to be a total dick.

Oh why is it disingenuous? Because there is some actual immunity from future infection if you previously survived covid? Hmmm. Ever wonder if a lot of people think that means they don't need a vax? It's right there...read the entire article...should we ignore this DR?

Again...stupid responses from stupid people blinded by only what they want to see/hear. Never mind reality. I think ostriches stick their heads in the sand.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using TGR Forums mobile app

[Skidog]

Here we go again for the 50th time. None of this has changed in any of the 49 other times it's been posted.


https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/co...us-vaccination



...

Where did anyone say better? Is it effective enough? Some people say yes. Seems the ex FDA director does too. Weird.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using TGR Forums mobile app

[Skidog]

0 evidence that people previously infected with Covid need to get a booster shot to participate in society when their antibodies work as well/if not better than those with the vaccine. “Super human immunity” is not a legitimate argument.

why the fuck are you inconsiderate assholes going out and getting a third shot when 1/3 of the worlds population doesn’t even have access to a 1st shot? I thought this was about helping the neighbors and keeping the virus under control? Doesn’t everyone need a life saving shot? Why is your 3rd shot more important than someone else’s 1st shot?!? Don’t you care about anyone else???

I love the disingenuous concern to vaccinate everyone that’s had Covid because we “need to gain immunity” and yet they’re out there taking away those precious vaccines from countries and people who could actually use them.

It's almost like it should be simple huh? Naaaa mOrE Sh0+z PuLEa$3

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using TGR Forums mobile app

[wooley12]

Should I get my annual flu shot first or my booster?

[SumJongGuy]

Should I get my annual flu shot first or my booster?

Flu is supposed to be worse this year because most of us didn't encounter it last season due to the masks. You already have COVID antibodies, but not much for flu. Get the flu shot first then I think 2 weeks after that you could do the booster right?

[CarlMega]

Should I get my annual flu shot first or my booster?

Combine them. Anal booster? This is getting interesting.

[MultiVerse]

Oh why is it disingenuous?

It is disingenuous because you wrote "Thought there wasnt any protection from covid with prior infection? Weird..." and nobody is saying there is no protection from prior infection.

People were discussing this back in spring 2020, long before you adopted it as your personal talking point. There's also been an ongoing discussion about mild vs convalescent protection from prior infection. And back in Jan/Feb of this year there was a discussion about how single dose folks "with pre-existing immunity" develop the highest number of antibodies and the strongest immune response.

[SumJongGuy]

Combine them. Anal booster? This is getting interesting.

That's probably going to be a real thing next year.. at least I've been hoping all along for that.. or at least be able to get the two shots at the same time. One in each arm!

[mtuhockey33]

Wrong, just wrong. Please stop talking until you read Mofro's linked article.

Edit: Buster beat me to it.

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

again - a scientific study that proves my point. The problem with TGR is the hive mind of the majority of its posters that can’t seem to think for themselves. Anything the hive mind says is law and anyone or anything that goes against it is automatically chastised and ignored regardless of the validity of their own sources.

[CarlMega]

It's almost like it should be simple huh? Naaaa mOrE Sh0+z PuLEa$3

If you weed thru the general incoherence from you two, your arguments distill down to: get sick and that's good. With a general theme of: we should do nothing.

There's not been a measure you haven't argued against: distancing, masks, vaccines, boosters, tracing. There's always some edge-case fucking nit pick. Seriously, get a life.

How about you two geniuses present your grand fucking plan or GTFO. Bring the detail, not the counter-punch nitpicks.

[Buster Highmen]

Where did anyone say better? Is it effective enough? Some people say yes. Seems the ex FDA director does too. Weird.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using TGR Forums mobile app

mtu and you repeatedly claim that nat immunity "antibodies work as well/if not better than those with the vaccine".

The linked article refutes this hands down.

I guess this is all just trolling on your part and the attacks are appropriate.

[jono]

At least we know we can trust him to come back and totally retract his bullshit when that study gets overhauled in peer review. So that's nice.

[Buster Highmen]

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

again - a scientific study that proves my point. The problem with TGR is the hive mind of the majority of its posters that can’t seem to think for themselves. Anything the hive mind says is law and anyone or anything that goes against it is automatically chastised and ignored regardless of the validity of their own sources.

For the fifth time, that Israeli unreviewed preprint has been debunked. There was no control group. One group was older and had higher exposure incidents.


Due to the matching process, only 4% of the available data is used (i.e. for model 1 only 32430/736559) and as a consequence the study population is fairly younger (with expectedly less comorbidity) than the source population (i.e. vaccinated individuals, infected individuals). Therefore, the study population may not be representative of this source population which severely limits the external validity of results for all vaccinated/infected people.
- Naturally, subjects who died due to previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were not included in the study. Yet, without information on morbidity and mortality and contribution to the spread of SARS-CoV-2 from the primary infection, the results of the study are not informative for the question whether people without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection should be vaccinated or await natural infection.
- All three study groups – vaccinated or infected at baseline (28th of February) – were established upon future information (no infection, no additional vaccination after June 1, 2021), which severely limits the use of the results for today’s decision making.

https://disqus.com/by/henrivanwerkhoven/comments/

[SumJongGuy]

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

again - a scientific study that proves my point. The problem with TGR is the hive mind of the majority of its posters that can’t seem to think for themselves. Anything the hive mind says is law and anyone or anything that goes against it is automatically chastised and ignored regardless of the validity of their own sources.

remains unclear

All I need to know about that study..

[riser4]

Wait, don't we get Alberta?

No. Because then you would extract more tar sands oil.

[Buster Highmen]

At least we know we can trust him to come back and totally retract his bullshit when that study gets overhauled in peer review. So that's nice.

Whatever you're on, how much does it cost and can I have some?

This is stupid. In these cases, the abuse is fitting. But it will only make things worse.