Reply With Quote
Those two randos actually looked into the methodology before copy/pasting it just because it was a "trusted source". Did you ever plan on looking into the methodology or is "trusted source" good enough for you these days?
Those two randos actually looked into the methodology before copy/pasting it just because it was a "trusted source". Did you ever plan on looking into the methodology or is "trusted source" good enough for you these days?
If the vaccine likely works much better against reinfection/hospitalization there would be plenty of studies to back this up. You have so far provided ZERO.
Explain your editing of my post. What's your issue with the small CDC studies.The most current small study makes checkmate.
You really can't find anything on the world wide web for this?
I already posted two from the CDC. Both were highly flawed studies.
You going to post any or did you just stop in to post this and add zero to the conversation?
Your trusted source was QAnon, TSA.
vaxxed antivaxx Trump s still shrieking
Lol Fauci triggered after every breakthrough infection
man wearing seat belt in car with fully operable airbags still suffers injury
Man confuses 1% death risk by Covid with > 85% death risk from a serious car crash
we have somewhere between 35-40k deaths from car crashes each year
how many from covid?
Man forgets 99.9% of cars have airbags
I stopped in to lol. Pretty much nothing you say here is convincing me that vaccines aren't working and clearly vice versa.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/nat...nity-covid-19/There is, of course, a scientific debate going on right now about post-infection immunity versus vaccine-induced immunity in terms of strength and duration of immunity, but that’s not what the invocation of “natural immunity” by COVID-19 contrarians and antivaxxers is about. What they are about is to deny the efficacy of vaccines and assert the supposed superiority of “natural” post-infection immunity, frequently in the context of minimizing or denying the likelihood of severe disease and death due to the coronavirus. The answers are coming in, seemingly slowly, but remember that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, only first reared its ugly head in China less than two years ago. That’s not a very long time at all to answer these questions. So it is not surprising that, thus far, the scientific literature is not entirely settled, which leads to people who want to believe that “natural immunity” is superior to be able to cherry pick articles to support their viewpoint.
It isn't about the science at this point, it is about the politics.
You are exactly wrong here. ""there would be a lot" of studies misses that studies take a while to fund, perform and write up, even if the connection was strong.
We don't really know with any high degree of certainty yet, to be sure, but just because no one has provided you with any doesn't mean they don't exist. It didn't take me long to find.
The problem with post-infection immunity versus vaccines is that infections with live virus can have widely varying initial viral loads which can strongly effect the course of the illness.
In any event, as summarized here (although I really do wish that the doctors who had written this had used the term “post-infection immunity” rather than “natural immunity”), there are a number of issues with post-infection immunity that make vaccination, even after recovery from COVID-19, desirable, including that:
More than a third of COVID-19 infections result in zero protective antibodies
“Natural immunity” fades faster than vaccine immunity, particularly after mild infection
“Natural immunity alone” is only half as effective as natural immunity plus vaccination
As for that Israeli study, which has been widely cited for its conclusion that those vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine were 13-fold more likely to suffer COVID-19 infection from the Delta variant than those who have recovered from the disease, it has…problems. First, it’s on a preprint server and hasn’t been peer-reviewed yet, which should tell you that you should take it with even more of a grain of salt than you take any study. Second, one thing I noticed right off the bat is how its tables and charts only report odds ratios (that “13-fold” number). You have to dig into the text to see that the absolute numbers of infections were quite low (for example, only 19 reinfections in one group) and actually do the math yourself to figure out that the breakthrough infection rates after vaccination were low. For instance, in model #1, the breakthrough infection rate was 238/16,215, or 1.5%; in model #2, it was 640/46,035, or 1.4%. I found that omission very curious, as well as the framing that didn’t mention that this study actually showed that the Pfizer vaccine was quite effective. It also showed that those who had recovered from COVID-19 and were later vaccinated were much less likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19. In addition, as described in this presentation, this study appears to have suffered from significant selection bias based on how different the populations being studied were. It also suffered from survivorship bias.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 11-03-2021 at 05:00 PM.
if only 99.9% of people were vaccinatedMan forgets 99.9% of cars have airbags
Never said the vaccines aren't working lol. Maybe do a little more than just stopping in next time so you don't look foolish with your next throwaway comment.
man that was so stupid it hurt my brain to read, but you accidentally glommed on to something important.
Unvaccinated means having about a hundred times higher chance of dying from an infection.
Unseatbelted means having about twice as much risk of dying or being seriously injured.
Unseatbelted means having thirty times as much risk of being ejected from a vehicle in a crash
Vaccinations are vastly better at managing the attendant risk than seatbelts.
You're the ones posting about every one of them.Lol Fauci triggered after every breakthrough infection
That's being triggered.
lol dumb hater
You admit we don't really know with any high of certainty yet. I agree with that. My issue was with the CDC releasing a junk study last Friday saying vaccine immunity offered 5X more protection than post infection immunity. It was completely irresponsible of the CDC to put their name on such a study.
Lol "look foolish"
When you stop in to "lol" at something that isn't happening then yeah, you look foolish.
Not possible. If you wear a seatbelt you won't have an accident.
There are currently 12 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 12 guests)
Posting Permissions
