|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On January 09 2022 23:53 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 12:37 Razyda wrote:On January 09 2022 10:39 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 09:05 Razyda wrote:I should have known that if I check this thread my aversion to all kind of fanatics will make me post... So lets start: On January 05 2022 03:34 Acrofales wrote:Just in case someone took your rambling seriously, the side effects mentioned in that article about Australia are:
The most frequent reported side effects include a sore arm, headache, fever and chills.
I'm guessing Australian social security is beyond crap and people had to take unpaid leave. So, yeah, Australia faces a hefty bill for that. But that is neither the case in the UK nor Poland, where you can take paid sick leave in the case of the vaccine knocking you out. Unless you're arguing that these side effects are the knock-on effects are related to these side effects. Despite these side effects being fairly common side effects for any vaccine: it is your immune response doing what it's supposed to do. Btw, try the yellow fever vaccination, it's really unpleasant. Still rather that than actually get yellow fever! Yes, yes, you obviously right it is widely known that word "most" reduces math and numbers to rambling... especially if in the same article is "most" referring to 79000 and "overwhelming majority of"...9 On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ There you go: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext"It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better." Clearly. Exempt from second research: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)." Obviously medical research <<<<< news article I guess?? Your non peer reviewee study is using number from 2019 and even more than that it does not counter my poiny, it says nothing about the comined protection. It is talking about a slight rise in side effects. And it is wondering if natural has enough protection (for beta covid) given the increased side effects WHILE also awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last. You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together. Dude you clearly need some meds, but i dont think Vaccine is the right one: 2019: really? "Published:November 08, 2021" Lancet is obviously less trustworthy than whatever news outlet out there, at least when it comes to medical data "Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better." https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown" And what part of: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)" You did not understand?? or do you think that "increased adverse events" are better?? and where does it state "slight"? "slight": https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101"A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care." " awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last." Eee.. so how long vaccines immunity lasts, before you need booster?? Natural one from SARS: " Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up," "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak." Remind me dear, after what time you need a booster and then second booster? You are really fanatic, article in Lancet published and unquestioned by peers = "no peer review"  . While yourself linking articles from news outlets with personal opinions?(not based on any research - so just that: personal opinions) "You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together." We, or you: "It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2." Honestly if you going to challenge article - read it (or actually understand it) The numbers are from 2019 not the publish date nummy. And again none of that counters that vaccination plus matural is better. Or that natural is better than vaccination for omicron. Even your cherry picked out of context quotes missing the weaknesses your own source states. Im not saying natural immunity does not work, im saying it plus vaccination is better. If I didnt think it worked I wouldnt be optimistic at omicron. You are embarrassing yourself. Here for example is the full sentence of one of your quotes bolded part you left off, could you be more disengenious? You are a liar and this is not the only one. You are going to callil it political or something but it comes down that you are lying to people on purpose. Show nested quote +
Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up,
it is unknown how long protective immunity will truly last.
I am embarassing myself ...
You just embarrassing yourself proving that you either cant read with understanding, or spreading misinformation on purpose. Which one is it:
2019 - just lol - this research was based on multiple studies and just one of this was " Another laboratory-based study that analysed the test results of 9119 people with previous COVID-19 from Dec 1, 2019, to Nov 13, 2020, found that only 0·7% became reinfected" - thats your 2019 numbers
I am lying to the people on purpose ... I do quote parts of article not article in its entirety as it is easier. Quoting entire article would be just messy. Neither of my "cherry picked" quotes change context as you implying.
The one you quoted in full reads essentially: 10 months is given, we dont know how much longer..., again dear, after what time you need a booster?? (there is also mention: "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak")
Seems like the only one lying here is you - about 2019 numbers and me taking sentences out of context (latter may be caused by the fact that you dont actually know what out of context means...).
|
|
|
On January 10 2022 03:02 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 01:42 Razyda wrote:On January 09 2022 23:53 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 12:37 Razyda wrote:On January 09 2022 10:39 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 09:05 Razyda wrote:I should have known that if I check this thread my aversion to all kind of fanatics will make me post... So lets start: On January 05 2022 03:34 Acrofales wrote:Just in case someone took your rambling seriously, the side effects mentioned in that article about Australia are:
The most frequent reported side effects include a sore arm, headache, fever and chills.
I'm guessing Australian social security is beyond crap and people had to take unpaid leave. So, yeah, Australia faces a hefty bill for that. But that is neither the case in the UK nor Poland, where you can take paid sick leave in the case of the vaccine knocking you out. Unless you're arguing that these side effects are the knock-on effects are related to these side effects. Despite these side effects being fairly common side effects for any vaccine: it is your immune response doing what it's supposed to do. Btw, try the yellow fever vaccination, it's really unpleasant. Still rather that than actually get yellow fever! Yes, yes, you obviously right it is widely known that word "most" reduces math and numbers to rambling... especially if in the same article is "most" referring to 79000 and "overwhelming majority of"...9 On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ There you go: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext"It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better." Clearly. Exempt from second research: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)." Obviously medical research <<<<< news article I guess?? Your non peer reviewee study is using number from 2019 and even more than that it does not counter my poiny, it says nothing about the comined protection. It is talking about a slight rise in side effects. And it is wondering if natural has enough protection (for beta covid) given the increased side effects WHILE also awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last. You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together. Dude you clearly need some meds, but i dont think Vaccine is the right one: 2019: really? "Published:November 08, 2021" Lancet is obviously less trustworthy than whatever news outlet out there, at least when it comes to medical data "Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better." https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown" And what part of: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)" You did not understand?? or do you think that "increased adverse events" are better?? and where does it state "slight"? "slight": https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101"A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care." " awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last." Eee.. so how long vaccines immunity lasts, before you need booster?? Natural one from SARS: " Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up," "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak." Remind me dear, after what time you need a booster and then second booster? You are really fanatic, article in Lancet published and unquestioned by peers = "no peer review" . While yourself linking articles from news outlets with personal opinions?(not based on any research - so just that: personal opinions) "You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together." We, or you: "It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2." Honestly if you going to challenge article - read it (or actually understand it) The numbers are from 2019 not the publish date nummy. And again none of that counters that vaccination plus matural is better. Or that natural is better than vaccination for omicron. Even your cherry picked out of context quotes missing the weaknesses your own source states. Im not saying natural immunity does not work, im saying it plus vaccination is better. If I didnt think it worked I wouldnt be optimistic at omicron. You are embarrassing yourself. Here for example is the full sentence of one of your quotes bolded part you left off, could you be more disengenious? You are a liar and this is not the only one. You are going to callil it political or something but it comes down that you are lying to people on purpose.
Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up,
it is unknown how long protective immunity will truly last.
I am embarassing myself ... You just embarrassing yourself proving that you either cant read with understanding, or spreading misinformation on purpose. Which one is it: 2019 - just lol - this research was based on multiple studies and just one of this was " Another laboratory-based study that analysed the test results of 9119 people with previous COVID-19 from Dec 1, 2019, to Nov 13, 2020, found that only 0·7% became reinfected" - thats your 2019 numbers I am lying to the people on purpose ... I do quote parts of article not article in its entirety as it is easier. Quoting entire article would be just messy. Neither of my "cherry picked" quotes change context as you implying. The one you quoted in full reads essentially: 10 months is given, we dont know how much longer..., again dear, after what time you need a booster?? (there is also mention: "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak") Seems like the only one lying here is you - about 2019 numbers and me taking sentences out of context (latter may be caused by the fact that you dont actually know what out of context means...). None of this information is in dispute, im not disputing the study. What the hell is wrong with you? Im saying none of it says natural is better for stopping omicron infection tham vaccination. None of the dates yoi have listed did omicron exist and non of your studies dispute my point. Stop.
Doesnt it though??
Quote from previously linked Lancet article:
"It important to note that antibodies are incomplete predictors of protection. After vaccination or infection, many mechanisms of immunity exist within an individual not only at the antibody level, but also at the level of cellular immunity.14, 15, 16 It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2.17 Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak.15 Additionally, a memory B-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 evolves between 1·3 and 6·2 months after infection, which is consistent with longer-term protection"
I am somewhat boldly assuming, that you are able to understand that omicron is an actual variant of Covid.
Remind me dear, whats the vaccine efficiency against omicron? and why are boosters needed?
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On January 10 2022 00:29 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 00:19 WombaT wrote:On January 09 2022 21:23 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 09:47 WombaT wrote:On January 09 2022 09:16 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:41 Mohdoo wrote:On January 09 2022 08:39 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:09 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2022 08:07 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:[quote] Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ What? Where have you been for the last 2 years? For many months in 2020 there was a debate whether COVID reinfection was even possible before it was decided that it was possible but very rare. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/health/coronavirus-reinfection.htmlBut these cases make the news precisely because they are rare, experts said: More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections. its almost like we're dealing with a new strain that is significantly more infectious that might change the math.
Again, we already see the double-vaxxed people have almost no protection against infection with Omicron. We have millions and millions of breakthrough cases, how many cases do you think exist of people being re-infected 1 month after having COVID? How much do you think the math needs to change to not be significantly better than 0%? Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month? vaxxed folks have much better medical outcomes than unvaxxed. You should not be saying stuff like this. A breakthrough case where someone has a sore throat can not be equated to someone on a ventilator. Plenty of states have released data showing what % of people hospitalized are vaxed or unvaxed. It is silly to say its all the same. Edit: And just to be clear, unvaxxed folks are currently causing cancer patients and other people to not get surgeries that would drastically improve their health outcomes. Massachusetts for example ran out of ICU beds last week and is pushing out surgeries. Why should I "not be saying stuff like this?" Are you incapable of comprehending the difference between protection against infection and protection against severe illness/death? Are you incapable of understanding that vaccines may help a lot better with the latter than with the former? I seriously don't understand this aversion to an honest and nuanced discussion but it really sours the experience of posting here. I don’t think Mohdoo is incapable of processing such a distinction, as per his response to my last posting. You’re asking questions beyond the pay grade of anyone in this thread, well specifically ‘Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month?’ I don’t think we know anything to answer that question with anything other than base speculation. It’s pretty clear the vaccines are considerably less effective against Omicron, I don’t think anyone disputes that. I would assume that, on aggregate even the low end estimates of protection add up to quite a meaningful level of protection if we’re talking about spread across whole populations. I can’t speak with any authority on how that impacts things. But say 30-40% is relatively bad protection for an individual, but if everyone in society has that level of protection it’s still pretty impactful. The only confirmed and consistent data we’ve been getting for quite some time is a comparison in hospitalisation rates and vaccination status. There are other phenomena at play, stuff it would be interesting to discuss but I’ve not seen the data on that, so it’s difficult to discuss. I don't think that's above anyone's paygrade. I think that's just a basic understanding of our immune system. After your body mounts a defense against an intruder it is well primed to defeat that intruder the next time it encounters it. If this didn't work then the vaccines wouldn't work because the vaccines just manipulate your body into mounting this response and then remembering it. This is basically true for not just all the COVID variants but for all viruses in general. So the idea that we don't really know if Novak Djokovic has good protection against COVID if he was infected 1 month ago just because this Omicron variant is "new" would require some bizarre level of skepticism to believe that Omicron behaves differently than not just the other variants but from basically every virus in history. But I'm pretty sure you more or less agreed with me that if Novak was infected last month he has better protection than the typical double-vaxxed person. Right, I misread. You said essentially, is Omicron in isolation going to interact in a unique, new way with our immune response, to the degree that continuous short term reinfection will happen?’ would that be a correct paraphrasing? Which it won’t, because it’s a virus, and the immune system is the immune system, yes that isn’t beyond our pay grade here. I misread that as ‘will Omicron react sufficiently differently with our immune system from other variants, that immunity conferred by other variants won’t be a large protective factor’ Different statements, my reading comprehension as per usual has let me down. Perhaps not beyond our collective pay grade, certainly beyond mine anyway! I’ve certainly not seen the data taking many factors into account. One key question would be, is the lack of vaccine effectiveness due primarily to the passage of time, or are they just outright not effective against Omicron? And likewise natural immunity. I can’t see Djokovic not being protected, unless somehow Omicron completely punches through prior immunity from other variants, and I’ve seen nothing to indicate that is that case. The Ausralians are not worried about him getting sick. They are somewhay worried about him infecting others. And more than that it normalizes the behavior of not vaccinating which leads to their healthcare issues and wild expenses on the system. The reason countires dont want to have a natural immunity pass is not because they think it does not work as well, it is because they dont know, it is much harder to test and many, many people lie about it and its much harder to track. And the vaccination is much safer than aquiring covid, like way way safer and if you end up with a break through that is even better protection for future infections. Everyone being vaccinated is the safest, fastest and cheapest way to move the pandemic to endemic.
I’d agree with all that incidentally.
As you say, from a pure admin perspective it’s not especially easy to administrate such a thing.
Even if natural immunity is superior, vaccine immunity on top is better again, and you don’t have to risk a bout of illness that may be serious.
And any natural immunity pass would require verifying people have had Covid. The two options there appear to be to let people self report via home testing, which is obviously ripe for abuse.
Or verify this via a third party, which likely requires people who suspect they have Covid to travel to get it done. Which for many obvious reasons isn’t a great idea.
|
|
|
On January 09 2022 21:18 Larry_Equadoro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40 There is no confusion regarding vaccines. I haven't heard of anyone dieing from the mRNA vaccines, there were some complications regarding j&j last year in certain populations. Your friends are very unlucky to know multiple people in the 1 in 4'000'000 or whatever it was that got blood clots + even further that went to die from said complications. This is not even a concern in many countries since they are exclusively mRNA. There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it. Let me ask you: are you taking responsibility for people lives? Even I agree with your points about chances, you are just a regular guy on the internet, people have to decide for themselves and be responsible. I`m not against vaccines and not vaccine lobbyists, just want to make a point about personal responsibility.
I'm not taking responsibility for other peoples' lives (because I cannot), just my own. In any case, in my opinion the most responsible thing, for yourself and others, is to get vaccinated.
|
On January 09 2022 22:02 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40 Nice to see sensible person in this thread. Sadly I dont think you will last long... Look at the Torquemada here: Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:
There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it. Now that great emperorchampion himself explained everyone's doubts shall vanish. People unable to embrace his holy words are clearly unable to make decisions by themselves and should be hunted down for a greater good. Maybe start with some mild encouragement, like I dont know, maybe pay 100 bucks for each scalp of unvaccinated person...?, execution of a household for hiding unvaccinated person...
I don't really know what to make of this.
|
On January 09 2022 22:02 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:
There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it. Now that great emperorchampion himself explained everyone's doubts shall vanish. People unable to embrace his holy words are clearly unable to make decisions by themselves and should be hunted down for a greater good. Maybe start with some mild encouragement, like I dont know, maybe pay 100 bucks for each scalp of unvaccinated person...?, execution of a household for hiding unvaccinated person...
If you're not convinced by the consensus of the experts - the medical researchers, the doctors, the immunologists, the virologists - that vaccines are absolutely worth it, then how would emperorchampion be able to convince you? Are you looking for an appeal to something other than the many published, peer-review papers on the subject, or the national and international scientific communities and medical organizations that all draw the same conclusion? What would convince you that vaccines are worth it? Would anything?
|
On January 10 2022 06:15 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 03:02 JimmiC wrote:On January 10 2022 01:42 Razyda wrote:On January 09 2022 23:53 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 12:37 Razyda wrote:On January 09 2022 10:39 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 09:05 Razyda wrote:I should have known that if I check this thread my aversion to all kind of fanatics will make me post... So lets start: On January 05 2022 03:34 Acrofales wrote:Just in case someone took your rambling seriously, the side effects mentioned in that article about Australia are:
The most frequent reported side effects include a sore arm, headache, fever and chills.
I'm guessing Australian social security is beyond crap and people had to take unpaid leave. So, yeah, Australia faces a hefty bill for that. But that is neither the case in the UK nor Poland, where you can take paid sick leave in the case of the vaccine knocking you out. Unless you're arguing that these side effects are the knock-on effects are related to these side effects. Despite these side effects being fairly common side effects for any vaccine: it is your immune response doing what it's supposed to do. Btw, try the yellow fever vaccination, it's really unpleasant. Still rather that than actually get yellow fever! Yes, yes, you obviously right it is widely known that word "most" reduces math and numbers to rambling... especially if in the same article is "most" referring to 79000 and "overwhelming majority of"...9 On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ There you go: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext"It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better." Clearly. Exempt from second research: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)." Obviously medical research <<<<< news article I guess?? Your non peer reviewee study is using number from 2019 and even more than that it does not counter my poiny, it says nothing about the comined protection. It is talking about a slight rise in side effects. And it is wondering if natural has enough protection (for beta covid) given the increased side effects WHILE also awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last. You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together. Dude you clearly need some meds, but i dont think Vaccine is the right one: 2019: really? "Published:November 08, 2021" Lancet is obviously less trustworthy than whatever news outlet out there, at least when it comes to medical data "Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better." https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown" And what part of: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)" You did not understand?? or do you think that "increased adverse events" are better?? and where does it state "slight"? "slight": https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101"A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care." " awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last." Eee.. so how long vaccines immunity lasts, before you need booster?? Natural one from SARS: " Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up," "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak." Remind me dear, after what time you need a booster and then second booster? You are really fanatic, article in Lancet published and unquestioned by peers = "no peer review" . While yourself linking articles from news outlets with personal opinions?(not based on any research - so just that: personal opinions) "You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together." We, or you: "It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2." Honestly if you going to challenge article - read it (or actually understand it) The numbers are from 2019 not the publish date nummy. And again none of that counters that vaccination plus matural is better. Or that natural is better than vaccination for omicron. Even your cherry picked out of context quotes missing the weaknesses your own source states. Im not saying natural immunity does not work, im saying it plus vaccination is better. If I didnt think it worked I wouldnt be optimistic at omicron. You are embarrassing yourself. Here for example is the full sentence of one of your quotes bolded part you left off, could you be more disengenious? You are a liar and this is not the only one. You are going to callil it political or something but it comes down that you are lying to people on purpose.
Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up,
it is unknown how long protective immunity will truly last.
I am embarassing myself ... You just embarrassing yourself proving that you either cant read with understanding, or spreading misinformation on purpose. Which one is it: 2019 - just lol - this research was based on multiple studies and just one of this was " Another laboratory-based study that analysed the test results of 9119 people with previous COVID-19 from Dec 1, 2019, to Nov 13, 2020, found that only 0·7% became reinfected" - thats your 2019 numbers I am lying to the people on purpose ... I do quote parts of article not article in its entirety as it is easier. Quoting entire article would be just messy. Neither of my "cherry picked" quotes change context as you implying. The one you quoted in full reads essentially: 10 months is given, we dont know how much longer..., again dear, after what time you need a booster?? (there is also mention: "Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak") Seems like the only one lying here is you - about 2019 numbers and me taking sentences out of context (latter may be caused by the fact that you dont actually know what out of context means...). None of this information is in dispute, im not disputing the study. What the hell is wrong with you? Im saying none of it says natural is better for stopping omicron infection tham vaccination. None of the dates yoi have listed did omicron exist and non of your studies dispute my point. Stop. Doesnt it though?? Quote from previously linked Lancet article: "It important to note that antibodies are incomplete predictors of protection. After vaccination or infection, many mechanisms of immunity exist within an individual not only at the antibody level, but also at the level of cellular immunity.14, 15, 16 It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2.17 Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak.15 Additionally, a memory B-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 evolves between 1·3 and 6·2 months after infection, which is consistent with longer-term protection" I am somewhat boldly assuming, that you are able to understand that omicron is an actual variant of Covid. Remind me dear, whats the vaccine efficiency against omicron? and why are boosters needed?
As others have mentioned, this is only part of the immune response (edit: also the first sentence of the quote in your post). I think the most obvious argument to get vaccinated is looking at hospital numbers. Hospitalized patients are consistently proportionately unvaccinated (ie 10% of the population makes up around 50% of hospital patients due to Covid). It has been like this for months now. Clearly vaccines are effective against severe illness which is likely the largest strain in most countries at the moment.
|
On January 10 2022 06:58 JimmiC wrote:
It does not omicron is 6x more contagious and too recent for any of the numbers looked at to be relevant, t-cells are also a part of vaccinated immunity. It is not saying at all what you think it is.
It really does, T cells from natural immunity =/= vaccine-induced T cells and in linked article it specifically states "infection" and "recovery" in relevant parts...
On January 10 2022 06:58 JimmiC wrote:
It is saying that natural immunity provides protection from future infection, which I and no doctor would ever dispute.
Lying again??
On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:
What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact.
On January 10 2022 08:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
If you're not convinced by the consensus of the experts - the medical researchers, the doctors, the immunologists, the virologists - that vaccines are absolutely worth it, then how would emperorchampion be able to convince you? Are you looking for an appeal to something other than the many published, peer-review papers on the subject, or the national and international scientific communities and medical organizations that all draw the same conclusion? What would convince you that vaccines are worth it? Would anything?
Firstly apologies to emperorchampion, it just that absoluteness of your statement kinda irked me off.
Thing is there is not consensus of the experts (to be honest there never is one). Even if there was one , we would have different priorities - they think about case globaly - eg people dying because of overcrowded hospitals etc, vs people dying/getting sick because of side effects etc, once they get numbers deemed acceptable, they go with it. My responibilities lie with my family and here is the difference: statistics/probability while representative for large numbers, dont mean squat for a single event.
"Are you looking for an appeal to something other than the many published, peer-review papers on the subject, or the national and international scientific communities and medical organizations that all draw the same conclusion?"
You may have not noticed that all the sources I linked are somewhat reputable. I could have linked this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIKbFmiXsAkCoqb?format=jpg&name=small
to "in EU goverments take responsibility" post before, but I had no way of knowing if it is not a fake so I didnt. (please ignore this link, or treat it as mere curiosity)
"What would convince you that vaccines are worth it? Would anything?"
Honestly, at this point I dont know. Some transparency would be good start. Do you honestly not find anything disturbing about it? :
- Normally vaccine is researched for 5-10 years, this one - several months, while using somewhat new technology.
- Legal immunity for producers of the vaccine (regarding side effects of the vaccine)
- changing description of what vaccine actually does every few hundred millions vaccinated
- actual experts getting they accounts banned for "spreading misinformation" (kudos for youtube and twitter mods knowing when medical experts spread misinformation...)
- FDA claiming that sharing requested data will take them 75 years, forced by court to do it in 8 months, but with the clause "you can redact it as you please"
|
Turns out my niece did indeed end up infecting her mom and dad. Just took a bit to show symptoms. All 3 of them triple dosed. Niece was knocked on her butt for a few days. Aunt basically has the flu. Uncle had very mild symptoms and appears to be over it at this point.
It is a pretty wild situation. It seems like cloth masks are completely ineffective at this point. Omicron is bonkers. Please everyone, stop wearing your terrible cloth masks. Get an N95 or don't go places.
|
On January 10 2022 10:19 Mohdoo wrote:
Turns out my niece did indeed end up infecting her mom and dad. Just took a bit to show symptoms. All 3 of them triple dosed. Niece was knocked on her butt for a few days. Aunt basically has the flu. Uncle had very mild symptoms and appears to be over it at this point.
It is a pretty wild situation. It seems like cloth masks are completely ineffective at this point. Omicron is bonkers. Please everyone, stop wearing your terrible cloth masks. Get an N95 or don't go places.
bit of a stretch to say cloth masks are ineffective because a daughter infected her parents who live in the same house?
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
‘Statistics/probability while representative for large numbers, dont mean squat for a single event.’
This is not correct. They only become irrelevant for an event that has already occurred. Which I assume is what you mean, i.e. it doesn’t matter if the percentage chance of me getting side effects from a vaccine is very low, if I get very sick from a vaccine. It’s no consolation that I’m unlucky it’s happened.
However in terms of risk assessment and the cost/benefit of taking such a decision, statistics and probability are still very relevant.
If I decide to run across a 8 lane motorway/highway and end up safe at the other side with a bunch of vehicles burning behind me, it does not stand that it was a sensible decision or mine to take.
‘Normally vaccine is researched for 5-10 years, this one - several months, while using somewhat new technology’
There is a good reason for that, can you guess what it is?
‘changing description of what vaccine actually does every few hundred millions vaccinated’
The extent of supposed flips is IMO actually quite exaggerated anyway, but what alternative is there here? How effective it is will change, of course it will. The only way for this not to occur is for people to have powers of precognition, or not make any public estimate on the efficacy of vaccines and see how it goes. In the absence of those two scenarios the need to reevaluate on a shifting set of circumstances is bound to happen, and should happen.
I don’t think the populace at large would stomach a ‘hey take this vaccine, how effective will it be? Don’t ask me, I don’t want to be called out for being wrong for the foreseeable future so I’m not saying anything’
Also can you stop calling Jimmy a liar, I haven’t seen him make anything other than the point he’s claiming to have made. Or make things clearer as to what he’s supposedly lying about, I’m not seeing him altering what he originally claimed at all.
Far as I can tell Jimmy has never claimed natural immunity isn’t of relevant, only that vaccines are preferable, either on top of or without existing natural immunity.
Unless I’m reading you wrong, which isn’t entirely on me you seem to be arguing that he changed his claim and is a liar, when he just hasn’t. I’m much more active than you on this thread and I’ve never seen him make any other claim.
Think he’s wrong, fair enough have at it but you’re accusing someone of lying with, from where I’m sitting no proof or justification.
|
On January 10 2022 10:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 10:19 Mohdoo wrote:
Turns out my niece did indeed end up infecting her mom and dad. Just took a bit to show symptoms. All 3 of them triple dosed. Niece was knocked on her butt for a few days. Aunt basically has the flu. Uncle had very mild symptoms and appears to be over it at this point.
It is a pretty wild situation. It seems like cloth masks are completely ineffective at this point. Omicron is bonkers. Please everyone, stop wearing your terrible cloth masks. Get an N95 or don't go places. bit of a stretch to say cloth masks are ineffective because a daughter infected her parents who live in the same house?
Sorry, 2 separate thoughts. Other data from other studies and overall infection rates within communities that have high mask usage are what indicate cloth masks aren't working anymore.
People infecting each other while living in the same house is not related.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
I’d be more tempted if I wasn’t seeing numbers of people wearing any mask dropping.
But no in seriousness how does one obtain masks that are a step up from the humble cloth variety? Or what should one go for?
I’ve somewhat neglected this for the period cloth masks seemed to be ‘good enough’, but that does seem to be flipping with Omicron, so it would be something I’d consider.
I’ve also been loath to being scalped by the unscrupulous on Amazon etc with masks that aren’t as advertised, and aside from ordering online from such sites I have zero clue where you would obtain them, never seen them in a shop or w/e
|
On January 10 2022 10:43 WombaT wrote:
Also can you stop calling Jimmy a liar, I haven’t seen him make anything other than the point he’s claiming to have made. Or make things clearer as to what he’s supposedly lying about, I’m not seeing him altering what he originally claimed at all.
Far as I can tell Jimmy has never claimed natural immunity isn’t of relevant, only that vaccines are preferable, either on top of or without existing natural immunity.
Unless I’m reading you wrong, which isn’t entirely on me you seem to be arguing that he changed his claim and is a liar, when he just hasn’t. I’m much more active than you on this thread and I’ve never seen him make any other claim.
Think he’s wrong, fair enough have at it but you’re accusing someone of lying with, from where I’m sitting no proof or justification.
Well but thats the thing - he was the first one calling me liar. Beside I just quoted two relevant sentences of his, which dont exactly go hand in hand, do they?
|
On January 10 2022 11:21 WombaT wrote:
I’d be more tempted if I wasn’t seeing numbers of people wearing any mask dropping.
But no in seriousness how does one obtain masks that are a step up from the humble cloth variety? Or what should one go for?
I’ve somewhat neglected this for the period cloth masks seemed to be ‘good enough’, but that does seem to be flipping with Omicron, so it would be something I’d consider.
I’ve also been loath to being scalped by the unscrupulous on Amazon etc with masks that aren’t as advertised, and aside from ordering online from such sites I have zero clue where you would obtain them, never seen them in a shop or w/e
N95 manufactured by 3M. find them at hardware stores. They are used for woodworking. They have a really good seal around the face because breathing in wood particulates is very bad for you.
|
On January 10 2022 10:53 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 10:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On January 10 2022 10:19 Mohdoo wrote:
Turns out my niece did indeed end up infecting her mom and dad. Just took a bit to show symptoms. All 3 of them triple dosed. Niece was knocked on her butt for a few days. Aunt basically has the flu. Uncle had very mild symptoms and appears to be over it at this point.
It is a pretty wild situation. It seems like cloth masks are completely ineffective at this point. Omicron is bonkers. Please everyone, stop wearing your terrible cloth masks. Get an N95 or don't go places. bit of a stretch to say cloth masks are ineffective because a daughter infected her parents who live in the same house? Sorry, 2 separate thoughts. Other data from other studies and overall infection rates within communities that have high mask usage are what indicate cloth masks aren't working anymore. People infecting each other while living in the same house is not related.
The effectiveness of both cloth and surgical masks was always dubious, and I have never seen evidence they make any difference in bars and restaurants, for example.
Even wearing a N95 in stores won't really make an impact. Stores afaik. are not where people get infected, especially if it is possible to keep a distance and the ventilation is decent. People don't sneeze eachoter in the face while shopping anyway .You would need obscene numbers of N95s to stop just a single case, but at least you feel morally superior!
|
|
|
On January 10 2022 12:07 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2022 10:53 Mohdoo wrote:On January 10 2022 10:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On January 10 2022 10:19 Mohdoo wrote:
Turns out my niece did indeed end up infecting her mom and dad. Just took a bit to show symptoms. All 3 of them triple dosed. Niece was knocked on her butt for a few days. Aunt basically has the flu. Uncle had very mild symptoms and appears to be over it at this point.
It is a pretty wild situation. It seems like cloth masks are completely ineffective at this point. Omicron is bonkers. Please everyone, stop wearing your terrible cloth masks. Get an N95 or don't go places. bit of a stretch to say cloth masks are ineffective because a daughter infected her parents who live in the same house? Sorry, 2 separate thoughts. Other data from other studies and overall infection rates within communities that have high mask usage are what indicate cloth masks aren't working anymore. People infecting each other while living in the same house is not related. The effectiveness of both cloth and surgical masks was always dubious, and I have never seen evidence they make any difference in bars and restaurants, for example. Even wearing a N95 in stores won't really make an impact. Stores afaik. are not where people get infected, especially if it is possible to keep a distance and the ventilation is decent. People don't sneeze eachoter in the face while shopping anyway .You would need obscene numbers of N95s to stop just a single case, but at least you feel morally superior!
They are not dubious they're just not trusted by the people who are pro-covid.
Many other countries have shown the clear and present benefit of masks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
