Covid: the shape of things to come

Kitchen Knife Forums

Help Support Kitchen Knife Forums:

big_adventure

What impulse control?
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
1,407
Location
Paris
The author of this piece is something of a hired gun for libertarian anti-mask, anti-vaccine passport, and anti-closure groups having served as an expert witness for Florida's anti-mask/anti-closure stance as well as for a group challenging Manitoba's covid restrictions. He was also an advocate for the largely discredited and never widely accepted herd immunity idea. You can always find "experts" who will support fringe positions - some are probably motivated by political ideology, some by hubris, some by money, and others may be just stupid (a PhD or MD is no guarantee to the contrary IME).
When I worked on research on heavy metals contamination in urban soils the lead industry had a collection of pet experts they trotted out to attack researchers and research indicating that the dangers, especially for infants and pre-school age children, were understated. They were particularly vicious in their attacks on Dr. Herbert Needleman*. Time and further research has vindicated Needleman's work but there have been no mea culpas from the lead industries captive scientists. If there is a hell I trust there is a special place for them.

*These were not collegial academic disagreements, they were out to ruin him.
You are being too gentle by even giving credit to hubris or stupidity. It's all 100% money or politics, but... politics is money, so, yeah, money. Most don't care what happens after their moment of fame. They will be a footnote or dead. But if they can make thousands or millions for saying something now, well, yeah, there they go.
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
Our Govt just dropped the 1.5meter rule, facemasks only required for public transport okains and airports, bars restaurants, events can happen at 75% of capacity for unseated events but access to events and restaurants etc depends on the 3G rule (vaccinated, recovered or tested negative). Only nightclubs and disco's still need to close at midnight, which IMO defeats the whole point of going to one.

So there is light at the end of the tunnel...let's hope we do not enter another tunnel.
 

big_adventure

What impulse control?
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
1,407
Location
Paris
Our Govt just dropped the 1.5meter rule, facemasks only required for public transport okains and airports, bars restaurants, events can happen at 75% of capacity for unseated events but access to events and restaurants etc depends on the 3G rule (vaccinated, recovered or tested negative). Only nightclubs and disco's still need to close at midnight, which IMO defeats the whole point of going to one.

So there is light at the end of the tunnel...let's hope we do not enter another tunnel.
I hope so for you guys. You have been stable at about 2500 cases a day for a month. Here in France, we've recently dropped to less than that (despite nearly 4x the population), and are on a continuous downward curve. As long as the vax+ checking is strict, hopefully it'll be OK. Ours is, here - you can't do anything without someone scanning your code. Indoor anything is still masked on top of the vax+ check. Of course, bars, nightclubs, restaurants, etc. are not masked. Can't get in the way of consumption.
 

Bill13

Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
2,141
Reaction score
92
That is great news! The US governments refusal to acknowledge natural immunity's superiority to a man made vaccine has been baffling. Hospitalizations caused by Covid (as opposed to with Covid) should be broken out into not vaccinated & never had Covid, not vaccinated but had Covid, had Covid and was vaccinated, and vaccinated but never had Covid.
Today's WSJ had a nice opinion piece about this: Opinion | Covid Confusion at the CDC

The first quote: "Sound data from the CDC has been especially lacking on natural immunity from prior Covid infection. On Aug. 25, Israel published the most powerful and scientifically rigorous study on the subject to date. In a sample of more than 700,000 people, natural immunity was 27 times more effective than vaccinated immunity in preventing symptomatic infections."

The second quote:

"The CDC did put out a study on natural immunity last month, forcefully concluding that vaccinated immunity was 2.3 times better than natural immunity. The CDC used these results to justify telling those with natural immunity to get vaccinated.

But the rate of infection in each group was less than 0.01%, meaning infections were exceedingly rare in the short two-month time period the agency chose to study. This is odd, given there are more than a year of data available. Moreover, despite having data on all 50 states, the CDC only reported data from Kentucky. Was Kentucky the only state that produced the desired result? Why else exclude the same data from the other 49 states?"
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
did you read the study article and not just the press release about it before coming to conclusions and suspicion?

The vaccine is not available for more than like 8 months, and you need to do a comparison in the same time frame, so they picked these two months, it is explained/described in the article.

From what I see the study concludes that the risk of getting re-infected is higher when you already had Covid than when you are vaccinated (reduces that risk to 0)
I'm pretty sure, though the choice for that state is not explicitly explained that it had something to do with th eplace of work of the authors, Kentucky. I'm also pretty sure that the results will be very similar for ANY state.

the editors take;
What is already known about this topic?

Reinfection with human coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has been documented. Currently, limited evidence concerning the protection afforded by vaccination against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is available.

What is added by this report?

Among Kentucky residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, vaccination status of those reinfected during May–June 2021 was compared with that of residents who were not reinfected. In this case-control study, being unvaccinated was associated with 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with being fully vaccinated.

What are the implications for public health practice?

To reduce their likelihood for future infection, all eligible persons should be offered COVID-19 vaccine, even those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.
 
Last edited:

Barmoley

Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
3,904
Location
USA
The CDC study was to compare natural protection vs natural protection + full vaccination. They determined that vaccination provides additional protection. Is this a surprise to anyone? This study did not compare purely vaccine vs natural immunity. The Israeli study compared purely vaccine vs natural immunity and found that natural immunity is much stronger. Last time I checked when it came out the study was not peer reviewed, so I don't know how much we can believe the Israeli study. Maybe it was reviewed since.

It seems clear that if your chance of getting seriously sick is extremely small after recovery than even if the vaccine improves your immunity 2.3 times, the vaccine is basically wasted on you. Now, I believe that the vaccines are very safe, but wasting them seems counterintuitive in the world that has a huge shortage of them.
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
what exactly is it you are trying to say? which study and who are saying anything?

Bottom line conclusion from the CDC study is that the authors suggest that people with natural immunity should also be OFFERED vaccination to protect them from re-infection. Sounds reasonable to me, whether people want to is up to them. The study also does not speak of morbidity and mortality of re-infection so who can judge what impact the relatively small risk may have?

the limitations of the CDC study are also presented; one of them is ; Finally, this is a retrospective study design using data from a single state during a 2-month period; therefore, these findings cannot be used to infer causation. Additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted to support these findings.
 

natto

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2015
Messages
236
Reaction score
42
Location
Wilhelmsburg.de
Do the last posts show some hope? may I ecxpect a less horrible future?

So far germany got stuck at 80/100 000 infections since about a week. Schools are open since few weeks and restrictions get lowered. Step by step people return to live as they are used to.

I would like to understand what stopped the exponential increase, despite weather becoming more covid frindly and lowering restrictions. Not knowing much the latest numbers might be the result of less tests, because vaccinated people use less tests, might be about how data is collected.

I would like a reliable explanation!
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
How about; vaccination actually works despite what many people think, and that the vaccination rate is getting high enough to really matter?
Denmark is cancelling all Covid measures.

EDIT: vax rate PLUS herd immunity of course
 
Last edited:

natto

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2015
Messages
236
Reaction score
42
Location
Wilhelmsburg.de
How about; vaccination actually works despite what many people think, and that the vaccination rate is getting high enough to really matter?
Denmark is cancelling all Covid measures.

EDIT: vax rate PLUS herd immunity of course
Vaccination shows up in statistic data, no question! you may be right about this, and I hope so. The last weeks showed infections incresing, not caring for vaccination rate. We may have reached a point where the vaccination reduces R to one. This idea fits the data of some other countries. The next days will show what to ecpect. If you are right, I would expect R to rise again, depending on the vaccination rate. . OK, this idea is good enough to go to bed

btw: Herd immunity sounds funny to me. With measels older people got it in their youth, and other people only need one shot to never get measels. Enough people vaccinated would stop measels forever, I hope. With covid I don't see anything that provides herd immunity.

Thank you, and have a good night.
 

Barmoley

Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
3,904
Location
USA
what exactly is it you are trying to say? which study and who are saying anything?

Bottom line conclusion from the CDC study is that the authors suggest that people with natural immunity should also be OFFERED vaccination to protect them from re-infection. Sounds reasonable to me, whether people want to is up to them. The study also does not speak of morbidity and mortality of re-infection so who can judge what impact the relatively small risk may have?

the limitations of the CDC study are also presented; one of them is ; Finally, this is a retrospective study design using data from a single state during a 2-month period; therefore, these findings cannot be used to infer causation. Additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted to support these findings.
You presented portions of the study that say that fully vaccinated are 2.34 more protected than unvaccinated. This makes it sound like the study was about vaccine vs no vaccine on people who were never sick. I pointed out that it was vaccine vs no vaccine, but for people recovered from COVID. This makes a huge difference since if natural protection is similar to being fully vaccinated then recovered people should not be vaccinated. You would not offer additional full vaccination to already fully vaccinated people. In the US recovered are treated as unvaccinated, this means that unless you have vaccine cards you need to be constantly tested even though you are potentially in the same category as fully vaccinated. Some countries treat recovered as fully vaccinated and I think this is correct assuming the protection is similar.

Vaccine should be offered to anyone, but recovered should not be forced to vaccinate, since vaccine should be used for unvaccinated that haven’t been sick. Improving protection of someone who is very unlikely to be seriously sick should be the last priority. CDC study is misleading and it should not be used to drive policy to vaccinate everyone. It would be better if they studied pure vaccination protection vs pure natural protection.
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
@Barmoley I presented the HIGHLIGHTS of the study and mentioned this and I copied the conclusion of the authors and one of the limitations they offered, reading the full paper helps as both the highlights and the CDC messaging are not the authors responsability. The authors wrote a well balanced paper with new information about re-infection risk, and that is about it.
The conclusion is that natural immunity is NOT comparable to immunity from vaccination as far as re-infection is concerned.

In most countries in the EU now 3G is used to allow access to various things; cured, vaccinated or tested in all three cases you need to show proof. Is there no way in the US to prove recovery?


What the CDC communications people did with the content and why is unclear to me too, yet I fail to see the 'misleading' aspect of the study article yet you may have a point saying that people draw misleading conclusions about the content. I also fail to see anything leading me to believe anyone is being forced to be vaccinated, the US overall vaccination rate is further proof of a lack of force (and motivation).
 
Last edited:

riba

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
673
Reaction score
694
Location
The Netherlands
Fwiw, there is also a temporal aspect. E.g. here the test status expires after 24h , and the 'cured' status expires after 180 days.
 

big_adventure

What impulse control?
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
1,407
Location
Paris
You presented portions of the study that say that fully vaccinated are 2.34 more protected than unvaccinated. This makes it sound like the study was about vaccine vs no vaccine on people who were never sick. I pointed out that it was vaccine vs no vaccine, but for people recovered from COVID. This makes a huge difference since if natural protection is similar to being fully vaccinated then recovered people should not be vaccinated. You would not offer additional full vaccination to already fully vaccinated people. In the US recovered are treated as unvaccinated, this means that unless you have vaccine cards you need to be constantly tested even though you are potentially in the same category as fully vaccinated. Some countries treat recovered as fully vaccinated and I think this is correct assuming the protection is similar.

Vaccine should be offered to anyone, but recovered should not be forced to vaccinate, since vaccine should be used for unvaccinated that haven’t been sick. Improving protection of someone who is very unlikely to be seriously sick should be the last priority. CDC study is misleading and it should not be used to drive policy to vaccinate everyone. It would be better if they studied pure vaccination protection vs pure natural protection.
There is an issue there, of course: there is no shortage of vaccines in the US. None at all. Anybody who wants one can have one, today, almost anywhere they like, for free. Just get the vaccine and stop trying to find reasons not to do it. Being vaccinated + recovered is better than just vaccinated or just recovered. Why on Earth wouldn't you get vaccinated?

@Barmoley I presented the HIGHLIGHTS of the study and mentioned this and I copied the conclusion of the authors and one of the limitations they offered, reading the full paper helps as both the highlights and the CDC messaging are not the authors responsability. The authors wrote a well balanced paper with new information about re-infection risk, and that is about it.
The conclusion is that natural immunity is NOT comparable to immunity from vaccination as far as re-infection is concerned.

In most countries in the EU now 3G is used to allow access to various things; cured, vaccinated or tested in all three cases you need to show proof. Is there no way in the US to prove recovery?


What the CDC communications people did with the content and why is unclear to me too, yet I fail to see the 'misleading' aspect of the study article yet you may have a point saying that people draw misleading conclusions about the content. I also fail to see anything leading me to believe anyone is being forced to be vaccinated, the US overall vaccination rate is further proof of a lack of force (and motivation).
Agree on everything, they weren't trying to be misleading in any way I could discern in the article - and no, in the US, there is no way to prove recovery because there is no centralized system to manage positive test results. In France, like I'm sure in the NL, having a centralized health care system means that they can issue an official, coded test certificate. Show a positive cert with a following negative cert, and you prove recovery well enough. The US doesn't have that anywhere. They don't even have a consistent vaccination card - companies, states, counties, whatever all do their own.

And, of course...

Fwiw, there is also a temporal aspect. E.g. here the test status expires after 24h , and the 'cured' status expires after 180 days.
Here in France, a negative test counts in the vax+ category for 48 or 72 hours, depending on the activity. Recovery counts for 6 months.

Over 65's and other at-risk people can already get a booster officially.
 

Keith Sinclair

Supporting Member
Joined
May 10, 2012
Messages
4,974
Reaction score
1,267
Location
Hawaii
Here you have to show app. on phone proof of shots to go anywhere. Large groups inside or outside limited. Inside Mask mandate except eating of coarse.

Quite a few pregnant mothers in hospital all not vaccinated. Were afraid to get shots when pregnant. Kids conceived during lockdown.
Doctor said never in her career seen so many women in bad shape while pregnant. One has died.

Tampa Bay football game had over 65 thousand fans in stadium. Hardly any wearing
mask. Watching F1 racing in Holland & Germany plenty fans again no mask. Think heard Japan canceled F1 this season. Look how tight Olympics were.

I'm waiting to see if cases continue to go up with loaded stadiums in football, & chugging beers tailgating in parking lots.
 

big_adventure

What impulse control?
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
1,407
Location
Paris
Here you have to show app. on phone proof of shots to go anywhere. Large groups inside or outside limited. Inside Mask mandate except eating of coarse.

Quite a few pregnant mothers in hospital all not vaccinated. Were afraid to get shots when pregnant. Kids conceived during lockdown.
Doctor said never in her career seen so many women in bad shape while pregnant. One has died.

Tampa Bay football game had over 65 thousand fans in stadium. Hardly any wearing
mask. Watching F1 racing in Holland & Germany plenty fans again no mask. Think heard Japan canceled F1 this season. Look how tight Olympics were.

I'm waiting to see if cases continue to go up with loaded stadiums in football, & chugging beers tailgating in parking lots.
Japan has a huuuuuuuuge vax issue though - the country was under 5% vax'ed when the Olympics kicked off.

Most of Western Europe is much further along than the States, and it shows in the case rates. I can't say if it's a good thing to go maskless packed in with 100K people, but when you know that the vax rate is pushing 80% and the vax/neg test rate is 100% to get into the event, well, risk is mitigated.

In the US, there are too many people going all Braveheart on this particular soapbox.

And therefore, the US case toll and death toll is approaching 25% of the world's total per day.
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
We need to dissociate cases from vaccination, which is vastly more important as you still can get infected (much less likely so) when vaccinated but the likehood that bad things happen is extremely low.
 

Barmoley

Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
3,904
Location
USA
There is an issue there, of course: there is no shortage of vaccines in the US. None at all. Anybody who wants one can have one, today, almost anywhere they like, for free. Just get the vaccine and stop trying to find reasons not to do it. Being vaccinated + recovered is better than just vaccinated or just recovered. Why on Earth wouldn't you get vaccinated?
The issue is that even though there is no shortage in the US there is a shortage in the rest of the world. WHO is begging wealthy nations to not boost their vaccinated and instead share with nations that need the vaccines. Should we just ignore the rest of the world and just boost every 6 month? Someone might decide not to get vaccinated after recovery for the same reason you wouldn't buy 2 lottery tickets instead of 1 when deciding to play, your odds of winning are much higher, but they are still so tiny that not playing at all is a better decision. People play anyway, but with covid we are supposed to follow the science not just do what makes us feel better regardless of evidence. If there were no shortages of vaccines everywhere then sure vaccinate as often as you want.

Agree on everything, they weren't trying to be misleading in any way I could discern in the article - and no, in the US, there is no way to prove recovery because there is no centralized system to manage positive test results. In France, like I'm sure in the NL, having a centralized health care system means that they can issue an official, coded test certificate. Show a positive cert with a following negative cert, and you prove recovery well enough. The US doesn't have that anywhere. They don't even have a consistent vaccination card - companies, states, counties, whatever all do their own.

And, of course...



Here in France, a negative test counts in the vax+ category for 48 or 72 hours, depending on the activity. Recovery counts for 6 months.

Over 65's and other at-risk people can already get a booster officially.
In the US you could prove recovery by showing positive and then negative tests or by showing a test indicating you have antibodies, but these are not taken into consideration. CDC basically used the discussed study to say that since protection goes up when vaccinating recovered then just vaccinate everyone because there is no harm. This is true, but it ignores the rest of the world that is lacking in the vaccines. Sure CDC maybe is not supposed to care about the rest of the world, but the pandemic is global, so solutions need to be somewhat global.

In any case at this point covid discussions have nothing to do with science and are more like religious believes. Some believe vaccines are evil, some that they will solve everything. Add to this all the political baggage and it is very difficult for a regular person to make the right decisions. To me it is pretty clear that unvaccinated should vaccinate even more so for vulnerable, recovered I don't know maybe at some point we need more studies on how long natural immunity lasts, I also don't know about boosters. Especially boosters for recovered + vaccinated, I am sure the booster will increase protection even more. I also realize that choices on individual level of either recovered or vaccinated will not help the world anyway. It is not as if I forgo the booster it will go to some other country to someone who needs it more.
 

ian

Not banned
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
5,184
Reaction score
10,252
Location
Boston, MA
Someone might decide not to get vaccinated after recovery for the same reason you wouldn't buy 2 lottery tickets instead of 1 when deciding to play, your odds of winning are much higher, but they are still so tiny that not playing at all is a better decision.
That may be a rational decision on an individual scale, but I think the analogy breaks down when you consider that if everyone got a vaccine that made them half as likely to be infected, then a virus that has an R_0 of like 1.5 or whatever would then result in each person infecting less than one other person, and then the virus would die out. So it's possibly not a rational decision on the scale of public policy, depending on what all the numbers are. Even if you have a more infectious disease, slightly cutting down the effective infectiousness by vaccinating everyone can result in a huge difference in the number of infected people, I guess.

Sending vaccines abroad to places that need them the most sounds like a good idea to me, though. I don't have any idea of what difficulties there are with the logistics of that (I'm sure there are many), but in principle I totally support combating the global problem over unduly* prioritizing the USA.


*Don't ask me what unduly means. I don't know anything.
 

big_adventure

What impulse control?
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
1,407
Location
Paris
The issue is that even though there is no shortage in the US there is a shortage in the rest of the world. WHO is begging wealthy nations to not boost their vaccinated and instead share with nations that need the vaccines. Should we just ignore the rest of the world and just boost every 6 month? Someone might decide not to get vaccinated after recovery for the same reason you wouldn't buy 2 lottery tickets instead of 1 when deciding to play, your odds of winning are much higher, but they are still so tiny that not playing at all is a better decision. People play anyway, but with covid we are supposed to follow the science not just do what makes us feel better regardless of evidence. If there were no shortages of vaccines everywhere then sure vaccinate as often as you want.



In the US you could prove recovery by showing positive and then negative tests or by showing a test indicating you have antibodies, but these are not taken into consideration. CDC basically used the discussed study to say that since protection goes up when vaccinating recovered then just vaccinate everyone because there is no harm. This is true, but it ignores the rest of the world that is lacking in the vaccines. Sure CDC maybe is not supposed to care about the rest of the world, but the pandemic is global, so solutions need to be somewhat global.

In any case at this point covid discussions have nothing to do with science and are more like religious believes. Some believe vaccines are evil, some that they will solve everything. Add to this all the political baggage and it is very difficult for a regular person to make the right decisions. To me it is pretty clear that unvaccinated should vaccinate even more so for vulnerable, recovered I don't know maybe at some point we need more studies on how long natural immunity lasts, I also don't know about boosters. Especially boosters for recovered + vaccinated, I am sure the booster will increase protection even more. I also realize that choices on individual level of either recovered or vaccinated will not help the world anyway. It is not as if I forgo the booster it will go to some other country to someone who needs it more.
1st point - showing valid proof : Sadly, in the US, everything is non-standardized. Meaning that test results are unique to a particular lab, insurer, drugstore, whatever. There is no standardized reporting format nationwide, so there is no standardized way to validate them. In Europe, for all the faults we have here, we DO have that in place.

2nd point - the numbers aren't lottery ticket numbers. This is true of other diseases as well: having a light case might mean your body never developed a strong immune response, so you might not have great protection despite having had the virus. Also, there is plenty of anecdotal "proof" that protection wanes over time - mostly in that nobody gets the bug again within 6 months of having it (literally, nobody) but people DO contract it after. And any time it's active in a system, even if it's a mild case, it's an opportunity to both spread the disease AND to develop a variant. Being vax'ed is very solid protection and being vax'ed plus victimized is even better. Everything agrees on this. I don't need to know precise numbers to say that it's a good idea to get vax'ed. I guarantee that 99% of people out there have no idea how effective the polio vaccine is (Salk's was only about 65% effective), but damn near everyone had it and because of that, polio was defeated in most of the world. Chicken pox has basically been defeated in western countries.

I agree that the difference may or may not be marginal - but there IS a definite difference and, given the number of people who are screwing it up for everyone else by not getting vaccinated, having everyone else who doesn't hate society and doesn't hate their fellow humans taking an extra, free, quick, nearly painless step to better protect all of us seems like a good idea.

3rd - Yes, you not having a vaccine or a booster will definitely not result in that vaccine being administered in Rwanda. We'd need teleporters, we don't have them yet. I wish we did. There's a disappointing and sad side to that; on the other hand, imagine the wrath and invective that would be hurled at the administration in France, the Netherlands or the US if people who wanted a vaccine couldn't get a vaccine. So the people in office, depending on our suffrage to remain there, have it in their best interest to have vax's available.

Note, I am pretty much agreeing with you on most of what you say about the hard-ish science, I just think that it's important to avoid excuses for not getting vaccinated, and it's important to put the context out, well, at least my view of it. I have nothing against you and I'm not "arguing" as much as looking at the point from a different direction.
 

Barmoley

Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
3,904
Location
USA
That may be a rational decision on an individual scale, but I think the analogy breaks down when you consider that if everyone got a vaccine that made them half as likely to be infected, then a virus that has an R_0 of like 1.5 or whatever would then result in each person infecting less than one other person, and then the virus would die out. So it's possibly not a rational decision on the scale of public policy, depending on what all the numbers are. Even if you have a more infectious disease, slightly cutting down the effective infectiousness by vaccinating everyone can result in a huge difference in the number of infected people, I guess.

Sending vaccines abroad to places that need them the most sounds like a good idea to me, though. I don't have any idea of what difficulties there are with the logistics of that (I'm sure there are many), but in principle I totally support combating the global problem over unduly* prioritizing the USA.


*Don't ask me what unduly means. I don't know anything.
The question was "Why on Earth wouldn't you get vaccinated?" in the context of previously recovered person, this is an individual level question, so my response is individual level as well. An example, of why on Earth a recovered or previously vaccinated individual would decide not to get vaccinated or boosted. The argument that some make is that recovered have same level of immunity as fully vaccinated. If this is the case then 2 groups should be treated the same. Currently we don't fully vaccinate a previously fully vaccinated person, so you shouldn't fully vaccinate a recovered person. You might want to boost both at some point, 6 month maybe. This all assumes natural immunity is similar to being fully vaxed.

From the public policy stand point it is simpler to just say vax all, so this is what is being done. I just wish that there were more studies on natural immunity, as a bonus we might stop villainizing people if they don't get vaxed with a valid reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ian

AT5760

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
846
Reaction score
1,290
Location
Omaha, NE
How are things locally for everyone? Here in eastern Nebraska (U.S.), COVID definitely isn't gone, but it also isn't affecting most people's everyday lives. The state has no real remaining restrictions and isn't tracking numbers consistently. Hospitals are busy; although anecdotally non-COVID illnesses (particularly in children) are driving a lot of that. School mask mandates are the biggest flashpoint with the folks against mask requirements becoming increasingly vitriolic.
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
How are things locally for everyone? Here in eastern Nebraska (U.S.), COVID definitely isn't gone, but it also isn't affecting most people's everyday lives. The state has no real remaining restrictions and isn't tracking numbers consistently. Hospitals are busy; although anecdotally non-COVID illnesses (particularly in children) are driving a lot of that. School mask mandates are the biggest flashpoint with the folks against mask requirements becoming increasingly vitriolic.
Johns Hopkins Covid tracker shows a black hole where you live, did your state pull a 'Tanzania" and decide not to count cases so Covid goes away?:oops:
 

AT5760

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
846
Reaction score
1,290
Location
Omaha, NE
Yes.

For the first 3-4 months, my state's governor kept his head down, listened to the medical professionals, and was a bit of an outlier compared to other governors in his political party. At some point that changed. Now, we don't have any concept of what numbers look like on a state-wide level.
 

ian

Not banned
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
5,184
Reaction score
10,252
Location
Boston, MA
The question was "Why on Earth wouldn't you get vaccinated?" in the context of previously recovered person, this is an individual level question, so my response is individual level as well. An example, of why on Earth a recovered or previously vaccinated individual would decide not to get vaccinated or boosted. The argument that some make is that recovered have same level of immunity as fully vaccinated. If this is the case then 2 groups should be treated the same. Currently we don't fully vaccinate a previously fully vaccinated person, so you shouldn't fully vaccinate a recovered person. You might want to boost both at some point, 6 month maybe. This all assumes natural immunity is similar to being fully vaxed.

From the public policy stand point it is simpler to just say vax all, so this is what is being done. I just wish that there were more studies on natural immunity, as a bonus we might stop villainizing people if they don't get vaxed with a valid reason.
Sorry, maybe I misinterpreted. Just seemed like the question of "what's rational for an individual" was getting tied up with "what do we as a nation think is rational for an individual, and therefore as a public policy should be accepted as an ok individual choice".
 

MarcelNL

professional blame taker
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,480
Yes.

For the first 3-4 months, my state's governor kept his head down, listened to the medical professionals, and was a bit of an outlier compared to other governors in his political party. At some point that changed. Now, we don't have any concept of what numbers look like on a state-wide level.
I visit(ed) the US very frequently and work with collegues in the US on a daily basis, but I have never been SO amazed as in the last year and a half....stunned.
 

tcmx3

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
1,797
How are things locally for everyone? Here in eastern Nebraska (U.S.), COVID definitely isn't gone, but it also isn't affecting most people's everyday lives. The state has no real remaining restrictions and isn't tracking numbers consistently. Hospitals are busy; although anecdotally non-COVID illnesses (particularly in children) are driving a lot of that. School mask mandates are the biggest flashpoint with the folks against mask requirements becoming increasingly vitriolic.
I mean I live in Texas which is just a complete disaster but let me tell you my suburb, whose demographics are pretty close to this forums, is acting like COVID isnt around anymore.

Never has it been more clear to me that there are two Americas than when you look at the demographics of who is dying around here.
 

Luftmensch

Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
2,090
@Barmoley,

You seem to be holding contradictory views. I couldnt walk past this comment:

as a bonus we might stop villainizing people if they don't get vaxed with a valid reason.
Nobody is villainising people who dont get vaccinated... if they have a valid reason. I have not heard even the most militant pro-vaccine evangelical, hecktor people suffering from autoimmune diseases. I'll even uncomfortably accomodate people with religious beliefs that prohibit vaccination. Simply disagreeing with the current medical consensus or civic orders are not 'valid reasons'.

Current consensus is that recovering from covid does not necessarily confer a robust immune response. A low-dose exposure to the virus does not guarantee a high level of antibodies. This skips past the obvious statement of risk that is associated with a high-dose exposure to the virus. Whether or not you have had covid, getting vaccinated helps protect you and others.

You are using language that has the seeds of anti-science language. Claiming rich countries are vaccinating people with 'natural immunity' at the cost of poor countries is leftie camouflage. I am afraid, as @big_adventure points out, Americans getting vaccinated in America does not subtract vaccines from poorer countries. That is simply not how the vaccine supply chains and deals work. Offering the opinion that people who recovered from covid should not be vaccinated is a dog-whistle to anti-vaxxers.
 
Last edited:

daveb

Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderators
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
13,110
Reaction score
5,662
There certainly is a movement in this country to villainize people who have not gotten vaxed - for whatever reason. Deny employment, attendance, participation, etc simply to drive the vax numbers up is not only folly but will have unintended but predictable consequences.

Because Barmoley got off to a good start, I just want to capture and "tweak" his thesis.

From the public policy stand point it is simpler to just say vax all, so this is what is being done. Simple has a great attraction to politicians who prefer to "do something" and then conflate it with "accomplish something". I just wish that there were more studies on natural immunity, as a bonus we might stop villainizing people if they don't get vaxed for whatever reason they choose.

Pro choice is not anti-vaccine.
 
Top