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

[MagnificentUnicorn]

That quote says being vaccinated is at LEAST as good as infection antibodies. It also says getting a mRNA vaccine after having Covid gives greater protection. So at least as good probably means as good or better. I’m not sure what your point is, the article still says being vaccinated after having Covid is recommended.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[The AD]

Yep, seems like just more evidence that vaccines make sense for everyone, not just for those who haven't had Covid.

[MultiVerse]

Skidog's article dates back to August. The article links to the much discussed REACT-1 study conducted by Imperial College London so it's a mystery why he would suggest it's being ignored. It's anybody's guess if he's purposely searching out healthline.com or medicalnewstoday.com articles to stir shit up or just to troll but if anyone wants to see for themselves the study in skidog's article is the same as the one linked below:


In an ongoing randomized trial with over 300K people involving regular testing to determine both vaccine immunity and natural immunity during Delta, mRNA vaccine immunity performs better than natural immunity.

The blue column contains mRNA vaccinated numbers, the yellow AZ, the green column contains unvaccinated but tested positive in the past:

Attachment 386886

The chart shows mRNA > previous infection > AZ against a low viral burden. Whereas against a high viral burden all vaccinated people had fewer symptoms when a breakthrough infection occurred compared with previous infection.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...237v1.full.pdf

[MontuckyFried]

the streets were empty at night.... like, there was nothing to do and we were not allowed to met in private except a partner or sexpartner ( and not changing every day : D )

there were talks of people getting checked and if your excuse was bad u were fined.

i dont know anybody personally, but word of mouth stories went around.
people followed in general

Austrians being sooper compliant, eh? Ya don't say?.....

[Skidog]

That quote says being vaccinated is at LEAST as good as infection antibodies. It also says getting a mRNA vaccine after having Covid gives greater protection. So at least as good probably means as good or better. I’m not sure what your point is, the article still says being vaccinated after having Covid is recommended.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

but we should ignore prior infection altogether? Thats my point...address that...

you can't, i believe honestly, say that prior infection isnt "enough". We all still can get sick vaxxed or not, we still seem to shed same viral loads (close depending on study). Still unknown, or I havent seen, data on viral loads with prior+vax are any different.

Never sick = get vaccinated no question your odds are better
Vaccinated = safe, but still can get sick and make others sick, even if they are vaccinated
Prior Covid = studies seem to point to it being = to or maybe possibly better than 2x vaccine in protection terms. Still can get sick and get other sick
Prior Covid + Vax = Studies seem to point to lesser symptoms/little to no hospitalization. Can still get sick, can still make others sick.

Drop unvaccinated/never sick, and tell me how any of those are vastly different?

We simply need a test that proves you have the necessary protection, its not immunity for any of us.

[Skidog]

Skidog's article dates back to August. The article links to the much discussed REACT-1 study conducted by Imperial College London so it's a mystery why he would say it's being ignored.

Wow yeah...refute it with a later study please???? its a fucking MONTH old....Or just keep slinging shit and ignoring other sides.

you believe prior covid infection is useless? many would disagree, not just REACT-1

[The AD]

Prior Covid = studies seem to point to it being = to or maybe possibly better than 2x vaccine in protection terms.

Mofro and others have posted many times evidence that this is false.

Aside from this, not sure what your point is? The evidence shows that previously infected individuals who are then vaccinated are better protected. I don't think anyone thinks that prior infection is useless.

[jono]

Can’t just not link it, tho…

Alta 2/27/08
https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...d.php?t=114683

Thanks. It's really good to recognize the subtlety required for a genuine quality troll.

[Skidog]

Skidog's article dates back to August. The article links to the much discussed REACT-1 study conducted by Imperial College London so it's a mystery why he would say it's being ignored. It's anybody's guess if he's purposely searching out healthline.com or medicalnewstoday.com articles to stir shit up or just to troll but if anyone wants to see for themselves the study in skidog's article is the same as the one below:


In an ongoing randomized trial with over 300K people involving regular testing to determine both vaccine immunity and natural immunity during Delta, mRNA vaccine immunity performs better than natural immunity.

The blue column contains mRNA vaccinated numbers, the yellow AZ, the green column contains unvaccinated but tested positive in the past:

Attachment 386886

The chart shows mRNA > previous infection > AZ against a low viral burden. Whereas against a high viral burden all vaccinated people had fewer symptoms when a breakthrough infection occurred compared with previous infection.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...237v1.full.pdf

huh yeah...that ONE part of the article used REACT-1...but the beginning of the article, which you so easily skimmed over...which is the OVERALL basis is from here

The researchers drew on data from the COVID-19 Infection Survey, a study led by the Office for National Statistics, the Department for Health and Social Care, and the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom.

[MultiVerse]

That quote says being vaccinated is at LEAST as good as infection antibodies. It also says getting a mRNA vaccine after having Covid gives greater protection. So at least as good probably means as good or better. I’m not sure what your point is, the article still says being vaccinated after having Covid is recommended.

The study says getting an mRNA vaccine after having Covid cuts the risk of infection in half.

[MultiVerse]

huh yeah...that ONE part of the article used REACT-1...but the beginning of the article, which you so easily skimmed over...which is the OVERALL basis is from here

The researchers drew on data from the COVID-19 Infection Survey, a study led by the Office for National Statistics, the Department for Health and Social Care, and the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom.

Try clicking on the link in your article. Then click on the link in my post. Then compare the two. If you do that, you'll find I didn't skim over anything.

[Skidog]

Mofro and others have posted many times evidence that this is false.

Aside from this, not sure what your point is? The evidence shows that previously infected individuals who are then vaccinated are better protected. I don't think anyone thinks that prior infection is useless.

yes, BETTER, not UNPROTECTED ....

Define Better now...if the difference ENOUGH?

y'all just dont want to admit that prior infections can actually be enough protection...never argued prior + vax was worse/better, never argued against vaccines...

I argue mandates that don't take all information into account. Simple as that...you all think its well and good..I dont...

[Adolf Allerbush]

I don't think anyone thinks that prior infection is useless.

but it might be close to being useless if the prior infection resulted in virtually no immune response. That's what others have been posting here, that there is a large amount of variability between one natural infection and another...ranging from asymptomatic to recovering after being on a vent, for example. As others have said and we keep on telling the contrarians, we know what happens when you vaccinate people, so it provides a baseline of protection for those who were naturally infected or not.

What some here are saying is that if you had a positive COVID-19 test and are not vaccinated, that merely showing that they at some point had a positive COVID-19 test that they shouldn't need to get vaccinated because they're already protected. The problem is that we don't know how much protection a really mild reaction to COVID-19 gives people...and the idea is to vaccinate so we all have a similar baseline level of protection which helps the immunocompromised by reducing the likelihood of it festering.

[The AD]

y'all just dont want to admit that prior infections can actually be enough protection

The key word here is "can." The problem is they often are not. That's why it makes sense to mandate vaccines for everyone. There has been data posted in this thread that makes that conclusion very clear.

[Adolf Allerbush]

The key word here is "can." The problem is they often are not. That's why it makes sense to mandate vaccines for everyone.

why is this such a difficult thing for some people to understand?

[Skidog]

Try clicking on the link in your article. Then click on the link in my post. Then compare the two.

If you do that, you'll find I didn't skim over anything. The researchers use the COVID-19 infection survey for the study.

so I see...your non peer reviewed study that shows different data is better than the other study cause it fits your argument...

Seems we are doing the same thing...and seems we have been here before and thats my point..you refuse to see any side but the one you wish to see...

What I see is data that shows, in reality, that prior infection does provide some, if not possibly as good as vaccination, but yes, those people should get "EXTRA" protection just cause the government mandates it. They can still get sick, they can still get other sick, but they should jump in for the extra or they are vile slime... Oh the hypocrisy.

[The AD]

For fuck's sake...

[jono]

Define Better now...if the difference ENOUGH?

Define ENOUGH vs. delta and/or delta+.

[Skidog]

The key word here is "can." The problem is they often are not. That's why it makes sense to mandate vaccines for everyone. There has been data posted in this thread that makes that conclusion very clear.

what conclusion? its still not been addressed at all that vaccinated or prior infection can still get sick, and can still get others sick...unvaccinated arent even in the discussion in my mind.

[MultiVerse]

so I see...your non peer reviewed study that shows different data is better than the other study cause it fits your argument...

what conclusion? its still not been addressed at all that vaccinated or prior infection can still get sick, and can still get others sick...unvaccinated arent even in the discussion in my mind.

It's the same study. Why is this so hard for you? Why do you keep lying about people not addressing these issues when it's been discussed everyday for months? Nobody is ignoring anything, your questions are answered every, single, day....

[Skidog]

For fuck's sake...

yes for fucks sake you all ignore anything you dont want to answer.

[Salvelinusconfluentus]

why is this such a difficult thing for some people to understand?

Because people don't want to be told what to do.

Also because a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.. ever heard that expression? Well the internet is proving that over and over.

[Adolf Allerbush]

Thanks. It's really good to recognize the subtlety required for a genuine quality troll.

That was an entertaining trip down memory lane. What a fucking douche.

[mtuhockey33]

but it might be close to being useless if the prior infection resulted in virtually no immune response. That's what others have been posting here, that there is a large amount of variability between one natural infection and another...ranging from asymptomatic to recovering after being on a vent, for example. As others have said and we keep on telling the contrarians, we know what happens when you vaccinate people, so it provides a baseline of protection for those who were naturally infected or not.

What some here are saying is that if you had a positive COVID-19 test and are not vaccinated, that merely showing that they at some point had a positive COVID-19 test that they shouldn't need to get vaccinated because they're already protected. The problem is that we don't know how much protection a really mild reaction to COVID-19 gives people...and the idea is to vaccinate so we all have a similar baseline level of protection which helps the immunocompromised by reducing the likelihood of it festering.

and it’s been shown that some people who get the vaccine don’t even develop antibodies! But we don’t need to test those people too! They’re immune because they got the vaccine!! Fuck testing everyone equally; we just want to be right!

[The AD]

yes for fucks sake you all ignore anything you dont want to answer.

We've been trying to answer you over and over. You won't listen.