Author Topic: Confirmed Infection Rate  (Read 234 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hpjet

  • Tourist
  • *
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 9
  • -Received: 4
  • Posts: 31
Confirmed Infection Rate
« on: December 15, 2021, 05:33:54 PM »
Infection Rate: Natural Immunity (Recovered) vs Vaccinated vs Hybrid (Recovered then Vaccinated vs Vaccinated then Recovered)
https://twitter.com/ClareCraigPath/status/1469277525390110720

Note that the above chart has Recovered 8-10, 10-12 and 12+ (so 3 extra rows) for Nat Immunity but only up to 6-8 months data for Vaccinated and Hybrid.

Sp compare 4-6 months data (highlighted) for more equal comparison:
https://twitter.com/Aroown/status/1469285067134582785

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline hpjet

  • Tourist
  • *
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 9
  • -Received: 4
  • Posts: 31
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2021, 05:36:42 PM »
So then, why is natural immunity being ignored?  (By the way, I am double vax'd but don't understand logic in not counting natural immunity other than Pfizer won't benefit otherwise...)

Offline CalBears96

  • O.C. Resident
  • ***
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 25
  • -Received: 56
  • Posts: 761
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2021, 05:42:20 PM »
So then, why is natural immunity being ignored?  (By the way, I am double vax'd but don't understand logic in not counting natural immunity other than Pfizer won't benefit otherwise...)

Because...what if you didn't acquire natural immunity? It is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY misleading to compare "natural immunity" vs. vaccine.

Vaccine is supposed to help prevent you from catching COVID.

Natural immunity means you already caught COVID. Kind of defeats the purpose of preventing you from catching COVID, don't you think?

Offline akula1488

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 25
  • -Received: 38
  • Posts: 410
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2021, 05:53:23 PM »
I think most scientists would agree natural immunity is not as targeted but could last longer. The problem is it is difficult to test and quantify natural immunity especially there are a lot of asymptomatic people after infection. So a lazy way would be vaccine mandate to jab everyone and hopefully the risk as a whole is better than the alternative.

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 152
  • -Received: 572
  • Posts: 2734
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2021, 05:59:05 PM »
So then, why is natural immunity being ignored?  (By the way, I am double vax'd but don't understand logic in not counting natural immunity other than Pfizer won't benefit otherwise...)

Because...what if you didn't acquire natural immunity? It is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY misleading to compare "natural immunity" vs. vaccine.

Vaccine is supposed to help prevent you from catching COVID.

Natural immunity means you already caught COVID. Kind of defeats the purpose of preventing you from catching COVID, don't you think?

Yea, side effects of that initial dose of natural can be pretty rough.


Offline hpjet

  • Tourist
  • *
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 9
  • -Received: 4
  • Posts: 31
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2021, 06:09:13 PM »
So then, why is natural immunity being ignored?  (By the way, I am double vax'd but don't understand logic in not counting natural immunity other than Pfizer won't benefit otherwise...)

Because...what if you didn't acquire natural immunity? It is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY misleading to compare "natural immunity" vs. vaccine.

Vaccine is supposed to help prevent you from catching COVID.

Natural immunity means you already caught COVID. Kind of defeats the purpose of preventing you from catching COVID, don't you think?

I think you misunderstand me.  If you vaccinate so you will not get Covid or transmit Covid (which we now know is not true),  and according to the chart, natural immunity (i.e. recovered) means you have better Covid prevention, why are vaccine passports not counting natural immunity?  And why are we not studying how long natural immunity lasts?  The vaccine protects against one protein (spike protein).  Natural immunity protects against Covid's 29 proteins (the whole virus).

If I get Covid and my protection is longer than a vaccine which lasts only 3 - 6 months, why are some saying that you have to get the booster regardless or your vaccine passport is expired?  Why would we want to get a shot every 3-6 months to be able to participate in society and also keep working (some companies in US are now requiring boosters) if we already caught Covid and have longer lasting immunity?  Why are we not measuring antibodies, etc. for a vaccine pass? 

Calbear, please explain this to me.

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline Ready2Downsize

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 15
  • -Received: 220
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Confirmed Infection Rate
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2021, 06:37:12 PM »
So then, why is natural immunity being ignored?  (By the way, I am double vax'd but don't understand logic in not counting natural immunity other than Pfizer won't benefit otherwise...)

Because...what if you didn't acquire natural immunity? It is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY misleading to compare "natural immunity" vs. vaccine.

Vaccine is supposed to help prevent you from catching COVID.

Natural immunity means you already caught COVID. Kind of defeats the purpose of preventing you from catching COVID, don't you think?

I think you misunderstand me.  If you vaccinate so you will not get Covid or transmit Covid (which we now know is not true),  and according to the chart, natural immunity (i.e. recovered) means you have better Covid prevention, why are vaccine passports not counting natural immunity?  And why are we not studying how long natural immunity lasts?  The vaccine protects against one protein (spike protein).  Natural immunity protects against Covid's 29 proteins (the whole virus).

If I get Covid and my protection is longer than a vaccine which lasts only 3 - 6 months, why are some saying that you have to get the booster regardless or your vaccine passport is expired?  Why would we want to get a shot every 3-6 months to be able to participate in society and also keep working (some companies in US are now requiring boosters) if we already caught Covid and have longer lasting immunity?  Why are we not measuring antibodies, etc. for a vaccine pass? 

Calbear, please explain this to me.

You would need to draw a titer and there is no data on what level of antibodies you would need to say you are immune. Then there are different variants, so you'd have to know if the antibodies YOU have are effective against all the variants around. Then if the immunity wanes, you'd have to have more titers drawn.

Pregnant ladies are tested for immunity to measles with a titer. Some have to get another vax even though they may have had all their doses when they were younger to get into school but in that case you know the level that you need in order to be considered immunized.

It would just be too difficult and there is not enough data. Going by someone's word they had covid wouldn't be enough imo.

The following member(s) thanked this post:


 

Talk Irvine Links

[Recent Posts]
[FAQ / Rules]

Site Supporters



Recent Posts

Re: Dow? by sleepy5136
[Today at 01:30:21 AM]


Re: Dow? by daedalus
[Yesterday at 11:35:24 PM]


Re: Renewable diesel (different from biodiesel) by daedalus
[Yesterday at 11:26:07 PM]


Re: Dow? by CalBears96
[Yesterday at 11:24:59 PM]


Re: Is Netflix going to die in the next year? by morekaos
[Yesterday at 10:52:14 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2022, SimplePortal