You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Confirmed Infection Rate
- Thread starter hpjet
- Start date
CalBears96
Well-known member
hpjet said: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 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.
nosuchreality
Well-known member
CalBears96 said:hpjet said: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.
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
hpjet said:CalBears96 said:hpjet said: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.