That has nothing to do with the mechanism by which getting the disease may confer additional immunity
This really shouldn’t be that hard for you. There hasn’t been a good study, so we don’t know.
If we don’t know, that means that the study could show either outcome.
If it shows that getting the disease confers more immunity, then it would suggest that there are other pathways activated by the disease that are not activated by the vaccine. This is what I said. Then you restated it and decided you needed to disagree with me because you are in one of your ikesian moods.
Using a gimmick while banned has always been grounds for catching a ban. Mods might look the other way if it’s a self-ban and the gimmick isn’t annoying, but this seems like a silly case to complain about.
but we do have proxies for the function of the immune system outside of antibody quants and the mRNA vaccines do very well there as well.
No one has been able to demonstrate in a lab or observational studies that getting the virus confers more immunity. Your talk about various immunity pathways has not held up in laboratory investigations in t-cell assays and the like.
You will not be able to do an RCT of people who get covid. It will never happen because it’s not ethical to do. Observational data is the best we have, and it hasn’t shown more immunity for a full infection.
All of this comes back to the actual reason for uncertainty. It’s not that there are various pathways in the immune system. It’s that the gold standard for studying such a thing is not possible in modern medical ethics. That is all. Bye.
Oh trust me this is nothing. Melk has taught me how to treat abscesses and how residency admissions work too. He’s mad about stuff from 5-10 years ago you see, so a few minutes of googling makes him an expert on anything when I say something.
What insults? Mentioning we had a nice 12 hour run of no whining? I don’t think that is much of an insult but ok. You immediately called me a no-content shitposter so GTFO with this nonsense.
Look, man. I don’t know what to tell you. For starters
is not the same as mRNA vaccines do better actually having the infection. You can’t really replicate the effect of actually having the disease and contracting the disease. So, that’s nice and all, but it doesn’t really have anything to do with what I was saying. Everyone agrees that the vaccines are great.
Secondly, I don’t know why you’ve suddenly decided to become RCT-or-bust, as you’ve often posted very differently when it suits your point of view. Obviously you couldn’t have an RCT, but you could design a prospective trial (as you seem to acknowledge), and that would be pretty compelling. And I think most reasonable people would say that if such a study showed a superiority of the vaccine, then that would be enough to say that we basically know.
But you are not most reasonable people. If I get you correctly you’ve arrived at the perfectly Ikesian position of “Well, we actually do know, but can’t say that because there hasn’t been an RCT”. Unfortunately, that is not what “we don’t know” means. It means we don’t know. And if we don’t know, it could be either case. And if it could be either case, that means plausible mechanisms for either case should exist.
Prana tells us a story about skin abscesses that he had. Ikes says culturing abscesses is "not recommended’. I post some medical literature that directly refutes this. Also the fucking dermatologist that prana initially saw actually cultured his abscess. But that doesn’t matter, ikes who has only been practicing unsupervised for like a couple of years knows more than an actual expert on skin disease. And the medical literature.
We end with ikes giving me a homework assignment to google some stuff, which I stupidly do, and says exactly what I said the first time around. Kind of like this latest disagreement.
I don’t know why ikes thinks I’m mad at him. It’s funny watch him flailing around with partial knowledge of things. It was funnier was he appealed to his authority as a medical student, though. But it still delivers amusement. I realize I’m probably the only one amused those, so I’ll try to knock it off . Sorry, everyone.
It’s pretty relevant in this case because he isn’t banned, he requested a silencing so he could still interact and then instead of shooting a mod a PM asking for his silence to be lifted he created an account to circumvent ignore lists.
You posted one guideline from 2013 from a specialty that doesn’t treat simple abscesses and for which there are numerous other papers showing antibiotics, cultures and what not are not necessary for a simple abscess. But hey the fuck do I know? You googled something that’s basically a medical education right? “Partial knowledge of things” the projection could not be larger.
“Not necessary” and “Not recommended” are not the same thing. The paper (2014, btw) made it very clear that while it is recommended, it is not necessary. It was also cited by the papers that you told me to search for as the basis for their reasoning. I get that reading is hard, but actually reading the contents of the stuff you cite (or in this case, didn’t actually cite) really helps.
And don’t take my word for it. After all, the dermatologist that prana saw cultured his abscess initially. What does he/she know? Certainly not more than the great ikes!
Some of my extended family is now convinced that vaxed people are the ones spreading Covid (due to the bullshit floating around facebook the past few months) and are cutting themselves off from people who have been vaccinated.
Hard to know whether to laugh or cry to be honest.
The fact that you think dermatologists are some sort of experts on abscesses is hilarious and demonstrates you know nothing about anything really. Primary management of abscesses is not derm whatsoever. Secondary management of abscesses is not derm whatsoever.
You just can’t stop yourself bud. It’s ok. That story is someone doing admittedly simple medicine that they don’t usually do and doing an unnecessary test. It would be like me telling a derm they are wrong about their evaluation of a mole.
This is not true. It really depends on the size of the abscesses and what they are caused by. If they are small abscesses that are a result of a biopsy that the dermatologist themselves performed, they would absolutely manage it themselves (which is what happened with Prana’s first abscess). I believe you said you has some friend who was a dermatologist. Ask him what he would do in the case of the bolded. If he disagrees with that I’ll eat my hat.
No reasonable person would say that a dermatologist is not an expert an managing an under 1 cm skin abscess. Certainly not the only type of expert, but definitely an expert. But again, you’re not a reasonable person.
