COVID-19: Chapter 9 - OMGicron

Sorry, but I don’t see anything wrong with the article. Are you expecting the writer to take an advocacy position on vaccines being more effective than infection in terms of providing immunity? There seems to be real division among “experts”, and that’s what the article reflects. I personally know of several vaccinated people who have gotten covid. I know of some unvaccinated as well, but I don’t personally know of unvaccinated people who have had a second case of covid. How does herd immunity work if infected people don’t receive any future protection as a result of their infection?

1 Like

I don’t think anyone is saying that getting infected can convey no immunity. The pushback comes from the false equivalency between catching COVID and getting vaccinated. One is better than the other, full stop.

I don’t think anybody is arguing that infected people don’t receive any protection. What they’re saying, as I understand it, is that there is “wide variation in covid patients’ immune response to infection” plus unknown effectiveness against variants, so they should get vaccinated to be sure they are protected.

Meanwhile, the other side is saying things like

“The research on natural immunity is quite definitive now,” he told KHN. “It’s better than immunity conferred by vaccines.”

I think this statement, especially with this level of certainty, is completely unjustified.

Yeah I agree. I think that which is better (vaxxed or pozzed) is an interesting scientific question. And I’m not convinced that anyone knows for sure.

However, what there should be no disagreement on is that vaxxed + pozzed, is almost certainly better than either alone. So the answer to the first question is nearly irrelevant to whether a pozzed person should get vaxxed.

“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt” bertrand russell

2 Likes

Yeah, but the example he uses in the article is based on this lawsuit, and that’s what the plaintiff is contending. His next sentence says the view is not shared by the scientific community. A lot of times writers will use a news event, like a lawsuit, as an example to examine the broader issue, and that’s all he’s doing here. I don’t think the writer needs to ignore that quote, just like I don’t think you can ignore other ridiculous things that other people say. Can’t really write about Trump (for example) saying something outrageous and leave out the outrageous thing he says.

Strongly disagree with this. It’s heavily weighted towards vaccine.

1 Like

Ok. I’m not following that closely. And that’s based on high numbers of repeat cases among unvaccinated? Cause the number of vaxxed people being infected seems to be growing. Just saying its not always easy for reporters to not “both sides” something when there’s any doubt at all.

1 Like

The biggest issue is that people who develop immunity after infection are demographically very different from those who get vaccinated on top of the survivorship bias of that group. People who survive Covid are younger with better immune systems than those who don’t generally, and the ones that pull through with only minor effects could also have other more individual factors that bias them towards surviving.

Also, ain’t no prospective rct on Covid immunity for obvious reasons. The prospective rct data is also so much stronger.

I’ve yet to see a serious doctor without #medicalconservative or some other nonsense make that argument.

It’s very predictable:

A large August study from Israel, which showed better protection from infection than from vaccination, may help turn the tide toward acceptance of prior infection, Klausner said. “Everyone is just waiting for Fauci to say, ‘Prior infection provides protection,’” he said.

Again, they say tHe EvIdEnCe Is MoUnTiNg and yet the only evidence offered is [drumroll…] the same single-sourced Israel preprint that’s in all of these articles. A fucking preprint! The same one that DeSantis is citing! We all remember what happened with the last horse paste favorite preprint where the authors underdivided by over 800,000 and had to fully retract the paper in humiliation.

1 Like

But you won’t get vaccine priority if you lose weight.

;)

1 Like

I know you mean the impact on preventing future infection but I’m not willing to go through the actual disease to acquire the immunity.

I order of preference:

  1. Vax and never poz
  2. Vax and mild breakthrough case
  3. Mild case then vax
  4. Severe case then vax
  5. Severe case and never vax

Mild case and never vax is probably 3.5 but I can also accept 4.5.

I think also we are talking the average response to pozzing. If I understand correctly the variance in immune response is much higher in virus acquired vs vax acquired.

On re-read I think you are saying the same thing

Get the damn vax regarddless.

Also excellent posts that those with bad immune systems to begin are dead and so conveniently removed from the data AND that Israeli study suffers from same reporting bullshit as all the other papers.

It’s just so fascinating how these people can make the arguement sound strong, when in fact they are not.

A grad school buddy ~2 years younger than me just had to drop out of his Ph.D. program due to months of post-COVID neurological issues. Dude’s a healthy sub-35-year-old that used to kill it on the sand volleyball court. Stay safe everyone.

14 Likes

Jesus

I’m sending this to the yoga guy, along with this article:

We’ll see where it goes.

I would go 3, 2, 1, 4, 5. If mild case is truly mild, then it’s worth the extra sklansky immunity points.

What is typically the immune effect of exposure that does not develop into infection? If someone was vaxxed and regularly exposed to small amounts of covid, would that person expect to eventually have superior immunity to the same person if they never left their house?

The hard part is that the poz case is a chance card. No guarantees.

That’s why vax no virus is #1. No virus means no chance of a serious case.

Pure speculation is Maybe? No idea if while the body is clearing Delta from your system that you might generate some different antibodies to give you broader protection.

Sounds good at least and in practice probably being vaxxed and returning to some kind of social life means you are getting “micro” exposed.

But again it’s hard to control and a risk for an unknown benefit.

It’s stuff like this that fortifies the decision to get a booster. My current state of vaccination might prevent me from dying, but I’d much prefer to not get sick at all.

1 Like