|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jul 14, 2021 18:42:13 GMT
Doesn't it seem evolutionary appropriate .. even beneficial.. to allow these genes to exit the pool ...
Don't treat'um.. Good riddance to stupid genes ..
It's sort'a like nitwits that climb mountains, get into trouble and look to someone else to save them..
I say leave them on the mountainside .. The next climber that comes by seeing a skeleton dangling from a rope might think twice.. . .
I will remove my tongue from my cheek at this point ...
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jul 14, 2021 18:49:04 GMT
But they are healthy and take good care of their health. They had COVID before. The antibodies will take care of them. The vaccine is more dangerous than the virus.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 19:09:01 GMT
But they are healthy and take good care of their health. They had COVID before. The antibodies will take care of them. The vaccine is more dangerous than the virus.
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,114
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 14, 2021 19:18:32 GMT
I say no.
Not out of any concern for their anti-vax philosophy or their self-centered "rights".
But rather, they tend to be both Variant Factories and Super Spreaders. This in turn can harm good people.
I would consider supporting locking them up and throwing away the key.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 19:20:10 GMT
I say no. Not out of any concern for their anti-vax philosophy or their self-centered "rights". But rather, they tend to be both Variant Factories and Super Spreaders. This in turn can harm good people. I would consider supporting locking them up and throwing away the key.
Tyrannical, authoritarian dictator-style. Nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jul 14, 2021 19:22:03 GMT
But they are healthy and take good care of their health. They had COVID before. The antibodies will take care of them. The vaccine is more dangerous than the virus.
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
What in the hell does #2 has to do with anything I said. And as for #1. Taking my words out of context is not a way to win an argument |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,114
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 14, 2021 19:23:58 GMT
I say no. Not out of any concern for their anti-vax philosophy or their self-centered "rights". But rather, they tend to be both Variant Factories and Super Spreaders. This in turn can harm good people. I would consider supporting locking them up and throwing away the key.
Tyrannical, authoritarian dictator-style. Nice.
It's no challenge any more...
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 19:25:55 GMT
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
What in the hell does #2 has to do with anything I said. And as for #1. Taking my words out of context is not a way to win an argument
#2 has to do with your "they had covid before" comment.
As for taking your words out of context, nope. I left them in your original context, so that claim makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 19:27:59 GMT
Tyrannical, authoritarian dictator-style. Nice.
It's no challenge any more...
If a simple post like mine is sign of being "triggered", what is it a sign of when someone posts the psychotic ravings you did about locking people away?
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 14, 2021 21:37:54 GMT
But they are healthy and take good care of their health. They had COVID before. The antibodies will take care of them. The vaccine is more dangerous than the virus.
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
If there's a study showing that these patients were recovered from Covid that would be research dynamite. Currently the scientific consensus is that within broad limits, recovery from infection and receipt of vaccine offer similar protection. www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccineThe likelihood, given the information that these C19 parients are not vaccinated, is that either the research showing protection from infection is wrong or that neither infection nor vaccines work well. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 21:44:01 GMT
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
If there's a study showing that these patients were recovered from Covid that would be research dynamite. Currently the scientific consensus is that within broad limits, recovery from infection and receipt of vaccine offer similar protection. www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccineThe likelihood, given the information that these C19 parients are not vaccinated, is that either the research showing protection from infection is wrong or that neither infection nor vaccines work well.
I don't understand your post. Are you referring to the ones discussed in the OP by the CNN post?
Why would knowing the sick folks are NOT vaccinated lead one to believe the vaccines don't work well? That doesn't make sense to me. I would see it as just the opposite.
My point I was making is that the people that CNN says are overwhelmingly not vaccinated are almost certain to be ALSO overwhelmingly NOT previously infected. My question was why CNN wouldn't include that bit. The innocent reason is that they don't have that information and neither do the hospital staff making the comment about vaccination status. The less innocent reason is that someone, somewhere doesn't want the past infection part to be widely known because they are of the mindset - for whatever reason - that everyone, whether they previously had it or not, should get vaccinated.
Edit: I think I get it. You were referring to the study showing similar effects of vaccination vs. natural immunity. And I was focused on the CNN post about the majority of hospital admissions being in the unvaccinated.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Jul 14, 2021 21:47:07 GMT
Doesn't it seem evolutionary appropriate .. even beneficial.. to allow these genes to exit the pool ...
Don't treat'um.. Good riddance to stupid genes ..
It's sort'a like nitwits that climb mountains, get into trouble and look to someone else to save them..
I say leave them on the mountainside .. The next climber that comes by seeing a skeleton dangling from a rope might think twice.. . .
I will remove my tongue from my cheek at this point ...
Agreed. And what dummy doesn’t know that eating too much garbage and not being active enough will lead to type 2 diabetes? Cut the insulin. “We” shouldn’t even treat them anymore. Also, who doesn’t know that unprotected gay sex could easily lead to AIDS? “We” shouldn’t treat those dummies either. Evolution. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 14, 2021 21:48:35 GMT
Doesn't it seem evolutionary appropriate .. even beneficial.. to allow these genes to exit the pool ...
Don't treat'um.. Good riddance to stupid genes ..
It's sort'a like nitwits that climb mountains, get into trouble and look to someone else to save them..
I say leave them on the mountainside .. The next climber that comes by seeing a skeleton dangling from a rope might think twice.. . .
I will remove my tongue from my cheek at this point ...
Agreed. And what dummy doesn’t know that eating too much garbage and not being active enough will lead to type 2 diabetes? Cut the insulin. “We” shouldn’t even treat them anymore. Also, who doesn’t know that unprotected gay sex could easily lead to AIDS? “We” shouldn’t treat those dummies either. Evolution.
Don't forget the option of locking them up and throwing away the key.
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 14, 2021 22:02:11 GMT
If there's a study showing that these patients were recovered from Covid that would be research dynamite. Currently the scientific consensus is that within broad limits, recovery from infection and receipt of vaccine offer similar protection. www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/14/recovering-from-covid-gives-similar-level-of-protection-to-vaccineThe likelihood, given the information that these C19 parients are not vaccinated, is that either the research showing protection from infection is wrong or that neither infection nor vaccines work well.
I don't understand your post. Are you referring to the ones discussed in the OP by the CNN post?
Why would knowing the sick folks are NOT vaccinated lead one to believe the vaccines don't work well? That doesn't make sense to me. I would see it as just the opposite.
My point I was making is that the people that CNN says are overwhelmingly not vaccinated are almost certain to be ALSO overwhelmingly NOT previously infected. My question was why CNN wouldn't include that bit. The innocent reason is that they don't have that information and neither do the hospital staff making the comment about vaccination status. The less innocent reason is that someone, somewhere doesn't want the past infection part to be widely known because they are of the mindset - for whatever reason - that everyone, whether they previously had it or not, should get vaccinated.
Edit: I think I get it. You were referring to the study showing similar effects of vaccination vs. natural immunity. And I was focused on the CNN post about the majority of hospital admissions being in the unvaccinated.
Our government is currently embarking upon a Covid regime that, according to epidemiologists, is tailor-made to create vaccine resistant variants. The push for as near as dammit universal vaccination ASAP is intended to reduce the virus's room for manoeuvre, and minimise the chance of yet another outbreak, with yet more death and economic carnage. I genuinely can't see any rational person opposing or refusing vaccination. I'm more than ambivalent about compulsory vaccination; I'm relaxed about legal restrictions on communal interaction for those refusing the vaccine, in the short term. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,114
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 14, 2021 22:53:57 GMT
It's no challenge any more...
If a simple post like mine is sign of being "triggered", what is it a sign of when someone posts the psychotic ravings you did about locking people away?
Triggered again!
You may set a new LNF record.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jul 15, 2021 1:01:19 GMT
Two things:
1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response?
2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
What in the hell does #2 has to do with anything I said. And as for #1. Taking my words out of context is not a way to win an argument My gawd, you are stupid |
|
|
|
Post by MojoJojo on Jul 15, 2021 3:03:41 GMT
But they are healthy and take good care of their health. They had COVID before. The antibodies will take care of them. The vaccine is more dangerous than the virus. Two things: 1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response? 2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
That's a really good point. Inoculation, whether through vaccine or exposure, has the same effect. I expect very few currently infected were previously positive and recovered. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,114
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 15, 2021 3:21:41 GMT
Two things: 1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response? 2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
That's a really good point. Inoculation, whether through vaccine or exposure, has the same effect. I expect very few currently infected were previously positive and recovered.
Actually the mammalian immune response is much more than just antibodies. There are a variety of cells and cellular products that help the body fight foreign invaders.
Here is a convenient overview. In particular, the role of T-cells of various types is very important for long term immune protection. Remember, even this is a simplification of the immune system response.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,114
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 15, 2021 3:26:40 GMT
Two things: 1. In the bolded part, you understand that "antibodies" are what the vaccines elicit right? You know that this is how they work? Triggering an anti-body response? 2. As far as I can tell, none of these headlines that say "almost all were unvaccinated" ever say "almost all were also not recovered from prior infections". Why not?
That's a really good point.
Inoculation, whether through vaccine or exposure, has the same effect. I expect very few currently infected were previously positive and recovered.
Not necessarily so. In some cases, natural infection confers better long lasting immune resistance. In other cases, well crafted vaccines confer superior long lasting immunity. It remains to be seen which is the case with the current smorgasbord of Covid-19 vaccines, and there are likely differences between them. And, theoretically at least, an mRNA vaccine such as the Pfizer and Moderna products, can be engineered to provide broader and even more effective immunity.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 15, 2021 11:59:03 GMT
I don't understand your post. Are you referring to the ones discussed in the OP by the CNN post? Why would knowing the sick folks are NOT vaccinated lead one to believe the vaccines don't work well? That doesn't make sense to me. I would see it as just the opposite. My point I was making is that the people that CNN says are overwhelmingly not vaccinated are almost certain to be ALSO overwhelmingly NOT previously infected. My question was why CNN wouldn't include that bit. The innocent reason is that they don't have that information and neither do the hospital staff making the comment about vaccination status. The less innocent reason is that someone, somewhere doesn't want the past infection part to be widely known because they are of the mindset - for whatever reason - that everyone, whether they previously had it or not, should get vaccinated. Edit: I think I get it. You were referring to the study showing similar effects of vaccination vs. natural immunity. And I was focused on the CNN post about the majority of hospital admissions being in the unvaccinated.
Our government is currently embarking upon a Covid regime that, according to epidemiologists, is tailor-made to create vaccine resistant variants. The push for as near as dammit universal vaccination ASAP is intended to reduce the virus's room for manoeuvre, and minimise the chance of yet another outbreak, with yet more death and economic carnage. I genuinely can't see any rational person opposing or refusing vaccination. I'm more than ambivalent about compulsory vaccination; I'm relaxed about legal restrictions on communal interaction for those refusing the vaccine, in the short term. You can't see a rational person who has already had and recovered from infection refusing vaccination? I can. I can also see it, in places where vaccines are still scarce, as a good policy to de-prioritize those already recovered from prior infection. |
|
