Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 361 posts

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#51

Post by e67f70028a46fba »

version_five wrote: post #41
isaacremuant wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is coercion. People have been coerced at every step of this crisis, by the threat of police violence, by the threat of reputation or job loss, by the the threat of fines and more. Hopefully, like we see with the wuhan lab theory suppression, as time goes on, a lot of what people suffered will come to light, and be contrasted by the benefit of the elite and political class during all this.

I agree 100% - whatever reaction posts like yours get, it's important to realize that a lot of people think this way, quite possibly a majority if you could talk to them on their own, despite efforts to pretend anyone against whatever government / corporate orthodoxy is pushing this week is some kind of conspiracy nut

Many many people agree with both of you. Don’t feel alone.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#52

Post by handmodel »

OJFord wrote: post #40
epgui wrote: post #21

Any other result would have been surprising. Why is this interesting, beyond just confirming what we were already 99.99% certain we knew? -- biochemist

Because it's not public health policy anywhere that I'm aware of? But vaccine rollout would be way quicker, and 'positive test or vaccinated' proportion of populations would be way higher, and that would influence discussion of other aspects, like 'herd immunity' for example.

My one anti-vax friend (who I make fun of constantly for not getting it) is constantly bombarded with people telling him that his previous infection doesn't give him any immunity. I already knew that was false - and I think he knew that too. It probably fed into his (motivated) reasoning to hold out this long if people are telling him so much information they know to be untrue.

Still, I don't see how public health would benefit from not recommending shots to everyone as there is no downside.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#53

Post by epgui »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #49
epgui wrote: post #21

Any other result would have been surprising. Why is this interesting, beyond just confirming what we were already 99.99% certain we knew? -- biochemist

My brother-in-law who recovered from Covid was told that it actually put him at higher risk from a subsequent infection, and therefore taking the vaccine was even more important than if he had never had it. Every time someone with any prominence says, "I'm not getting vaccinated because I was already infected" there's a whole "well ackshually!" army that descends to insist that yes it's still SUPER IMPORTANT to get t…

The person who told your brother this is either a non-expert, or some expert who for some reason is giving medical advice which is incompatible with the scientific consensus (this would really boggle my mind).

PS.: my 99.99% refers to the state of human knowledge and is more about what experts in the field know than what the general public knows.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#54

Post by brailsafe »

version_five wrote: post #41
isaacremuant wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is coercion. People have been coerced at every step of this crisis, by the threat of police violence, by the threat of reputation or job loss, by the the threat of fines and more. Hopefully, like we see with the wuhan lab theory suppression, as time goes on, a lot of what people suffered will come to light, and be contrasted by the benefit of the elite and political class during all this.

I agree 100% - whatever reaction posts like yours get, it's important to realize that a lot of people think this way, quite possibly a majority if you could talk to them on their own, despite efforts to pretend anyone against whatever government / corporate orthodoxy is pushing this week is some kind of conspiracy nut

There are a tremendous amount of people who have just been fed the same compounding stuff on YouTube or wherever based on their previous clicks. There's a difference between considering the nature of X with a way to validate or think about it, and simply having watched a netflix documentary while high on acid. The latter of which become conspiracy nuts, and they're really draining to listen to, probably as much as big L liberals droning on about whatever pet topic they have

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#55

Post by stormbrew »

OJFord wrote: post #40
epgui wrote: post #21

Any other result would have been surprising. Why is this interesting, beyond just confirming what we were already 99.99% certain we knew? -- biochemist

Because it's not public health policy anywhere that I'm aware of? But vaccine rollout would be way quicker, and 'positive test or vaccinated' proportion of populations would be way higher, and that would influence discussion of other aspects, like 'herd immunity' for example.

I'm incredibly skeptical that it would do much at all to hasten rollout, at least in the US and other countries in a similar place. There are more than enough vaccines to go around at this point[1], and adding any kind of question mark to "should I get it?" just creates unnecessary complexity.

Just get it in everyone's arms as fast as possible, all this dicking around with rules around who can or should get it now that it's plentiful is just slowing everything down.

[1] to the point that 'we' should be doing a lot more to get our excess to countries that are still struggling.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#56

Post by AndrewBissell »

epgui wrote: post #53
AndrewBissell wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My brother-in-law who recovered from Covid was told that it actually put him at higher risk from a subsequent infection, and therefore taking the vaccine was even more important than if he had never had it. Every time someone with any prominence says, "I'm not getting vaccinated because I was already infected" there's a whole "well ackshually!" army that descends to insist that yes it's still SUPER IMPORTANT to get t…

The person who told your brother this is either a non-expert, or some expert who for some reason is giving medical advice which is incompatible with the scientific consensus (this would really boggle my mind). PS.: my 99.99% refers to the state of human knowledge and is more about what experts in the field know than what the general public knows.

> some expert who for some reason is giving medical advice which is incompatible with the scientific consensus (this would really boggle my mind)

Doesn't really seem that mind boggling to me. The clear public health impetus at this point is simply to get shots in as many arms as possible. We've already had Fauci openly admit that he gave guidance against masking and low-balled herd immunity threshold estimates because he presumed it would not lead to the behavior he desired from the public at the time. It's not hard to imagine that mentality has made its way into the rank-and-file somewhat.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#57

Post by OJFord »

handmodel wrote: post #52
OJFord wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's not public health policy anywhere that I'm aware of? But vaccine rollout would be way quicker, and 'positive test or vaccinated' proportion of populations would be way higher, and that would influence discussion of other aspects, like 'herd immunity' for example.

My one anti-vax friend (who I make fun of constantly for not getting it) is constantly bombarded with people telling him that his previous infection doesn't give him any immunity. I already knew that was false - and I think he knew that too. It probably fed into his (motivated) reasoning to hold out this long if people are telling him so much information they know to be untrue. Still, I don't see how public health wo…

> I don't see how public health would benefit from not recommending shots to everyone as there is no downside.

You'd get all the never infected people vaccinated sooner; so 'everyone' (except anti-vax not infected prior to effective 'herd immunity') would be immune sooner.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#58

Post by rajin444 »

epgui wrote: post #53
AndrewBissell wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My brother-in-law who recovered from Covid was told that it actually put him at higher risk from a subsequent infection, and therefore taking the vaccine was even more important than if he had never had it. Every time someone with any prominence says, "I'm not getting vaccinated because I was already infected" there's a whole "well ackshually!" army that descends to insist that yes it's still SUPER IMPORTANT to get t…

The person who told your brother this is either a non-expert, or some expert who for some reason is giving medical advice which is incompatible with the scientific consensus (this would really boggle my mind). PS.: my 99.99% refers to the state of human knowledge and is more about what experts in the field know than what the general public knows.

> some expert who for some reason is giving medical advice which is incompatible with the scientific consensus

Does that really boggle your mind? We're all human. I don't think there's a relationship between being an expert and being honest.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#60

Post by version_five »

e67f70028a46fba wrote: post #51
version_five wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree 100% - whatever reaction posts like yours get, it's important to realize that a lot of people think this way, quite possibly a majority if you could talk to them on their own, despite efforts to pretend anyone against whatever government / corporate orthodoxy is pushing this week is some kind of conspiracy nut

Many many people agree with both of you. Don’t feel alone.

Thanks! That's why I posted a reply instead of just upvoting, I think its important to show people that they're not alone, and what they are thinking is normal.
Post reply on HN