Live data from Hacker News

Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

bbc.co.uk

101–110 of 153 posts

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the scientists at the NIH aren't 'lobbyist scientists' (I think that's who you mean?), so if you think they are that, well, there's no real point in trying to discuss it. The idea that the government overseeing efficacy study design invites corruption is also sort of tedious. Just deciding to regulate something reaches that same low bar of inviting corruption, but that would not be a good reason to not have reg…

> Yeah, the scientists at the NIH aren't 'lobbyist scientists' (I think that's who you mean?) No, that's not what I mean. The scientists at Moderna are effectively lobbying for the effectiveness of their product and "inviting" NIH to apply a thin veneer of respectability by "participating" in their studies. It's no different from getting scientists at a large research university from "participating" in a large, well-…

You understand that the NIH did the basic research on the Moderna mRNA vaccine?

The proper rabid screaming is that public research was privatized for profit, not that a public research agency is giving a veneer of respectability to a scam vaccine.

And then there's also the option of not rabidly screaming.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reported your comment for misinformation, this is untrue.

No. You are wrong. I have reported your comment for misinformation. [1] Study: Fully vaccinated people with "breakthrough" COVID Delta infections carry as much virus as the unvaccinated [1] https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/covid-vaccine-delta-variant...

That specifies "people with breakthrough infections". Breakthrough infections are much less likely than an infection in an unvaccinated person, so the vaccines could still be preventing spread by preventing infections in the first place.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You definitely have that right, but at this point the choice isn't vaccine vs no vaccine, it is vaccine vs getting covid. It is much more contagious than it was last year.

Your logic gate is faulty; it sounds like you are concluding that you will definitely get covid if you are not vaccinated, but that still depends on a number of things; people can get deliveries and work out of their home and never get it. It is also demonstrably incorrect that the vaccine is an amulet of proof against covid.

Ditto. When lockdown cease the contagion will spread much more widely. Everyone will be exposed to some of it. What matters are fewer critical conditions and less spread from vaccinated.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#104
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we should be vaccinating people to discourage spread Vaccinations with current vaccines don't stop infections/spread at all - it's very obvious now with the Delta variant in countries that are already massively vaccinated like Israel and Island. In fact, vaccinated people can apparently carry just as high of a viral load as unvaccinated people (while vaccinated people will likely experience less symptoms). So the v…

Reported your comment for misinformation, this is untrue.

> Reported your comment for misinformation, this is untrue.

What does this even mean? We are in a discussion forum! If you have the evidence to the contrary, please post it. This is how people are educated, not by "reporting misinformation." Dang has enough to deal with already.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#105
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, you did get vaccinated and still have these symptoms. You could also fairly end your TLDR with 'did get vaccinated, this sucks'. It seems we are still learning about the efficacy of the vaccines, and the nature of the virus. From this pov I understand why some are hesitant to be vaccinated in this phase of the pandemic

We have mountains of data about the current vaccine. This amount of disease-tracking is unheard of. Almost any institution in the world has regular discussions about this singular disease. Governments spend huge resources to pinpoint the exact minimum measures that can control the spread enough. My country attempted a 3rd dose, and within 2 weeks they were already reporting data on reduced risk of catching the virus…

Sampling 3rd dose after two weeks would be statistically insignificant and not enough time to record stats from sickness.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reported your comment for misinformation, this is untrue.

No. You are wrong. I have reported your comment for misinformation. [1] Study: Fully vaccinated people with "breakthrough" COVID Delta infections carry as much virus as the unvaccinated [1] https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/covid-vaccine-delta-variant...

> I have reported your comment for misinformation.

I seriously hope this is a kind of meme and you guys are just kidding.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#107
post #36
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They sort of mention that in the breadth section. The idea is that natural immunity may target more than just the spike proteins the vaccine focuses on so may actually target more variants. One can imagine a scenario where continued (not initial) vaccination actually contributes to a longer spread with weaker immunity so more chance for variants to develop. Not saying this is 100% the case, but interesting article I’…

But the spike is what is important, targeting the rest just makes the immune system make antibodies that don't do anything.

Are you a medical professional researcher? You are wrong though.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Bloomberg today, https://archive.is/fy4Wf > In lieu of answers, what has emerged is a host of case studies providing somewhat different pictures of breakthrough infections. Variables including when the surveys were conducted, whether the delta variant was present, how much of the population was vaccinated and even what the weather was like at the time make it hard to compare results and suss out patterns. It’s d…

"But there is just a lot we don’t know." Well... as a citizen, I should have the right to stay back and watch what happens, and take it when I feel safe, instead of being forced to join the experiment.

Just as long as you stay away from the rest of us, I agree. In fact, I'd pitch in to a fund aimed at shipping you all to desert island together and letting you return when you decide to like the science.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#109

Tangentially related but I’m on day 9 of COVID infection which is easily the longest I’ve been sick in years. I got two shots of Pfizer last one on the 13th of July. If the vaccine has kept this relatively mild then I’m very glad. It sucks. My main symptoms are a stuffed up face, cough, sore throat, aching body and an extremely fuzzy head that seems to come and go. I had a slightly raised temp at the start but otherw…

> Annoyingly my first test was negative even though I was symptomatic so I was wandering around being infectious for seven days.

This is my hypothesis for why we are seeing such spread after a mass vaccine event. The moral hazard of a vaccine and negative test are more dangerous than Covid itself. 7 days of additional spread are exponentially more detrimental to the goal of stopping spread… which stops hospitalizations, which stops deaths and long covids.

Even if the “break throughs” are 1% of cases, if those 1% are 700% more transmissed through false hubris… it’s just like the early days of Covid.

Re: Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Bloomberg today, https://archive.is/fy4Wf > In lieu of answers, what has emerged is a host of case studies providing somewhat different pictures of breakthrough infections. Variables including when the surveys were conducted, whether the delta variant was present, how much of the population was vaccinated and even what the weather was like at the time make it hard to compare results and suss out patterns. It’s d…

> “It is generally the case that we have to make public health decisions based on imperfect data,” Why can't the public draw their own conclusions and make their own health decisions, based on (imperfect) public data? Why does the data have to be kept secret? (Perhaps the data doesn't support the "public health decisions" and dictates of the state?) If there's a concern that we can't effectively interpret the data, w…

Because if you saw just how “imperfect” the data was… you’d borderline call it willful negligence and demand a recall/revolution.

The person running an excel sheet at a state public health office has never had to “clean” data to find duplicates with St and Street… heck even the IRS website needed your exact address in ST or Street form (case sensitive) to inform you of a economic relief payment.

So in a way, I’m very happy our brightest minds are working on clicking ads rather than building an oppressive regime.

Post reply on HN