The Lancet just published a study yesterday on natural infection still causing symptoms one year later (“long Covid”) for 49% of unvaccinated people.
I’ll stick to the vaccine.
Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
41–50 of 371 posts
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#42But don’t you risk long hauler symptoms or worse? Meaning, it’s an interesting datapoint but not a viable strategy.
Working very viably for myself.
Are you saying you didn't get vaccinated and have yet to get COVID so your strategy is working? Or you already got COVID but it wasn't serious so it is working? Either way it seems like saying "I've been smoking all my life and never got cancer. Not sure why everyone is so worried about smoking."
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people in high risk groups should get it, i.e., the elderly and people with weak immune systems or other health issues. Those who are strong health wise ok, they stand a good chance. That said, I am totally against this blanket insistence on passports. There may be some situations which warrant vaccinations where the subject has no acquired immunity, health workers, etc. But being denied access to govt servic…
> But being denied access to govt services because you lack the papers is not a good thing. What gov services are people being denied? legit question - I hear this, but unsure what is being referred to. How about "vaccine proof or wear a mask" to get/access govt services/buildings/etc?
That works for me. This is a compromise I agree with.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#44Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you saying 32,000 people isn't a large enough study to be meaningful?
It's more about the small effect sizes of 8 people vs 1. Still a lot of room for noise in the result.
True, but where's a better study at the moment? I think it would be easier to gather more studies and do a cross-study meta analysis rather than recruiting a million people into a single study to eliminate the effects of noise.
The "27 times" is factually their finding in one study, which someone might read as being given too much weight in the article but doesn't change the data.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#46Isn't there some selection bias going on here? Having covid once protects against getting it again - if the first one didn't kill you that is.
Its relevant to survivors.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#47There's really nothing surprising about this conclusion. Before Covid came along and the focus inexplicably shifted to antibodies-only, it was well understood that infection with a pathogen was always likely to result in better immunity than vaccination.
Not that I doubt you, but where can I read more about this? I know nothing about epidemiology or immunology and reading threads like this makes me realise I need to get more informed.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Working very viably for myself.
Are you saying you didn't get vaccinated and have yet to get COVID so your strategy is working? Or you already got COVID but it wasn't serious so it is working? Either way it seems like saying "I've been smoking all my life and never got cancer. Not sure why everyone is so worried about smoking."
I’m very confident I’ve been exposed to covid, yet never had any test or conclusive symptoms.
I’m also confident that people like me do not experience problems from covid. At least not any more problems than a flu. A 1/3000 risk of myocarditis is not something I will risk. That’s a long term scarring of heart tissue, similar to how my father died in his 30s from teenage medical treatment.
The difference in your statement is that covid is an acute condition rather than a chronic slow growing tumor. If covid took years to show symptoms it’d be a reasonable comparison, but it’s very silly to make otherwise.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people in high risk groups should get it, i.e., the elderly and people with weak immune systems or other health issues. Those who are strong health wise ok, they stand a good chance. That said, I am totally against this blanket insistence on passports. There may be some situations which warrant vaccinations where the subject has no acquired immunity, health workers, etc. But being denied access to govt servic…
Wearing a mask is a mild annoyance. With vaccine, you might suffer side effects, but even that is short term. It's basically no-brainer, since getting infected with the virus is more likely to kill you than getting the vaccine. The only reason people are not getting the vaccine is for various reasons they don't trust that the vaccine is going to help them. Everything else is justification.
Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine
#50What about a person who is vaccinated and then has an asymptotic case? Do they still build up even better immunity? If so, that’s still a great reason to vaccinate.
Wouldn’t the Hoskins effect [1], or “original antigenic sin”, apply in this case?
> the propensity of the body's immune system to preferentially utilize immunological memory based on a previous infection when a second slightly different version of that foreign pathogen (e.g. a virus or bacterium) is encountered. This leaves the immune system "trapped" by the first response it has made to each antigen, and unable to mount potentially more effective responses during subsequent infections.