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

Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

bmj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#811

Post by TulliusCicero »

hammock wrote: post #669
TulliusCicero wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too? Overweight people can't transmit their overweightness to me through a virus or bacterium that they breathe into the air. If they could, then yeah, we'd probably have some kind of legal mandate on it. Just like we have a bunch of restrictions on smoking now, because indeed, that's something that you push into the air. The general rule is that your rights stop wher…

>Overweight people can't transmit their overweightness to me through a virus or bacterium that they breathe into the air. They can fill up hospital beds though, that might not be available for you when you need one!

That's true, and certainly I'm in favor of national policies to encourage people to be healthy and fit.

That said, getting vaccinated is about a thousand times easier than staying in shape. It's free and quick to get over with, whereas fitness requires sustained effort indefinitely. It's reasonable to treat people's choice to refuse something easy different from people either refusing or struggling with something difficult.

The other important distinction is that we're not gonna suddenly have a shock of people coming down with obesity and flash flooding the hospitals. The country getting bigger is not a good thing, but as a gradual thing it can be managed much more easily.

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#812

Post by senectus1 »

it does matter, but your chances of getting it without taking more damage than you started with is a hell of a lot lower than getting it via vaccination.

Gov's are not good at granular management. they have to make broad sweeping rules that everyone needs to fit into or they get nothing done.

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#813

Post by Supermancho »

wrycoder wrote: post #596
kristjansson wrote: post #525

Because it's a terrible policy prescription. If natural immunity is acceptable, what proportion of the unvaccinated-uninfected population will just take the risk? Half? More? Millions of people will just (continue to) take the risk, get sick, go to hospital, and die (in decreasing proportions), incurring substantial personal and social costs along the way. Accepting only vaccination as evidence of protection reduces…

We can test for natural immunity. That then counts as fully vaccinated.

> We can test for natural immunity. That then counts as fully vaccinated

According to who? It's not in the US or Canada, as examples. That's the point of the topic you're replying to.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2313728/canada-refuses-entry-to...

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#814

Post by mike00632 »

peteradio wrote: post #62
Someone1234 wrote: post #52

The answers aren't medical, they're pragmatic. - COVID-19 Antibody Tests cost more than the vaccine (roughly $40 Vs. $16/dose). - We lack the quantity of Antibody Tests we'd need. - We'd need to set up additional systems and processes to accommodate the testing and proof (which, again, is a cost). The implicit assumption that often go along with these natural immunity proponents is that the vaccine is unsafe. Since i…

I don't believe the science is settled no matter how much the already vaccinated wish to turn the page. What do you have to say that studies of vaccine efficacy and risk conducted by drug companies exclude those with prior immunity. How could the science be settled for a cohort purposefully excluded?

Neither is the science settled on whether COVID infection infers "immunity".

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#815

Post by nradov »

mike00632 wrote: post #810
nradov wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safety is not a binary condition. The vaccines have a good safety profile as confirmed through large-scale clinical trials, and have met stringent FDA criteria. However the risk isn't zero. The CDC has acknowledged a small risk of myocarditis for the mRNA vaccines. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/my... This isn't generally a reason to avoid vaccination for most of the population, however the…

More people will die waiting unvaxxed for their antibody results than will die from vaccine side effects. Please use real numbers when you talk about vaccine side effects.

The real numbers are in the links I posted above, as well as this CDC presentation.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/ad...

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#816

Post by mike00632 »

rpmisms wrote: post #702
rajin444 wrote: post #8

It's very concerning that the president is saying things like "your refusal has cost all of us" and "our patience is wearing this" when talking to people with natural immunity who have not received the vaccine. As president, he should be looking for every reason to not alienate his own citizens. It seems like he's doing the opposite. I'm not really sure why. My best guess is politics has become all about polarization…

I'm not against the vaccine, but I already had Covid, have been exposed and tested negative since having it, and haven't gotten the shot. I'm also a little bit of an adversarial person, and this move by Biden has made me seriously lean away from ever getting the jab. I'm probably one of the more well-to-do people he's trying to target here, and if my first instinct is "Fuck you", this doesn't bode well for getting an…

You sound like you're against the vaccine. What's wrong with just getting the vaccine (even if you had COVID)?

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#817

Post by cko »

erhk wrote: post #690
kcplate wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. Overweight people pay their tax in a significant decrease in their quality of life. Eating unhealthy is way way cheaper. I can confirm both after 170lbs of weight loss. My food budget quadrupled. Rice, pasta, and white bread are cheap. Meat and veggies, not so much.

Carbohydrates are not inherently unhealthy.

But they're inherently cheap! And more addictive, apparently, based on how my friends crave them all the time.

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#818

Post by [deleted] »

ixacto wrote: post #770
MSM wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too? >What about drinking and smoking? There's a lot of investment in trying to fix these problems already, or at least offset the costs. For example, there are "sin taxes" for things like cigarettes and alcohol, which means smokers and drinkers are paying disproportionately more taxes than those that don't. You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disprop…

Actually no, we don’t even need a shot to lose weight you just eat less. Also the government is actively promoting obesity by subsidizing cheap unhealthy food via agriculture subsidies like hfcs and soybeans. So while there are some who have actually spoken out against obesity like Michelle Obama, most are silent as the issue is kinda politically inconvenient for both parties on a macro scale. It’s disgusting and why…

[deleted]

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#819

Post by quantumBerry »

gnopgnip wrote: post #748
ixacto wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To reply as the devils advocate to this comment, what is the tolerance to social costs that society is willing to bear? Also why would one segment of society have to do something that it doesn't want e.g. not bear risk if they want to? Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too? Overweight and obesity are going to cost much more in increased healthcare costs than COVID will in the coming decades (pls prove m…

>what is the tolerance to social costs that society is willing to bear? Also why would one segment of society have to do something that it doesn't want e.g. not bear risk if they want to? Vaccines are already required to attend schools, daycare, college, to immigrate to the US, for many existing federal jobs, to join the military, most jobs in the medical field. These requirements have existed for 20+ years, society…

>Drunk driving is a crime

In someplace like Texas drunk driving is only a crime in limited circumstances, like driving in public. You could go to somewhere private, like an employer's private gated parking lot that is accessible to 100 employees but not the public, and you could not get a DUI. By the same token that it would be tyrannical for drunk driving to be a crime on private area of private property, it is quite tyrannical to enforce covid vaccines on facilities with 100 employees voluntarily engaging in employment on private property.

Re: Why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

#820

Post by mike00632 »

proc0 wrote: post #388
lmilcin wrote: post #136

Because it is pretty simple to account for who got the vaccine and who did not. And running entire population through antibody test just to find, in most cases, that you still need to administer the vaccine is just wasteful.

> Because it is pretty simple to account for who got the vaccine and who did not. So it's about tracking people so the government can more easily keep the public safe. Let's give them all the power in the world to keep us safer! We should be demanding OPTIONS. Even from a pragmatic standpoint, this would convince more people. When they mandate only one thing, it's as if they are pushing towards a dictatorship just fo…

It's not "fear" of what could happen. It's the recognition of what is happening and what did happen. What you're engaging in is called "denial".
Post reply on HN