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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by cgrealy »

d1a2n wrote: post #917
PoignardAzur wrote: post #915

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seethe and cope, because at the end of the day you are a slave, and I will never be. See, I'm not that petty, and I mostly content myself with living in a country where hospitalization rates are at a record low thanks to vaccine mandates. I don't need to seethe or think about it that much. But if I were that petty, I think my seething and coping would be abated by the knowledge a lot of you people are dying these d…

> a lot of you people are dying these days What's the death rate again?

9/11 every two days.

https://www.axios.com/covid-deaths-september-11-8b2b230f-9dd...

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

#982

Post by prox »

davorak wrote: post #757
prox wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you do get a breakthrough, chance of not going to a hospital is significantly lower. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...

I think you had an extra 'not' and meant something like 'Even if you do get a breakthrough, chances of going to a hospital is significantly lower.'

You are right, and not wrong :p. Thanks for spotting that.

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

#983

Post by Causality1 »

tim333 wrote: post #978
Causality1 wrote: post #953

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the data I've seen: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm...

That study seems to be showing that vax + natural is better than natural alone but does not seem to compare vax alone to natural alone.

Right. The article is arguing against vaccinating people who already had covid. I'm saying the data shows there's significant benefit to vaccination even if you were already infected.

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

#984

Post by WillPostForFood »

amalcon wrote: post #116
WillPostForFood wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we actually believe that "big pharma" (in the form of 3 companies that make US approved vaccines) have greater influence than all of the collective industries They only need more influence in key places like FDA and CDC, not more influence overall, to push health policies.

The FDA and CDC are not involved in vaccine mandates. Even the coming federal mandate is through OSHA. They issue recommendations, but so do a lot of other influential people and organizations. That said, this is a real phenomenon and worth bearing in mind when doing this type of reasoning.

"They are not involved" seems like an understatement. Their recommendations are the backbone of all the vaccine policies.

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

#985

Post by kgin »

ixacto wrote: post #536
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…

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…

> Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too?

Japan does this and has a 3.6% obesity rate compared to our 42%. Doesn’t seem that terrible of a slope to slip down.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html

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

#986

Post by LudvigVanHassen »

jowday wrote: post #189

The answer is pretty simple - the moment authorities start saying "well, natural immunity is probably just as good as vaccination, we'll accept that as equal to vaccination for passport purposes", a huge segment of the population who's on the fence about getting the vaccine might just opt to wait until they're infected naturally, or, even worse, get infected purposefully (EG, chicken pox parties). Which leads to more…

Your first paragraph is correct, but you seem to think it's a problem that people might choose to be naturally infected. That's a valid choice people can make. I believe most people who aren't vaccinated are doing so on purpose. Delta has actually been helpful towards getting herd immunity because is it so contagious but far less lethal than the earlier strains.

We can reach herd immunity with a combination of vaccines and natural immunity. You will not be able to vaccinate everyone.

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

#987

Post by javagram »

Tycho wrote: post #592
javagram wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of experts who regularly interpret this data. Your comment is pretty vague, so I looked at the excel sheet myself - I assume you’re referring to table 5, “Second dose”? The highest death rate in that table is 14.6 per 100k on 2-Jul-21. Meanwhile, looking at the unvaccinated population in that same table, the death rate per 100k starts out at 22 per 100k, goes as high as 66 per 100k in February, and the…

You didn’t notice what is happening in the “21 days after first dose” column? It went from 22 to 100! And if the NHS and other experts noticed it, they for some didn’t include an explanation along with their other comments on the data.

If the vaccine was dangerous and resulting in “non covid” deaths, why would the mortality be lower for people who had a second dose than for people who just had 1 dose?

Commented separately but it’s pretty clear there’s some sort of selection effect going on with the people who are not getting a 2nd dose that makes them more likely to die of non-covid causes.

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

#988

Post by rednerrus »

redler wrote: post #717
rednerrus wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the best solution, if you're a healthy adult, is to get vaccinated then expose yourself to a variant better tolerated by the vaccines.

Since we will all likely be exposed, I find it hard to fathom the logic that it’s not better, from a risk perspective, to encounter it vaccinated.

Isn't that what I'm saying?

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

#989

Post by fsociety »

dinobones wrote: post #871

I like to put numbers to things. People give up freedoms when there is a chance they or many other people die. Look at 9/11, not only did we give up multiple freedoms, but subsequently killed many Americans and other civilians in the Middle East as additional fallout. 9/11 killed: 2,977 people (only during the attack, many more likely received cancer or long-term illness and side-effects) COVID19 has killed (in the U…

This is good solid math that I encourage everyone to think hard about, and that death rate is only going to go up.

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

#990

Post by tekknik »

MSM wrote: post #620
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…

>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…

> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less.

You have a real incorrect view of obesity. Being obese does not mean excessive eating. There’s a whole slew of digestive and hormone issues that someone can have and be obese while eating less than 2000 calories a day.

Post reply on HN