4 ms·

> Do you think it's a reasonable thing for most people to take your stance and not get vaccinated? As with any other disease, it is reasonable (and expected) f

by rsj_hn 5y ago

> Do you think it's a reasonable thing for most people to take your stance and not get vaccinated? As with any other disease, it is reasonable (and expected) for everyone who had covid to not get vaccinated, given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine. That this is even considered controversial by some people just goes to show you how far our science education has failed us.

jf22 5y ago
>given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine This is false. Stop spreading misinformation.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  Stop spreading misinformation. My comment was not false, and in fact is quite obvious. e.g. from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/Waiver_Ed_Natural_Immunity_479884_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/Waiver_Ed_Natural_Im... "It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines."
  - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
    The only argument that document takes about it actually being better is that with some vaccines you need two shots instead of one. That's not compelling as being "better" at all. "Better" would imply that, once the complete course of vaccination is complete, the immunity is somehow more complete, stronger, or longer lasting.
  - jf22 5y ago
    Quite often what is "obvious" isn't true. Take some time and do some reading on this topic and you'll find that vaccines can provide equal or better immunity than a natural infection.
  - jhayward 5y ago
    Your comment was indeed false, and many many studies have been done to compare natural vs vaccine immunity. Vaccination with a highly effective vaccine, e.g. Moderna or Phizer/BNT yield higher antibody response, and are more protective against variants in study after study.
- JPKab 5y ago
  You don't have the authority to decide what is misinformation and what isn't. If you disagree with it counter it with your own facts but you are not the speech police.
  - jf22 5y ago
    Who are the speech police and who has the authority?
dgritsko 5y ago
> the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine. My understanding is that the opposite is true, at least based on what we know right now. Here is an article summarizing just that[1], which links to a few peer-reviewed studies (and a couple that are pending review) suggesting that the vaccines are better than natural immunity. I don't have any background in this or agenda or anything, so don't shoot the messenger - just sharing what I understand to be the opinion of at least some of the medical community. > "Vaccines are highly efficacious," Fauci concluded. "They are better than the traditional response you get from natural infection." [1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-why-covid-vaccines-work-better-than-natural-infection-alone-2021-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-why-covid-vaccines-wor...
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  I would want something a bit more than studies by the vaccine maker about how good their vaccine is -- for example having those studies reproduced by a third party and comparing natural immunity to the vaccine -- before concluding that a vaccine can be better than natural immunity. It is almost always the case that natural immunity is superior to vaccines.
  - DennisP 5y ago
    > It is almost always the case that natural immunity is superior to vaccines. Do you have a source for that claim? GP offered peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary, which you don't believe, but so far you've offered no evidence at all.
- johbjo 5y ago
  The linked article doesn't support either view. The link reports that vaccines have been observed to generate higher antibody-levels than natural infections. It was also observed that vaccines seem to protect against a set of variants. This is the good news that is worth reporting. But there are observed occurences of the opposite; that vaccinated people test negative for antibodies. Similarly, people test negative for antibodies some time after recovering. Sometimes, recovered people never test positive for antibodies. Diagnostic tools widely available are simply not good enough to test the immune response.
SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
> given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine That sort of claim really requires evidence. "Obvious" statements aren't science.
ratorx 5y ago
I’m not an expert by any means, just trying to reason this out logically. I don’t know too much about COVID, so I’ll use Flu as an example. Let’s say your statement is true. You get antibodies for the specific strain of Flu that you caught and the response was greater than vaccine. Flu vaccines include multiple strains. So even if your premise was true, you should get the vaccine to protect against other strains right? Unless you are advocating for catching every strain of Flu?
Fomite 5y ago
"As with any other disease, it is reasonable (and expected) for everyone who had covid to not get vaccinated, given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine." This is actively untrue. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4813740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4813740/ vs. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29029053/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29029053/ for a non-COVID example.

by rsj_hn 5y ago

jf22 5y ago

>given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine This is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

rsj_hn 5y ago
Stop spreading misinformation. My comment was not false, and in fact is quite obvious. e.g. from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/Waiver_Ed_Natural_Immunity_479884_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/Waiver_Ed_Natural_Im... "It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines."
- SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
  The only argument that document takes about it actually being better is that with some vaccines you need two shots instead of one. That's not compelling as being "better" at all. "Better" would imply that, once the complete course of vaccination is complete, the immunity is somehow more complete, stronger, or longer lasting.
- jf22 5y ago
  Quite often what is "obvious" isn't true. Take some time and do some reading on this topic and you'll find that vaccines can provide equal or better immunity than a natural infection.
- jhayward 5y ago
  Your comment was indeed false, and many many studies have been done to compare natural vs vaccine immunity. Vaccination with a highly effective vaccine, e.g. Moderna or Phizer/BNT yield higher antibody response, and are more protective against variants in study after study.
JPKab 5y ago
You don't have the authority to decide what is misinformation and what isn't. If you disagree with it counter it with your own facts but you are not the speech police.
- jf22 5y ago
  Who are the speech police and who has the authority?

dgritsko 5y ago

> the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine. My understanding is that the opposite is true, at least based on what we know right now. Here is an article summarizing just that[1], which links to a few peer-reviewed studies (and a couple that are pending review) suggesting that the vaccines are better than natural immunity. I don't have any background in this or agenda or anything, so don't shoot the messenger - just sharing what I understand to be the opinion of at least some of the medical community. > "Vaccines are highly efficacious," Fauci concluded. "They are better than the traditional response you get from natural infection." [1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-why-covid-vaccines-work-better-than-natural-infection-alone-2021-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-why-covid-vaccines-wor...

rsj_hn 5y ago
I would want something a bit more than studies by the vaccine maker about how good their vaccine is -- for example having those studies reproduced by a third party and comparing natural immunity to the vaccine -- before concluding that a vaccine can be better than natural immunity. It is almost always the case that natural immunity is superior to vaccines.
- DennisP 5y ago
  > It is almost always the case that natural immunity is superior to vaccines. Do you have a source for that claim? GP offered peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary, which you don't believe, but so far you've offered no evidence at all.
johbjo 5y ago
The linked article doesn't support either view. The link reports that vaccines have been observed to generate higher antibody-levels than natural infections. It was also observed that vaccines seem to protect against a set of variants. This is the good news that is worth reporting. But there are observed occurences of the opposite; that vaccinated people test negative for antibodies. Similarly, people test negative for antibodies some time after recovering. Sometimes, recovered people never test positive for antibodies. Diagnostic tools widely available are simply not good enough to test the immune response.

SketchySeaBeast 5y ago

> given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine That sort of claim really requires evidence. "Obvious" statements aren't science.

ratorx 5y ago

I’m not an expert by any means, just trying to reason this out logically. I don’t know too much about COVID, so I’ll use Flu as an example. Let’s say your statement is true. You get antibodies for the specific strain of Flu that you caught and the response was greater than vaccine. Flu vaccines include multiple strains. So even if your premise was true, you should get the vaccine to protect against other strains right? Unless you are advocating for catching every strain of Flu?

Fomite 5y ago

"As with any other disease, it is reasonable (and expected) for everyone who had covid to not get vaccinated, given that the immunity you get from having the disease is always better than what you'd get from a vaccine." This is actively untrue. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4813740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4813740/ vs. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29029053/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29029053/ for a non-COVID example.