4 ms·

Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?

31 points by mrfusion 5y ago

mlindner 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
- someperson 5y ago
  The article is from the perspective of the UK, where the population is largely already fully vaccinated. It's asking whether regular booster shots (potentially indefinitely) is preferable to immunity from catching the virus and not getting too sick because people have already received their first two vaccine doses.
11235813213455 5y ago
I guess it also depends on who and how, some people don't have a strong immune system, but it might be good as always to fix issues at the source with different lifestyles, regular contact with nature, with better organic local and not tranformed food, that we are naturally adapted to assimilate. That definitely boost your immune system, that's something you can experiment yourself. Surely a good time to start these changes at scale with climate changes issues. Currently I don't think many people have a good health https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/p7lhwq/prooportion_of_the_overweight_or_obese_population/ https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/p7lhwq/prooportion_...
nikanj 5y ago
Can’t believe BBC has sunk this low. Goes to show even public broadcasters have to chase eyeballs today
- hellbannedguy 5y ago
  I would like to see less BBC articles here.
yonaguska 5y ago
Yes.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
pfisherman 5y ago
No. Lol! Exposure to a deadly respiratory virus is several orders of magnitude more risky than exposure to “disembodied” viral proteins or mRNAs in a vaccine. You would have to see several orders of magnitude increase in protection for this question not to be totally insane.
- senectus1 5y ago
  christ. The fact that this question has been asked in mainstream media, is shocking enough. the fact its BBC... I'm astounded.
- yonaguska 5y ago
  Almost all respiratory viruses are "deadly". This article brings up children. For whom the virus is almost never deadly. These vaccines pose a higher risk than reward for children and healthy young people. Myocarditis often results in permanent heart damage. It's not something you just get over and move on with. For a young person, this is effectively a permanent disability.
  - pfisherman 5y ago
    Yes. Many respiratory viruses can be deadly. This is why we vaccinate for influenza every year. Some are much lower risk. This is why we don’t vaccinate against rhinoviruses. Your claim about risks in children is almost certainly wrong. This will be borne out by the data from vaccine trials in pre adolescent children. But even now, it shouldn’t take much more than a quick back of envelope estimation (# of exposures / # of cases) to convince yourself that even in children risk from COVID >> risk from vaccines. The numbers become even more ridiculous when you consider the safety record of vaccines in general over the last 5 - 10 (or 100) years. And just for kicks can COVID cause myocarditis or trigger other chronic conditions (i.e. cfs/me)? What are the rates of long COVID vs lasting side effects from vaccines?
    - mewpmewp2 5y ago
      Not sure how welcome vaccine debate is here, but the more we give vaccines to people the more quickly the virus will start to mutate due to evolutionary pressures as I think it is clear now that there's no herd immunity against this virus. So this raises another question, should we vaccinate everyone or just risk groups? Each new variant and mutation is a risk for appearance of unknown symptoms and unclear ability to get through current vaccines.
bhickey 5y ago
The spike protein is under selective pressure. It needs to bind to ACE2 in order to reproduce. This constrains its mutational landscape. The viral envelope, for example, isn't similarly constrained and can undergo neutral drift. It would probably be wasted effort to target these with subunit or mRNA vaccines. This isn't an argument for challenging vaccinated people with Delta, but suggests there's room for a live attenuated or whole inactivated vaccine booster.
jet_32951 5y ago
Is "exposure" a continuum (e.g. virus units/day)? If it is, then does everyone with anything over a certain intensity of exposure start developing antibodies without necessarily being symptomatic? IOW do immune systems develop background protection or does it take becoming symptomatic in order for the immune system to become sensitized?
gunapologist99 5y ago
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28256065 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28256065
version_five 5y ago
It's scary (completely expected though) to see people switching to bashing the BBC when it publishes a view they disagree with. People pretend that science is somehow involved in the covid orthodoxy, and I expect it was at one point, but we've moved into religious territory. What credentials, evidence, source combination would actually convince people to question the current religious view?
- pfisherman 5y ago
  Why not? Should people practice blind fealty to any particular source of information? The BBC is generally pretty good, but they are not infallible. In this case they are talking goop-science, and people are rightly calling them out.
  - gunapologist99 5y ago
    And when the CDC does the same thing?
    - Andys 5y ago
      It makes sense to me that people should have a healthy skepcticsim for "captured regulators". Trust, but verify?

31 points by mrfusion 5y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...

someperson 5y ago
The article is from the perspective of the UK, where the population is largely already fully vaccinated. It's asking whether regular booster shots (potentially indefinitely) is preferable to immunity from catching the virus and not getting too sick because people have already received their first two vaccine doses.

11235813213455 5y ago

I guess it also depends on who and how, some people don't have a strong immune system, but it might be good as always to fix issues at the source with different lifestyles, regular contact with nature, with better organic local and not tranformed food, that we are naturally adapted to assimilate. That definitely boost your immune system, that's something you can experiment yourself. Surely a good time to start these changes at scale with climate changes issues. Currently I don't think many people have a good health https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/p7lhwq/prooportion_of_the_overweight_or_obese_population/ https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/p7lhwq/prooportion_...

nikanj 5y ago

Can’t believe BBC has sunk this low. Goes to show even public broadcasters have to chase eyeballs today

hellbannedguy 5y ago
I would like to see less BBC articles here.

yonaguska 5y ago

Yes.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

pfisherman 5y ago

No. Lol! Exposure to a deadly respiratory virus is several orders of magnitude more risky than exposure to “disembodied” viral proteins or mRNAs in a vaccine. You would have to see several orders of magnitude increase in protection for this question not to be totally insane.

senectus1 5y ago
christ. The fact that this question has been asked in mainstream media, is shocking enough. the fact its BBC... I'm astounded.
yonaguska 5y ago
Almost all respiratory viruses are "deadly". This article brings up children. For whom the virus is almost never deadly. These vaccines pose a higher risk than reward for children and healthy young people. Myocarditis often results in permanent heart damage. It's not something you just get over and move on with. For a young person, this is effectively a permanent disability.
- pfisherman 5y ago
  Yes. Many respiratory viruses can be deadly. This is why we vaccinate for influenza every year. Some are much lower risk. This is why we don’t vaccinate against rhinoviruses. Your claim about risks in children is almost certainly wrong. This will be borne out by the data from vaccine trials in pre adolescent children. But even now, it shouldn’t take much more than a quick back of envelope estimation (# of exposures / # of cases) to convince yourself that even in children risk from COVID >> risk from vaccines. The numbers become even more ridiculous when you consider the safety record of vaccines in general over the last 5 - 10 (or 100) years. And just for kicks can COVID cause myocarditis or trigger other chronic conditions (i.e. cfs/me)? What are the rates of long COVID vs lasting side effects from vaccines?
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    Not sure how welcome vaccine debate is here, but the more we give vaccines to people the more quickly the virus will start to mutate due to evolutionary pressures as I think it is clear now that there's no herd immunity against this virus. So this raises another question, should we vaccinate everyone or just risk groups? Each new variant and mutation is a risk for appearance of unknown symptoms and unclear ability to get through current vaccines.

bhickey 5y ago

The spike protein is under selective pressure. It needs to bind to ACE2 in order to reproduce. This constrains its mutational landscape. The viral envelope, for example, isn't similarly constrained and can undergo neutral drift. It would probably be wasted effort to target these with subunit or mRNA vaccines. This isn't an argument for challenging vaccinated people with Delta, but suggests there's room for a live attenuated or whole inactivated vaccine booster.

jet_32951 5y ago

Is "exposure" a continuum (e.g. virus units/day)? If it is, then does everyone with anything over a certain intensity of exposure start developing antibodies without necessarily being symptomatic? IOW do immune systems develop background protection or does it take becoming symptomatic in order for the immune system to become sensitized?

gunapologist99 5y ago

Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28256065 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28256065

version_five 5y ago

It's scary (completely expected though) to see people switching to bashing the BBC when it publishes a view they disagree with. People pretend that science is somehow involved in the covid orthodoxy, and I expect it was at one point, but we've moved into religious territory. What credentials, evidence, source combination would actually convince people to question the current religious view?

pfisherman 5y ago
Why not? Should people practice blind fealty to any particular source of information? The BBC is generally pretty good, but they are not infallible. In this case they are talking goop-science, and people are rightly calling them out.
- gunapologist99 5y ago
  And when the CDC does the same thing?
  - Andys 5y ago
    It makes sense to me that people should have a healthy skepcticsim for "captured regulators". Trust, but verify?