5 ms·

But don’t you risk long hauler symptoms or worse? Meaning, it’s an interesting datapoint but not a viable strategy.

AndrewBissell 5y ago
Long haul Covid is generally associated with severe cases. The question then becomes, how much does getting the vaccine reduce a recovered individual's probability of having a severe case? Given that it's pretty rare for reinfections to be serious, and the vaccine does not prevent infection or even serious breakthrough cases, the answer would seem to be "not much."
vibrato2 5y ago
Working very viably for myself.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  Well, we should just scale your experience/anecdote up by 8 billion and we’re good then.
- jjuel 5y ago
  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."
  - vibrato2 5y ago
    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.
    - jjuel 5y ago
      Okay so a case fatality rate of 1.65% is fine with you, but a 0.003% chance of Myocarditis is not okay? Yes another difference is COVID is easily spread through the air amongst people so yeah it is much worse than a slow growing tumor you are correct.
    - t0mas88 5y ago
      The European total was 145 cases of myocarditis on 177 million vaccinations. Assuming 2 vaccinations per person, that's 145 cases in 88.5 million people or a 0,00016% chance. That's less than 1 in 600.000 not the 3000 you claim. And even then, a very big majority of the myocarditis cases were mild enough to go away on their own. Only 5 people died from it and all were elderly with other pre-existing conditions.
      - SlowRobotAhead 5y ago
        I don’t know much about myocarditis, but isn’t it possible and even likely a large number of those cases would be undiagnosed?
SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“. That’s not pro or con anything, it’s just the truth that some are having a hard time admitting. I’m not sure at what point in the last year “we don’t know” became taboo. Maybe when we wrapped unknowns in policy decisions? EDIT: yes, we have data for that long Covid symptoms especially in severe cases, and suspected in mild cases, my point was that we do not have enough data to make policy decisions based on this. Currently hard to quantify, as the CDC has anxiety and depression listed as long Covid symptoms.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“ As in we have proof one exists and none of the other?
  - SlowRobotAhead 5y ago
    I’m a little out of loop, but isn’t it true that there can be no possible studies for long covid more than a year and half or so? Of course there is long Covid, and of course there is the possibility of long Covid vaccine regardless of how ridiculous and unlikely that surely is. But from a scientific standpoint, it seems all we have could be initial studies at best.
    - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
      > all we have could be initial studies at best Correct. But at t+1.5 we have evidence long COVID exists. At t+1 we have zero evidence of long-term vaccine side effects.
peteradio 5y ago
Its not about vaccine vs natural immunity. Its about immunity vs mandates. Getting covid intentionally is stupid. If you feel up to it, get the vaccine. Any encounter with covid will be milder. However, some people have already had it and are frankly being unjustly discriminated in some states and institutions. I'm not against vaccines but the treatment of previously infected people as second tier has got to stop.
- shmatt 5y ago
  there is a point to be made here. in Israel for example, a verified blood test with high antibody levels gets you a "vaccine passport", without the need of a vaccine it only lasts a limited time though, and these measured antibodies fade within months. so people that have been sick are still encouraged to get at least 1 shot of Pfizer It's important to add antibody levels for people that have been sick are very different. I know many sick people who got under 150 (the stated minimum to get the passport) a few weeks after being sick. With 2 shots of Pfizer I got over 12,000 units. So it's not even the same ballpark. At least for the measurable antibody tests we currently have I suspect, if the government offered a monitored blood test to prove antibodies, the "but muh mandates" crowd will still be just as angry
- travisporter 5y ago
  I would equate it to hiring for a job: saying you have a college degree (history of infection) < showing the degree (proof of vaccination) < showing your GPA (antibody levels). This is because my colleagues say of covid: "oh, just sniffles" versus "worst sore throat and muscle aches of my life". Unlikely both these immune systems are similarly trained to fight covid

Long haul Covid is generally associated with severe cases. The question then becomes, how much does getting the vaccine reduce a recovered individual's probability of having a severe case? Given that it's pretty rare for reinfections to be serious, and the vaccine does not prevent infection or even serious breakthrough cases, the answer would seem to be "not much."

vibrato2 5y ago

Working very viably for myself.

sokoloff 5y ago
Well, we should just scale your experience/anecdote up by 8 billion and we’re good then.
jjuel 5y ago
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."
- vibrato2 5y ago
  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.
  - jjuel 5y ago
    Okay so a case fatality rate of 1.65% is fine with you, but a 0.003% chance of Myocarditis is not okay? Yes another difference is COVID is easily spread through the air amongst people so yeah it is much worse than a slow growing tumor you are correct.
  - t0mas88 5y ago
    The European total was 145 cases of myocarditis on 177 million vaccinations. Assuming 2 vaccinations per person, that's 145 cases in 88.5 million people or a 0,00016% chance. That's less than 1 in 600.000 not the 3000 you claim. And even then, a very big majority of the myocarditis cases were mild enough to go away on their own. Only 5 people died from it and all were elderly with other pre-existing conditions.
    - SlowRobotAhead 5y ago
      I don’t know much about myocarditis, but isn’t it possible and even likely a large number of those cases would be undiagnosed?

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago

We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“. That’s not pro or con anything, it’s just the truth that some are having a hard time admitting. I’m not sure at what point in the last year “we don’t know” became taboo. Maybe when we wrapped unknowns in policy decisions? EDIT: yes, we have data for that long Covid symptoms especially in severe cases, and suspected in mild cases, my point was that we do not have enough data to make policy decisions based on this. Currently hard to quantify, as the CDC has anxiety and depression listed as long Covid symptoms.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“ As in we have proof one exists and none of the other?
- SlowRobotAhead 5y ago
  I’m a little out of loop, but isn’t it true that there can be no possible studies for long covid more than a year and half or so? Of course there is long Covid, and of course there is the possibility of long Covid vaccine regardless of how ridiculous and unlikely that surely is. But from a scientific standpoint, it seems all we have could be initial studies at best.
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > all we have could be initial studies at best Correct. But at t+1.5 we have evidence long COVID exists. At t+1 we have zero evidence of long-term vaccine side effects.

peteradio 5y ago

Its not about vaccine vs natural immunity. Its about immunity vs mandates. Getting covid intentionally is stupid. If you feel up to it, get the vaccine. Any encounter with covid will be milder. However, some people have already had it and are frankly being unjustly discriminated in some states and institutions. I'm not against vaccines but the treatment of previously infected people as second tier has got to stop.

shmatt 5y ago
there is a point to be made here. in Israel for example, a verified blood test with high antibody levels gets you a "vaccine passport", without the need of a vaccine it only lasts a limited time though, and these measured antibodies fade within months. so people that have been sick are still encouraged to get at least 1 shot of Pfizer It's important to add antibody levels for people that have been sick are very different. I know many sick people who got under 150 (the stated minimum to get the passport) a few weeks after being sick. With 2 shots of Pfizer I got over 12,000 units. So it's not even the same ballpark. At least for the measurable antibody tests we currently have I suspect, if the government offered a monitored blood test to prove antibodies, the "but muh mandates" crowd will still be just as angry
travisporter 5y ago
I would equate it to hiring for a job: saying you have a college degree (history of infection) < showing the degree (proof of vaccination) < showing your GPA (antibody levels). This is because my colleagues say of covid: "oh, just sniffles" versus "worst sore throat and muscle aches of my life". Unlikely both these immune systems are similarly trained to fight covid