6 ms·

Past covid gives antibodies that are superior to two shots of Pfizer. https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immun

Past covid gives antibodies that are superior to two shots of Pfizer. https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-on... So yes, it IS just as good as the vaccination and should be treated as such. Vaccinating people for the sake of vaccinating them is illogical here. And don't even get me started on vaccine passports, which are completely unnecessary. If a place of employment absolutely needs proof of vaccination, like the NICU at the hospital or a nursing home or a college dorm, that information can be relayed via existing protocols. We don't need a "papers please" society where paper shufflers and bureaucrats can arbitrarily gate access to society this way.

jowday 5y ago
I'd agree with you that vaccine passports definitely represent a sacrifice of individual liberty for safety - but what makes you say that that they're "completely unnecessary"? If we accept that a vaccinated person has a lowered, but not eliminated, chance of contracting and transmitting COVID, wouldn't it make sense to avoid contact with people that are at a much higher risk of infection? If you feel that the tradeoff between liberty and safety here is too high, that makes sense - but do you really think vaccination passports don't reduce the transmission of the virus?
- throwawayfear 5y ago
  They would reduce transmission of the virus in the same way that locking everyone in temperature-controlled air-corrected 24/7-monitored government housing pods would reduce the transmission. Maybe those pods are better, because they could ship us food and let us out for exercise at times determined by an efficiency algorithm! The question is, is the cost worth it? There's no need for a "sacrifice of individual liberty for safety." That's Orwellian talk for going along with tyranny. By this point, the majority of Americans are going to have antibodies before long from a combination of vaccinations and past covid. Over 100 million already had past covid and I already shared links about how those antibodies are superior to two shots of Pfizer. So how is it necessary for those people to have to subject to a "papers please" tyranny? No thanks. Implementing these passports will cause something even worse than some covid spread to happen. A two-tiered society where one segment of society is viewed as unhealthy, unclean, even dangerous. History is replete with examples of this being a bad thing. And philosophy aside, there's also newer evidence showing that for some segments of the population it may be riskier to vaccinate. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-risk-from-pfizer-jab-side-effect-than-covid-suggests-study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r... So why start enforcing passports? To accidentally find out later on, after creating a two-tiered society, that there may be unintended long-term consequences for the teenagers? Nope. Time for YOU, reader, to say no and realize that these passports are just about control. They don't care about your health. It's about power. Think critically about the system being built. It's about the control.
  - jowday 5y ago
    It sounds like you just disagree with the tradeoff between liberty and safety, then. But it does lower transmission, and flashing a card before you go into a bar the same way you flash your driver's license isn't as onerous as the weird government pod scenario you outlined above. >unhealthy, unclean, even dangerous. This is probably how I'd describe wilfully unvaccinated people, yeah. Also curious where you got the 100 million number from - AFAICT there have been 40 million covid infections in the US.
    - throwawayfear 5y ago
      Over 100 million Americans have superior antibodies from past covid. Why would you WILLINGLY describe those like that who refuse the vaccination as unhealthy, unclean, and even dangerous? Unless you're naive and don't know history? Or perhaps you simply keep ignoring the links being provided because you've been tricked by the narrative and it feels good to be tribal/partisan about it as if it's a matter of politics? It won't be long now until everyone has antibodies one way or another, yet people falling for the "vax vs unvax" narrative are going to create a problem much worse than covid if they insist on drawing battle lines and inching closer and closer to full-on dehumanization of tens of millions. Source for how many people had covid: https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/one-three-americans-already-had-covid-19-end-2020 https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news... Anew study published in the journal Nature estimates that 103 million Americans, or 31 percent of the U.S. population, had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by the end of 2020 The number you mentioned is the number verified, but based on the modeling of infection rates and spread they've come up with the bigger number. It will keep getting bigger. In any case, "flashing a card" to go into a bar is the precipice of the slippery slope. And yes, it's slippery. It doesn't take much effort to see the writing on the wall and observe the tyranny emerging in other places. If you're not simply ignorant to history and being tricked by the narrative, at least be honest about what you actually want - which is to control others. Don't try to pass it off as being concerned about health though, I wasn't born yesterday.
      - jowday 5y ago
- hodgesrm 5y ago
  Does this mean you think vaccine records kids show for school are a sacrifice of individual liberty?
  - throwawayfear 5y ago
    Not necessarily. Like I said in other posts, wherever vaccination requirements existed we have protocols for sharing proof of antibodies. That's all that needs to happen. If you work in a hospital or want to dorm in a college, go ahead and submit your proof of antibodies. But mandating it across the board and taking away people's opportunity to put bread on the table if they don't comply? That's not a sacrifice of some marginal amout of individual liberty - that is a declaration of war on liberty itself. The reason I say this is because it's not hard to think logically about where systems around vaccine passports will take us. A two-tiered society in which one side of tens of millions is forced out of society, ostracized, and dehumanized. For no reason, considering we're already looking at the majority of Americans having antibodies one way or another soon. The 100 million who had past covid have superior antibodies already. Time for us to stop allowing this converastion to be framed around someone getting or not getting the vaccination.
    - jonnycomputer 5y ago
      Over the top.
jonnycomputer 5y ago
I would hesitate to take one study as definitive either way. Also, I've seen data pointing to important variables of possible interest moderating the potential effectiveness, including age, and severity of first infection.
- throwawayfear 5y ago
  Please hestitate after providing your sources.
  - ineptech 5y ago
    https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-study/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-...
  - Thorrez 5y ago
    This seems to indicate that a Pfizer vaccination is better than having Covid previously: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-08-19-vaccines-still-effective-against-delta-variant-concern-says-oxford-led-study-covid-0 https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-08-19-vaccines-still-effectiv... Pfizer reduced rates by 82% whereas a Covid infection reduced rates by 73%. >Fourteen days after a second dose of Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech, rates had dropped by 67% and 82% respectively. In comparison, people who had not been vaccinated but had had COVID-19 before had rates which were 73% lower than unvaccinated individuals
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - jonnycomputer 5y ago
    I don't need to. As a general matter I never take a single study as definitive. I'd be an idiot if I did.
zmmmmm 5y ago
Even while supporting the notion that the source is valid and the statement is generally true, it is still NOT the same as the mountain of clinical evidence generated to show efficacy of the vaccines. So no, you can't make that claim unless you actually go through the same kind of proof to show efficacy the way FDA would require for the vaccines.

jowday 5y ago

I'd agree with you that vaccine passports definitely represent a sacrifice of individual liberty for safety - but what makes you say that that they're "completely unnecessary"? If we accept that a vaccinated person has a lowered, but not eliminated, chance of contracting and transmitting COVID, wouldn't it make sense to avoid contact with people that are at a much higher risk of infection? If you feel that the tradeoff between liberty and safety here is too high, that makes sense - but do you really think vaccination passports don't reduce the transmission of the virus?

throwawayfear 5y ago
They would reduce transmission of the virus in the same way that locking everyone in temperature-controlled air-corrected 24/7-monitored government housing pods would reduce the transmission. Maybe those pods are better, because they could ship us food and let us out for exercise at times determined by an efficiency algorithm! The question is, is the cost worth it? There's no need for a "sacrifice of individual liberty for safety." That's Orwellian talk for going along with tyranny. By this point, the majority of Americans are going to have antibodies before long from a combination of vaccinations and past covid. Over 100 million already had past covid and I already shared links about how those antibodies are superior to two shots of Pfizer. So how is it necessary for those people to have to subject to a "papers please" tyranny? No thanks. Implementing these passports will cause something even worse than some covid spread to happen. A two-tiered society where one segment of society is viewed as unhealthy, unclean, even dangerous. History is replete with examples of this being a bad thing. And philosophy aside, there's also newer evidence showing that for some segments of the population it may be riskier to vaccinate. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-risk-from-pfizer-jab-side-effect-than-covid-suggests-study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r... So why start enforcing passports? To accidentally find out later on, after creating a two-tiered society, that there may be unintended long-term consequences for the teenagers? Nope. Time for YOU, reader, to say no and realize that these passports are just about control. They don't care about your health. It's about power. Think critically about the system being built. It's about the control.
- jowday 5y ago
  It sounds like you just disagree with the tradeoff between liberty and safety, then. But it does lower transmission, and flashing a card before you go into a bar the same way you flash your driver's license isn't as onerous as the weird government pod scenario you outlined above. >unhealthy, unclean, even dangerous. This is probably how I'd describe wilfully unvaccinated people, yeah. Also curious where you got the 100 million number from - AFAICT there have been 40 million covid infections in the US.
  - throwawayfear 5y ago
    Over 100 million Americans have superior antibodies from past covid. Why would you WILLINGLY describe those like that who refuse the vaccination as unhealthy, unclean, and even dangerous? Unless you're naive and don't know history? Or perhaps you simply keep ignoring the links being provided because you've been tricked by the narrative and it feels good to be tribal/partisan about it as if it's a matter of politics? It won't be long now until everyone has antibodies one way or another, yet people falling for the "vax vs unvax" narrative are going to create a problem much worse than covid if they insist on drawing battle lines and inching closer and closer to full-on dehumanization of tens of millions. Source for how many people had covid: https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/one-three-americans-already-had-covid-19-end-2020 https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news... Anew study published in the journal Nature estimates that 103 million Americans, or 31 percent of the U.S. population, had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by the end of 2020 The number you mentioned is the number verified, but based on the modeling of infection rates and spread they've come up with the bigger number. It will keep getting bigger. In any case, "flashing a card" to go into a bar is the precipice of the slippery slope. And yes, it's slippery. It doesn't take much effort to see the writing on the wall and observe the tyranny emerging in other places. If you're not simply ignorant to history and being tricked by the narrative, at least be honest about what you actually want - which is to control others. Don't try to pass it off as being concerned about health though, I wasn't born yesterday.
    - jowday 5y ago
hodgesrm 5y ago
Does this mean you think vaccine records kids show for school are a sacrifice of individual liberty?
- throwawayfear 5y ago
  Not necessarily. Like I said in other posts, wherever vaccination requirements existed we have protocols for sharing proof of antibodies. That's all that needs to happen. If you work in a hospital or want to dorm in a college, go ahead and submit your proof of antibodies. But mandating it across the board and taking away people's opportunity to put bread on the table if they don't comply? That's not a sacrifice of some marginal amout of individual liberty - that is a declaration of war on liberty itself. The reason I say this is because it's not hard to think logically about where systems around vaccine passports will take us. A two-tiered society in which one side of tens of millions is forced out of society, ostracized, and dehumanized. For no reason, considering we're already looking at the majority of Americans having antibodies one way or another soon. The 100 million who had past covid have superior antibodies already. Time for us to stop allowing this converastion to be framed around someone getting or not getting the vaccination.
  - jonnycomputer 5y ago
    Over the top.

jonnycomputer 5y ago

I would hesitate to take one study as definitive either way. Also, I've seen data pointing to important variables of possible interest moderating the potential effectiveness, including age, and severity of first infection.

throwawayfear 5y ago
Please hestitate after providing your sources.
- ineptech 5y ago
  https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-study/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-...
- Thorrez 5y ago
  This seems to indicate that a Pfizer vaccination is better than having Covid previously: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-08-19-vaccines-still-effective-against-delta-variant-concern-says-oxford-led-study-covid-0 https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-08-19-vaccines-still-effectiv... Pfizer reduced rates by 82% whereas a Covid infection reduced rates by 73%. >Fourteen days after a second dose of Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech, rates had dropped by 67% and 82% respectively. In comparison, people who had not been vaccinated but had had COVID-19 before had rates which were 73% lower than unvaccinated individuals
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jonnycomputer 5y ago
  I don't need to. As a general matter I never take a single study as definitive. I'd be an idiot if I did.

zmmmmm 5y ago

Even while supporting the notion that the source is valid and the statement is generally true, it is still NOT the same as the mountain of clinical evidence generated to show efficacy of the vaccines. So no, you can't make that claim unless you actually go through the same kind of proof to show efficacy the way FDA would require for the vaccines.