4 ms·

1. You need to account for the fact that some percentage (perhaps large) of healthcare workers already survived COVID and have natural immunity. Since the scien

1. You need to account for the fact that some percentage (perhaps large) of healthcare workers already survived COVID and have natural immunity. Since the science is demonstrating that natural immunity is as durable and robust as vaccine immunity (if not more durable and robust), one would have to ask what the rationale is for firing workers who have natural immunity (as verified by a past COVID diagnosis or presence of antibodies) and do not want to be vaccinated. 2. The science is clear that vaccinated individuals can contract and spread the virus. While this doesn't mean that the vaccines aren't useful (they absolutely are), we need to be realistic about this in high-risk settings.

zdragnar 5y ago
Healthcare workers have been on the front line, unvaccinated, for going on two years. To mandate it or risk being fired has absolutely pissed off quite a few that I know of... My wife has gotten it, and even she is offended. The hyperbole around this very serious situation just makes all the policies seem even more like theater. To your second point, there was just a new report I saw yesterday that there is no difference in viral load between asymptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  > The hyperbole around this very serious situation just makes all the policies seem even more like theater. One has to conclude that it is theater at this point. Because the science is pretty darn clear. Interesting that nobody downvoting my comment (and yours) has posted a reputable and recent/current scientific source stating that: 1. Natural immunity is inferior to vaccine-based immunity. 2. Millions of Americans (perhaps 100 million according to a model developed by the CDC) haven't already had and recovered from COVID. 3. Vaccinated individuals can't become infected and spread the virus.
  - macintux 5y ago
    I’m definitely in the pro-vaccine, pro-mandate column, but both 1 and 3 from your list strike me as dubious given the information to this point. Certainly there’s been conflicting information on both.
    - LurkingPenguin 5y ago
      Re-read my comment. I'm asking if anybody downvoting me can provide scientific evidence that those statements are true. Nobody has, because they're not. Natural immunity is durable and robust, and vaccinated people can get infected and spread the virus. In fact, according to the Israeli data, vaccinated people are magnitudes of order more likely to get a Delta breakthrough infection than a person with natural immunity is to get reinfected with Delta.
frostirosti 5y ago
> do not want to be vaccinated What's the reason for this? The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it. > 2. ... Sure, and people who have had covid and get it again as well. But why risk sick days, lost productivity, severe illness when there's an effective, safe alternative. The capital cost of caring people who get sick with covid is far higher on a per capita basis for those who are unvaccinated.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  > do not want to be vaccinated What's the reason for this? The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it. It's none of your business why they don't want to be vaccinated. If science demonstrates that COVID survivors have strong immunity, why should they be forced to be vaccinated as well? We do not force people who can show immunity to measles, mumps, and rubella to get the MMR vaccine. From the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html > You do not need measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine if you meet any of these criteria for presumptive evidence of immunity*: > You have laboratory confirmation of past infection or had blood tests that show you are immune to measles, mumps, and rubella. > Sure, and people who have had covid and get it again as well. But why risk sick days, lost productivity, severe illness when there's an effective, safe alternative. The capital cost of caring people who get sick with covid is far higher on a per capita basis for those who are unvaccinated. You are distorting the science by trying to lump people who survived COVID in with the unvaccinated. They are not the same group. From Israel: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v... > SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected. > This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.

zdragnar 5y ago

Healthcare workers have been on the front line, unvaccinated, for going on two years. To mandate it or risk being fired has absolutely pissed off quite a few that I know of... My wife has gotten it, and even she is offended. The hyperbole around this very serious situation just makes all the policies seem even more like theater. To your second point, there was just a new report I saw yesterday that there is no difference in viral load between asymptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

LurkingPenguin 5y ago
> The hyperbole around this very serious situation just makes all the policies seem even more like theater. One has to conclude that it is theater at this point. Because the science is pretty darn clear. Interesting that nobody downvoting my comment (and yours) has posted a reputable and recent/current scientific source stating that: 1. Natural immunity is inferior to vaccine-based immunity. 2. Millions of Americans (perhaps 100 million according to a model developed by the CDC) haven't already had and recovered from COVID. 3. Vaccinated individuals can't become infected and spread the virus.
- macintux 5y ago
  I’m definitely in the pro-vaccine, pro-mandate column, but both 1 and 3 from your list strike me as dubious given the information to this point. Certainly there’s been conflicting information on both.
  - LurkingPenguin 5y ago
    Re-read my comment. I'm asking if anybody downvoting me can provide scientific evidence that those statements are true. Nobody has, because they're not. Natural immunity is durable and robust, and vaccinated people can get infected and spread the virus. In fact, according to the Israeli data, vaccinated people are magnitudes of order more likely to get a Delta breakthrough infection than a person with natural immunity is to get reinfected with Delta.

frostirosti 5y ago

> do not want to be vaccinated What's the reason for this? The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it. > 2. ... Sure, and people who have had covid and get it again as well. But why risk sick days, lost productivity, severe illness when there's an effective, safe alternative. The capital cost of caring people who get sick with covid is far higher on a per capita basis for those who are unvaccinated.

LurkingPenguin 5y ago
> do not want to be vaccinated What's the reason for this? The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it. It's none of your business why they don't want to be vaccinated. If science demonstrates that COVID survivors have strong immunity, why should they be forced to be vaccinated as well? We do not force people who can show immunity to measles, mumps, and rubella to get the MMR vaccine. From the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html > You do not need measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine if you meet any of these criteria for presumptive evidence of immunity*: > You have laboratory confirmation of past infection or had blood tests that show you are immune to measles, mumps, and rubella. > Sure, and people who have had covid and get it again as well. But why risk sick days, lost productivity, severe illness when there's an effective, safe alternative. The capital cost of caring people who get sick with covid is far higher on a per capita basis for those who are unvaccinated. You are distorting the science by trying to lump people who survived COVID in with the unvaccinated. They are not the same group. From Israel: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v... > SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected. > This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.