7 ms·

I've also noticed this. I have covid right now. I'm double vaccinated. I was planning to get my booster shot, but now that I've had covid what's the point. It's

by eloff 5y ago

I've also noticed this. I have covid right now. I'm double vaccinated. I was planning to get my booster shot, but now that I've had covid what's the point. It's not likely to increase my immunity and it comes with risks. At some point the government will probably change the definition of fully vaccinated to three shots and then I'll be in that unvaccinated group I usually make fun of. Somebody I know lost their job because they wouldn't get vaccinated (but they'd already had confirmed covid). That seems very unfair. I'm very angry at the dumbasses who haven't been infected and refuse to get vaccinated, including family of mine who died because of that. But no distinction is being made of those who have natural immunity. Which, as you say, is unscientific. I feel like partly that's because many people think they had it, but didn't, and partly because it's easier for the government to just tell everyone to get vaccinated.

orang2tang 5y ago
>I'm very angry at the dumbasses who haven't been infected and refuse to get vaccinated, including family of mine who died because of that. You use your dead relative as proof for your case in the same breath as calling them a dumbass. This goes to prove a point. Does it matter if everyone is vaccinated & "safe", at the expense of our dignity and respect as a species?
- eloff 5y ago
  Getting vaccinated doesn't hurt our "dignity as a species". It's the smart and socially responsible thing to do, so it would make one more worthy of respect. I know name calling is pretty low, but I stand by it. The data is so good right now, there are so many people who have been vaccinated, so many who've had covid with and without being vaccinated, that yes, you're a dumbass if you think it's smart not to get the vaccine. You've listened to the wrong information and built a bad argument in your mind. My family member who died was a lovely person, but always bad at critical thinking and always fell for conspiracy theories. Mostly it was harmless. Sometimes it just cost him a lot of money. This time it cost him his life.
bink 5y ago
> It's not likely to increase my immunity and it comes with risks. Can you explain what risks you're referring to here?
- mlac 5y ago
  There have been side effects from the vaccine, including documented cases of really bad reactions [1],[2]. I’m double vaxxed, boosted, and got covid. But to say the shot is without risks is disingenuous. That said, the risk of dying unvaccinated from COVID is much greater than the risks of vaccine. And it’s unclear if side effects from the shot are correlated to worse outcomes from COVID (e.g. It’s unknown if these people who were paralyzed definitely would have died when they contracted covid, so paralysis is a potentially better outcome). [1] https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/every-day-that-i-work-hard-i-get-closer-being-whole-bethel-park-woman-shares-her-recovery-story-since-being-paralyzed/RVFB5HRHSVAUHCVH56O7YDPZTM/ https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/every-day-that-i-work-... [2] https://www.wkrn.com/news/nashville-woman-partially-paralyzed-after-rare-reaction-to-covid-vaccine-walks-again/ https://www.wkrn.com/news/nashville-woman-partially-paralyze...
  - edmundsauto 5y ago
    The relevant risk for your situation is vaccine risk, versus risk of reinfection (not just hospitalization, but also long term effects). The math may still work out for your preferred choice, but i wanted to point out that it’s fallacious to dismiss the (rare) risks from reinfection, especially when focusing on the (rare) risks from the vaccine. You may have said this and I just missed it, but both those risks are small and honestly boils down to a preference IMO. I may just have missed in your comment where you made the right comparison, in which case I’m being a bit pedantic without cause and I apologize.
    - jader201 5y ago
      You really went out of your way, there, to cover any potential misinterpretation. Thanks for being a considerate part of the community!
    - 5y ago
reedjosh 5y ago
> partly because it's easier for the government to just tell everyone to get vaccinated. Do you make no allocation in your mind for the potential that the government is corrupted and the motivations have nothing really to do with public health?
- SCHiM 5y ago
  Sorry, but in my opinion that is a silly thing to believe. I'm assuming you're from a liberal democracy, what if I told you you could have _your_ name on the (local) ballot next time a $LOCAL vote comes around? The government, for the most part, is not an evil cabal of deep state cultists (in most countries that describe themselves as liberal today). People like you or me can join a party, and then get elected within a year or two. What I absolutely do believe is that people elected, through what is essentially a harmless popularity contest in peace time, are the worst type of people you want to have taking decisions in a crisis. People worried about their next re-election are _not_ going to make the right decisions, apart from the fact that in peace time the electorate optimizes for populism and extremism, and the candidates are sometimes more like actors than leaders. In short: they are incompetent, heavy handed and not even remotely equipped to deal withe massive leverage attached to the levers they control.
  - reedjosh 5y ago
    Sure, I could end up voted in as the mayor of a small town. That's nothing like making it into congress. A small town mayor has none of the power a member of congress would. In democracy the larger the seat, the larger the infrastructure required to get there. The funding of this infrastructure brings the necessity of corruption.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > A small town mayor has none of the power a member of congress would. Assuming the mayor is in an executive mayor system (not a council-manager) system, they often have far more practical power than a member of Congress over any issue, but their power is over smaller issues. Even in a council-manager system, the mayor (who is a primus inter pares council member) is more likely than member of Congress to have decisive power over any issue within their ambit. (Also, being a small town mayor, or similar local officer, is not an uncommon way to build the infrastructure for becoming, say a state legislator. And that's a way to build the infrastructure for Congress, and that for Senate/Governorship, and that for the Presidency.)
umvi 5y ago
Around half of my immediate family members had pretty bad reactions to the booster (fever/chills, aches for several days). And all of them got omicron anyway and had the same symptoms as family members who hadn't gotten the booster. I'm debating getting the booster but part of me thinks "why punish myself with high probability of fever/chills if in all likelihood I'm just going to get omicron anyway and suffer the same symptoms as everyone else"
- eloff 5y ago
  The data so far suggests that the booster grants substantial protection against severe disease with omicron. If anecdotally there doesn't appear much difference in your circle, that's much weaker evidence. I would still recommend it. Also my parents got the booster with no side effects of note, so not everybody reacts that way.
  - samuelstancl 5y ago
    > If anecdotally there doesn't appear much difference in your circle, that's much weaker evidence You can't compare studies looking at the population average with someone's specific social circle. Young people have a near-zero chance of getting severe disease anyway. "substantial protection against severe disease with omicron" is irrelevant when the chance of severe disease is so low.
    - res0nat0r 5y ago
      COVID was the #1 cause of death in the USA in 2020. Not just for morbidly obese 70+ year olds etc. Anyone saying that something which has killed near 1 million people just in the USA in the last two years is a minor risk are just flat wrong.
  - chronofar 5y ago
    Does it really? Across age demographics and other risk factors when compared with those with 2 shots (who from data I’ve seen aren’t getting severe disease because of the protection from the vaccination)? That would surprise me and isn’t what I’ve seen. Would love to see what you’re referring to.
rcpt 5y ago
The mRNA vaccines were developed in February 2020. The virus has had ample opportunity to change since then so it's not surprising that you still got sick. I don't think it makes sense to extrapolate this to a hypothetical new shot which is developed for the new virus.
tunesmith 5y ago
> now that I've had covid what's the point. Because the booster increases future immunity and decreases the chance that you'll pass future infection to others. > It's not likely to increase my immunity Yes it is. I don't know why people are so certain it won't. https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-11-27/protection-offered-by-booster-shot-beats-natural-immunity https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-11-27/protection-... for instance.
jjeaff 5y ago
It's not true that no distinction is made for natural immunity. The CDC guidelines consider natural immunity from confirmed covid cases as valid for 90 days. That may not match the science, but policy has to trail the science as well as balance the science with public policy strategy.
- eloff 5y ago
  90 days is just silly. Also anywhere there's a vaccine mandate, except in parts of Europe, that doesn't count for anything - when a confirmed recovery should be equal to vaccinated status.

by eloff 5y ago

orang2tang 5y ago

>I'm very angry at the dumbasses who haven't been infected and refuse to get vaccinated, including family of mine who died because of that. You use your dead relative as proof for your case in the same breath as calling them a dumbass. This goes to prove a point. Does it matter if everyone is vaccinated & "safe", at the expense of our dignity and respect as a species?

eloff 5y ago
Getting vaccinated doesn't hurt our "dignity as a species". It's the smart and socially responsible thing to do, so it would make one more worthy of respect. I know name calling is pretty low, but I stand by it. The data is so good right now, there are so many people who have been vaccinated, so many who've had covid with and without being vaccinated, that yes, you're a dumbass if you think it's smart not to get the vaccine. You've listened to the wrong information and built a bad argument in your mind. My family member who died was a lovely person, but always bad at critical thinking and always fell for conspiracy theories. Mostly it was harmless. Sometimes it just cost him a lot of money. This time it cost him his life.

bink 5y ago

> It's not likely to increase my immunity and it comes with risks. Can you explain what risks you're referring to here?

mlac 5y ago
There have been side effects from the vaccine, including documented cases of really bad reactions [1],[2]. I’m double vaxxed, boosted, and got covid. But to say the shot is without risks is disingenuous. That said, the risk of dying unvaccinated from COVID is much greater than the risks of vaccine. And it’s unclear if side effects from the shot are correlated to worse outcomes from COVID (e.g. It’s unknown if these people who were paralyzed definitely would have died when they contracted covid, so paralysis is a potentially better outcome). [1] https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/every-day-that-i-work-hard-i-get-closer-being-whole-bethel-park-woman-shares-her-recovery-story-since-being-paralyzed/RVFB5HRHSVAUHCVH56O7YDPZTM/ https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/every-day-that-i-work-... [2] https://www.wkrn.com/news/nashville-woman-partially-paralyzed-after-rare-reaction-to-covid-vaccine-walks-again/ https://www.wkrn.com/news/nashville-woman-partially-paralyze...
- edmundsauto 5y ago
  The relevant risk for your situation is vaccine risk, versus risk of reinfection (not just hospitalization, but also long term effects). The math may still work out for your preferred choice, but i wanted to point out that it’s fallacious to dismiss the (rare) risks from reinfection, especially when focusing on the (rare) risks from the vaccine. You may have said this and I just missed it, but both those risks are small and honestly boils down to a preference IMO. I may just have missed in your comment where you made the right comparison, in which case I’m being a bit pedantic without cause and I apologize.
  - jader201 5y ago
    You really went out of your way, there, to cover any potential misinterpretation. Thanks for being a considerate part of the community!
  - 5y ago

reedjosh 5y ago

> partly because it's easier for the government to just tell everyone to get vaccinated. Do you make no allocation in your mind for the potential that the government is corrupted and the motivations have nothing really to do with public health?

SCHiM 5y ago
Sorry, but in my opinion that is a silly thing to believe. I'm assuming you're from a liberal democracy, what if I told you you could have _your_ name on the (local) ballot next time a $LOCAL vote comes around? The government, for the most part, is not an evil cabal of deep state cultists (in most countries that describe themselves as liberal today). People like you or me can join a party, and then get elected within a year or two. What I absolutely do believe is that people elected, through what is essentially a harmless popularity contest in peace time, are the worst type of people you want to have taking decisions in a crisis. People worried about their next re-election are _not_ going to make the right decisions, apart from the fact that in peace time the electorate optimizes for populism and extremism, and the candidates are sometimes more like actors than leaders. In short: they are incompetent, heavy handed and not even remotely equipped to deal withe massive leverage attached to the levers they control.
- reedjosh 5y ago
  Sure, I could end up voted in as the mayor of a small town. That's nothing like making it into congress. A small town mayor has none of the power a member of congress would. In democracy the larger the seat, the larger the infrastructure required to get there. The funding of this infrastructure brings the necessity of corruption.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > A small town mayor has none of the power a member of congress would. Assuming the mayor is in an executive mayor system (not a council-manager) system, they often have far more practical power than a member of Congress over any issue, but their power is over smaller issues. Even in a council-manager system, the mayor (who is a primus inter pares council member) is more likely than member of Congress to have decisive power over any issue within their ambit. (Also, being a small town mayor, or similar local officer, is not an uncommon way to build the infrastructure for becoming, say a state legislator. And that's a way to build the infrastructure for Congress, and that for Senate/Governorship, and that for the Presidency.)

umvi 5y ago

Around half of my immediate family members had pretty bad reactions to the booster (fever/chills, aches for several days). And all of them got omicron anyway and had the same symptoms as family members who hadn't gotten the booster. I'm debating getting the booster but part of me thinks "why punish myself with high probability of fever/chills if in all likelihood I'm just going to get omicron anyway and suffer the same symptoms as everyone else"

eloff 5y ago
The data so far suggests that the booster grants substantial protection against severe disease with omicron. If anecdotally there doesn't appear much difference in your circle, that's much weaker evidence. I would still recommend it. Also my parents got the booster with no side effects of note, so not everybody reacts that way.
- samuelstancl 5y ago
  > If anecdotally there doesn't appear much difference in your circle, that's much weaker evidence You can't compare studies looking at the population average with someone's specific social circle. Young people have a near-zero chance of getting severe disease anyway. "substantial protection against severe disease with omicron" is irrelevant when the chance of severe disease is so low.
  - res0nat0r 5y ago
    COVID was the #1 cause of death in the USA in 2020. Not just for morbidly obese 70+ year olds etc. Anyone saying that something which has killed near 1 million people just in the USA in the last two years is a minor risk are just flat wrong.
- chronofar 5y ago
  Does it really? Across age demographics and other risk factors when compared with those with 2 shots (who from data I’ve seen aren’t getting severe disease because of the protection from the vaccination)? That would surprise me and isn’t what I’ve seen. Would love to see what you’re referring to.

rcpt 5y ago

The mRNA vaccines were developed in February 2020. The virus has had ample opportunity to change since then so it's not surprising that you still got sick. I don't think it makes sense to extrapolate this to a hypothetical new shot which is developed for the new virus.

tunesmith 5y ago

> now that I've had covid what's the point. Because the booster increases future immunity and decreases the chance that you'll pass future infection to others. > It's not likely to increase my immunity Yes it is. I don't know why people are so certain it won't. https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-11-27/protection-offered-by-booster-shot-beats-natural-immunity https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-11-27/protection-... for instance.

jjeaff 5y ago

It's not true that no distinction is made for natural immunity. The CDC guidelines consider natural immunity from confirmed covid cases as valid for 90 days. That may not match the science, but policy has to trail the science as well as balance the science with public policy strategy.

eloff 5y ago
90 days is just silly. Also anywhere there's a vaccine mandate, except in parts of Europe, that doesn't count for anything - when a confirmed recovery should be equal to vaccinated status.