Prior COVID Infection Is As Effective At Preventing Reinfection As Vaccination

[shunyadragon]

Where did I suggest killing anyone? Quit using words you clearly don't understand.

In ever accused you of killing anyone. Please respond to what I actually posted.

Yes, your opposition to vaccination, and meaningless assertion the getting Covid-19 is in any way an alternate to vaccination or the so called 3% (?) represents the impact of Covid-19 is equivalent to advocating eugenics to deal with the pandemic. Sort of a 'survival of the fittest' is the solution.

No a very meaningful thread anyway,

[NorrinRadd]

Dennis Prager -- “I have engaged with strangers, constantly hugging them, taking photos with them knowing that I was making myself very susceptible to getting COVID,” the host said. “Which is, indeed, as bizarre as it sounded, what I wanted, in the hope I would achieve natural immunity and be taken care of by therapeutics.”

From here.

Interesting. I would not be inclined to go that far, even if I had his ready access to HCQ, IVM, etc.

[Bill the Cat]

In ever accused you of killing anyone. Please respond to what I actually posted.

What happens to people in eugenics exercises? Are they killed or not?

Yes, your opposition to vaccination,

That is a bold faced lie. I am not opposed to vaccination. I've repeated that multiple times. I am opposed to mandating vaccines for people who have already recovered from COVID.

and meaningless assertion the getting Covid-19 is in any way an alternate to vaccination

Burn that straw. I mad a reductio argument to make a larger point about the hypocrisy of vax Nazis.

or the so called 3% (?) represents the impact of Covid-19 is equivalent to advocating eugenics to deal with the pandemic. Sort of a 'survival of the fittest' is the solution.

Never said any of that. What I said was that the virus is 97% recoverable. Is that inaccurate? You vax Nazis act like getting the virus is a sure death sentence but being recovered is as inconsequential as eating a PB&J to ward off a cold.

No a very meaningful thread anyway,

The thread is EXTREMELY meaningful. We millions who have recovered from the virus are being treated as second class citizens and are either being forced to wear a scarlet letter or to take a shot that we just don't need. And your hand waving is what is not very meaningful.

[Bill the Cat]

Don't think there's an easy answer to that question. A good argument can be made for never mandating vaccination. I'm in two minds about it. That said, we're WAY past the threshold where any informed, caring person should be getting vaccinated for the benefit of everyone.

I'm pretty well informed. There is no reason I should be forced to get the vaccine.

No idea how this follows, sorry.

I am being told my level of protection (B), which is equal to a fully vaccinated person's (C), is insufficient (A). By the law of substitution, if A > B and B = C then A > C. Therefore, being fully vaccinated is insufficient.

You might well be right that insisting on vacinating previously infected people will turn out to be an over-reaction which didn't add much to our fight against covid. But a low-risk intervention like this to squeeze every last bit of juice out of our vaccines isn't unreasonable.

But forcing it is.

Given the chaos of covid, and the lockdowns which we want to avoid at any cost, erring on the side of "too many vaccines" seems way more sensible than erring on the side of "too few vaccines".

If the studies weren't available, you may have had a point, but there are ample studies out that show naturally acquired immunity is sufficient, durable, and long-lasting. Maybe not the highest level available, but no one is really willing to mandate that course of action for everyone, are they? So, again, we are being treated as second class citizens. Rand Paul was right.

Honestly Bill, this really does read like you throwing a girly little strop for a silly reason.

Count yourself lucky this is a Christian owned site and I am one of the owners, because I almost let the former Airman in me slip...

Get some perspective, man.

I HAVE perspective, man! The OP gave it for me.

Millions have died, and lockdowns have caused lots of harm too.

That is completely irrelevant to my argument here. Reinfections are rare, and severe reinfections are even more rare by orders of magnitude.

We want to do everything we can to avoid both these things.

Even ignoring science in the process.

Just suck it up and take the darned vaccine.

No. It is basically pointless for me to do so, and the increase in risk the vaccine brings isn't worth it to me. Even a small risk is an additional risk.

Regardless of your hurt feelings regarding recognition of your immunity, the risk/benefit ratio makes sense.

No it doesn't. Getting vaccinated proves no real benefit to me. It increases the risk of heart issues for me that I don't need to take. It provides NO guarantee that it will even work to keep me from catching COVID again and spreading it to others who may die from it, vaccinated or not. My own doctor agrees that I do not need the added risk.

[shunyadragon]

What happens to people in eugenics exercises? Are they killed or not?

Your misusing the concept of 'to kill.' That would be direct act to kill and not applicable in this case unless you would advocate euthanasia for those with Covid-19.

In advocating eugenics, and rejecting vaccines people die and suffer for Covid =19, by natural selection without the real potential of surviving through taking the vaccines.

That is a bold faced lie. I am not opposed to vaccination. I've repeated that multiple times. I am opposed to mandating vaccines for people who have already recovered from COVID.

The thread title and your apparent intent of this thread indicates otherwise, which is decidedly to minimise the neccessity of vaccines to refuce the effects of Covid-19It is a fact that the large number of unvaccinated perpetuates the spread and contributes to more verslent vaients

Burn that straw. I mad a reductio argument to make a larger point about the hypocrisy of vax Nazis.

Your wiggling hypocrisy and failure to respond is very apparent, For on for many many vaccines have been legally mandated over the years, and ALL found legal by the Supreme Court. Your reverting to Nazi accusation is a fallacy guess wich one,

Never said any of that. What I said was that the virus is 97% recoverable. Is that inaccurate? You vax Nazis act like getting the virus is a sure death sentence but being recovered is as inconsequential as eating a PB&J to ward off a cold.

False far more Covid-19 victims are not necessarily recoverable due brain, and organ damage. Your use of these phony numbers remains cold indifference to the victims of Covid-19

The thread is EXTREMELY meaningful. We millions who have recovered from the virus are being treated as second class citizens and are either being forced to wear a scarlet letter or to take a shot that we just don't need. And your hand waving is what is not very meaningful.

Again so what!?!?!?!? Not meaningful when considering the spread of Covid-19 to the uninfected, which is the main issue in the pandemic.This simply true of ALL viral infections,

[Bill the Cat]

Your misusing the concept of 'to kill.' That would be direct act to kill and not applicable in this case unless you would advocate euthanasia for those with Covid-19.

In advocating eugenics, and rejecting vaccines people die and suffer for Covid =19, by natural selection without the real potential of surviving through taking the vaccines.

You missed the point Frank. Completely. For people to obtain "hybrid immunity", the highest level of protection - what researchers are calling "the Holy Grail" of immunity - people need to get sick first. Since you agree that this is not a favorable position to take, then you are saying that being vaccinated alone is sufficient, are you not?

The thread title and your apparent intent of this thread indicates otherwise, which is decidedly to minimise the neccessity of vaccines to refuce the effects of Covid-19It is a fact that the large number of unvaccinated perpetuates the spread and contributes to more verslent vaients

Could you misspell one more word please? The thread title came from the linked article. Nowhere have I minimized COVID naďve people choosing to get a vaccine. It is a fact that "vaccine only" also perpetuates the spread and mutations of the virus.

Your wiggling hypocrisy and failure to respond is very apparent, For on for many many vaccines have been legally mandated over the years, and ALL found legal by the Supreme Court. Your reverting to Nazi accusation is a fallacy guess wich one,

I've directly responded to each of your claims. There is no scientific reason to mandate a recovered person getting the vaccine. Vaccines aren't generally recommended for someone who has recently recovered. There may be reasons for me to CHOOSE to get a post-infection vaccine, but that's MINE to choose, not pudding brain tyrants who got elected solely based on being "not the last guy".

False far more Covid-19 victims are not necessarily recoverable due brain, and organ damage. Your use of these phony numbers remains cold indifference to the victims of Covid-19

Way to avoid the question...

Again so what!?!?!?!? Not meaningful when considering the spread of Covid-19 to the uninfected, which is the main issue in the pandemic.This simply true of ALL viral infections,

It is completely meaningful. A recovered person's immunity is equal or better than a vaccinated person's. That is the conclusion of the study in the OP. So, by you saying that MY immunity is "not meaningful", then you are declaring yours just as meaningless. Good take there Frank...

[Bill the Cat]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-.../text?r=36&s=1

S. 2846

To require Federal agencies to acknowledge, accept, and agree to truthfully present, natural immunity pertaining to COVID–19 pursuant to promulgating certain regulations.

---

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
September 23, 2021

Mr. Lee introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

---

A BILL
To require Federal agencies to acknowledge, accept, and agree to truthfully present, natural immunity pertaining to COVID–19 pursuant to promulgating certain regulations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Natural Immunity Is Real Act”.

SEC. 2. NATURAL IMMUNITY TO COVID–19.


(a) In General.—Pursuant to any regulation promulgated by a Federal agency and related to the public health emergency declared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d) with respect to COVID–19, the applicable agency shall acknowledge, accept, agree to truthfully present, and incorporate, the consideration of natural immunity as it pertains to COVID–19 with respect to the individuals subject to the applicable regulations.



(b) Definition.—For purposes of this section, the term “natural immunity” means immunity that is naturally existing.



(c) Rule Of Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow for, or authorize, a Federal vaccination mandate.

[Littlejoe]

I posted this in one of the other threads but probably more relevant here:

FWIW, purely anecdotal of course but my coworker who is vaccinated, has a son who was not. Son got Covid, and now co-worker has tested positive and is exhibiting symptoms. I as a covid survivor, however have not tested positive (even after being exposed to co-worker off and on for several days). I am un-vaccinated but did have covid before the vaccine was released. Also, our other co-worker, who is also vaccinated has not tested positve either...do with that what you will.

[Bill the Cat]

https://contracostaherald.com/91-res...ed-and-quoted/

91 research studies affirm naturally acquired immunity to COVID-19: Documented, linked, and quoted



We should not force COVID vaccines on anyone when the evidence shows that naturally acquired immunity is equal to or more robust and superior to existing vaccines. Instead, we should respect the right of the bodily integrity of individuals to decide for themselves.

Public health officials and the medical establishment with the help of the politicized media are misleading the public with assertions that the COVID-19 shots provide greater protection than natural immunity. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, for example, was deceptive in her October 2020 published LANCET statement that “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection” and that “the consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future.”

Immunology and virology 101 have taught us over a century that natural immunity confers protection against a respiratory virus’s outer coat proteins, and not just one, e.g. the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. There is even strong evidence for the persistence of antibodies. Even the CDC recognizes natural immunity for chicken-pox and measles, mumps, and rubella, but not for COVID-19.

The vaccinated are showing viral loads (very high) similar to the unvaccinated (Acharya et al. and Riemersma et al.), and the vaccinated are as infectious. Riemersma et al. also report Wisconsin data that corroborate how the vaccinated individuals who get infected with the Delta variant can potentially (and are) transmit(ting) SARS-CoV-2 to others (potentially to the vaccinated and unvaccinated).

This troubling situation of the vaccinated being infectious and transmitting the virus emerged in seminal nosocomial outbreak papers by Chau et al. (HCWs in Vietnam), the Finland hospital outbreak (spread among HCWs and patients), and the Israel hospital outbreak (spread among HCWs and patients). These studies also revealed that the PPE and masks were essentially ineffective in the healthcare setting. Again, the Marek’s disease in chickens and the vaccination situation explains what we are potentially facing with these leaky vaccines (increased transmission, faster transmission, and more ‘hotter’ variants).

Moreover, existing immunity should be assessed before any vaccination, via an accurate, dependable, and reliable antibody test (or T cell immunity test) or be based on documentation of prior infection (a previous positive PCR or antigen test). Such would be evidence of immunity that is equal to that of vaccination and the immunity should be provided the same societal status as any vaccine-induced immunity. This will function to mitigate the societal anxiety with these forced vaccine mandates and societal upheaval due to job loss, denial of societal privileges etc. Tearing apart the vaccinated and the unvaccinated in a society, separating them, is not medically or scientifically supportable.

See the web page for the 91 studies that were current as of Oct 30

[shunyadragon]

I posted this in one of the other threads but probably more relevant here:

FWIW, purely anecdotal of course but my coworker who is vaccinated, has a son who was not. Son got Covid, and now co-worker has tested positive and is exhibiting symptoms. I as a covid survivor, however have not tested positive (even after being exposed to co-worker off and on for several days). I am un-vaccinated but did have covid before the vaccine was released. Also, our other co-worker, who is also vaccinated has not tested positve either...do with that what you will.

Yes, having had Covid-19 imparts a degree of immunity for being reinfected, but like all infected and reinfected one can still spread the virus once infected regardless of the severity. Over the history of the pandemic the number of reinfections is very low compared to the total infections, hospitalizations and fatalities.To get immunity from reinfection you still have to survive the first infections, hospitalization and the side effects of the infection some disabling and long term. It remains documented that the dominance of the hospitalizations and fatalities are among the unvaccinated.