[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by chet2020

Immunity always wanes, whether acquired via infection or vaccination.

Current peer-reviewed published info indicates vaccines confer better immunity than infection. There is an Israeli paper hanging around out there that is not yet peer-reviewed, we'll see what happens there.

It seems to me we still have little understanding of which antibodies interact with which virus proteins. So I'm trying to understand your statement re: S-specific ABs only attacking one type of spike protein. Do you have an article or paper to reference?

I asked for a reference, so I'll provide one also. This is a good overview of the current situation. Of course, this will evolve over time.

COVID-19 natural immunity versus vaccination | Nebraska Medicine Omaha, NE

Here's an article by the NIH from this year. You have to remember that the pandemic and related research is only two years old. They just need to keep testing for Abs of those who have recovered from Covid going forward to get more comprehensive data.

Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19 | National Institutes of Health (NIH)

[dewilson58]

It was weather.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

Here's an article by the NIH from this year. You have to remember that the pandemic and related research is only two years old. They just need to keep testing for Abs of those who have recovered from Covid going forward to get more comprehensive data.

Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19 | National Institutes of Health (NIH)

...And the battle of the statistics continues.

As Mark Twain once said, "There are three kinds of untruths; lies, damned lies and statistics". As far as I am concerned statistics are the worst, because we can make them say virtually anything we want them to say.

Just another example that we are having the wrong debate. The REAL question is whether or not, in the end, the Supreme Court will decide that people have the right, or not, to decide on their own whether or not a vaccination is right for them.

[Bonnevie]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

This is PRECISELY why this is happening. The Southwest pilots are protesting the vaccine mandate (not the vaccine). In my opinion mainstream media is frantic to keep this from being well-known (organized resistance and all that) but the Internet has numerous pictures of Southwest Airlines airplanes parked and flying the "Don't Tread On Me" flag. Rumor has it as well this will (perhaps already has) include other airlines as well.

Kudos to those brave men and women. We have been sheep long enough.

despite anything that's being said, so many of you refuse to budge from the "it's the mandates". Spirit had a similar situation a couple of months ago when they had to cancel many flights. Both Spirit and Southwest don't use hubs....so there's a cascade effect. If there's been "numerous pictures" then they are of the same thing. if you actually do some research, there was one photo in someone's tweet. Per Snopes: We reached out to Benny Johnson (who tweeted the photo) for more information to help authenticate the image but did not receive a response. For all of these reasons, on Oct. 14, we changed the rating from “Research In Progress” to “Unproven.”

as for sheep, I know of no bigger sheep than those who take everything they here from Fox News or the like as fact without verifying anything.

[SkBlogW]

Originally Posted by Bonnevie

as for sheep, I know of no bigger sheep than those who take everything they here from Fox News or the like as fact without verifying anything.

I hear that there are not that many Fox watchers here.

[chet2020]

Originally Posted by SkBlogW

You don't need a control group to count the number of reinfections in a large cohort. Even Johnny knows that retrospective case studies do not have control groups.

2nd statement was made by CDC, I think they know more about it than you do.

3rd statement: SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects. Stands by itself, is there something you don't understand about almost zero?

Since you appear to think you know more about this than the scientists and doctors that made the statements I linked to, show us your studies and data.

Do you actually think that reinfections are common and occur at higher rates than breakthrough cases? Don't believe natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccines? That's absurd, all the data says the opposite.

You took this statement:

"The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated."

But you only posted this:

"The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects."

That's quite an interesting way to make an argument.

Since you mention the CDC, here's an article from their website dated Aug 6, 2021 (this article is two months more recent than yours).

"In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections."



New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection | CDC Online Newsroom | CDC

[Swoop]

Originally Posted by chet2020

You took this statement:

"The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated."

But you only posted this:

"The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects."

That's quite an interesting way to make an argument.

Since you mention the CDC, here's an article from their website dated Aug 6, 2021 (this article is two months more recent than yours).

"In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections."



New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection | CDC Online Newsroom | CDC

According to Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease doctor from Johns Hopkins University, regarding COVID-19 reinfections. “It's not a very common thing - at least - and it will get higher as we get further out. But right now, it's probably less than 1%.”

Sorry, but vaccinated breakthrough cases are occurring at a higher rate than 1%.

Except for a single isolated study in Kentucky, the vast majority of studies worldwide indicate that the likelihood of reinfection is lower than the likelihood of breakthrough cases in vaccinated individuals.

Most “reports” touting the higher effectiveness of the vaccines, are based on models, not actual cases.