[QUOTE=Liverpooldawg;1374543]Lol, If you only knew![/QUOTE
Printable View
[QUOTE=Liverpooldawg;1374543]Lol, If you only knew![/QUOTE
Since you like stats, do you look at yesterday's traffic patterns and crash statistics to determine how much you drive the next day? Stop living in fear. As a preacher I figured you would put your faith in the Lord.
First it's me to get the shot to keep my job, then it will be my wife, then my kids. I've see the argument businesses are doing this to keep insurance costs down. What happens when they say they will only cover a family of four going forward to save on costs? Are you going to adjust how many kids you wanted to have based on that?
That's the same study your article and my article were talking about. It has been seized on by every anti vaxxer and crank out there. It doesn't say what they, and you, think it says. It DOES say some of it, but people are leaving out context also contained in the study, such as the actual numbers and not just the ratios. It is also one study. If all you will pay attention to are ones that agree with you then I cant help you. That study was the one I was referencing above when I said I knew you could provide something to back your assertion. Its THE one most linked on certain media. I saw it right after the pre-print came out. Fact remains, even in that study, that you are better off getting the vax even if you have had it.
Why do you people always assume anyone that has the point of view I do is living in fear? As I have been saying above to that nut that follows me around the internet, if you only knew. WHERE did you get that I'm a preacher? LORD HELP US if that were true, LOL! I'm in a clinical healthcare field, not a physician. I've posted that numerous times. I look at this stuff because I have to to do my job as safely as possible. I even have to sort through CDC stuff directed at my field and try to decipher exactly what it means. This is serious business for me. It's not some bizarre hobby. It's not my first rodeo with stuff like this either. When AIDS first got going it was much the same, the unknown. We did the same then as we are doing now, following the best available recommendations from people who study this kind of things their whole lives. We got a handle on that after a few years, even though we are STILL having to live with and work with what that meant. COVID is going to be no different. At least we DO have a vaxx for COVID, and a pretty good one considering what type of virus and disease it is.
That links to the same study you cited above.
And it is about antibodies, which have nothing to do with long term immunity. That's why the T cell studies are so important and why the double blind Israel study is the gold standard. At least that's what my doctor said.
I just googled it.
Care to retort the Israel study that is recognized by the gold standard? It was 32,000 people, not a couple hundred like the American ones and the KY one you linked.
At best, you can say that it is inconclusive whether the vaccine or natural immunity is better. That being the case, why would you insist the ones with natural immunity be treated worse than those with the vaccine?
Because there are other studies that show different, in fact most of them do. It's still an unknown. If we start to see a lot of well done studies by other researchers (there are still questions about that one) ("questions" don't mean that the study is bogus,) that say the same thing then ok. Read that science based medicine article closely. That guy does a better job explaining it than I ever could. His credentials are also way better than mine. Even the Israeli one says that you are way better off getting the vaccine if you have had COVID. Most all studies are in agreement you are something like two and a half times less likely to be re-infected if you get the vaccine. That well worth doing. I haven't got the booster yet. I was Moderna. I will be in the first or second group when the guidelines are issued. I got my 1st dose in January . If the guidelines are the same as for Pfizer I will be in the first one, job related. I will get it as soon as possible. I would like to stick with Moderna, it's number are a bit better than Pfizer so far.
Thread lock in 3,2,1
I happened to bump into him on his run to the bourbon store 2 days ago. Figured y'all needed to vent.**
https://c.tenor.com/YbCmX8_obPgAAAAd/ace-ventura.gif
This is an add on. I was still looking at that study last night. I ran across something from a fairly reputable source that had a plausible theory to back up what the Israeli study shows. That's the first time I had seen one of the observations it made. It was technical stuff, cell physiology level minutia, but it gave a frame work that would lead me to accept the hypothesis, IF we get other good studies that duplicate the results. What I would like to see is a non-retrospective study that gets the same result. Retrospective studies can sometimes give wonky results. You need to have an explanation for the results that makes sense. I don't have time to link it right now as I'd have to go back and find it again, if I can I will.
I know it's a fact checker but this kind of lays it out there about that study.
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/sc...ural-immunity/
As I said there are questions about it. That doesn't mean it won't turn out to be correct.