Coronavirus

Out of context: Reply #5195

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 6,418 Responses
  • pr2-6

    "Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before."

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/…

    pr2 -6Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • First thing it says is that it’s not peer reviewed and should NOT be used to guide medical advice. Their emphasis.monospaced
    • It also concludes that if you’re unvaccinated you should get vaccinated. Either that or risk death from Covid infection.monospaced
    • They also limited previously infected as only the last 42 days. They threw out anyone who had it before that. Not very good angle there to ignore the majority.monospaced
    • EVERY paper in preprint is not peer-reviewed. How is this a news to anyone?pr2
    • It’s not news to anyone. But it is important if you’re going to cite it. Obviously.monospaced
    • the purpose of this study is not to find out if you should or shouldn't get vaccinated. don't confuse the aims. there a plethora of quality papers about it.pr2
    • It is saying that the vaccine works if you haven’t had Covid yet. If you’ve survived Covid it might be less effective. This isn’t news to anyone.monospaced
    • It supports the case for getting vaccinated. Nothing else.monospaced
    • but what about freedom?

      *spits      GuyFawkes
    • um, yeah ok once again you show total disregard to how science works. any study has an AIM and proves something in context of that AIM.pr2
    • here specifically if those who had covid are as protected as those with vaccines. the study might lead to other conclusions but since that wasn't the AIM,pr2
    • those findings are not conclusive.pr2
    • papers that actually AIM to find if vaccines are good for you will show more nuanced findings: yes, if you are older or have comorbidity, inconsequential...pr2
    • ... but probably recommended when you are young and healthy.pr2
    • and not recommended for children (including those above 12).pr2
    • happy you both and your families are still alive and can argue in perpetuum on an online forum :-)uan
    • I did not show disregard for how science works, not at all. The AIM here is to say that a covid infection MAY have a period of immunity attached. Not news.monospaced
    • But nothing about the finding implies a vaccine isn't useful or necessary.monospaced
    • My family I know will be safe. Same can't be said for pr2's considering he doesn't mask and doesn't vaccinate.monospaced
    • but he got it already...so he is got vaccinated by nature.uan
    • Maybe.monospaced
    • science paper says: u got covid it's as good as if you were vaccinated;
      mono: "Maybe" then "i'm not anti science"
      sure you are note, sure you are not.      pr2
    • No it doesn’t say that. The article says “maybe” you clown. It hasn’t even been peer reviewed nor is very complete.monospaced
    • The overwhelming majority of the science on the subject says to get vaccinated. You’re denying that and finding weak fringe studies instead.monospaced
    • The fact that 90% of current ICU covid patients are unvaccinated is the science you need to see.monospaced
    • dude, every time i read something you write i have a hard time believing that someone can be so obtuse to fundamental logic.pr2
    • mono's logic: ICUs are filled with unvaccinated people who NEVER HAD covid before = vaccinate people who had covid. fuck me!pr2
    • Your logic is that it’s better to risk death and accept loss of life for chance of some resistance than get vaccine which is almost guaranteed to save youmonospaced
    • And it’s not just people who aren’t vaccinated. There are 10-20% who were. That’s why it’s important. But go ahead and ignore the science you fucking retard.monospaced
    • My logic beats yours any day of the week. Because I am more informed, more well read and far more educated than you. And I don’t question the experts like you.monospaced
    • I’m also not irrationally scared of masks, the vaccine, or so emotionally driven like you, so I can see clearly. You have issues.monospaced
    • You live in fear, you live to spread fear, and you ignore anything that threatened that. That is why you are considered qbns #1 CUNTmonospaced
    • sure you are more informed, sure you are. here is your lollipop.pr2
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread