quote:

Originally posted by rusbro:
Just looking at Google results, it seems re-infection occurs, but only rarely.

---

quote:

Originally posted by tigereye313:


If that's true, then you would have to have the vaccine regimen on a regular basis as well which they aren't recommending..

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
We DO know that if you have had Covid-19, you CAN get it again. (Despite a highly scientific “google search”)

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by tigereye313:


If that's true, then you would have to have the vaccine regimen on a regular basis as well which they aren't recommending..

No, that’s false logic.

You are confusing any immunity associated with the virus, with any immunity associated with the vaccine(s).

Further, more than one dose of the vaccine IS required, and given the limited scope and short duration of the trials preparatory to emergency authorizations for the vaccine use, we do not know the long term resistance granted by use of the vaccine.

We DO know that if you have had Covid-19, you CAN get it again. (Despite your highly scientific “google search”)

quote:

All of the above facts about immunology in general and C-19 in particular were published in medical journals, textbooks, or encyclopedias near the outset of the pandemic in March 2020 or earlier. Yet, the World Health Organization sowed confusion around this issue by publishing a scientific brief and a tweet on April 24th that stated: “There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from #COVID19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.”

Many media outlets parroted that claim, even though the World Health Organization deleted its tweet later that day and wrote: “Earlier today we tweeted about a new WHO scientific brief on ‘immunity passports’. The thread caused some concern & we would like to clarify: We expect that most people who are infected with #COVID19 will develop an antibody response that will provide some level of protection.”

That clarification was closer to the truth but still misleading because it ignored these three key facts that were already proven by that time:

The virus that causes C-19 has low mutational capacity.
The virus that causes C-19 is very vulnerable to antibody neutralization.
Viruses with these attributes are easy to protect against because vaccines and acquired immunity commonly provide long-lasting immunity against them.

Since April 2020, a torrent of research has continued to confirm those facts:

In May, the South Korean CDC published a study of 285 people who contracted C-19, recovered, and then tested positive again. Contrary to the assumption that they must have caught the disease a second time, the study found no evidence that even one these individuals was infectious. Viral culture testing was performed on 108 of the subjects, and “all had negative results.” Also, “no case was found” in which someone “was newly infected solely from contact with” one of the people. These facts indicate that these positive C-19 tests were caused by remnants of dead or harmless virus particles. Thus, South Korea changed its policy to treat such individuals as non-infectious.

In August, the journal Cell published a study of the immune system responses of 206 people in Sweden who had contracted C-19. Unlike other studies that only looked for antibodies, this one measured “T cells,” which are the body’s main source of “long-term immune protection.” This is important because antibodies quickly wane after infections, while T cells provide lasting immunity. The study found that:
100% of the subjects who had severe C-19 and 87% who had mild C-19 had “highly functional memory T cell responses, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe Covid-19.”
“In line with these observations, none of the convalescent individuals in this study, including those with previous mild disease, have experienced further episodes of Covid-19.”

In August, after C-19 had “affected over 23 million patients with more than 0.8 million deaths in over 200 countries,” the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases reported the first proven case of someone catching C-19 and then catching it again. This sometimes occurs with all infectious diseases—including with people who have been vaccinated—because immunity is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. However, when it comes to C-19 and other ailments caused by viruses that are vulnerable to antibodies and have little capacity for mutations, such events are rare exceptions, not the rule.
In September, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a genetic analysis of 18,514 virus samples collected from people who contracted C-19 in 84 different nations. The study found that mutations to date have been so “limited” that “a single vaccine” should be “broadly protective” on a “global” basis. The authors note this situation is very different from the viruses that cause HIV, the flu, and Dengue fever because their ample mutations make it nearly impossible to create effective vaccines against them.

In November, the journal Cell published a study of 15 people who recovered from mild cases of C-19 to determine if their immune systems developed “a multilayered defense that lasts.” The study found that all of them did, as evidenced by the presence of C-19-specific T cells and B cells in their blood. Both are sources of long-term immune protection, although T cells are the primary source. Researchers also tested the cells and found that they reacted appropriately when exposed to the virus that causes C-19. Those results, as the authors point out, are consistent with the fact that no one who previously had C-19 caught it again during major outbreaks on a fishing vessel and at an overnight camp.
Time will tell more about the mutations of the virus that causes C-19, but current indications are that it will not dramatically mutate and become an ongoing cause of numerous deaths.

---

quote:

Originally posted by tigereye313:

quote:

Originally posted by rusbro:
Just looking at Google results, it seems re-infection occurs, but only rarely.

My suspicion on those few documented cases is that they may have had some unrecognized immuno-deficiency.

quote:

Originally posted by m58:
has severe side effects in about 4.5 % of the people who have taken this shot.

quote:

Originally posted by m58:
No, I will refuse to take it even though I am in the high risk category due to my age and other underlaying health issues. In addition as a police officer I mingle daily with the general public and do not have the option of working from home.
This vaccine was rushed into production and has severe side effects in about 4.5 % of the people who have taken this shot.

I do not trust big pharmacy to do the right thing in regards to creating a safe and efficient vaccine .

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:
ER doc here, taking care of COVID patients more now than at any point previously. This shit has to get stopped. ICUs are at capacity everywhere, no matter what they may be saying (opening PACU beds as ICUs is effectively expanding capacity above 100%). Getting the Pfizer vaccine tomorrow.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by m58:
has severe side effects in about 4.5 % of the people who have taken this shot.

That's much higher than anything I've seen thus far. Do you have a source for that figure?