COVID Vaccination Hesitancy - Page 4

bcredliner · #31 11-18-2021, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalworks

That is an opinion. As is most of the discussion surrounding CV19 (including mine). I've come to the conclusion that trying to vaccinate it away is not the silver bullet some believe it to be. You've come to a different one, which is fine.
What are the three most important reasons that brought you to your conclusion?

Oh, I wasn't taking it personal. I was speaking in the general sense of those proponents of mandates (not yourself I would hope) berating the unvaccinated as if they are incapable of looking at data and drawing a conclusion. There are doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc who are unvaccinated. Are they not intelligent enough to make a decision? I'm sure most understand the potential risks of remaining unvaccinated. If people believed covid killed even 10% of healthy people, this wouldn't be a discussion. For most, covid hits like the flu or is asymptomatic. Outlying cases may have lasting effects (we don't really know the extent of this yet) or need to seek medical treatment.
I really hope it doesn't sound like I am berating the unvaccinated. My purpose is only to present verified facts in hopes some will change their mind and get vaccinated. Doesn't matter who they are. It's not about intelligence it is about drawing their own conclusion without considering or having access to all the research that can be verified by a specialist in infectious disease or organizations like the CDC and WHO. There are bad doctors, lawyers and scientists and the health crisis and social media that are enticing to make a name for themselves and being anti-vax expedites that goal. Most have little to no formal education concerning infectious diseases.
I've come to believe Covid is here to stay. My family is vaccinated and my kids will be soon. We'll likely all need boosters once or twice a year. We don't know long term effects of the vaccine, not that I believe there will be any. But it is still an unknown and I don't blame anyone not wanting to put it in their body if they aren't ready to. Or whatever there reason is, doesn't have to be fear of the unknown.
I agree that COVID will be around for a long time. But it is not a given that there is nothing we can do to prevent that from happening. We can't reach herd immunity without hundreds of thousands of those unvaccinated changing their minds, I'm not sure I blame anybody or not. I do feel very strongly that one is either part of the solution or part of the problem. I have no idea how many refuse to follow any of the guidelines, how many are never going to get vaccinated because of political reasons, because of their flawed interpretation of freedom, because they have drawn their conclusions from the media sources rather than infectious disease specialists, because they are just being obstinate or it is just part of there identity. I can understand being confused. But I see very little effort to resolve their confusion. I think they should have separated the wheat from the chaff by now. I view all of these groups as part of the problem. If there was another solution to controlling COVID I can understand choosing that route rather than vaccination but there isn't.

I would still like to know how the unvaccinated are infringing on the freedoms of others. Did not get a response to that minus the supply chain issue that I don't believe can be placed at their feet. If there is a compelling case, I'd like that info to continue forming my opinions.
https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-...rs-begins-mean The supply chain problems were exacerbated by COVID. Many weren't allowed to go to work, many were too sick to work or were quarantining because of the infection. Even with the vaccine available around the world there are still not enough workers to clear up the bottlenecks. Businesses have failed or don't know what they need to order to serve their customers so they have shortened ordering leadtimes. Buying habits have changed as have purchase choices. That still is the case today. Vaccination is best of what we have to curb COVID. Failure to be vaccinated perpetuates the supply chain problems.

Another year or so and all this talk will normalize and be a "covid/flu season is here, get your shots" ten second blurb on the local news.
I don't think that will happen. A flu shot is a vaccine. As long as the words COVID and vaccine are strong emotional trigger points anti vaccine folks are not going to get a shot.

You are 100% correct. It does something that might be far more important, again IMO. It might shed light on who we should and should not be listening to or trust going forward. Remember when I said (in another thread that seems like ages ago now) Fauci, the WHO, and the CDC were lying when they said masks weren't effective? That turned out to be correct. Masks have been the go to for centuries. Masks were the key to stopping the influenza epidemic in the early 1900s. The same for quarantining and social distancing. Not all masks are effective. 1https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html There are specific recommendations for the appropriate mask for COVID protection. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...k/art-20485449 What is your source for the lack of effectiveness of masks.

BTW, I also suffer permanent hand damage now due to the FDA's relaxing laws on the ethanol quality that could be used in hand sanitizers by manufacturers. Turns out benzene and methanol are really bad to be rubbing on your skin, even in relatively small quantities. They have since rolled that back (after a lab turned up those chemicals in products) and recommended issuing batch recalls on certain manufacturers. Thanks FDA. Much appreciated.

From what I can find the FDA recommended not using certain hand sanitizers because they exceeded the FDA requirements not that the allowed levels were reduced. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safet...should-not-use

Very sorry about your wrist. Is it your dominate hand?

Sponsored Links

bcredliner · #32 11-18-2021, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E53Envyy

Considering a large portion (~35%) of Ontario’s hospitalization are fully vaccinated it’s clear breakthrough cases are not uncommon and will only be more frequent as the vaccine effectiveness degrades. We clearly saw this happen in Israel, where you now must have a booster shot to be categorized as “fully vaccinated”.

A couple other metrics here in Ontario:
89% have at least one vaccine
85% are fully vaccinated

Currently in the hospital (not including ICU):
92 unvaccinated
16 partially vaccinated
68 fully vaccinated

Currently in the ICU:
62 unvaccinated
4 partially vaccinated
19 fully vaccinated

Source: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Sent from my iPhone using Xoutpost.com

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/co...-19-cases.html. Complete data for Canada tells a little different story. Note the disclaimer for accuracy of the numbers in Ontario link posted. As percent of those vaccinated increases the number of breakthrough cases increases. 85% is a high vaccination level. I don't know of anything that states how high breakthrough case percentages will go but the 85% level of vaccinated is an influence.

crystalworks · #33 11-18-2021, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

From what I can find the FDA recommended not using certain hand sanitizers because they exceeded the FDA requirements not that the allowed levels were reduced. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safet...should-not-use

Very sorry about your wrist. Is it your dominate hand?

It's mentioned on that link you posted after you drill down. But here is a more specific link. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pres...and-sanitizers

It's both hands unfortunately as you would expect using hand sanitizer. Not disfiguring or anything. Just very sensitive/painful and some visible cracking bleeding on joints. I have to use petroleum jelly and hand creams now or my knuckles turn into a bloody mess. Hard to open soda bottles now unless I remember to brace for the pain before hand. Fun stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

What are the three most important reasons that brought you to your conclusion?

Sure.

1. The vaccine is not 100% effective at preventing infection
2. It is not 100% at preventing the infected from being a carrier
3. The vaccines lose efficacy over time requiring everyone to "reup" on a 6-10 month schedule (they are still evaluating the recommended intervals)
4. Travel in and out of the US will always bring new chance for infection. Even if 100% of the US is vaccinated. 12-24 months (maybe longer) from now, when efficacy has waned infection will spread again by travel.

Quote:

I really hope it doesn't sound like I am berating the unvaccinated. My purpose is only to present verified facts in hopes some will change their mind and get vaccinated. Doesn't matter who they are. It's not about intelligence it is about drawing their own conclusion without considering or having access to all the research that can be verified by a specialist in infectious disease or organizations like the CDC and WHO. There are bad doctors, lawyers and scientists and the health crisis and social media that are enticing to make a name for themselves and being anti-vax expedites that goal. Most have little to no formal education concerning infectious diseases.

To the bolded, agreed. Those exist on both sides. Misinformation is the greatest threat to our democracy IMO. Merchants of Doubt should be required viewing to all high school students to instill a healthy amount of skepticism and distrust in them towards companies and politicians alike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

I agree that COVID will be around for a long time. But it is not a given that there is nothing we can do to prevent that from happening. We can't reach herd immunity without hundreds of thousands of those unvaccinated changing their minds, I'm not sure I blame anybody or not. I do feel very strongly that one is either part of the solution or part of the problem. I have no idea how many refuse to follow any of the guidelines, how many are never going to get vaccinated because of political reasons, because of their flawed interpretation of freedom, because they have drawn their conclusions from the media sources rather than infectious disease specialists, because they are just being obstinate or it is just part of there identity. I can understand being confused. But I see very little effort to resolve their confusion. I think they should have separated the wheat from the chaff by now. I view all of these groups as part of the problem. If there was another solution to controlling COVID I can understand choosing that route rather than vaccination but there isn't.

Your position is very clear. As is mine I would think. You are placing blame on these people for prolonging the pandemic. I am of the opinion that covid will always be here and frankly, people not getting vaccinated has very little affect on my family's safety or freedoms. We do everything we did before now except that we take precautions (like masks indoors) because the environment has changed. Before vaccinations were a thing, non-mask wearers were a threat. Now they aren't. Now, it's their choice if they want to take that risk as I no longer worry about a serious infection. We either trust that the vaccine works at the quoted 90%+ rate or we don't.

To the bolded. So you believe that if there was a 95-100% vaccination rate, covid 19 would be beaten? Within the 6 month efficacy period we could go back to shaking hands, not wearing masks, and gathering in large crowds?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

The supply chain problems were exacerbated by COVID. Many weren't allowed to go to work, many were too sick to work or were quarantining because of the infection. Even with the vaccine available around the world there are still not enough workers to clear up the bottlenecks. Businesses have failed or don't know what they need to order to serve their customers so they have shortened ordering leadtimes. Buying habits have changed as have purchase choices. That still is the case today. Vaccination is best of what we have to curb COVID. Failure to be vaccinated perpetuates the supply chain problems.

Disagree. I think the economic factors at play are much more to blame. "Just in time" supply chain. The blocking of the Suez. The inefficiencies of our ports. The increase of imports. The reason for not enough workers has nothing to do with the unvaccinated. It's more about inflation, payscales, eviction moratoriums, and unemployment benefits. More people are starting their own E businesses now than ever because they realize working like a slave to barely make it sucks. https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-...uring-covid-19 Unemployment continues to drop because people are working or have exited the job market to work for themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

I don't think that will happen. A flu shot is a vaccine. As long as the words COVID and vaccine are strong emotional trigger points anti vaccine folks are not going to get a shot.

I think you misunderstood. I didn't mean the news would say "time for your shots, go get 'em" and everyone would. I meant those who always get their flu shots would also get their boosters. Flu vaccines usually have ~40% take rate (if memory serves) so I figure those same people (my family among them) would do so as well. But that it would be normal as it has always been during flu season.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

What is your source for the lack of effectiveness of masks.

Not sure what you're asking. I always said masks were effective. That was the point. It was the WHO, CDC, and Fauci who originally said the general public would see no benefit by wearing them. Until they changed their mind 2 or 3 months later and said it would.

bcredliner · #34 11-19-2021, 04:56 PM

Can't find it. Where in the link does it say FDA changed specifications because of problems with their original approval? I read it as a temporary measure only about alcohol when there was a shortage of sanitizers and stopped when there was adequate inventory.

1. The vaccine is not 100% effective at preventing infection
2. It is not 100% at preventing the infected from being a carrier
3. The vaccines lose efficacy over time requiring everyone to "reup" on a 6-10 month schedule (they are still evaluating the recommended intervals)
4. Travel in and out of the US will always bring new chance for infection. Even if 100% of the US is vaccinated. 12-24 months (maybe longer) from now, when efficacy has waned infection will spread again by travel.
I agree with 1-3 as factual but I see them as barriers to reaching herd immunity rather than rationale to not be vaccinated. 4 can be addressed by testing or a quarantine period for incoming international visitors. And if US has achieved herd immunity infections from out of the country will not result in even a spike in COVID cases anyway. Vaccination is a critical element of reaching herd immunity just as it has been for other potentially deadly viruses.

Your position is very clear. As is mine I would think. You are placing blame on these people for prolonging the pandemic. I am of the opinion that covid will always be here and frankly, people not getting vaccinated has very little affect on my family's safety or freedoms. We do everything we did before now except that we take precautions (like masks indoors) because the environment has changed. Before vaccinations were a thing, non-mask wearers were a threat. Now they aren't. Now, it's their choice if they want to take that risk as I no longer worry about a serious infection. We either trust that the vaccine works at the quoted 90%+ rate or we don't. The key word in my post was -part of the problem. I don't think of it has blame. The problem is getting COVID under control. Vaccination is the cornerstone. I'm not blaming anyone for their position. I'm saying they are part of the problem. If not part of the problem how are they part of the solution?

To the bolded. So you believe that if there was a 95-100% vaccination rate, covid 19 would be beaten? Within the 6 month efficacy period we could go back to shaking hands, not wearing masks, and gathering in large crowds? Since we have not reached herd immunity no one knows for sure what percent vaccination for COVID results in herd immunity. The original percentage was based previous viruses which was 75-85 percent. Regardless, herd immunity is the goal.

Disagree. I think the economic factors at play are much more to blame. "Just in time" supply chain. The blocking of the Suez. The inefficiencies of our ports. The increase of imports. The reason for not enough workers has nothing to do with the unvaccinated. It's more about inflation, payscales, eviction moratoriums, and unemployment benefits. More people are starting their own E businesses now than ever because they realize working like a slave to barely make it sucks.
https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-...uring-covid-19 Unemployment continues to drop because people are working or have exited the job market to work for themselves.
Just in time has been a SOP for decades. The problem with the supply was already there when the Suez was blocked as were port inefficiencies. The pandemic exasperated the problems. Imports increased as quarantining and infections increased. Folks had the time, the money and many weren't spending money on things like vacations so they bought more products. Some of the new E businesses are the result of the feelings you mention. Far more are the result of lost jobs or reduced income from the impact of the pandemic. They saw the opportunity to not return to their jobs but rather open their own businesses. The cost of opening an E business is low and there is usually no brick and mortar or cost of employees.
Sorry I misunderstood your position on masks. The NIH position on masks changed after two months. COVID was new. it took that long to determine how contagious it is. That is the reason for the change in position. It was not due to error.

crystalworks · #35 11-19-2021, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

[COLOR="Blue"]Can't find it. Where in the link does it say FDA changed specifications because of problems with their original approval? I read it as a temporary measure only about alcohol when there was a shortage of sanitizers and stopped when there was adequate inventory.

Policy has not stopped as of yet. I'm not sure what language you are looking for? They aren't going to say specifically, "We are ending this policy because we allowed non-drug mfgs to produce alcohol based sanitizers and took their word that they would follow our quality and testing guidelines." Come on now. Links to the actual policy below. The FDA says:

"Effective Dec. 31, 2021, companies manufacturing alcohol-based hand sanitizers under the temporary policies must cease production of these products. After that date, manufacturers wishing to continue producing hand sanitizer can do so provided they comply with the tentative final monograph for over-the-counter topical antiseptics and other applicable requirements, including the FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practice requirements."

If you read the new update companies are able to continue selling until March 2022, though have to stop production Dec 31, 2021.

These are non-drug producing companies that were given temporary license to produce cheap hand sanitizers at elevated pricing. What could go wrong?

Here is the study that prompted them to end the policy. The sanitizer I used was found to have the worst benzene contamination of all those tested.

https://www.valisure.com/wp-content/...izer-v4.14.pdf

On your original link they became aware of problems with methanol contamination somewhere around July 2020 but did not take action except to issue a press release because sanitizer was still in short supply.

A recommendation against specific sanitizers (and voluntary recall urging to mfg) containing benzene did not come until 10/4/2021. Only 8 days before the withdrawal of the temporary policies. Coincidence?

Here is a link to the temporary policies: https://www.fda.gov/media/136289/download

There are a few lawsuits filed already. Hell, I should probably call an attorney myself.

You don't have to believe the FDA fucked up and that all the alphabet agencies are fallible. But they did and they are. This discussion on mandates has gone circular and this one on the FDA is in danger of doing so as well so I am withdrawing. Don't want another reinforcement plate bolt discussion.

Stay safe all.

ard · #36 11-19-2021, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nolimite39

T

1. Personal attacks really help drive the point home in a discussion, really proves the breadth of one's ability to get his/her point across in a civilized manner, I bet you're just as bold in person.

I tend to be, yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nolimite39

2. I never mentioned failure rates. I stated that the vaccine does not affect transmission rates, guess I should've specified further. The CDC along with their counterparts from around the world have all stated that the current vaccines have a profound affect on the alpha variant while the transmission of all other variants is not greatly affected.

Again, this is either a lie or ignorant. The vaccine IS protective against delta. Not 95%, but better than nothing. Against delta pfizr is estimated at ~50. (note this drops after the second dose, moreso than the Alpha variant)

It is UTTERLY false that the vaccine has no impact on 'transmission'. It does. Period. We can argue math if you wish, but your assertion seems to imply 'why bother?'. It works.

It also prevents people from dying, RIght?

It is clear you have a narrative you picked up from Tucker that (1) you have 'natural' immunity, and (2) the vaccine is pointless against delta and (3) the vaccine will likely harm you long term becuase, well, its new. (Never mind there isnt a clear mechanism for these supposed long term effects. and never mind that covid DOES have some long term impacts. But this is your narrative that you twist the data to fit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nolimite39

3. When I had the infection (in April of 2020) I stayed home, didn't fly, didn't eat out, didn't go to school, etc. Not because I had to be told so but because I take responsibility for my affect on the wellbeing of the people around me.

Wonderful.

Others seem to be happy to spread the disease, either doing their part to drive herd immunity or just a feeling that they enjoy being anti-social. These folks may need something other than their sense of societal well being to dictate their behaviors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nolimite39

4. This is the farthest thing from abolitionism, it is in fact the measured positive effect vs the potential negative. Now on the off chance in 20 years my liver starts to malfunction as a direct result of the vaccination that I was basically forced to get because my freedoms to do basically anything were being forcibly removed even though I already had the natural immunity that comes with beating a viral infection, even though the effects of the virus on my entire family were minimal, even though I am responsible enough to know when to stay my sick #$% home. Do I come harvest your organs because you're in the camp that forced me to get an immunization that ultimately led to a much MORE severe health implication for me or do I go after your kids organs since yours will probably be in just as bad of shape as mine?

Why do you think your 'natural' protection from an earlier covid exposure is protective to the delta? Data shows that protection from prior infection AND prior immunization BOTH drop off. Do you plan on getting infected again with covid to get 'boosted'? So much more 'natural' than a risky injection eh? (and has the upside of being able to pass along your infection if you dont realize you are infectious quickly enough. I know, if other people are worried about getting infected from you thats their problem, right?)

Drs. Carlson and Paul (and the healthcare team at Fox) convince you of this?

Given 750,000 dead Americans, I am OK with the infinitesimal risk of some odd liver issue cropping up in 30 years. (I know, I know- thats an overcount and it was politically manipulated ...they were all likely weak, old or suffering from some other issue and didnt die of covid)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nolimite39

I really don't have a problem with mass vaccination, my problem is with how it is being rolled out and as I think most of us agree with how this whole situation is being used as political tool for the people (politicians) we would all like to see removed from existence (not killed, just maybe sent to a different dimension or something)

You are the modern posterchild for FOx. Covid was used as a political tool by the right- 'resist resist resist, lets cause this to drag out and that will hurt the democrats in 2020'...and now it is being twisted into some weird "Dems are using vaccine mandates to control society".

Instead the pivot is "Im pro-vaccine but anti mandate" and that will become the battle royale until 2024.

Get the vaccine (even if you had covid)..get the booster, wear a Fing mask, sit down, put on your seatbelt- STFU. Lets get back to normal life in a year.

EODguy · #37 11-20-2021, 01:49 AM

"Why do you think your 'natural' protection from an earlier covid exposure is protective to the delta? Data shows that protection from prior infection AND prior immunization BOTH drop off."

Well considering that the vaccine ONLY teaches your immune system to react to the spike protein portion of covid19 and that people who've recovered from covid19 have immune responses to ALL parts of the coronavirus their immunity is greater due to the delta variant being mostly a change in the spike proteins allowing it to bypass vaccine easier than people who have an immune response to the entire virus.....

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

bcredliner · #38 11-20-2021, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalworks

Policy has not stopped as of yet. I'm not sure what language you are looking for? They aren't going to say specifically, "We are ending this policy because we allowed non-drug mfgs to produce alcohol based sanitizers and took their word that they would follow our quality and testing guidelines." Come on now. Links to the actual policy below. The FDA says:

"Effective Dec. 31, 2021, companies manufacturing alcohol-based hand sanitizers under the temporary policies must cease production of these products. After that date, manufacturers wishing to continue producing hand sanitizer can do so provided they comply with the tentative final monograph for over-the-counter topical antiseptics and other applicable requirements, including the FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practice requirements."
The FDA didn't say that because that was not not what happened. The FDA concessions were always temporary. That's the key word. That is not an indication the FDA made a mistake or that sanitizers with the alcohol content the FDA temporarily approved were harmful to users.

If you read the new update companies are able to continue selling until March 2022, though have to stop production Dec 31, 2021.
OK, My guess is that the demand remained larger than the supply. Nothing bad about that as the temp level of alcohol was not dangerous to humans.

These are non-drug producing companies that were given temporary license to produce cheap hand sanitizers at elevated pricing. What could go wrong?

Here is the study that prompted them to end the policy. The sanitizer I used was found to have the worst benzene contamination of all those tested.
https://www.valisure.com/wp-content/...izer-v4.14.pdf
https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/benzene/basics/facts.asp. Valisure is a group of pharmacies not of the capability of the FDA. The key to the potential effects of benzines is how much contact it takes to cause any problems. on humans. That is not considered in the petition and though not a lawyer I see it as frivolous petition probably designed to get into the news with the goal to improve business. The Valisure link is a petition not a suit.

On your original link they became aware of problems with methanol contamination somewhere around July 2020 but did not take action except to issue a press release because sanitizer was still in short supply.

A recommendation against specific sanitizers (and voluntary recall urging to mfg) containing benzene did not come until 10/4/2021. Only 8 days before the withdrawal of the temporary policies. Coincidence?
You are referencing the second consumer warning. The first was 8/20/20. https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/hea...s-coronavirus/

Here is a link to the temporary policies: https://www.fda.gov/media/136289/download
I don't see how this link supports your position

There are a few lawsuits filed already. Hell, I should probably call an attorney myself.

You don't have to believe the FDA fucked up and that all the alphabet agencies are fallible. But they did and they are. This discussion on mandates has gone circular and this one on the FDA is in danger of doing so as well so I am withdrawing. Don't want another reinforcement plate bolt discussion.
I don't know if or what problems the FDA has. I have not said FDA is flawless. What agencies are you suggesting have more credibility than the FDA?

Stay safe all.

The new products were tested by the FDA and those not meeting the requirements were recalled from the market and a public notice was released. That began on August of 2020. Who has filed the lawsuits?

bcredliner · #39 11-20-2021, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EODguy

"Why do you think your 'natural' protection from an earlier covid exposure is protective to the delta? Data shows that protection from prior infection AND prior immunization BOTH drop off."

Yes, protection from the virus from vaccination or natural immunity does fall off, at least thus far. That is the reason for the second shot and the booster. In a few months we will know if the booster is enough or if another booster is needed. Remember COVID is a new virus. While it can be confirmed the vaccine is safe and effective, we don't know how long adequate protection lasts. We don't know how long adequate immunity will last from natural immunity either.

Well considering that the vaccine ONLY teaches your immune system to react to the spike protein portion of covid19 and that people who've recovered from covid19 have immune responses to ALL parts of the coronavirus their immunity is greater due to the delta variant being mostly a change in the spike proteins allowing it to bypass vaccine easier than people who have an immune response to the entire virus.....
The issue with natural immunity is about how long it remains effective and all cases of COVID do not produce the same level of natural immunity. That's the reasons it is recommended to vaccinated even if you have had COVID https://www.who.int/publications/i/i...mmunity-2021.1

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

Click on the update to the original study.

bcredliner · #40 11-20-2021, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EODguy

"Why do you think your 'natural' protection from an earlier covid exposure is protective to the delta? Data shows that protection from prior infection AND prior immunization BOTH drop off."
Studies show that natural immunity is as effective against the Delta variant as 19.
Well considering that the vaccine ONLY teaches your immune system to react to the spike protein portion of covid19 and that people who've recovered from covid19 have immune responses to ALL parts of the coronavirus their immunity is greater due to the delta variant being mostly a change in the spike proteins allowing it to bypass vaccine easier than people who have an immune response to the entire virus.....
The changes in the infection rate from the Delta variant was because the Delta version is more contagious. The Delta variant did not get a pass from the vaccine protection. It is just as effective as it is on 19. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...M:gen:PTN:FY21
Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

Since there is so much to learn about the effectiveness of vaccinations and natural immunity I suggest erring on the side of caution which would be based on CDC, NIH and WHO findings.

Sponsored Links