What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

UNOFFICIAL COVID-19: NOT the mainstream Narrative (1 Viewer)

brun said:
If I understand correctly. Torres and most of those other Yankees were asymptomatic. If not for being tested daily due to contact tracing, you wouldn't know about these cases. Furthermore, I believe the CDC isn't reporting cases of vax'd people getting covid unless they at least visit the hospital. 
Click to expand...
Aaron Boone said the other day that Torres was actually a false positive earlier in the year. He was the only one who had covid in 2020.

 
jobarules said:
Agreed. That was my original point. Nothing has been proven yet
Click to expand...
Wrong. Actual bloodwork Data has shown quite clearly a SIGNIFICANTLY higher Average level of immune response in vaccinated folks over natural immunity. 
 

Paper link
 

The "study" you posted doesn't actually have a link to the actual paper, methodology, or data.... lots of possible variables (vaccinated folks could be healthcare workers with dramatically higher risk for re-exposure, for example).
 

Thus it reads as HIGHLY circumstantial as it sits now... particularly given it contrasts with actual conclusive lab analysis. If they share more details it could become worthy of a deeper look but as it reads now it's not. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav said:
I said, someone show me factual evidence that getting the vax after having covid helps.  The opinion is get it.  Yet, no factual proof.

I think that is malpractice to tell me to take something that can do harm that does no benefit.  Seems simple to me.

Vaccines direct our immune systems.  

I had covid and let's say you have vax.  Tell me how long your vax works compared to my natural immunity.  I don't think you can.  

I said this a million times, if I didn't have covid I would take the jab.  

I don't understand why people want me to take both risks without any proof of benefit.
Click to expand...


IC FBGCav said:
So, show me your study since its not tough to understand.  I will get jabbed tomorrow.  Or send chance4hope 1k if you cant.
Click to expand...


IC FBGCav said:
I trust science and data.  I said this before.  If I didn't have covid already I would have been first in line for the jab.  

We don't have enough data for me yet and that I am being sold to get the vax too is a huge turn off.  

But all I want is a solid study telling me there is a bigger benefit then risk to get the vax.

If would recommend to anyone who didn't have covid to get the vax.

There are also no studies saying that natural immunity after having covid is less effective.  

I truly think the effective rate of the vax is less than what's being pimped and side effects are higher.  Just my opinion.  
Click to expand...


IC FBGCav said:
So you think when all the data comes out the people that had covid and took the vax will be better protected with less risk?  I will throw 5k on that you are not correct.
Click to expand...


Here you go 

@IC FBGCav

Among Kentucky residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, vaccination status of those reinfected during May–June 2021 was compared with that of residents who were not reinfected. In this case-control study, being unvaccinated was associated with 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with being fully vaccinated.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
gianmarco said:
Here you go 

@IC FBGCav

Among Kentucky residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, vaccination status of those reinfected during May–June 2021 was compared with that of residents who were not reinfected. In this case-control study, being unvaccinated was associated with 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with being fully vaccinated.
Click to expand...
Thank you, need to look into this!

 
Terminalxylem said:
Yes. But collecting that data is problematic at best, and convincing you to accept it (if it can be definitely determined) will be even harder.

So why am I convinced?

1. Neutralizing antibodies are central in our immune response to recurrent infection.

2. The mRNA vaccines promote creation of neutralizing antibodies more reliably than natural infection.

3. Higher titers of antibodies generally lead to more robust and durable immune response.

4. The mRNA vaccines lead to higher antibody levels, on average, than natural infection.

5. Significant adverse effects from the vaccines appear inconsequential at this point.

So there is biologic plausibility suggesting mRNA vaccine superiority over natural immunity,  with links to supporting data in this very thread. I’ve seen nothing in support of the opposing viewpoint, where vaccinated people have worse outcomes. 
Click to expand...
Here is how you win.  mRNA vaccine has superiority over natural immunity.

 
I want a statistical definition of rampant.  What percentage of people have Covid at this time?  Why should I be worried about this percentage?

 
brettdj said:
I want a statistical definition of rampant.  What percentage of people have Covid at this time?  Why should I be worried about this percentage?
Click to expand...
I don't know how to define rampant for you, but it would probably depend on your region. Because during "uncontrolled spread" it can spiral out of control in a day or two. I forget the tipping point, but at that point cases can double quickly after that in a short time. More cases = more % of people from that population needing medical care. This becomes problematic when hospitals are already strained for resources (beds AND staff, not necessarily in that order). If you are in an area that is sparsely populated, probably a little more shielded than other areas, but then again, it's all relative to the available healthcare resources in your area.

IMHO 

 
IC FBGCav said:
Here is how you win.  mRNA vaccine has superiority over natural immunity.
Click to expand...
@IC FBGCav

Still not peer reviewed yet, but from the study that some have been quoting lately here

Model 3 - previously infected vs. vaccinated and previously infected individuals
In model 3, we matched 14,029 persons. Baseline characteristics of the groups are
presented in Table 1b. Examining previously infected individuals to those who were
both previously infected and received a single dose of the vaccine, we found that the
latter group had a significant 0.53-fold (95% CI, 0.3 to 0.92) (Table 4a) decreased risk
for reinfection, as 20 had a positive RT-PCR test, compared to 37 in the previously
infected and unvaccinated group. Symptomatic disease was present in 16 single dose
vaccinees and in 23 of their unvaccinated counterparts. One COVID-19-related
hospitalization occurred in the unvaccinated previously infected group. No COVID-
19-related mortality was recorded.
We conducted a further sub-analysis, compelling the single-dose vaccine to be
administered after the positive RT-PCR test. This subset represented 81% of the
previously-infected-and-vaccinated study group. When performing this analysis, we
found a similar, though not significant, trend of decreased risk of reinfection, with an
OR of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.21, P-value=0.188).

More ammo as a reason that you should get vaccinated even if you had Covid already.

 
gianmarco said:
@IC FBGCav

Still not peer reviewed yet, but from the study that some have been quoting lately here

Model 3 - previously infected vs. vaccinated and previously infected individuals
In model 3, we matched 14,029 persons. Baseline characteristics of the groups are
presented in Table 1b. Examining previously infected individuals to those who were
both previously infected and received a single dose of the vaccine, we found that the
latter group had a significant 0.53-fold (95% CI, 0.3 to 0.92) (Table 4a) decreased risk
for reinfection, as 20 had a positive RT-PCR test, compared to 37 in the previously
infected and unvaccinated group. Symptomatic disease was present in 16 single dose
vaccinees and in 23 of their unvaccinated counterparts. One COVID-19-related
hospitalization occurred in the unvaccinated previously infected group. No COVID-
19-related mortality was recorded.
We conducted a further sub-analysis, compelling the single-dose vaccine to be
administered after the positive RT-PCR test. This subset represented 81% of the
previously-infected-and-vaccinated study group. When performing this analysis, we
found a similar, though not significant, trend of decreased risk of reinfection, with an
OR of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.21, P-value=0.188).

More ammo as a reason that you should get vaccinated even if you had Covid already.
Click to expand...
There is another study not peer reviewed that say people that had covid are 6x more protected than vaccine people.  That is on par with the past but oh well.  

And this isn't a vaccine per se.  It's a shot that will always require more shots.  I will let time pass and let real research tell the true story.  Since we have started discussing this I have not been proven incorrect.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is the dumbest thread carried on by indescribable methods and valuations that I personally cannot comprehend.

 
Examining previously infected individuals to those who were
both previously infected and received a single dose of the vaccine, we found that the
latter group had a significant 0.53-fold (95% CI, 0.3 to 0.92) (Table 4a) decreased risk
for reinfection, as 20 had a positive RT-PCR test, compared to 37 in the previously
infected and unvaccinated group

So this comparison is so shady.

Did you have covid and then get the vax or get the vax then get covid?

Why these semantics?

Give me people who had vax vs people who had covid.  Pretty simple.  But that leave 114 million people as not customers.

 
It still drives me nuts that people think getting a shot with part of virus that goal is to stimulate an immune response is more effective than having covid and fighting off the entire virus.

 
My theory has zero marking dollars behind it.  Yours 1 billion, in marketing.  Why?  

Do you really think the people that won't pass health care for all care now?

Really?

 
I will give you the headline.

Vaccine no benefit to people that had covid....We were just doing the best we could to protect everyone.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav said:
And this is better than fighting off the infection?   Plus not being sterilizing?  Its a flu shot.  Does same thing.   Tell me how the covid shot is different from the flu shot?
Click to expand...
you think that the covid vaccine sterilizes people?   :lmao:   

 
IC FBGCav said:
And this is better than fighting off the infection?   Plus not being sterilizing?  Its a flu shot.  Does same thing.   Tell me how the covid shot is different from the flu shot?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's better. I personally know a dozen or more people just in this little neck of the woods who've already had Covid TWICE. Meaning the first infection either didn't generate enough or ANY antibodies to defend against the same infection the second time. Already knowing that Delta is more infectious than the first brand we had, if it's something you want to gamble on, then that's your prerogative. If it were me, I'd surely at least get my antibodies checked and find out what numbers put you at a good level of protection against Delta.  

As for flu shot, best I can understand they have to PREDICT what strain is going to prevalent each year and try to defend against it. Which is why sometimes the flu shot just "doesn't work." It's working it's just not looking for the right strain.  I know that my own son has had 2 strains of flu at once before (which shocked me but I'm sure is probably common lol). The COVID shot (at least   to date) is effective against all strains, and overwhelming majority of the time does it's job very well. Which leads me to...

Final point, it's not just about fighting off infection. It never has been. It's about fighting off SEVERE infection and death. 

 
IC FBGCav said:
And this is better than fighting off the infection?   Plus not being sterilizing?  Its a flu shot.  Does same thing.   Tell me how the covid shot is different from the flu shot?
Click to expand...
It's not. The flu shot is a vaccine though. And I would liken them the same. If you get the flu you don't get the flu shot that season but you would get it the next flu season. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem covid has a season. So if you get covid you don't need the covid shot right away but at some point you will need it. We just don't know when. Maybe 8 months. Maybe a year. Unfortunately, the CDC doesn't seem to know either so they just say "take the covid shot ".

 
Nathan R. Jessep said:
Yes, it's better. I personally know a dozen or more people just in this little neck of the woods who've already had Covid TWICE. Meaning the first infection either didn't generate enough or ANY antibodies to defend against the same infection the second time. Already knowing that Delta is more infectious than the first brand we had, if it's something you want to gamble on, then that's your prerogative. If it were me, I'd surely at least get my antibodies checked and find out what numbers put you at a good level of protection against Delta.  

As for flu shot, best I can understand they have to PREDICT what strain is going to prevalent each year and try to defend against it. Which is why sometimes the flu shot just "doesn't work." It's working it's just not looking for the right strain.  I know that my own son has had 2 strains of flu at once before (which shocked me but I'm sure is probably common lol). The COVID shot (at least   to date) is effective against all strains, and overwhelming majority of the time does it's job very well. Which leads me to...

Final point, it's not just about fighting off infection. It never has been. It's about fighting off SEVERE infection and death. 
Click to expand...
Weird. I don't know a single person who has had covid twice and know a dozen vaccinated people to get it. And I live in the original epicenter 

 
jobarules said:
Weird. I don't know a single person who has had covid twice and know a dozen vaccinated people to get it. And I live in the original epicenter 
Click to expand...
Perspective. 😉 What I'm not sure of is if it was Delta or the original strain the second time. Most of these cases were fairly early on (like last summer/fall after already having it the prior spring) and were mild cases (symptoms, sick at home for a few days). I suppose it could've been also the Alpha variant (or another one), but the point remains, for some people just being infected doesn't guarantee against another infection. 

 
Nathan R. Jessep said:
Perspective. 😉 What I'm not sure of is if it was Delta or the original strain the second time. Most of these cases were fairly early on (like last summer/fall after already having it the prior spring) and were mild cases (symptoms, sick at home for a few days). I suppose it could've been also the Alpha variant (or another one), but the point remains, for some people just being infected doesn't guarantee against another infection. 
Click to expand...
True but neither does being vaccinated. So perhaps being infected provides the same protection against hospitalization as the vaccine. 

 
jobarules said:
True but neither does being vaccinated. So perhaps being infected provides the same protection against hospitalization as the vaccine. 
Click to expand...
See that's where our anecdotal sample sizes take a seat and we listen to the large-scale peer-reviewed studies. They've been pretty consistent all along in stating that natural infection is "hit or miss" on creating lasting antibodies. 

 
jobarules said:
Weird. I don't know a single person who has had covid twice and know a dozen vaccinated people to get it. And I live in the original epicenter 
Click to expand...
Many people had COVID with minimal or no symptoms. And some of them didn’t get tested. So there’s a pool of people who’ve had COVID twice and don’t even know it.

Contrast people who received the vaccine. Pretty sure they’re all aware they were vaccinated.

I posted a study from Denmark which proved those with prior infection were more likely to be reinfected than vaccinated folks. In that study, they tested everybody for the presence of antibodies, so they picked up people who might not have known they had COVID the first time. @gianmarcoposted another study from Kentucky, which showed basically the same thing.

Yet you cling to a single non-reviewed paper, where we aren’t told exactly how they picked the study population. And your personal experience, which relies upon people knowing and volunteering they’ve been infected more than once.

Can you see where this might lead you to false conclusions?

 
Terminalxylem said:
Yet you cling to a single non-reviewed paper, where we aren’t told exactly how they picked the study population. And your personal experience, which relies upon people knowing and volunteering they’ve been infected more than once.

Can you see where this might lead you to false conclusions?
Click to expand...
Trying logic and reason. That's cute. And as effective as a nice shot of bleach. I applaud your resolve though.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rattle and Hum
Indie Folk / Folk Rock: Thread for exploring these genres?
Replies
23
Views
465
NutterButter
NutterButter
chet
Long COVID Final Stage FDA Trial
Replies
1
Views
251
The Dreaded Marco
The Dreaded Marco
Judge Smails
Official 2024 Kentucky Derby Thread
2 3 4
Replies
173
Views
3K
QuizGuy66
QuizGuy66

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top