Are we still going to ignore natural immunity?

7,879 Views | 84 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Kvetch
TarponChaser
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FlyRod said:

There are a lot of studies showing natural immunity wanes, just as vaccine immunity wanes. Yes of course you could just get reinfected, but as others have pointed out, our hospitals are at the breaking point, and while yes, vaccinated people can get sick and hospitalized, the bulk of patients in the ICUs were the ones "natural immunity" was supposed to work for.

All pandemics have their survivors...those who get infected and recover. That's great, but the big issue right now is keeping the hospital networks and their burned out staff from becoming overwhelmed. We are failing on that front.

Also any story about Covid, regardless of POV, that starts with THIS ENDS THE DEBATE should be thrown in the trash.

No there aren't.

There are hypotheses that natural immunity wanes but then they keep testing people and they're exhibiting natural immunity and antibodies for longer and longer periods of time. Definitely longer than the vaccines to this point.

And no, there is no "bulk of patients in the ICUs" who supposedly had natural immunity from prior infections. These are people who never had covid but thought they weren't at risk despite being sedentary fat-asses.
ttha_aggie_09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

the bulk of patients in the ICUs were the ones "natural immunity" was supposed to work for

I think I understand what you're trying to say, that people were just going to acquire natural immunity and not have to get vaccinated, and some ended up in the ICU, right?

If not, please point me in the direction where almost anyone has ended up in the ICU for reinfection... I have only seen a handful in all of the studies I have read and all were very elderly and had been on vents the first go round.
ORAggieFan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ttha_aggie_09 said:

Quote:

the bulk of patients in the ICUs were the ones "natural immunity" was supposed to work for

I think I understand what you're trying to say, that people were just going to acquire natural immunity and not have to get vaccinated, and some ended up in the ICU, right?

If not, please point me in the direction where almost anyone has ended up in the ICU for reinfection... I have only seen a handful in all of the studies I have read and all were very elderly and had been on vents the first go round.
Natural immunity doesn't exist if one hasn't contracted it though. If that's what he's trying to say, he really shows he has no clue what he's talking about.
t - cam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Kvetch said:

t - cam said:

Salute The Marines said:

t - cam said:

Kvetch said:

Why is this even a question? The vaccines serve to simulate the immune response in the presence of the actual virus. If natural immunity doesn't protect you, how the hell would a vaccine that emulates the exact same immune response?

My experience with natural immunity is that it works. I was exposed again a week and a half ago and I haven't had a single symptom. The goal is to prevent serious infection, not eradicate the virus. Pandora's box is open, and it ain't closing.

Will there be exceptions? Yes. But the level of unscientific insanity that this board has reached is incredible. Any time a new fear porn article comes out, the pearl clutching and "antivaxxer" bashing begins. Go outside. Live life.


But you have to risk serious infection to gain this extra immunity when likely the immunity gained from the poke will serve you just fine and not put you in much harm if you do get the sick.

I don't think anyone here is advocating purposeful exposure and infection as a strategy to provide immunity. I think people are upset that those that are already immune via previous infection are being treated as pariahs for not vaccinating.


Yeah, I understand that point for sure.
Do we have data that show us how quickly we should be at heard immunity based on both the vaccination and recovered immunity? I realize we aren't kicking the virus but we should've serious illness decline at some point right?


Serious illness has declined. Stop worrying about case counts. It's pretty simple.


Nobody is worried about case counts but hospitals are full. That's still true I believe.

Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
t - cam said:

Kvetch said:

t - cam said:

Salute The Marines said:

t - cam said:

Kvetch said:

Why is this even a question? The vaccines serve to simulate the immune response in the presence of the actual virus. If natural immunity doesn't protect you, how the hell would a vaccine that emulates the exact same immune response?

My experience with natural immunity is that it works. I was exposed again a week and a half ago and I haven't had a single symptom. The goal is to prevent serious infection, not eradicate the virus. Pandora's box is open, and it ain't closing.

Will there be exceptions? Yes. But the level of unscientific insanity that this board has reached is incredible. Any time a new fear porn article comes out, the pearl clutching and "antivaxxer" bashing begins. Go outside. Live life.


But you have to risk serious infection to gain this extra immunity when likely the immunity gained from the poke will serve you just fine and not put you in much harm if you do get the sick.

I don't think anyone here is advocating purposeful exposure and infection as a strategy to provide immunity. I think people are upset that those that are already immune via previous infection are being treated as pariahs for not vaccinating.


Yeah, I understand that point for sure.
Do we have data that show us how quickly we should be at heard immunity based on both the vaccination and recovered immunity? I realize we aren't kicking the virus but we should've serious illness decline at some point right?


Serious illness has declined. Stop worrying about case counts. It's pretty simple.


Nobody is worried about case counts but hospitals are full. That's still true I believe.


No they aren't. Some have staffing issues, but hospitals are not full. Stop reading the news that's been incorrectly predicting their overrun for the last year and a half.
Fitch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Oh. Oh my that's funny right there.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
t - cam said:

Kvetch said:

t - cam said:

Salute The Marines said:

t - cam said:

Kvetch said:

Why is this even a question? The vaccines serve to simulate the immune response in the presence of the actual virus. If natural immunity doesn't protect you, how the hell would a vaccine that emulates the exact same immune response?

My experience with natural immunity is that it works. I was exposed again a week and a half ago and I haven't had a single symptom. The goal is to prevent serious infection, not eradicate the virus. Pandora's box is open, and it ain't closing.

Will there be exceptions? Yes. But the level of unscientific insanity that this board has reached is incredible. Any time a new fear porn article comes out, the pearl clutching and "antivaxxer" bashing begins. Go outside. Live life.


But you have to risk serious infection to gain this extra immunity when likely the immunity gained from the poke will serve you just fine and not put you in much harm if you do get the sick.

I don't think anyone here is advocating purposeful exposure and infection as a strategy to provide immunity. I think people are upset that those that are already immune via previous infection are being treated as pariahs for not vaccinating.


Yeah, I understand that point for sure.
Do we have data that show us how quickly we should be at heard immunity based on both the vaccination and recovered immunity? I realize we aren't kicking the virus but we should've serious illness decline at some point right?


Serious illness has declined. Stop worrying about case counts. It's pretty simple.


Nobody is worried about case counts but hospitals are full. That's still true I believe.

You literally have schools across texas shutting down classes and activites due purely to case counts among students, who are statistically at no risk from covid.
Knucklesammich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Kvetch said:

FlyRod said:

There are a lot of studies showing natural immunity wanes, just as vaccine immunity wanes. Yes of course you could just get reinfected, but as others have pointed out, our hospitals are at the breaking point, and while yes, vaccinated people can get sick and hospitalized, the bulk of patients in the ICUs were the ones "natural immunity" was supposed to work for.

All pandemics have their survivors...those who get infected and recover. That's great, but the big issue right now is keeping the hospital networks and their burned out staff from becoming overwhelmed. We are failing on that front.


We've heard that BS for a year and a half and the hospitals have never once been overrun. Staffing issues and burnout are a different issue, but at the end of the day if you chose the job that's what you signed up for.

And show me the proof immunity wanes. Active antibodies are a terrible metrics for measuring that, but that's apparently the only thing people consider nowadays.
TMC has 49% of their Stage 1 ICU beds filled with COVID patients and 39% of Stage 2 beds.
That's 647 beds out of 1330 while also putting off a large chunk of elective surgeries (which pay the bills mind you), but its all just burn out.

Head over to the ICU over at Brack in Austin and see the folks proned and on vents. Listen to the docs and nurses that post on this board all over the US and its just burnout.

There is tone deaf and then there is whatever this is.

I think we need to look at natural immunity too but the path forward is also aggressive vaccination.

Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Knucklesammich said:

Kvetch said:

FlyRod said:

There are a lot of studies showing natural immunity wanes, just as vaccine immunity wanes. Yes of course you could just get reinfected, but as others have pointed out, our hospitals are at the breaking point, and while yes, vaccinated people can get sick and hospitalized, the bulk of patients in the ICUs were the ones "natural immunity" was supposed to work for.

All pandemics have their survivors...those who get infected and recover. That's great, but the big issue right now is keeping the hospital networks and their burned out staff from becoming overwhelmed. We are failing on that front.


We've heard that BS for a year and a half and the hospitals have never once been overrun. Staffing issues and burnout are a different issue, but at the end of the day if you chose the job that's what you signed up for.

And show me the proof immunity wanes. Active antibodies are a terrible metrics for measuring that, but that's apparently the only thing people consider nowadays.
TMC has 49% of their Stage 1 ICU beds filled with COVID patients and 39% of Stage 2 beds.
That's 647 beds out of 1330 while also putting off a large chunk of elective surgeries (which pay the bills mind you), but its all just burn out.

Head over to the ICU over at Brack in Austin and see the folks proned and on vents. Listen to the docs and nurses that post on this board all over the US and its just burnout.

There is tone deaf and then there is whatever this is.

I think we need to look at natural immunity too but the path forward is also aggressive vaccination.




I don't see a single refutation of my point. Who said not to vaccinate? Your stats show that hospitals are not overwhelmed. I know nurses who can confirm that fact. Those nurses will also confirm that staffing is the biggest issue.

Stop with the garbage fear porn. The virus is bad. People will continue to die. That does not mean we are overwhelmed or doing anything wrong. The path forward is for people to inform themselves, take the risks they're comfortable with, and live with the outcomes. "Aggressive vaccination" is the exact reason why so many people are hesitant in the first place.

Just be honest about what's going on and let people live their ****ing lives.
aggielostinETX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tone deaf is Dr and nurses complaining about Dr and Nurses having too much work when they are the ones who have been limiting seats in schools for 40 years. Thanks
“A republic, if you can keep it”

AggieKatie2 said:
ETX is honestly starting to scare me a bit as someone who may be trigger happy.
Knucklesammich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Define overwhelmed? For me its when a hospital system stops a core function of its operation for multiple, extended periods of time.

The very thing you are talking about, staff shortages and burnout are a symptom. Blowing it off as they knew what they signed up for is tone deaf.

12% of admitted COVID patients admitted to TMC have died from this disease. Take deaths divided by admitted patients. The bulk of those deaths flow through ICU's where nurses and doctors know that 90% of those on vents (based on what docs on this board share) are probably going to die. They get to watch that, powerless but hey they signed up for it.

Every nurse that walks away or Dr. that takes a step back is another symptom of a system under immense strain. It is acute in the moment of this spike but is chronic in its duration.

Right now I equate those working day to day are in sprint mode across a marathon distance, its not sustainable.

That's not fear porn.
I believe folks should get on with their lives as best as possible. I travel for work, been on vacation, my kids are in person and have been since last year. That doesn't mean I'm not concerned during spikes that our system can be put under significant stress.

Vaccines again are our way out of this mess. If we can find a way to track natural immunity and keep an eye on how mutations effect that then fold that in. Whatever we can do to get back to normal would be great.

I talk to a ton of nurses and doctors myself, I work in HCLS Tech. Staffing is a massive issue but its not common in recent times for the largest medical system on earth to have 50% of its ICU beds taken by a virus for weeks/months at a time either. Burnout and the spike are linked together, that's not fear porn that's just what it is.

Concern isn't fear porn.

Knucklesammich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AggieLostinDallas said:

Tone deaf is Dr and nurses complaining about Dr and Nurses having too much work when they are the ones who have been limiting seats in schools for 40 years. Thanks
Huh?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Why is this even a question? The vaccines serve to simulate the immune response in the presence of the actual virus. If natural immunity doesn't protect you, how the hell would a vaccine that emulates the exact same immune response?
The short answer is because it's not stimulating the immune response the same way.

The vaccine is presented in a different part of your body - muscle, lymph nodes, spleen vs respiratory tract.
It's presented in a different way - protein production for a specific duration, then expression
It's done twice at an interval
The fatty nanoparticles act as an adjuvant and stimulate the immune system
The vaccine presents just the spike, and the spike itself is slightly modified

There are other vaccines that provide better protection than actual infection. HPV is one of them.
Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:


Quote:

Why is this even a question? The vaccines serve to simulate the immune response in the presence of the actual virus. If natural immunity doesn't protect you, how the hell would a vaccine that emulates the exact same immune response?
The short answer is because it's not stimulating the immune response the same way.

The vaccine is presented in a different part of your body - muscle, lymph nodes, spleen vs respiratory tract.
It's presented in a different way - protein production for a specific duration, then expression
It's done twice at an interval
The fatty nanoparticles act as an adjuvant and stimulate the immune system
The vaccine presents just the spike, and the spike itself is slightly modified

There are other vaccines that provide better protection than actual infection. HPV is one of them.


Do you have evidence that this method is superior in preventing death and serious illness for this disease? I understand that the different introduction stimulates the immune system uniquely, but where the data to say that it matters? If prior infection provides enough protection, what does it matter if you make it stronger? Taking infinitesimal odds and making them a little smaller does effectively nothing. May save one life here or there, but as a public policy matter is useless.

Where are the surges of deaths in healthy, prior-infected individuals? Israel is the only real data available, and it strongly supports that idea that natural immunity is more than adequate.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now you're asking something different. They're comparable. Data out of Israel has some issues with generalization because of some unaddressed biases in their study. It was discussed here.

I don't think there's an easy answer to say this one or that one is better. They're just different. Based on what I've read I'd guess prior infection gives you better local protection in your nose, because that's where it presented, but vaccination gives you better systemic protection. But I don't think anyone knows much of anything for sure. I also don't know if anyone knows which one lasts longer for systemic protection, and I don't really think it matters much. Case definition being local infection in the nose makes things very confusing.
Kvetch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

Now you're asking something different. They're comparable. Data out of Israel has some issues with generalization because of some unaddressed biases in their study. It was discussed here.

I don't think there's an easy answer to say this one or that one is better. They're just different. Based on what I've read I'd guess prior infection gives you better local protection in your nose, because that's where it presented, but vaccination gives you better systemic protection. But I don't think anyone knows much of anything for sure. I also don't know if anyone knows which one lasts longer for systemic protection, and I don't really think it matters much. Case definition being local infection in the nose makes things very confusing.


Well not really any disagreement with that. I guess only time will tell. I am young and had a mild case with fatigue and loss of taste/smell, so I'll be a part of the control group to answer that question unless something changes and I need vaccination.

My main thesis has always been that natural immunity should not be discounted. Guess we will see how my hypothesis plays out.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.