Proposition Joe said:
Seems like a site really coming at things from an unbiased angle.
FbgTxAg said:Proposition Joe said:
Seems like a site really coming at things from an unbiased angle.
Ad Hominem from the top-rope!
Jabin said:
Unbiased because it agrees with you?
That article has lots of good info, but it is clearly biased in the pejorative terms it uses. It also appears to ignore the reinfection from Omicron occurring in previously infected people. Such reinfection appears to be the case, but is not yet certain since the data on Omicron is still pouring in.
But, if that's true, doesn't that defeat the central premise of the article: i.e., that Covid does not mutate quickly and that natural immunity from prior infection is durable and will protect against all future variants?
Challenge here is what is defined as "reinfection". There are a lot of people that continue to test positive for COVID long after they actually had it but they aren't symptomatic and can't transmit it. These "reinfected" people could simply have lingering particles of COVID that trigger a positive test. That's called out in the article.Jabin said:
Unbiased because it agrees with you?
That article has lots of good info, but it is clearly biased in the pejorative terms it uses. It also appears to ignore the reinfection from Omicron occurring in previously infected people. Such reinfection appears to be the case, but is not yet certain since the data on Omicron is still pouring in.
But, if that's true, doesn't that defeat the central premise of the article: i.e., that Covid does not mutate quickly and that natural immunity from prior infection is durable and will protect against all future variants?
YouBet said:
So, I guess we are throwing out the 20 studies it cites because those studies don't conform to the right message?
There's lots of anecdotal evidence of reinfection from Omicron - not just testing positive but also becoming symptomatic once again. Early on when it was just in South Africa, I think I remember reading that prior immunity does not look to be very robust against Omicron. But, again, I've not seen lots of hard data on that point. Most of the discussions I've seen are focusing on the hospitalization rate.Quote:
Such reinfection appears to be the case, but is not yet certain since the data on Omicron is still pouring in.
But, if that's true . . . .
Jabin said:
As I said:There's lots of anecdotal evidence of reinfection from Omicron - not just testing positive but also becoming symptomatic once again. Early on when it was just in South Africa, I think I remember reading that prior immunity does not look to be very robust against Omicron. But, again, I've not seen lots of hard data on that point. Most of the discussions I've seen are focusing on the hospitalization rate.Quote:
Such reinfection appears to be the case, but is not yet certain since the data on Omicron is still pouring in.
But, if that's true . . . .
There are lots of people posting on this website who say they have.Quote:
I don't personally know anyone who has had symptomatic Covid two different times.
Let's all hope that's right!Quote:
The eyeball test and looking at data so far tells you this variant has clearly mutated Covid into its endemic form. It's flu form, if you will. It feels like we are just waiting for the other shoe to drop on that confirmation.
Couldn't agree more, but that's a different issue than what's being discussed here - whether the article linked in the OP was "unbiased" and a good source of information.Quote:
I know companies are starting to chaff at operating like it's March 2020 because of what we've seen with omicron. Wife's company is now considering abandoning cdc guidelines because they are confusing, conflicting, and unsustainable and no longer make sense with omicron. Business world may push us there. They already got the 10 day quarantine rule axed.
How many studies were ignored that did not fit their desired outcome?YouBet said:
So, I guess we are throwing out the 20 studies it cites because those studies don't conform to the right message?
I am recovered and unvaccinated. My antibody level after a year is 900, tested on December 28th. I don't know if that level will prevent me from testing positive but neither will a vaccine. I anticipate, if exposed, a minimal course of illness if any symptoms at all. I am not convinced with that level of antibodies that a vaccine would do much more.Jabin said:
Here are a couple of articles, not studies, talking about reinfections from Omicron:
Reinfections on the rise: Health officials advise to not depend on natural COVID-19 immunity - The Republic News
Study shows COVID-19 reinfection 5 times more likely with Omicron (nypost.com)
FWIW - Got Omicron from our niece. She had covid (prior to delta), was then vaxxed and boosted (not sure what shot -was a requirement for her NE college) and still got Omicron.DannyDuberstein said:
I see examples posted in texags, but in my own anecdotal personal network (which as a near 50 year old guy with a kid in college, a kid in HS, and who works for big corporate, it is pretty large), I do not know any previously infected people who had a 2nd round of symptomatic covid. Not yet at least. That includes several households in the past month where a vaccinated only individual had covid but the previously infected in the same house did not
Fits with what I'm reading here
What part of the articles do you not agree with?Proposition Joe said:YouBet said:
So, I guess we are throwing out the 20 studies it cites because those studies don't conform to the right message?
Not at all.
But I'd hope you'd 100% go into reading any article from a site like that with a incredibly large skepticism that it's giving you all the data and not just the cherry-picked data that fits it's message.
I'd hope most would ignore obvious pandering sites like that completely, just like CNN's crap.
Any site that is trying to signal to you that it's "Just the Facts" while then having hundreds of articles showing it only looks for "certain kinds of facts"... Well I'd hope that would be an obvious indicator to educated readers. It's like going to HornFans for "just the facts" on who the best college football team in Texas is. Yeah, there might be some factual data in the content, but...
