Official Thread: Coronavirus "COVID-19"

[SD-[Inc]]

Unvaccinated ≠ lacking immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2 if natural immunity has been acquired.

The rhetoric has become a heated "us against antivaxxers" narrative instead of "us united against SARS‐CoV‐2". I think many people have become far too tribal about this (including some here) and are looking for ways to punish others for non-compliance rather than looking at the science. Ultimately, we want to eradicate SARS‐CoV‐2, not persecute other humans.

If the science says that acquired natural immunity is equivalent or better than vaccine immunity, then we don't need to push vaccine mandates on unvaccinated people who already have robust immunity, as doing so is unnecessarily authoritarian, with no underlying scientific rationale.

Currently, the UK acknowledges this. We should too.

What we want is maximal immunity in the population. Vaccination is one way to move toward that goal, but it is not the only way. If some people already have robust natural immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2, and this immunity is better than via vaccination, then it makes little sense to treat them like second class citizens, ostracize them, and fire them from their jobs, etc.... as they are not likely to cause further spread, at least not any more likely than vaccinated people.

Now, I'll admit that we ought to seek to further studies to see if they back up the Israeli findings regarding the superiority of natural immunity. If that's what the science tells us, public policy should follow the science, not tribalism or crude, heavy-handed, political expediency.

As I stated earlier, vaccines are low risk, but not zero risk. Physicians and other medical personnel should do no harm. If vaccination presents a significant risk to certain people with existing natural immunity, then it would be unethical to vaccinate them, as the risks may outweigh the potential benefit.

We want is maximal immunity in the herd, not necessarily maximal vaccinations, especially if robust immunity already exists. The goal is to beat SARS‐CoV‐2 into submission, not our fellow humans....

Asking someone with natural immunity to take a vaccine is not beating someone into submission. Your hyperbole sort of kills your entire point. The problem is most of the “natural immunity” comes from people that refused the vaccine in the first place. Striving for immunity through natural causes is dangerous as it spreads the virus. No one should be encouraging this. Congrats to those with the “strongest” immunity possible. Too bad for all the other people they may have infected to get there.

[Crawdaddy79]

If the science says that acquired natural immunity is equivalent or better than vaccine immunity, then we don't need to push vaccine mandates on unvaccinated people who already have robust immunity, as doing so is unnecessarily authoritarian, with no underlying scientific rationale.

Currently, the UK acknowledges this. We should too.

As does Germany as well, at least. There are probably many more.

I think this is the second time I've agreed with you in all of Rage3D history.

Some here are expressing worry that rolling those who are 'naturally immunized' into the vaccinated club would only further encourage the uninfected, unvaccinated to further refuse the vaccine. I'd argue that ignoring the science (as the US seems to be doing in this case) only further sows doubt among these people that the authorities truly have their best interests in mind, which entrenches them.

[SD-[Inc]]

As does Germany as well, at least. There are probably many more.

I think this is the second time I've agreed with you in all of Rage3D history.

Some here are expressing worry that rolling those who are 'naturally immunized' into the vaccinated club would only further encourage the uninfected, unvaccinated to further refuse the vaccine. I'd argue that ignoring the science (as the US seems to be doing in this case) only further sows doubt among these people that the authorities truly have their best interests in mind, which entrenches them.

The biggest group of unvaccinated people are younger. They are highly less likely to have severe complications. So, news like this encourages them to just avoid the vaccine. Natural immunity is better is a message that will kill more people. People choosing what’s best for them will not end this pandemic. As the spread is the real issue. Not, just how it affects you personally.

[KAC]

Everyone should get vaccinated unless they have underlying health conditions that prevent them from it.

On that note, who is getting that booster?

[pax]

Asking someone with natural immunity to take a vaccine is not beating someone into submission. Your hyperbole sort of kills your entire point. The problem is most of the “natural immunity” comes from people that refused the vaccine in the first place. Striving for immunity through natural causes is dangerous as it spreads the virus. No one should be encouraging this. Congrats to those with the “strongest” immunity possible. Too bad for all the other people they may have infected to get there.

This.

Getting immunity via infection or vaccination or both doesnt prevent that immunity from waning over time. And thus making one into a potential spreader if one keeps getting more infected than otherwise would with a regular vaccine regimen.

Its no more punishing people to get vaccinated that it is to fine them for not wearing their seatbelt or respecting speed limits...

The Israeli study may show better immunity at first from infection but like with any study, before we gauge a large change in policy, we should need more studies that back it up. IMO lets take a few years before we go there.

[ugly]

If you're interested in a fairly long read on the subject, this is a fairly detailed blog on the matter of prior infection and vaccine passports:COVID-19 Vaccine passport systems should largely ignore recovery from COVID-19


And in other news a new study on stillbirths and COVID infections:
Risk for Stillbirth Among Women With and Without COVID-19 at Delivery Hospitalization — United States, March 2020–September 2021

Summary
What is already known about this topic?

Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe disease from COVID-19, and COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk for adverse perinatal outcomes.

What is added by this report?

Among 1,249,634 delivery hospitalizations during March 2020–September 2021, U.S. women with COVID-19 were at increased risk for stillbirth compared with women without COVID-19 (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.69–2.15). The magnitude of association was higher during the period of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance than during the pre-Delta period.

What are the implications for public health practice?

Implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination before or during pregnancy, is critical to reduce the impact of COVID-19 on stillbirths.

During March 2020–September 2021, a total of 8,154 stillbirths were documented, affecting 0.64% and 1.26% of deliveries without COVID-19 and with COVID-19, respectively (aRR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.69–2.15) (Figure). During the pre-Delta period (March 2020–June 2021), 6,983 stillbirths were documented, involving 0.98% of deliveries with COVID-19 compared with 0.64% of deliveries without COVID-19 (aRR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.27–1.71). During the Delta period (July–September 2021), 1,171 stillbirths were documented, involving 2.70% of deliveries with COVID-19 compared with 0.63% of deliveries without COVID-19 (aRR = 4.04; 95% CI = 3.28–4.97).†††† Effect modification was present in the model; the risk for stillbirth was significantly higher during the period of Delta predominance than during the pre-Delta period (p<0.0 01).

Among deliveries with COVID-19, chronic hypertension, multiple-gestation pregnancy, adverse cardiac event/outcome, placental abruption, sepsis, shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, mechanical ventilation, and ICU admission were associated with a higher prevalence of stillbirth (Table 2). The associations for adverse cardiac event/outcome and ICU admission varied significantly between the periods before and during Delta predominance (p = 0.03 and p = 0.003, respectively); for each of these, the associations were stronger during the period of Delta predominance.

[12Bass]

Asking someone with natural immunity to take a vaccine is not beating someone into submission. Your hyperbole sort of kills your entire point. The problem is most of the “natural immunity” comes from people that refused the vaccine in the first place. Striving for immunity through natural causes is dangerous as it spreads the virus. No one should be encouraging this. Congrats to those with the “strongest” immunity possible. Too bad for all the other people they may have infected to get there.

Some subtleties of the argument seem to have been lost. This issue is complex, involving medical science, law, ethics, etc... and is not a simple binary. I am generally pro-vaccine, have had two shots of Pfizer, and will probably get a booster in early 2022. AFAIK, I haven't had COVID-19, though I did have a rather nasty flu in March 2020 which might have been related.

However, I am not in favor of mandating vaccines for people who already have robust immunity. Maximizing herd immunity should be the goal, not maximizing the number of vaccinations. If natural immunity is as robust as the Israeli studies indicate, mandatory vaccination is medically unnecessary and goes too far into authoritarianism.

Note that this view is NOT the same as advocating for people to get infected to gain natural immunity, nor is it against vaccination. I do not suggest that anyone risk getting COVID just for the sake of acquiring natural immunity. I am, however, against forcing vaccination on people who have already had COVID and have acquired natural immunity, if this immunity is equal or better than vaccine immunity.

We need to conceptually separate immunity from vaccination. Again, the goal it to maximize immunity in the herd. Vaccines are one way, but not the only way. It is unnecessary and unjust to force people who have already suffered through COVID-19 to get vaccinated if it is not actually medically necessary to achieve this goal. Medical personnel should perform no unnecessary and potentially risky procedures. Vaccination is not zero risk.

Note also that I am not advocating that people who are medically able to get vaccinated and have no existing natural immunity should avoid vaccination as the risks of vaccination are generally much lower than the risks associated with COVID-19. We want as many people as possible to have immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2. However, for various reasons, some people cannot or should not be vaccinated, and it is unjust to force vaccine mandates upon those who have already acquired natural immunity.

Some of these arguments may seem too subtle for people who only look at vaccination in terms of an "us and them" binary. The key here is to separate the concepts of vaccination and immunity. They are related, but not identical. Immunity can also be acquired naturally via infection, without the mandated use of vaccines.

And before anyone jumps in to argue semantics about the term 'force', mandates put significant restrictions on people, and in some cases cause them to lose their jobs as a result, making them rather coercively authoritarian. The exact word used to describe this doesn't particularly matter. Mandates are a huge use of coercive force to get people vaccinated, and, according to recent scientific studies, may be going too far if people already have existing natural immunity.

[Java Cool Dude]

It looks like a booster shot (even Astra) takes immunity beyond two shots level, but for how long?!

https://www.ft.com/content/8330da6c-031d-4613-8f55-5b0269eaac00

[SD-[Inc]]

Some subtleties of the argument seem to have been lost. This issue is complex, involving medical science, law, ethics, etc... and is not a simple binary. I am generally pro-vaccine, have had two shots of Pfizer, and will probably get a booster in early 2022. AFAIK, I haven't had COVID-19, though I did have a rather nasty flu in March 2020 which might have been related.

However, I am not in favor of mandating vaccines for people who already have robust immunity. Maximizing herd immunity should be the goal, not maximizing the number of vaccinations. If natural immunity is as robust as the Israeli studies indicate, mandatory vaccination is medically unnecessary and goes too far into authoritarianism.

Note that this view is NOT the same as advocating for people to get infected to gain natural immunity, nor is it against vaccination. I do not suggest that anyone risk getting COVID just for the sake of acquiring natural immunity. I am, however, against forcing vaccination on people who have already had COVID and have acquired natural immunity, if this immunity is equal or better than vaccine immunity.

We need to conceptually separate immunity from vaccination. Again, the goal it to maximize immunity in the herd. Vaccines are one way, but not the only way. It is unnecessary and unjust to force people who have already suffered through COVID-19 to get vaccinated if it is not actually medically necessary to achieve this goal. Medical personnel should perform no unnecessary and potentially risky procedures. Vaccination is not zero risk.

Note also that I am not advocating that people who are medically able to get vaccinated and have no existing natural immunity should avoid vaccination as the risks of vaccination are generally much lower than the risks associated with COVID-19. We want as many people as possible to have immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2. However, for various reasons, some people cannot or should not be vaccinated, and it is unjust to force vaccine mandates upon those who have already acquired natural immunity.

Some of these arguments may seem too subtle for people who only look at vaccination in terms of an "us and them" binary. The key here is to separate the concepts of vaccination and immunity. They are related, but not identical. Immunity can also be acquired naturally via infection, without the mandated use of vaccines.

And before anyone jumps in to argue semantics about the term 'force', mandates put significant restrictions on people, and in some cases cause them to lose their jobs as a result, making them rather coercively authoritarian. The exact word used to describe this doesn't particularly matter. Mandates are a huge use of coercive force to get people vaccinated, and, according to recent scientific studies, may be going too far if people already have existing natural immunity.

I am not arguing against the science. I am just pointing out the weaknesses of human nature.

There are tons of public safety mandates already in place that are enforced far more rigidly than a vaccine mandate. Just try driving drunk all the time and see what happens. The 55MPH highway speed limit is a simple enforceable mandate. It doesn’t matter if some drivers are worse than others, the law applies to everyone. It’s the only way to implement broad public safety measures. They never work unless everyone follows them. And, it’s impossible to manage them at an individual level. Getting a vaccine isn’t that necessary for a lot or reasons with a lot of people. If you are young it may not be as necessary because the risk is low. If you already contracted the virus it may not be as necessary because of your natural immunity. But, if you want to implement broad safety measures that actually work, they MUST apply to everyone.

If you broadly feel that these safety measures are not necessary. That’s a different argument. You can also try and say it’s necessary for some and not others. But in the case of controlling the spread of a virus. That approach will result in lack of adoption and failure. Evidence: The last 9 months.

[Nunz]

I am not arguing against the science. I am just pointing out the weaknesses of human nature.

There are tons of public safety mandates already in place that are enforced far more rigidly than a vaccine mandate. Just try driving drunk all the time and see what happens. The 55MPH highway speed limit is a simple enforceable mandate.

Please god tell me I didn't see someone just compare punishment for drunk driving to the vaccine mandates

[12Bass]

As does Germany as well, at least. There are probably many more.

I think this is the second time I've agreed with you in all of Rage3D history.

Some here are expressing worry that rolling those who are 'naturally immunized' into the vaccinated club would only further encourage the uninfected, unvaccinated to further refuse the vaccine. I'd argue that ignoring the science (as the US seems to be doing in this case) only further sows doubt among these people that the authorities truly have their best interests in mind, which entrenches them.

While politics is forbidden here, I'm pro-science and anti-authoritarianism. I don't agree with blunt-force laws or policies. I'm all for maximizing herd immunity, but not at the cost of unnecessarily threatening people's livelihoods via vaccine mandates, provided these people already have natural immunity and the science solidly supports it. There's room for nuance on this issue.

[pax]

I dont see a consensus on this issue in epidemiological circles nor should there be based on one study in a rapidly evolving situation. Its one thing to call it science its another to call it settled science based on a wide consensus from which we can derive policy.

The downsides of establishing policy at this time would be near blanket testing for those who arent vaccinated on a regular ongoing basis to establish their level vs the rest of the population and its relative effectiveness over time of their immunity vs an evolving pathogen. Small sample testing might not catch many of the variables that the Israeli study didnt catch and hasnt kept up with. The cost and trouble of running this kind of a testing program to defend a group who dont believe in vaccine science is not justified.

[12Bass]

I'm not defending antivaxxers. I'm vaxxed... not yet to the max... but SOON!

The UK is on board. As are others. Remember, the goal is to maximize immunity, not vaccinations.

[Nunz]

The cost and trouble of running this kind of a testing program to defend a group who dont believe in vaccine science is not justified.

I feel like this is hypocritical for you to find it unjustified considering you promote spending money and resources on finding alien life..

[pax]

I feel like this is hypocritical for you to find it unjustified considering you promote spending money and resources on finding alien life..

Apples and oranges. Yea well one thing spends a few million a year if that on the part of admin types who often have the spare time to do it already. The size the military bureaucracy is immense I think they can make room for it. Doing actual observational science is also not likely very pricey... slapping a science pod on the underbelly of a jet for the times we know those things show up cant be that big a deal.

Testing the entire population on at least a 6 month basis... or even just the 30&#37; of americans who are refusing the vaccine. We open the window and some of those already vaccinated may jump ship to the unvaxxed in the future. I also think opening the window to more doubt about the vaccine that is unjustified from a population that is already hesitant... it would send a pretty bad message in saying that yea maybe your right about the side effects of the vaccine so we'll give you a choice...

That kind of perception is our main problem right now.

I dont think we have the medical manpower anyway.

[Nunz]

Sorry, but that came across as hypocritical to me. Also, slapping a science pod on the bottom of a jet? Brotha that is not how aerodynamics work lol .. that is a massive deal.

As for the topic on hand, I think many people are miffed about the lack of choice, and the fact that we completely ignore natural immunity gained through the antibodies, which thus far, has been shown to be stronger than vaccination (or at least some of the vaccines .. moderna is out here drowning people with mRNA).

The bad message was sent when we said "masks don't help" to "masks are mandatory" to "cloth masks do not give you protection you need an N95" to "cloth masks will work fine, it's better than nothin," and then we find out that we were lied to in order to "prevent a mask shortage" and "allow hospitals/medical personnel to build stock" ..

Of course, there is evolving science and research, but in this case, we could potentially (I'd like to see a larger study to back the Israeli one) have an alternative to the vaccine. Options and choices are not bad things - and trying to force everyone into the vaccine obviously does not work. People are losing careers they spent decades building over what they want to put into their bodies .. I'm vaxxed, but ultimately that does not sit right with me, and shouldn't sit right with anyone in my opinion. I'm from NYC, which is the cesspool of the world, especially when it's come to how they have handled COVID, so my view is probably a bit more exaggerated.

[12Bass]

I'll put it in more real world terms...

If I had COVID months ago and recovered, and thus acquired natural immunity, I'd consider unjust if I were fired from my job because I refuse to take the vaccine. Why? Because I already have immunity from SARS‐CoV‐2, apparently immunity that is more robust than via vaccination. I would already have immunity that serves the global fight against the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2. I would wonder why I am being coerced, via threat of unemployment, to get a vaccine that I don't actually need, a vaccine which comes with risks to my health.

If we want to go down the "but infection plus vaccination gives even better immunity!" route, then we ought to be putting immunity-level based restrictions on everyone. "Oh, you're immunocompromised and three shots of Moderna haven't produced enough antibodies; sorry, you're now labeled a spreader. NOT officially vaccinated!".

[pax]

There are extra measures for immunocompromised vs the general population actually. Often in facilities and usually around how others are allowed to get in touch with them.

Too many factors regarding naturally acquired immunity remains. How much did you get? How long ago? What variant? How much does immunity wane in you vs others over time?

A regular regimen of vaccination covers all the bases. Especially with the reformulated vaccine expected next year which would justify another series of studies of vaccine effectiveness vs naturally acquired immunity alone.

[xCLAVEx]

Sorry, but that came across as hypocritical to me. Also, slapping a science pod on the bottom of a jet? Brotha that is not how aerodynamics work lol .. that is a massive deal.

As for the topic on hand, I think many people are miffed about the lack of choice, and the fact that we completely ignore natural immunity gained through the antibodies, which thus far, has been shown to be stronger than vaccination (or at least some of the vaccines .. moderna is out here drowning people with mRNA).

The bad message was sent when we said "masks don't help" to "masks are mandatory" to "cloth masks do not give you protection you need an N95" to "cloth masks will work fine, it's better than nothin," and then we find out that we were lied to in order to "prevent a mask shortage" and "allow hospitals/medical personnel to build stock" ..

Of course, there is evolving science and research, but in this case, we could potentially (I'd like to see a larger study to back the Israeli one) have an alternative to the vaccine. Options and choices are not bad things - and trying to force everyone into the vaccine obviously does not work. People are losing careers they spent decades building over what they want to put into their bodies .. I'm vaxxed, but ultimately that does not sit right with me, and shouldn't sit right with anyone in my opinion. I'm from NYC, which is the cesspool of the world, especially when it's come to how they have handled COVID, so my view is probably a bit more exaggerated.

Agree with everything you said.

[SD-[Inc]]

Sorry, but that came across as hypocritical to me. Also, slapping a science pod on the bottom of a jet? Brotha that is not how aerodynamics work lol .. that is a massive deal.

As for the topic on hand, I think many people are miffed about the lack of choice, and the fact that we completely ignore natural immunity gained through the antibodies, which thus far, has been shown to be stronger than vaccination (or at least some of the vaccines .. moderna is out here drowning people with mRNA).

The bad message was sent when we said "masks don't help" to "masks are mandatory" to "cloth masks do not give you protection you need an N95" to "cloth masks will work fine, it's better than nothin," and then we find out that we were lied to in order to "prevent a mask shortage" and "allow hospitals/medical personnel to build stock" ..

Of course, there is evolving science and research, but in this case, we could potentially (I'd like to see a larger study to back the Israeli one) have an alternative to the vaccine. Options and choices are not bad things - and trying to force everyone into the vaccine obviously does not work. People are losing careers they spent decades building over what they want to put into their bodies .. I'm vaxxed, but ultimately that does not sit right with me, and shouldn't sit right with anyone in my opinion. I'm from NYC, which is the cesspool of the world, especially when it's come to how they have handled COVID, so my view is probably a bit more exaggerated.

I'd like the pandemic to be over. Can I choose that?

[Nunz]

I'd like the pandemic to be over. Can I choose that?

Sure, but realize there are other ways to achieve that outcome than forcing people to choose between their livelihoods or putting something in their bodies they do not want to take.

[bill dennison]

I'll put it in more real world terms...

If I had COVID months ago and recovered, and thus acquired natural immunity, I'd consider unjust if I were fired from my job because I refuse to take the vaccine. Why? Because I already have immunity from SARS‐CoV‐2, apparently immunity that is more robust than via vaccination. I would already have immunity that serves the global fight against the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2. I would wonder why I am being coerced, via threat of unemployment, to get a vaccine that I don't actually need, a vaccine which comes with risks to my health.

If we want to go down the "but infection plus vaccination gives even better immunity!" route, then we ought to be putting immunity-level based restrictions on everyone. "Oh, you're immunocompromised and three shots of Moderna haven't produced enough antibodies; sorry, you're now labeled a spreader. NOT officially vaccinated!".

money .

the vaccines are big money that some very big shots are invested in it

i got to wonder who and how many in congress have pfizer, moderna and johnson and johnson stock

and since the government is buying all the vaccines and giving them away to everyone even to other countries
the us taxpayer is paying for it all and driving those stock prices up

[Quickstrike]

If I had COVID months ago and recovered, and thus acquired natural immunity, I'd consider unjust if I were fired from my job because I refuse to take the vaccine. Why? Because I already have immunity from SARS‐CoV‐2, apparently immunity that is more robust than via vaccination. I would already have immunity that serves the global fight against the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2.

Tell that to this guy:



First time he had COVID, it wasn't bad..
Doctors performed a test and found he had antibodies in his blood, so he decided not to get vaccinated.

The second time he had COVID, it almost killed him.

[yt]XBYls1LM9oI[/yt]

[SD-[Inc]]

Sure, but realize there are other ways to achieve that outcome than forcing people to choose between their livelihoods or putting something in their bodies they do not want to take.

Name one that doesn't include millions of dead people as part of the solution.

[pax]

money .

the vaccines are big money that some very big shots are invested in it

i got to wonder who and how many in congress have pfizer, moderna and johnson and johnson stock

and since the government is buying all the vaccines and giving them away to everyone even to other countries
the us taxpayer is paying for it all and driving those stock prices up

Trying not to P&R this but its kind of a societal choice to decide that vaccine production stays in the private sector. Id have left it in the public. I mean most med research and vaccines were developed in universities...

And private sector means profits.

[pax]

Name one that doesn't include millions of dead people as part of the solution.

Id love for there to be an easy cheap pill that could replace a vaccine. But there arent. The medical treatments for severe covid cost a fortune. Often in the hundreds of thousands when in ICU and as far as needing a lung transplant.

Kind of a pricey and risky option if you ask me when a simple and affordable vaccine regimen every 6-8 months for a few years can have much better results.

Best I can see is if people get infected they avoid a vaccine for about 6 months. But in the case of long covid they'd be avoiding a very good chance at early recovery if they got it sooner anyway.

[Greasy]

It looks like a booster shot (even Astra) takes immunity beyond two shots level, but for how long?!
https://www.ft.com/content/8330da6c-...5-5b0269eaac00

Needs to last two months min. My boys weekend trip is 1/19. I don't want to deal with self quarantine again after one of the two that refuse the vax show up sick again.

Edit we're down to one. Forgot the other guy had to for his job. Don't ****ing ruin this for us Chuck!

[bill dennison]

Id love for there to be an easy cheap pill that could replace a vaccine. But there arent. The medical treatments for severe covid cost a fortune. Often in the hundreds of thousands when in ICU and as far as needing a lung transplant.

Kind of a pricey and risky option if you ask me when a simple and affordable vaccine regimen every 6-8 months for a few years can have much better results.

Best I can see is if people get infected they avoid a vaccine for about 6 months. But in the case of long covid they'd be avoiding a very good chance at early recovery if they got it sooner anyway.

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizers-novel-covid-19-oral-antiviral-treatment-candidate

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/11/21/pandemic-antiviral-pills/

[pax]

Theres caveats in those pills tho in terms of timing for its use and regulatory approval. Meds dont usually get that quickly approved. Anti virals arent new and dont approach the practicality or success rate of vaccines. Vaccines work for months possibly years. Meds only when you take them.

Im wondering on the cost as well. Pills tend to be pricey in the US especially new meds.

[Java Cool Dude]

Theres caveats in those pills tho in terms of timing for its use and regulatory approval. Meds dont usually get that quickly approved. Anti virals arent new and dont approach the practicality or success rate of vaccines. Vaccines work for months possibly years. Meds only when you take them.

Im wondering on the cost as well. Pills tend to be pricey in the US especially new meds.

The pills, no matter how costly, are a fraction of the price of a COVID hospitalization.
Let people pop them as mentos if it means getting out of this mfing pandemic.

[SD-[Inc]]

The pills, no matter how costly, are a fraction of the price of a COVID hospitalization.
Let people pop them as mentos if it means getting out of this mfing pandemic.

Some one is looking out for that..

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/...treatment.html

Given this news. It’ll only take a couple of posts from now before people begin claiming that anti-viral pills are nothing but a scam to increase corporate profits.

[Greasy]

The thing that cracks me up the most. Antivax folks will take anything once they get sick. Save me.

If only there was another way...

[SubCog]

The thing that cracks me up the most. Antivax folks will take anything once they get sick. Save me.

If only there was another way...

[SubCog]

Some one is looking out for that..

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/...treatment.html

Given this news. It’ll only take a couple of posts from now before people begin claiming that anti-viral pills are nothing but a scam to increase corporate profits.

Way easier to implant computer chips in people through a pill than through a shot. Those needles are tiny!

[pax]

The pills, no matter how costly, are a fraction of the price of a COVID hospitalization.
Let people pop them as mentos if it means getting out of this mfing pandemic.

I think of the aids epidemic. It eventually was well treated with anti virals... if you could afford them. And it took years... decades.

Had an aids vaccine been available early on it couldve saved millions of lives.

Its nice to have if needed, hopefully not taking 10 years off the life of your liver or kidneys in the process. But I wouldnt use it as a reason to undo a vaccine mandate.

But if its pills people want they do make vaccines in other than injections... they have a nasal inhaler type and maybe they can make a pill type one later. Not sure they would be ready anytime soon tho and the next wave maybe quite a bit worse than the last one winter indoors and all.

[bill dennison]

The thing that cracks me up the most. Antivax folks will take anything once they get sick. Save me.

If only there was another way...

as someone that has spent way to much of the last year in and around hospitals

most everyone will do most anything to stay alive or to get better
but i never found it funny

......

what i can't fathom is why people that have been vaxxed seem to fear those that have not ?

i mean everyone is going to get it sooner or later even everone vaxxed no matter what only a mater of time
if your vaxxed you will most likely be fine when you get it and if you are not you will most likely want a pill or something to add to your survivability rate also

[SubCog]

what i can't fathom is why people that have been vaxxed seem to fear those that have not ?

i mean everyone is going to get it sooner or later even everone vaxxed no matter what only a mater of time
if your vaxxed you will most likely be fine when you get it and if you are not you will most likely want a pill or something to add to your survivability rate also

The fear is that unvaxxed people will grow and spread WAAAAY higher volumes of the virus (because they do), thus leading to unnecessary breakthrough infections, and infecting those vulnerable folks who have medical reasons they can't take the vaccine.

Additionally, unvaxxed people are basically petri dishes for the virus to mutate into vaccine-resistant strains, thus threatening vaccinated folks. I know, I know, you're going to argue that vaccinated people can still get infected too. But it's a matter of volume. Unvaxxed people will grow and spread WAAAAY higher volumes of the virus (because they do), thus creating a much higher chance of dangerous mutations. When the big vaccine-resistant mutation happens, it will almost certainly be in the body of an unvaxxed person.

[Jay20016]

While politics is forbidden here, I'm pro-science and anti-authoritarianism. I don't agree with blunt-force laws or policies. I'm all for maximizing herd immunity, but not at the cost of unnecessarily threatening people's livelihoods via vaccine mandates, provided these people already have natural immunity and the science solidly supports it. There's room for nuance on this issue.

The major issue with natural immunity vs. vaccine mandates is that one can be harder to prove than the other. The shot gives you a little white card with the dates that can be shown off and documented, what is the best way to show natural immunities? I don't think that those pushing for shots, shots shots! are doing so because they disagree with the science, I think it is more logistics and process oriented. There are those who lie about the shot when the card exists, how many will just simply say "I had covid" and be done with it? If the goal is to get to a point where herd immunity seems feasible, we cannot remove human nature from our decisions. In a perfect world people would act with others in mind, but as the last 19 months have shown we are not in a perfect world.

To me there is nuance in following the science and attempting to create a policy that works within the confines or reality, where human nature, logistics, and ultimate goals are still realized. What would the testing regiment of those with natural antibodies look like? How much burden would it place on an overly taxed system?

[acroig]

Is there such a thing as "herd immunity" with Covid though? There's no herd immunity against the common cold and Covid is mutating the same way.

What am I missing?

[pax]

I think they mean relatively immune as we dont get deathly ill from the other 4 families of covids, covid-19 being a fifth, that we catch colds from. Unless one is very frail.

In 5-10 years maybe we will probably see the same thing with covid-19 where annual shots might not be necessary anymore.