Is Delta Dying?
-
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
Too bad they state natural immunity is better.
This seems to be a democrat thing now.
Is that correct? Democrats don't like immunity due to covid infection. In other words, democrats prefer the vaccine.
How did that happen? I assume it is related to Mr. Trump.
Actually you are in the cat bird’s seat. Having had Covid plus the vaccine is the best status. I could point to a number of science articles that have studied and proved the hierarchy of protection but its not going to change minds at this point. Everyone is dug in, and those not vaccinated have accepted the enhanced risks. Most articles point to death bed conversions of course but there could be bias in not reporting the folks that are dying and have no regrets.
-
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
-
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
-
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
-
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
Out of curiosity, where do you think the vaccine process would’ve been right now without Operation Warp Speed?
-
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
Out of curiosity, where do you think the vaccine process would’ve been right now without Operation Warp Speed?
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
Out of curiosity, where do you think the vaccine process would’ve been right now without Operation Warp Speed?
I give Trump a ton of credit and as I said i felt it should have been administered sooner but not for the election. As evidence Britain was well ahead of us on the approval process.
-
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
-
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@copper said in Is Delta Dying?:
There is definitely a vaccine good/natural immunity not good community now. The vaccine mandate people are members.
Why?
I'm not sure it is just the I-Hate-Trump crowd.
Maybe it's because you can make money selling vaccine, but not by selling natural immunity.
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-why-arent-we-celebrating-the-naturally-immune/
Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published American cardiologist and a tireless advocate for truth, maintains that immunity from a previous COVID infection is robust, complete, and durable. He is by no means alone. Dr. Richard Urso, a physician out of Houston, Texas suggests that natural immunity is the “achilles heel of the vaccine program, and if you are COVID recovered you are immune competent.” He emphatically argues that vaccine status should not supplant immune status.
Tens of doctors from the St. Elizabeth Healthcare System in Ohio submitted a compelling letter to their administration on Sept. 1, logically and completely outlining their concerns with vaccine mandates. A portion of their very first point states that “Natural immunity is at least equal to and likely superior to vaccine immunity, yet this has not been a part of the discussion for unclear reasons. A majority of healthcare providers in our system are declining the vaccine due to prior infection and already having sufficient immunity to COVID-19.”
As many of my more reluctant readers like to point out, I am not a doctor. This is true, of course. But why is it that there are hundreds of doctors who ARE qualified to have an opinion regarding natural immunity, but the door to scientific collaboration is all but closed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) continue to be the loudest voices in the land, shouting one opinion and one opinion alone, that getting the vaccine is all that matters.
This vaccine is leaky. Which means that a vaccinated person can still acquire the virus and spread the virus. It does not provide the sterilizing immunity (which means you can’t carry the virus) that most other vaccines offer. This is why many argue that calling it a vaccine is incorrect, as it does not provide immunity in the traditional sense of the word. However, becoming naturally infected and recovering from the virus does. Traditional herd immunity in a population is recognized by the combination of those that have antibodies due to natural infection, and those that have been immunized.
Well here we are. Great country that people can publish this. As Trump said himself even last week, he saved millions of lives!!!
Out of curiosity, where do you think the vaccine process would’ve been right now without Operation Warp Speed?
I give Trump a ton of credit and as I said i felt it should have been administered sooner but not for the election. As evidence Britain was well ahead of us on the approval process.
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
Britain was well ahead of us on the approval process.
Yes. However, FDA only approved "emergency" use, not full approval at the time.
Some of the anti-(COVID) vaxxers are saying that because it didn't have full approval you should not get it. Of course, in the last month or so, that's changed wrt Pfizer.
-
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
Of course death, long covid, killing others because ICUs are full and the strain on healthcare resources and 350k a year for nurses are variables you need to add to your equation. In normal times that would be inconceivable that someone could even argue the point.
-
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
Of course death, long covid, killing others because ICUs are full and the strain on healthcare resources and 350k a year for nurses are variables you need to add to your equation. In normal times that would be inconceivable that someone could even argue the point.
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
Of course death, long covid, killing others because ICUs are full and the strain on healthcare resources and 350k a year for nurses are variables you need to add to your equation. In normal times that would be inconceivable that someone could even argue the point.
What the hell does any of that have to do with immunity levels?
-
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
Of course death, long covid, killing others because ICUs are full and the strain on healthcare resources and 350k a year for nurses are variables you need to add to your equation. In normal times that would be inconceivable that someone could even argue the point.
What the hell does any of that have to do with immunity levels?
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
@loki said in Is Delta Dying?:
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
There are pros and cons to natural immunity, I think…
Pro: It would seem likelier to provide a wider range of protection against variants since it is against the whole virus and not limited to a particular spike protein.
Con: It seems that a fair number of Covid patients didn’t actually develop immunity. Somewhere between 20-30%. Assuming you are immune could be a big problem.
Pro: It’s numbers seem to match the vaccines as far both infection and serious cases are concerned.
Con: To get it, you have to get COVID, which puts is a much more significant risk than the vaccine and boosters.
Of course death, long covid, killing others because ICUs are full and the strain on healthcare resources and 350k a year for nurses are variables you need to add to your equation. In normal times that would be inconceivable that someone could even argue the point.
What the hell does any of that have to do with immunity levels?
It applies to people who have had Covid and don’t think they need the vaccine and generally they are the same people who are fighting the vaccine mandate.
-
The problem isn’t people that had COVID and aren’t getting vaccinated. The problem IS the people that haven’t had COVID and aren’t getting vaccinated.
-
And the bigger problem is living in a land that was established on the intrinsic rights of the individual not being impinged upon by the government. Personally, I’d rather have that problem than the other.
-
And the bigger problem is living in a land that was established on the intrinsic rights of the individual not being impinged upon by the government. Personally, I’d rather have that problem than the other.
@lufins-dad said in Is Delta Dying?:
Personally, I’d rather have that problem than the other.
I rather doubt that.
