New CDC study states natural immunity was superior to vaccines for protection from Delta

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

If COVID was unable to go outside the respiratory system, they wouldn't be able track it by testing waste water. Right there we know it goes into your digestive tract. If it goes there, where can't it go?

It's only limited in the type of cell receptor it attacks, but ACE2 is everywhere.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanstaafl

"The meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) protects against four types of meningococcal bacteria

kidshealth.org...
Wow... you are correct, in this, I was speaking out of my arse. I'm not sure how I got that stuck in my head...

I stand completely convicted of speaking cluelessly... in this case...

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: tanstaafl

The method of delivery is unimportant. The virus gets into your body and spreads throughout one way or another. There is a reason why it is so hard for micros to cross the blood/brain barrier - because so many viral and bacterial invaders manage to penetrate everywhere else.

It is extremely important how the exposure occurs, because where/how the exposure occurs controls the activation of the different myriad pathways and processes of our intricate immune systems - both known and unknown.

Anyone who claims that we know everything there is to know about how our immune ssytem works is just... again... ignorant/arrogant.

a reply to: tanstaafl

So it matters and the proof is we don't know everything so it MUST matter. So when you get covid from exposure to the eye you have no protection against covid unless it hits your eye again?

a reply to: interupt42

Right, they still don't want to acknowledge the recovered, non-vaccinated as a legitimate class.

I've had people tell me "but but if you get vaxxed too you'd be super-duper immune! So go get vaxxed!" Like the article.

But that doesn't make sense, unless one feels the need (such as if they are high risk). People who are equally as immune due to natural immunity shouldn't be punished after already being ill by being subjected to vaccination too. That's putting undue responsibility on them, beyond those who didn't recover and got vaccinated. They didn't just go through Covid, and thankfully recover, they also have to get vaccinated so they can be even more immune than the vaccinated. If they've met the level of protection (or even greater) equal to those vaccinated, why should they be required to be even more super duper immune?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanstaafl

So it matters and the proof is we don't know everything so it MUST matter. So when you get covid from exposure to the eye you have no protection against covid unless it hits your eye again?

No, and again, you're just exhibiting ignorant arrogance.

The immune system works in a certain way. Bypassing any part of it will never and can never produce the same result as natural exposure.

Then we have the problem of these ignorant/arrogant pricks adding all kinds of toxic chemicals (they call them 'adjuvants'), because, you know... why not...

a reply to: tanstaafl

So if you get infected by your eyes then you don't get protected from inhaling covid, right? Or are you admitting it doesn't matter what route the infection uses, your immune system will still recognize it?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanstaafl

So if you get infected by your eyes then you don't get protected from inhaling covid, right?

Or course not, you're just exhibiting more ignorance/arrogance.

Or are you admitting it doesn't matter what route the infection uses, your immune system will still recognize it?

Rather than trying to twist my works into some silly nonsensical meaning just so you can ridicule it, how about reading what I actually wrote?

Novel idea, I know...

a reply to: tanstaafl

That is what you wrote, you just not realize how stupid it sounds so you won't give real answers, stay vague, and act like you didn't say what you said.

You absolutely 100% said the route matters.

Unless the 'vaccine' is administered in the exact same way that natural infection occurs, it can never, ever come close to naturally acquired immunity.

So again, covid in the eyes is not the same way you would get covid in the lungs, your logic would necessitate immunity gained from a covid infection from getting covid in the eye can never come close to immunity gained from covid in the lungs. Your words, not mine. They just sound foolish to you now, as they should.

I mean "are you seriously suggesting that the process of the body fighting an infection caused by the introduction of virus into the eye is the same process as fighting off a virus acquired by exposure via the air/respiratory canals?"

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanstaafl

That is what you wrote, you just not realize how stupid it sounds so you won't give real answers, stay vague, and act like you didn't say what you said.

You absolutely 100% said the route matters.

Yes. I did. But as usual, you are confused... "you just not realize how stupid it sounds so you won't give real answers, stay vague, and act like you didn't say what you said" is what you are doing.

I never said that you are only protected by the path that you acquire the infection. You said that.

I said, and you actually quoted it correctly, that "Unless the 'vaccine' is administered in the exact same way that natural infection occurs, it can never, ever come close to naturally acquired immunity.".

Where in that did I say that the protection is limited only to the attack vector?

So I think everyone agrees about natural immunity, but lets say you are high risk to begin with, do you get vacced to help or do you just role the dice being in a group that will most likely have huge issues up front with COVID?

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So I think everyone agrees about natural immunity, but lets say you are high risk to begin with, do you get vacced to help or do you just role the dice being in a group that will most likely have huge issues up front with COVID?

What does rolls the dice mean? You mean roll the dice with the vaccine to see if you get killed by it or not, while ignoring effective treatments like ivermectin that DARPA admits are a cure?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

What does rolls the dice mean? You mean roll the dice with the vaccine to see if you get killed by it or not, while ignoring effective treatments like ivermectin that DARPA admits are a cure?

No, roll the dice with the virus if you are in the group that has been like 95% of the deaths and extreme illness. Ivermectin sill hasn't had great clinical results, so OK. Funny how you say the vaccine is untested but jump on anything else instantly saying it cures...lol

BTW isn't DARPA also the Government, so which is it? Bad Government not to be trusted, or Good Government to be trusted?

2 Pfizer shots. Getting over Omicron right now.

Mostly congestion in the upper respiratory pathways

Had a high fever for 1 night. My body sweat that one out.

Low grade 99.1-99.7 since then.

Today. No fever. Nausea from sinus pressure.

O2 level always at 96-98

Very much like a cold after the 1st 24 hours.

Used DayQuil and NyQuil to counter effects as needed.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Anyone with 1 working eye and 2 working brain cells sees you contradict yourself in that post. If protection is not limited by how the virus enters the body and the immune response produced can be identical either way then that is an admission it does NOT need to be the exact same way, because multiple different ways all produce the same response by your own admission. I feel bad pouring the salt in the wounds.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So I think everyone agrees about natural immunity, but lets say you are high risk to begin with, do you get vacced to help or do you just role the dice being in a group that will most likely have huge issues up front with COVID?

Depends. If the vaccine comes with potential serious side effects and offers zero protection against Omicron then which is actually rolling the dice, getting it or not getting it?

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So I think everyone agrees about natural immunity, but lets say you are high risk to begin with, do you get vacced to help or do you just role the dice being in a group that will most likely have huge issues up front with COVID?

I've always said that if someone is high risk, they have a different risk analysis. Absolutely they have a meritorious argument to get vaxxed.

That's why this is about choice, no mandates, rationalism, and ending the demonization of all unvaxxed people (including those with natural immunity). What we have right now is a binary, reductionist demonization of all unvaxxed people. I'm all for the choice.

originally posted by: wdkirk
2 Pfizer shots. Getting over Omicron right now.

Mostly congestion in the upper respiratory pathways

Had a high fever for 1 night. My body sweat that one out.

Low grade 99.1-99.7 since then.

Today. No fever. Nausea from sinus pressure.

O2 level always at 96-98

Very much like a cold after the 1st 24 hours.

Used DayQuil and NyQuil to counter effects as needed.

And here's the thing, I just got over Covid part deux without vax. It was less intense than that.

a reply to: Madviking

Hi. I'm high risk, 72 yo stroke and cancer survivor. I had covid ,last year in january 2021. We went and got the J+j vax.
I'm not getting any boster jabs ever. I'm prepared for my demise when ever it comes, I'm slowly comming apart, It"s somthing breaking down. This year I had nodules on my thyroid, and carpal tunnel. I'm a mess.