Coronavirus

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

According to the British Society for Immunology, that statement is not true.

https://www.immunology.org/coronavir...ection-vaccine



Also…

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/co...us-vaccination

so good you need multiple doses.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

According to the British Society for Immunology, that statement is not true.

https://www.immunology.org/coronavir...ection-vaccine



Also…

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/co...us-vaccination

What website is that?

This is an alternative view. This is not just any website. It’s a BBC website. So it must be true.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58270098

You are asking what website is that? - do you mean the one I posted a link to in the post, and named as "the British Society for Immunology"?

There is nothing in your linked article that supports your proposition - the parts that mention immunity state

You get a broader immune response after being infected with the virus than vaccination.
Whether you've had Moderna or Pfizer or Oxford-AstraZeneca, your body is learning to spot just one thing - the spike protein.
This is the critical part of the virus to make antibodies to, and the results - by keeping most out of hospital - have been spectacular.
But having the other 28 proteins to target too, would give T-cells far more to go at.
"That means if you had a real humdinger of an infection, you may have better immunity to any new variants that pop up as you have immunity to more than just spike," said Prof Riley.

So you have had to have had a serious bout of COVID to have "better" immunity (which is what the "immune response" section on the image in my post said) - only two problems with that; 1) if you have a serious bout of COVID, you’ve probably been hospitalised (with the concomitant risk of death), and 2), as you have frequently stated, most people who catch it only have a mild case. As the article states

there is a huge gulf in antibodies between those who are asymptomatic (who don't make very much) and those who get a severe bout of Covid.

You can’t have it both ways - if people have had a mild case, they won’t have "better" immunity.

btw, this is a recent tweet from Professor Finn (one of the Profs mentioned in the BBC article).

Adam Finn
@adamhfinn

Masterful explanation of the uncertainties ahead. But one thing’s for sure, the more people get vaccinated the better things will be. The decision is not hard given what we know - it’s a:“the boat is sinking, shall I put on this life jacket?” type decision

If you are an expert immunologist could you please put your hand up.Otherwise please stop confusing the hell out of me.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Maggy

If you are an expert immunologist could you please put your hand up.Otherwise please stop confusing the hell out of me.

It's easy Maggy, apparently what makes you ill makes you stronger . . . depending how ill you get. Although getting really really ill will finish you off

. . or as one famous actor is misquoted as saying . . "do you feel lucky punk?"

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You are asking what website is that? - do you mean the one I posted a link to in the post, and named as "the British Society for Immunology"?

There is nothing in your linked article that supports your proposition - the parts that mention immunity state



So you have had to have had a serious bout of COVID to have "better" immunity (which is what the "immune response" section on the image in my post said) - only two problems with that; 1) if you have a serious bout of COVID, you’ve probably been hospitalised (with the concomitant risk of death), and 2), as you have frequently stated, most people who catch it only have a mild case. As the article states

You can’t have it both ways - if people have had a mild case, they won’t have "better" immunity.

btw, this is a recent tweet from Professor Finn (one of the Profs mentioned in the BBC article).

Quote:
Adam Finn
@adamhfinn

Masterful explanation of the uncertainties ahead. But one thing’s for sure, the more people get vaccinated the better things will be. The decision is not hard given what we know - it’s a:“the boat is sinking, shall I put on this life jacket?” type decision

I would not question this desirability of getting vaccinated. My point is that once you have had the vaccination and it has taken effect, being exposed to the virus is not something to be discouraged.

However, it is worth pointing out that even the scientists are disagreeing about how to deal with this virus, and so quoting a particular scientist or a particular medical body doesn’t actually prove anything.

Even the World Health Organisation doesn’t come out of this looking pretty.

[Pierre]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-b1913173.html

Schools have been back 2 weeks now, no major increase in cases. Which btw is a pretty irrelevant metric as you can catch COVID regardless of vaccination status.

The two metrics that are important are Deaths, which have remained pretty steady for the past 3-4 weeks and hospitalisation which has been going down steadily for the past 3 weeks.

Vaccines work, people catch COVID but brush it off as nothing more than a usual cough/cold, as I have done recently.

Looking forward to a normal Christmas and 2022 ……rest of my life.

Feel sorry for Australians though, they truly are living under the jackboot of government oppression.

Golf booked for Tenerife in a fortnight……..get in.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Pierre

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-b1913173.html

Schools have been back 2 weeks now, no major increase in cases. Which btw is a pretty irrelevant metric as you can catch COVID regardless of vaccination status.

The two metrics that are important are Deaths, which have remained pretty steady for the past 3-4 weeks and hospitalisation which has been going down steadily for the past 3 weeks.

Vaccines work, people catch COVID but brush it off as nothing more than a usual cough/cold, as I have done recently.

Looking forward to a normal Christmas and 2022 ……rest of my life.

Feel sorry for Australians though, they truly are living under the jackboot of government oppression.

Golf booked for Tenerife in a fortnight……..get in.

Right on, mate.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Quote:
Adam Finn
@adamhfinn

Masterful explanation of the uncertainties ahead. But one thing’s for sure, the more people get vaccinated the better things will be. The decision is not hard given what we know - it’s a:“the boat is sinking, shall I put on this life jacket?” type decision

I would not question this desirability of getting vaccinated. My point is that once you have had the vaccination and it has taken effect, being exposed to the virus is not something to be discouraged.

However, it is worth pointing out that even the scientists are disagreeing about how to deal with this virus, and so quoting a particular scientist or a particular medical body doesn’t actually prove anything.

Even the World Health Organisation doesn’t come out of this looking pretty.

Haha, yes. As you consistently demonstrate in this thread. Including this very post!

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Haha, yes. As you consistently demonstrate in this thread. Including this very post!

Your point being…?

[Carth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Your point being…?

His point being that he expected (and got) a reply

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Your point being…?

I think his point is that he is always right, and everyone else is always wrong.

At least thats usually what his point is.

[jfman]

My point, agreeing with OB, is you’ll find scientists who can say anything depending on who is funding them.

Comedy Carl Heneghan, that Gupta woman and others pushing the Great Barrington Declaration are scientists. Who is funding them to spread misinformation? Who knows. But OB’s general point about scientists was correct. They shouldn’t be held up as oracles or in absolute terms as correct without understanding their motives first. Same for anyone on Government payroll - many are engaging in PR, not science.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by jfman

My point, agreeing with OB, is you’ll find scientists who can say anything depending on who is funding them.

Comedy Carl Heneghan, that Gupta woman and others pushing the Great Barrington Declaration are scientists. Who is funding them to spread misinformation? Who knows. But OB’s general point about scientists was correct. They shouldn’t be held up as oracles or in absolute terms as correct without understanding their motives first. Same for anyone on Government payroll - many are engaging in PR, not science.

Probably your best post, ever

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

Probably your best post, ever

Law of averages mate, after posting thousands of bad ones he had to finally get a good un, how long will we have to wait for the next one