Posted on 10/13/2021 8:45:26 PM PDT by Fractal Trader
I try to find posts which have been recommended by people on Twitter whom I regard as authoritative, in my opinion. It may be possible that they can be too quick and don’t check out things in depth before tweeting or retweeting, but that is part of the hazards in trying to figure out what the truth is.
Because the 'prevention' wanes over time much, much more quickly than Natural Immunity. And, as far as we know, natural immunity does not produce micro clots that are ending sports players' careers, for example.
Except that a vaccine does nothing for people who recovered from Covid except poise a danger.
Data only covers folks 65 to 74 years old.
What about 18 to 65?.
We don't know that for sure but even so that's a different issue.
Many thanks for this info!!
Actually we do know that. But the burden of proof is on vaccine pushers.
You must prove it offers better protection than recovery.
Then you must prove it is safer for the recovered to get your shot than whatever remote chance of catching Covid again.
What evidence do you have of either? (None is the correct answer)
You made the claim there's no benefit from the vaccine if you've had the disease. The burden is on you to back up that claim.
I claim it will not be proven that vaccines provide benefit to people with natural immunity.
Less than 1% of people of people with natural immunity became infected.
Natural immunity is more than 99% effective. Suppose the combination of natural immunity and vaccines is more than 99% effective. With such a small difference, to make a a
statistical proof would require a number of people I think you will not have.
- - -
Natural immunity produces different antibodies. Vaccines encourage the production of one type of antibody. If a person with natural immunity gets vaccinated, the proportion of the different types of antibodies he has might change. I expect antibodies in natural proportions to be more effective than in artificial proportions.
That’s not how mandates work, Joe.
The person mandating had the burden. You have the burden.
A burden you will not meet, as the well-known Israeli study, the Cleveland clinic study, and numerous others proved my point to anyone who is not willfully stupid.
I don’t have time to waste on you anymore.
Goodbye.
Anyone using the term "The Jab" should be called a weak little sheep.
How about that?
Care to explain?
Otherwise ad hominem usually means you've run out of logical or scientific arguments.
I didn’t stutter.
Whatever
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.