Quote (InsaneBobb @ Dec 22 2020 05:29pm)
The word "thought" directly implicates lack of empirical evidence (aka science). You ARE making assumptions. Vaccine immunity is "usually" nothing. This is an entirely new form of vaccine. It has never been used before. There is no precedent. The vaccine has not existed long enough to determine whether it even prevents people from being contagious, let alone immunity.
Yes the word thought implies lack of empirical evidence, which is why I DID NOT make an assumption and continue NOT to make assumption on vaccine immunity vs. natural immunity. Why are you having so much difficulty reading? Nowhere did I state vaccine immunity is superior to natural immunity. Interestingly, there is a large school of thought that DOES think this - I am actually impartial for the time being until we know more.
Despite it being novel mechanism, the way we measure its effectiveness is no different, do you understand this? The precedent for determining vaccination effectiveness is well determined, which despite it being a novel approach, the effectiveness has never been called into question. The scientific community can make hypothesis on if/how it will be superior to natural immunity, as many vaccinations indeed are. Assumptions based on the amount of antibody production after vaccination and even more precise measurements of memory cells after the fact, both of which far exceed levels seen in natural immunity with the mRNA vaccine. When compared to other vaccinations that share this trait, these are vaccinations that confer much stronger immunity than natural immunity. Today you have some immunologists that are convinced mRNA vaccine immunity is superior for precisely this reason, as that is what the initial data leads you to assume.
however you will also have some that prefer to take a more cautious approach and not make statements until then can be fully backed up. I’m actually in the latter category - NOT making assumptions until we have more Information.
ergo,
Quote
You ARE making assumptions.
You are putting words in my mouth and continuing to lie. I made no claims to know with certainty, nor would I because we simply don’t know yet. If you are able to read at a 3rd grade level you will find I actually said if you already acquired corona through natural means I think you should hold off, and realistically you will be forced to hold off, at least for now:
Quote
From an individual standpoint if you got the virus within 6 months don’t think there is a need to rush to get the vaccine and I see the argument to hold off for now. In fact if you got it within 120 days, depending on where you live, you may be ineligible for the vaccine due to amount of supply.
in regards to...
Quote
Literally everything you're saying is horse shit. I don't need to dodge you because you're using mindpuke and more and more doubtful sounding credentials to try to pass off your pipe dreams as "science".
On the contrary, Let me show you what horse shit looks like:
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Dec 22 2020 02:06pm)
What? I mean just to name a quick one, diabetes has been linked to several vaccination types, such as the H influenzae type b vaccine used in the 90's. This is old information, mate. We aren't talking some autism bullshit here.
then you dodge as if you never said this moronic statement.
enjoy the hand out you're getting from me. put it to good use and don't spent it all on alcohol please.
This post was edited by Bazi on Dec 22 2020 06:14pm