The latest lie from anti-vaxxers

See this is strange it's not me saying the vaccine doesn't work.

So I got vaccinated for the measles decades ago. I probably would never request a test to see if I had the measles because I believe the vaccine works.

If the vaccine works why would people even get tested for it why would they come up positive?

You wonder why people don't have blind Faith in the vaccine this is why we think. And there is that over 100% increase in the stock of the drug companies that made it. Hi on Earth would they be pushing you to use their product that's not like what every other product manufacturer does.

 

Captain, please try to be Nice!

 

Really? What about 140 for Ivermectin and 300+ for hydroxychloroquine? Are you buying into the lies they feed you, that we medical scientists refused to study these drugs? We did. It's just that they don't work for Covid.

 

One study? LOL. There were hundreds. But you wouldn't know because you're not a medical scientist in tune with the medical literature. And for your information, the effectiveness of ivermectin for Covid-19 is not 20%, it is zero.

It. Doesn't. Work.

Period.

This is a settled question. There isn't any interest in revisiting it.

Only the gullible and the crazy still believe in ivermectin for Covid-19. And yes, that does include some crazy doctors. No profession is 100% free of some crazy members.

 

That's too funny, Do you think that YOU can teach ME about straw men??? You, the champion of made up stuff, false references, misinterpreted real references, and to top it all, the guy who posted a 1960's picture of a girl with chickenpox, trying to make it pass for a 2021 picture of a child with a reaction to Covid-19 vaccines (before children even started getting vaccinated, LOL)? Do you actually think you have any credibility left to challenge anybody (much less, me)??? Thanks for a good laugh, it's always good to laugh.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

 

Why? let him Express his death wishes for people with the opposite political ideology.

Let him be all he can be. Tell the truth and shame the devil.

 

Yes go ahead and laugh, I tend to laugh at your Giant ego and your anonymous credentials...

And your inability to understand basic communication techniques.

Have you ever considered talking to people instead of talking down to them?

I guess they don't teach that in medical school.

 

Oh actually appreciate him saying this. The people who aren't getting the vaccine probably don't believe they're going to die from it and and almost all cases they are correct.

But I agree with the sentiment let me care about me I'm better at it.

 

I absolutely agree with him here this is the attitude these people need to adopt let us choose to be on vaccinated if we want.

Chances are extraordinarily great that we won't die. It's okay if he doesn't know that or accept that it won't change it.

 

Of course there is. You just aren’t supposed to know about it! You really should not talk about things you aren’t knowledgeable about. You are providing misinformation. You claim to dislike misinformation. Now when you make a statement like the above again it will be disinformation because now you know better.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04060-7

And.

At what point do you start to question your sources of information? In your case probably never. But thanks for helping me demonstrate AGAIN how the most authoritarian are the least informed.

 

I hope you realize, 557, that just like this paper shows this, several others show the opposite. I won't go hunt for them now, because I've posted several of them multiple times. In science we should never go by only one article, as you know.

But even if I hadn't done so, Omicron is changing everything anyway. It's rapidly becoming the dominant variant everywhere it lands. Here it started being 0.4% of positive cases, then 2.9%, and then it suddenly jumped to 74% nationwide and 95% in the Southeast. Soon to reach 100% everywhere. And the newest studies have demonstrated that natural immunity against Omicron is lousy, and inferior to two Pfizer doses + one Moderna, or 3 Moderna doses.

The studies on natural immunity against Alpha and Delta are now effectively a moot point. All that matters is which kind of immunity now is less lousy against Omicron. The mRNA vaccines + booster remain somewhat effective. The adenovirus vector vaccines (J&J, AZ, Sputnik V) and the whole inactivated vaccines (CoronaVac, Cansino) are all practically useless against Omicron, and so are convalescent plasma, subsequent natural immunity, and most monoclonal antibodies (19 out of 20; for some reason only SKF/Vir seems to be still active against Omicron).

So I wouldn't be paying much attention to earlier studies on natural immunity versus vaccine immunity for the variants that are ancestral to Omicron. This is a rapidly evolving situation, and it seems like even Delta is yesterday news, now that Omicron is taking over and has by far the most antigenic drift of all variants to date.

 

Care to back that up with a link?

 

Most of the studies I’ve seen so far measure neutralizing effects of antibodies. How about cell-mediated immunity? That area of immune system doesn’t use antibodies, but it does result in the production of new and accurate antibodies with that smell of a brand new car.
There is just no way natural immunity is going to be inferior to vaccine-induced immunity against a mutated strain, at least because the vaccine targets only the spike protein, while natural immunity stores antigens from various parts of the virus, and they all mutate at different rate. So, even if you don’t have neutralizing antibodies yet, you have killer cells that kill infected cells before they release new copies of the virus, therefore, slowing it down, and gaining new antigens.

 

I have never seen a study showing more mature B cells (and subsequent higher affinity antibodies) in naive vaccinees than convalescents. Higher titers of neutralizing antibodies initially with vaccines? Yep. Some B cell maturation for a few weeks in germinal centers after vaccination? Yep. But further differentiation out to a year after vaccination? Not that I’ve seen. If you run across one I’d love to see it.

I read this one the other day. It examines all available studies and agrees with my assessment.
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/vaccines/vaccines-09-01503/article_deploy/vaccines-09-01503.pdf

Seems immunologists are coming around to what I’ve proposed for a long time.

Yes Omicron is changing things. But B cells producing antibodies with higher affinity for variants is what we would want for Omicron and it’s what natural infection provides that vaccination alone doesn’t.

I would add the immunogenicity preprint you posted the other day comparing natural infection antibodies to vaccines for Omicron used antibodies taken from convalescents shortly after recovery, not after B cell maturation in germinal centers and not antibodies produced by long lived plasma cells a year after infection.

 

“This article is a pre-print and has not been peer reviewed”
Meanwhile
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00219-6/fulltext






https://www.immunology.org/coronavi...nt-resources/covid-immunity-infection-vaccine

 

Center, either put up or shut up. Post your link to peer review studies that show the long term effect of Luciferase on the immune system. https://www.dailydot.com/debug/luciferase-covid-vaccine-conspiracy-theory/.

 

Sorry. We know a lot of more now than we did in June. There is a lot of outdated (incorrect) information in that link. I like pre prints better than outdated information contradicted by numerous peer reviewed published studies.

 

Sooooo, you want us to do to disprove a made up bit of rubbish

 

It was intended as humor, Bower. You should know me better by now. I am not the conspiracist type. Hopefully Centerfield does!

 

So, just because it’s wasn’t peer reviewed yet then it’s not true?
The paper that you quoted only looks for antibodies. Are you denying the fact that cell-mediated immunity exists? Many studies about covid immunity concentrate too much on antibodies. While they are great at neutralizing when present, it doesn’t mean that cell-mediated immunity won’t be able to keep the virus in check. Even if you just think logically about it - a vaccine results in your body storing 1 antigen, while natural infection more than 1. The vaccine immunity targets just one area that mutated to almost unrecognizable level. If your vaccine targets only that specific protein then your antibodies won’t be very effective. With cell-mediated immunity, the quality of antibodies do not matter as that process does not involve them, and T cells store antigens that come from slower mutating areas of the virus, giving them a better ability to recognize, kill, and extract new antigens from infected cells.
If you think about it, natural immunity is much more comprehensive and when you are dealing with a mutating pathogen, cell-mediated immunity results in faster immune response. Cell-mediated immunity does not prevent infection per se, but it will most likely result in asymptomatic or very mild reinfection, and, ultimately, faster production of highly accurate neutralizing antibodies. Denying that is literally denying science.

 

It seems you may not have read your source. It includes this tidbit.

Well, June came and went and now we know more. Like people with mild Covid actually have better cohorts of memory B cells than those with severe disease.

In fact, a lot of this was KNOWN before your info graphic was published. An example.

https://www.jimmunol.org/content/jimmunol/early/2021/05/28/jimmunol.2100135.full.pdf

And:

And:

We also know now that natural infection produces long lived plasma cells whereas vaccination does not. Since I’ve provided ample evidence of this in this thread I won’t repeat myself here. But there are definitely components of natural immunity that are superior to vaccination.

To be clear. My argument is not against vaccination. My only argument is we SIMPLY MUST STOP MISREPRESENTING NATURAL INFECTION INDUCED IMMUNITY. If this continues there will be no credibility left in the realm of “public health” immunology. I understand it’s your job to get people vaccinated. But misrepresenting science won’t help you long term with that. Trust me. I predicted it wouldn’t before these vaccines became available and my prediction is coming true in full.

 

I’d be happy if you could back up your own made up claims.

 

I’d like to add that the other danger of misrepresenting natural infection immunity is how doing so limits the desire to IMPROVE vaccines by learning about and mimicking the advantages we see in natural immunity.

We have a great start with Covid vaccines. Let’s acknowledge the weaknesses and IMPROVE on them. Not misrepresent them.

 

Beautiful but what we need is help now, until this wave passes and oral antivirals are available. Everything else now is purely academic and outdated. You are presenting these B cells conclusions. Great. Except that scores of previously infected people IN REAL LIFE are getting Omicron. That trumps any study. Natural immunity against Omicron is kaput, and that's a fact confirmed by thousands, millions of infections, regardless of outdated studies you can quote. This is a new situation. A virologist yesterday (and I agree) said Omicron is the second most contagious virus in the history of mankind, and I agree. I'm not sure if you've realize how profoundly the equation has changed with this variant.

On the other hand, it's so contagious that the wave may pass fast. There are ALREADY signs that it is passing in South Africa. So what we need is neutralizing antibodies now. The vaccines can do it better than natural infection, period. The mRNA vaccines and booster (and for some reason, SKF/Vir) still hold true.