Vaccination Increases Risk of COVID-19 Infection, But Infection Without Vaccination Gives Immunity:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/vacci...vaccination-gives-immunity-study_4544042.html

HYPERLINK has full article but if you cannot reach it, then read the NEw England Journal of Medicine link below which is from where the article gets the info

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2203965?query=featured_home

snip

Having two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine has been linked with negative protection against symptomatic infection with the disease, scientists say, while a previous infection without vaccination offers around 50 percent immunity, according to a study analyzing the Omicron wave in Qatar.......................

However, individuals who received two doses of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine but had no previous infection, were found with negative immunity against both BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron subvariants, indicating an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 than an average person.

end snip

The human body is an amazing thing. Time and again the natural immune system steps up and combats disease. This report by the NEJM also will make it more difficult for the Democrat party to manipulate votes this mid-term. They can't use Covid as a reason

 

So you are less likely to have a severe reaction to COVID the first time if you are vaccinated but are more likely to contract the virus and less likely to catch COVID a second time after you had already had it?

That sounds like common sense.

A vaccine triggers an immune response and doesn’t prevent infection. So the vaccine is working as intended?

 

Why the frick would I do that .. why would you ask someone to do something as idiotic as go to a link .. where the poster has not cited from the link .. and not even stated what one would be looking for ..would one be dumb enough to run on such a wild goose chase ?

What is more idiotic is thinking a headline constitutes support for claim. don't you agree ?

Your claim that the vaxed population suffer less from covid is unsupported nonsence .. made worse by the fact that I have already handed it to you on this topic .. demonstrating why your nonsense claim is so preposterously false. .. so what is your excuse for returning to this vomit ?

 

Thank you for your opinion

 

That was a good call since the article totally misrepresented the study by selectively quoting data and ignoring all of the actual conclusions and discussions in it.

The protection from infection for two doses (with the second dose being more than six months previously on average) was reported as negligible. The raw results were negative but the margins of error ran from slightly negative to slightly positive.

The hybrid case, of natural infection plus vaccination, provided greater protection from infection than natural infection alone. A previous infection doesn't guarantee you won't be infected again and also getting (or already being) vaccinated will still increase the natural protection.

Also, all scenarios studied, including the older two-dose vaccination, provided similar protection from severe symptoms (which don't, as you seem to believe, only affect the old or those with pre-existing issues).

And, of course, the idea that just hoping to randomly catch a virus in the wild is a good way to gain protection from catching a virus doesn't make any sense.

That has never been in doubt but it doesn't mean there is nothing we can or should do to add to that natural protection.

I'm not sure I really want to get in to a petty argument about American politics but I don't see how this makes the blindest bit of difference.

 

Your opinion is noted but now that we have tons of data, we see vaccine mandates for what they are here in the USA. Unconstitutional and a Democrat (statist) over-reach by govt

We need to learn from the mistakes during Covid especially the politicizing of the virus by the Democrat party. There is never a good reason for more government.

We must never forget an important word; liberty.

 

OK video on this (natural immunity vs shot).
Natural Immunity is stronger and lasts longer than the shot BUT!!! Covid can kill you on your way to getting natural immunity.
I've thought since day 1: if you have health risks (morbidly obese, extreme old age, respiratory illness) and have not already had Covid, get the shot.
If you have had Covid, do not get the shot. If you do not have these other issues, do not get the shot.

 

agreed

the elderly and those with several co-morbidities should choose the vaccine.
Those in good health should not be forced to take it. We now have data from the NEJM that confirms what we've always suspected.

 

That's an entirely different point to the one raised in your OP though. That was just a scientific assessment of the relative effectiveness of vaccination. It was (quite rightly) absent any kind of political angle at all (or any direct American angle for that matter) - that was all added by you and the article you linked.

I didn't respond with opinion, I responded with facts, correcting the misrepresentation of the data you presented. Regardless, this data coming to light today isn't really relevant to decisions made two years ago (regardless of who made them). Those decisions need to be assessed in the context of what was known or reasonably believed at the time.

 

News Alert: It's not a vaccine.

Worse, it's a bioweapon.

The data cited by the OP shows its complete failure. Those who take it get sick from it. Pretty much every person I know who's taken it has been sick with the crud several times in the last 18 months.

 

I know quite a few that have been vaccinated, including myself, no one has been sick longer than a day and people that have had subsequent infections with Covid have had little to no symptoms.

The data presented by the OP states that natural immunity builds a stronger resistance to re-infection then the vaccine. They still have to have been initially infected and study after study has shown that individuals that have received the vaccine have significantly less medical complications than those without for a first time infection.

I really don’t comprehend how you can assert that anything in the study shows the vaccine is a failure. It was designed to prevent mass death and hospitalization, which it has done

 

The information that is finally coming out is likely to have a big effect on politics here in Canada over the coming months and years.

I am guessing that this will give some unity to Canada's political right.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...arty-leadership.600127/page-2#post-1073526963
Team Leslyn Lewis for Conservative Party Leadership?

 

Have you asked your doctor to take a sample of your blood and looked at it under a microscope?

From the few I've seen, it's not pretty.

But you're right, most people look no different. My family and friends who've taken the shots look no different at all, but they've had more colds in the last 12 months than ever before in their lives. Two previously healthy male friends now wear pace-makers for their new cardiac problems.

 

My case is the common one according to numerous medical studies. Perhaps you and yours need to be looked at since you are having such unusual reactions

 

I did not take the shot. 12 friends who did can no longer be 'looked at' because they are deceased.

 

Wow...for you to know twelve people who took the shot and then died is pretty astonishing......
I am pretty sure that I know of four... but that is in an area that would be termed rural Canada. My wife and I do know quite a few others who who had what sure seemed like nasty side effects that fitted with what the nasty side effects of the vaccine are supposed to be.

 

What a joke of a post >ignoring conclusions - misrepresenting the study< no it didn't

What part of "negative immunity" were you unable to understand ? --

and then in the overall equation ..
what part of .. The vax offers no protection to those who have never seen Covid did you not get ?

Your comment on hybrid immunity is nonsense in the grand scheme of things as well .. as there was no significant difference in immunity .. .. not that you provided any data or link to back up your claim to begin with .. or would have any clue what "significant" means in context.

Bottom Line -- Vax is usless in preventing transmission .. This was the case with Alpha - Delta .. and 10 X the case with Omicron .. negative immunity .. for those unexposed .. who are the most vunerable .. as those who have had it before .. getting it again is no big deal sans 4 comorbidities... and that said .. getting Omicron to begin with is childs play except for those who have medical issues .. and the vax really helps these folks .

Moral of the story - If you are immune compromized .. the vax is a good idea .. if not .. the risk of harm from vax is "far higher" than risk of harm from "Omicron"

 

In my first reply in the thread, I clearly explained the misrepresentations in the article in reference to the actual study itself. Sec ignored that and went on an irrelevant political rant.

I understand the phrase. The problem is that it is never used in the actual study. If you want to discuss the study, reference the study rather than the article.

That statement I honestly don't understand. If someone never "sees" Covid, they're obviously never going to catch it at all. If you mean that vaccination offers zero benefit to people who have already had Covid, that is not what the study actually says.

It is literally in the study Sec linked. Again, if you want to discuss the study, reference the actual study. You will, of course, need to read and understand it first.

There could well be something to this conclusion, especially at the point in the pandemic we are now in (and it seems to be certainly where authorities here in the UK are looking). The problem is that the (mis)understanding of the reported facts and determination to reach a predetermined answer means that this reasoning and confidence are simply not supported.

The other issue is that this is what we now know, due to research like this. Nobody had this information at he start of the pandemic and the clinical, social and political decisions about vaccination in the past could only be based on the evidence available at that time.

 

the SC just said, not your body, not your choice anymore

 

Responding to the topic line:

"Vaccination Increases Risk of COVID-19 Infection, But Infection Without Vaccination Gives Immunity:", an addition may be in order.

Something like, "Infection without vaccination gives immunity for those who survive the disease. Over 1,000,000 Americans didn't."

I have not found any information on the vaccine side effects which suggests a similar level of deaths.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.

 

I've been living in the same 4 county area in Florida for most of my life. I'm 74 and have many friends and acquaintances.