Elon Musk is a nice chap

[PlainName]

No, watch again. Fauci said you don't need a (flu) vaccine if you had an infection.

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

COVID mutated into a way less lethal form

There is no reason why a mutation wouldn't go the other way given the right circumstances. So far we are lucky in that respect, and we can stay lucky by reducing the chance of mutations, which means minimising infections.

[Zero999]

The worst mistake he made was telling people masks didn't work then changing his mind, but early data was that Covid was not spread particularly through aerosol droplets,  but by small airborne particles, which masks (well, cheap surgical and fabric ones at least) don't provide much protection against.  So it was the right decision at the time with what was known.  It also had the probably intentional side effect of ensuring the medical staff could get them first, FAR more important.  What else is there to criticise?

The unwillingness to objectively gather data, which might contradict public health policy and masks was a classic example.

There was never any strong evidence to support cloth masks did anything to stop the spread and there still isn't any. I personally don't have a big problem with wearing one. It's a slightly inconvenient, but if it makes others around me feel less anxious that's fine by me. The problem is, they never did any proper studies into masks. The ones I've seen which claim to, are flawed because there are other factors which could explain the results. I do know they don't work in schools based on data from Europe (Spain and Denmark if I remember rightly) when children over the age of 12 had to wear one, yet there was no decrease in infections in the 12 and overs. I suspect the results would be the same for adults in supermarkets, on aeroplanes, in restaurants etc.

No, watch again. Fauci said you don't need a (flu) vaccine if you had an infection.

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

COVID mutated into a way less lethal form

There is no reason why a mutation wouldn't go the other way given the right circumstances. So far we are lucky in that respect, and we can stay lucky by reducing the chance of mutations, which means minimising infections.

The same is true for both viruses, more so for influenza which mutates more rapidly than SARS-Cov-2. If reinfection didn't occur, there wouldn't be an annual flu season.

The fact COVID cases haven't started rising exponentially this winter is proof of natural immunity. They probably will rise, as the season progresses, but not to the same extent as last year.

Whether it's more risky to get the COVID-19 or a vaccine, depends on the variant, previous infection, vaccination status, age, sex and co-morbidities. It's certainly true the vaccine was the less risky option for most adults, who hadn't been previously infected, pre-Omicron, but now it's not clear cut. It's certainly more risky for a healthy 15 year old boy, who's already been infected, to get vaccine, than the virus. The risk of myocarditis from the vaccine would definitely outweigh any harm from catching the virus again.

There is absolutely no evidence to support any benefit of vaccination in healthy adults, who have prior infection. Reinfection is milder in 99% of cases. If it didn't kill you or leave you with lasting damage the first time, it's highly unlikely to do so the second and much less likely after subsequent infections, whilst this risk of the vaccine doesn't change so much and is higher, if it's shortly after infection.

A big mistake is applying a one size fits all policy and not taking into account natural immunity. It's possible to be pro-vaccine, yet not be in favour of vaccinating everyone.

[TimFox]

Here is my summary of the politics and history of the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, looking at Pfizer and Moderna in the US.
(I have never voted for Trump, but I give credit where it is due.)
The virus was noticed in the US early in 2020.
When the lethality of that virus had become obvious in the spring of 2020, President Trump assembled a group of experts to suggest solutions.
My understanding is that they replied that a vaccine was required, but that vaccines take a long time to develop for a new pathogen.
Trump did not accept that estimate of a long time, and demanded a crash program.
"Operation Warp Speed", a joint operation of DHHS, DOD, and the private sector (although Pfizer proceeded without Federal funding) began in May, 2020 and was an unprecedented success in rapid development.
(The first measles vaccine took about 9 years.)
The initial budget was $10 billion, but it ended up at about $18 billion.
In June, 2020, the FDA announced that a vaccine would have to be at least 50% effective to be certified.
Pfizer and Moderna obtained purchase orders ahead of authorization to fund production.
Pfizer/BioN Tech and Moderna received initial "emergency" authorization for their vaccines in December, 2020.
Trump was pissed off, since this was a month after the presidential election of November, 2020.
With manufacturing and distribution logistics problems, the vaccine was rationed and I (at the age of 71, but otherwise healthy) had to wait until February, 2021 for my first shot.
Full approval of the Pfizer vaccines (for adults) followed in August, 2021, after a "priority review" by the FDA.
For that approval, the FDA noted 91% effectiveness in "preventing Covid disease", and the need to follow the risk in certain age groups for myocarditis and pericarditis.
Full approval for Moderna (for adults) followed thereafter in January, 2022.
For the newer and future variants, evolutionary biologists use "evolutionary strategy" as a metaphor for pathogen evolution.
If a pathogen mutates to be more virulent (contagious) but less lethal, it will spread more readily, not kill off its hosts, and lead in the germ derby over the previous variants: winning by natural selection.
 

[coppice]

COVID mutated into a way less lethal form

There is no reason why a mutation wouldn't go the other way given the right circumstances. So far we are lucky in that respect, and we can stay lucky by reducing the chance of mutations, which means minimising infections.

Actually there is a very good reason why its a lot less likely for a pathogen to become more lethal, rather than less. Lethality is not just undesirable for us, its very bad for something that needs us for its life cycle. Evolutionarily, its a losing strategy. Most lethal infections that rip through populations are spurious, rather than stable long term winning designs. Typically they've crossed for somewhere that they were not eliminating the very thing they need, to us.

[wraper]

No, watch again. Fauci said you don't need a (flu) vaccine if you had an infection.

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

It's not about flu in particular, but a fact that generally virus infection causes immunity. Again, the question is why previous COVID infection is not taken into account when doing government backed vaccine efficiency studies while having this general knowledge about viruses. Do you not get it? You say COVID is different, but you cannot possibly know because there were no proper studies done to give a definite answer on that. It may very well be that taking vaccine has or has not significant advantage to those who already had in infection. But we don't actually know because of deeply flawed studies, which (totally unsuspicious coincidence) is advantegious to pharma companies as everyone is deemed to need a booster shot every so often.

[TimFox]

Double post

[TimFox]

COVID mutated into a way less lethal form

There is no reason why a mutation wouldn't go the other way given the right circumstances. So far we are lucky in that respect, and we can stay lucky by reducing the chance of mutations, which means minimising infections.

Actually there is a very good reason why its a lot less likely for a pathogen to become more lethal, rather than less. Lethality is not just undesirable for us, its very bad for something that needs us for its life cycle. Evolutionarily, its a losing strategy. Most lethal infections that rip through populations are spurious, rather than stable long term winning designs. Typically they've crossed for somewhere that they were not eliminating the very thing they need, to us.

Like I said at the end of my long post above, that is the normal evolutionary strategy for a pathogen:  increase virulence, decrease lethality, that more viruses can spread!

[tom66]

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

This.  It just isn't the same.  Coronaviruses don't seem to convey anywhere near the same level of natural immunity as influenza.  People get colds every year often times caused by a familial relative of COVID. It might relate to the spike protein or something unique about the structure of the virus that gives it a competitive advantage.

[wraper]

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

This.  It just isn't the same.  Coronaviruses don't seem to convey anywhere near the same level of natural immunity as influenza.  People get colds every year often times caused by a familial relative of COVID. It might relate to the spike protein or something unique about the structure of the virus that gives it a competitive advantage.

Source: trust me bro. That it the problem. If government does not want scepticism on COVID vaccines, why they efing don't do proper studies with natural immunity taken into account?

[Zero999]

He was talking about flu there, no? If you get flu you don't get it again (until next year when it's mutated). With covid you stand a high chance of getting it again, and it mutates seemingly every 5 mins. And you're more likely to either die or be very seriously (like very) seriously ill with covid. It isn't flu; you can't apply flu solutions to it.

This.  It just isn't the same.  Coronaviruses don't seem to convey anywhere near the same level of natural immunity as influenza.  People get colds every year often times caused by a familial relative of COVID. It might relate to the spike protein or something unique about the structure of the virus that gives it a competitive advantage.

Where's the evidence to suggest that? There are numerous viruses which cause common cold symptoms: rhinovirus, RSV and influenza also cause common colds, not just other coronaviruses. There's the old myth that if you get the flu, you'll know about it because you'll feel really bad, but it's false: influenza can be very mild or even asymptomatic. It's highly unlikely you'll get the same cold virus year after year.

COVID mutated into a way less lethal form

There is no reason why a mutation wouldn't go the other way given the right circumstances. So far we are lucky in that respect, and we can stay lucky by reducing the chance of mutations, which means minimising infections.

Actually there is a very good reason why its a lot less likely for a pathogen to become more lethal, rather than less. Lethality is not just undesirable for us, its very bad for something that needs us for its life cycle. Evolutionarily, its a losing strategy. Most lethal infections that rip through populations are spurious, rather than stable long term winning designs. Typically they've crossed for somewhere that they were not eliminating the very thing they need, to us.

That's not always the case. It depends on how much of an incentive there is for the virus to be mild, in order to reproduce. In the case of SARS-Cov-2, transmission mostly occurred before the person felt too sick to go out, let alone dead and the infection fatality rate was relatively low. It was also widely spread by young and healthy people who went out and socialised. It did appear to become more deadly from the original strain, to alpha and delta, although it's not certain. It could have easily doubled in severity, without affecting its ability to spread. We definitely got lucky with Omicron.

Natural immunity is definitely a big factor. The fact that repeat infection is milder 99% of the time, means that once everyone has had it a couple of times, it'll become a mild disease, only killing the extremely vulnerable. This is why uncontacted tribes succumb to deadly epidemics of respiratory disease, when they make contact with outsiders. The viruses are just seasonal coronaviruses, RSV and influenza but are deadly because they lack natural immunity.

[tom66]

Why do you think they do not do studies on natural immunity? Even during the pandemic there was such a thing as a COVID passport, you could go to certain venues if you'd been vaccinated OR had a positive test in the last 6 months and now test negative.  The same policy was used for many countries (e.g. Spain allowed entry on these conditions, I travelled in Feb 2022).

[TimFox]

Here is a summary (for general readers) of studies on natural immunity and vaccine immunity for Covid-19, from Johns Hopkins, published in late 2021:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-natural-immunity-what-you-need-to-know
A later technical paper (from June, 2022 in the New England Journal of Medicine) on a study of natural and vaccine immunity:  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2118946
A summary from Cornell of that paper stated: 
"A key finding was that a history of vaccination with the standard two doses of either the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccine, but no history of prior infection, brought no significant protection against symptomatic omicron infection. Having a booster dose appeared to be about 60 percent protective, though most boosters were received just weeks before the omicron wave. Overall, the analysis suggested—consistently with prior studies—that mRNA vaccines and boosters work fairly well in protecting against symptomatic omicron infection, though their protective effect wanes rapidly and disappears within six months or so."

Yes, there have been studies that include natural immunity.
Yet, skeptics will skep...

[PlainName]

The fact COVID cases haven't started rising exponentially this winter is proof of natural immunity.

UK Vaccinations: 50m
UK cases: 20m

I'd say that's more likely due to vaccinations working rather than infections.

[wraper]

Here is a summary (for general readers) of studies on natural immunity and vaccine immunity for Covid-19, from Johns Hopkins, published in late 2021:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-natural-immunity-what-you-need-to-know
A later technical paper (from June, 2022 in the New England Journal of Medicine) on a study of natural and vaccine immunity:  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2118946
A summary from Cornell of that paper stated: 
"A key finding was that a history of vaccination with the standard two doses of either the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccine, but no history of prior infection, brought no significant protection against symptomatic omicron infection. Having a booster dose appeared to be about 60 percent protective, though most boosters were received just weeks before the omicron wave. Overall, the analysis suggested—consistently with prior studies—that mRNA vaccines and boosters work fairly well in protecting against symptomatic omicron infection, though their protective effect wanes rapidly and disappears within six months or so."

So point me where in your quote is mentioned efficiency of natural immunity or efficiency of vaccination after prior infection?

Yes, there have been studies that include natural immunity.

More like exclude.

[wraper]

The fact COVID cases haven't started rising exponentially this winter is proof of natural immunity.

UK Vaccinations: 50m
UK cases: 20m

I'd say that's more likely due to vaccinations working rather than infections.

Correlation is not causation, not to say most of the people already had COVID, often without any symptoms. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/04/26/majority-americans-coronavirus-infections/

[TimFox]

Here is a summary (for general readers) of studies on natural immunity and vaccine immunity for Covid-19, from Johns Hopkins, published in late 2021:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-natural-immunity-what-you-need-to-know
A later technical paper (from June, 2022 in the New England Journal of Medicine) on a study of natural and vaccine immunity:  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2118946
A summary from Cornell of that paper stated: 
"A key finding was that a history of vaccination with the standard two doses of either the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccine, but no history of prior infection, brought no significant protection against symptomatic omicron infection. Having a booster dose appeared to be about 60 percent protective, though most boosters were received just weeks before the omicron wave. Overall, the analysis suggested—consistently with prior studies—that mRNA vaccines and boosters work fairly well in protecting against symptomatic omicron infection, though their protective effect wanes rapidly and disappears within six months or so."

So point me where in your quote is mentioned efficiency of natural immunity or efficiency of vaccination after prior infection?

From the NEJM article, readily available on line, in the abstract: 
"The number of cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection per 100,000 person-days at risk (adjusted rate) increased with the time that had elapsed since vaccination with BNT162b2 or since previous infection. Among unvaccinated persons who had recovered from infection, this rate increased from 10.5 among those who had been infected 4 to less than 6 months previously to 30.2 among those who had been infected 1 year or more previously. Among persons who had received a single dose of vaccine after previous infection, the adjusted rate was low (3.7) among those who had been vaccinated less than 2 months previously but increased to 11.6 among those who had been vaccinated at least 6 months previously. Among previously uninfected persons who had received two doses of vaccine, the adjusted rate increased from 21.1 among those who had been vaccinated less than 2 months previously to 88.9 among those who had been vaccinated at least 6 months previously.""
You can read the entire article at your convenience.  You asked, "If government does not want scepticism [sic] on COVID vaccines, why they efing don't do [sic] proper studies with natural immunity taken into account?"

[vad]

Correlation is not causation, not to say most of the people already had COVID, often without any symptoms. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/04/26/majority-americans-coronavirus-infections/

The problem is that some people who had the virus also died from it.

Countries that did not have good mRNA vaccines and did not have strict lockdown, such as Russia, had huge excess death rate during the pandemic. In Russia alone the official excess mortality figures were  over 800,000 or about 1% of adult population.

[PlainName]

The fact COVID cases haven't started rising exponentially this winter is proof of natural immunity.

UK Vaccinations: 50m
UK cases: 20m

I'd say that's more likely due to vaccinations working rather than infections.

Correlation is not causation

Except when it works for you?

[james_s]

Why did you assess the risks as small? mRNA therapies have a problematic history, and had never previously been deployed at scale. They have such a problematic history that the well funded Moderna was on the point of bankruptcy, because nothing was working out for them. I didn't take the mRNA vaccine, because I'm an engineer. I've seen far too many serious teething troubles with new technologies. A very conventional vaccine I would have taken without much thought. I eventually took the Moderna vaccine when other personal medical issues tilted the balance in favour of me taking it.

Because tens of millions of people had received it by the time I was eligible and now hundreds of millions have and we have enough data to say beyond any reasonable doubt that the vaccine is much safer than the Covid virus. Also I decided what the hell, I'll try it and see what happens. For some strange reason I have seen people who are extremely concerned about possible side effects of the Covid vaccine, yet they seem to have no such concerns about drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, smoking tobacco or using other drugs. Life is filled with calculated risks, I have seen no reason to believe that the Covid vaccines are not safe. At this point I've had four of them with no ill effects, aside from some fatigue for a few hours a day or so after receiving them. I've received vaccinations for variosu things throughout my life and evidence suggests to me that they are safe and effective.

[TimFox]

Correlation is not causation, not to say most of the people already had COVID, often without any symptoms. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/04/26/majority-americans-coronavirus-infections/

The problem is that some people who had the virus also died from it.

Countries that did not have good mRNA vaccines and did not have strict lockdown, such as Russia, had huge excess death rate during the pandemic. In Russia alone the official excess mortality figures were  over 800,000 or about 1% of adult population.

From a recent data analysis: "COVID-19 is on track to be the third leading cause of death in the United States for the third year in a row. The virus claimed more than 340,000 lives in 2020, 475,000 lives in 2021, and so far, has taken 230,000 lives in 2022 through September."
see:  https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/covid-19-leading-cause-of-death-ranking/

[TimFox]

Why did you assess the risks as small? mRNA therapies have a problematic history, and had never previously been deployed at scale. They have such a problematic history that the well funded Moderna was on the point of bankruptcy, because nothing was working out for them. I didn't take the mRNA vaccine, because I'm an engineer. I've seen far too many serious teething troubles with new technologies. A very conventional vaccine I would have taken without much thought. I eventually took the Moderna vaccine when other personal medical issues tilted the balance in favour of me taking it.

Because tens of millions of people had received it by the time I was eligible and now hundreds of millions have and we have enough data to say beyond any reasonable doubt that the vaccine is much safer than the Covid virus. Also I decided what the hell, I'll try it and see what happens. For some strange reason I have seen people who are extremely concerned about possible side effects of the Covid vaccine, yet they seem to have no such concerns about drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, smoking tobacco or using other drugs. Life is filled with calculated risks, I have seen no reason to believe that the Covid vaccines are not safe. At this point I've had four of them with no ill effects, aside from some fatigue for a few hours a day or so after receiving them. I've received vaccinations for variosu things throughout my life and evidence suggests to me that they are safe and effective.

In the middle of the pandemic, during a short-lived "lull", I joined my family for a funeral. 
Most of my relatives at roughly my age remembered the polio vaccination drive in the mid-1950s, and could not understand the change in attitude since then.
At least one of my classmates in high school was an obvious polio victim.

[vad]

Correlation is not causation, not to say most of the people already had COVID, often without any symptoms. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/04/26/majority-americans-coronavirus-infections/

The problem is that some people who had the virus also died from it.

Countries that did not have good mRNA vaccines and did not have strict lockdown, such as Russia, had huge excess death rate during the pandemic. In Russia alone the official excess mortality figures were  over 800,000 or about 1% of adult population.

From a recent data analysis: "COVID-19 is on track to be the third leading cause of death in the United States for the third year in a row. The virus claimed more than 340,000 lives in 2020, 475,000 lives in 2021, and so far, has taken 230,000 lives in 2022 through September."
see:  https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/covid-19-leading-cause-of-death-ranking/

Thank you for proving my point. This is at least 2 times lower per capita rate than official excess mortality in Russia over 24 month period. Russia is known for manipulating its statistics, and real gap could be much higher. Also lockdown here in the US was much more relaxed than in Australia and Europe

[james_s]

In the middle of the pandemic, during a short-lived "lull", I joined my family for a funeral. 
Most of my relatives at roughly my age remembered the polio vaccination drive in the mid-1950s, and could not understand the change in attitude since then.
At least one of my classmates in high school was an obvious polio victim.

My mom told me about that, she said she remembers lining up in a big line and nurses walked down the line of people and gave each of them a jab. She doesn't recall anyone refusing or making a stink about it, people trusted science and technology then.

[Wallace Gasiewicz]

I am a physician with multiple board certifications and a Master of Public Health degree
I have worked a little in research and have also taken one year of a two year program in a Master Degree Program in Biochem
Here is my opinion:
Because of the  huge financial and political overtones to the virus and the "Vaccines" there are no independent sources that I can find to be totally believed.
With this sort of atmosphere surrounding this particular issue, I cannot form what I would consider a professional opinion.
I would take anyone's opinion at this point with a grain of salt. Even "scientific" studies can be skewed.

[coppice]

Why did you assess the risks as small? mRNA therapies have a problematic history, and had never previously been deployed at scale. They have such a problematic history that the well funded Moderna was on the point of bankruptcy, because nothing was working out for them. I didn't take the mRNA vaccine, because I'm an engineer. I've seen far too many serious teething troubles with new technologies. A very conventional vaccine I would have taken without much thought. I eventually took the Moderna vaccine when other personal medical issues tilted the balance in favour of me taking it.

Because tens of millions of people had received it by the time I was eligible and now hundreds of millions have and we have enough data to say beyond any reasonable doubt that the vaccine is much safer than the Covid virus. Also I decided what the hell, I'll try it and see what happens. For some strange reason I have seen people who are extremely concerned about possible side effects of the Covid vaccine, yet they seem to have no such concerns about drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, smoking tobacco or using other drugs. Life is filled with calculated risks, I have seen no reason to believe that the Covid vaccines are not safe. At this point I've had four of them with no ill effects, aside from some fatigue for a few hours a day or so after receiving them. I've received vaccinations for variosu things throughout my life and evidence suggests to me that they are safe and effective.

It depends on your age. If you are young, and especially if you are male, the vaccines present real risks, greater than the threat of the disease. Yet, we see people pushing for younger and younger people to take the vaccine. Perhaps because they've ordered rather a lot, and need to do something with in. The news says the EU has signed up for 10 doses for every citizen, and now politicians are asking why.

Why would you predict the likelihood of a problem with a radically new technology. that has a problematic development history, and was rushed to market, based on very well proven technology, with a long history of success?