Jun 22, 2021
3:20:25pm
3:20:25pm
You are right. I will add my qualifier that I meant to say but did not:
"In general across the population"
Again, my point still stands. The first statement should not be said and it is not close. The second as well. They are generalizing. They cannot scientifically say no benefit especially when they can't say that people get the same immune level regardless of how infected they were and ignore the impact of false positives. Second, They can't at one point say no impact to getting the vaccine when it can act as a booster. Now you could say that it is a small impact not worth noting. And maybe you would have a point, if not for the last point for they point out the very small risk of the vaccine.
Again, my point still stands. The first statement should not be said and it is not close. The second as well. They are generalizing. They cannot scientifically say no benefit especially when they can't say that people get the same immune level regardless of how infected they were and ignore the impact of false positives. Second, They can't at one point say no impact to getting the vaccine when it can act as a booster. Now you could say that it is a small impact not worth noting. And maybe you would have a point, if not for the last point for they point out the very small risk of the vaccine.
- Previous username
- jarocho
- Bio page
- Baron
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Last login
- Jun 17, 2024
- Total posts
- 95,276 (33,188 FO)
Messages
Time
6/22/21 7:35am
Is prior infection just as good (or nearly as good) as being fully vaccinated? I don’t know the stats on it and I don’t
6/22/21 7:46am
6/22/21 8:18am
6/22/21 8:41am
The problem is it hasn’t been established what amount of antibodies in a naturally infected person provides
6/22/21 7:59am
6/22/21 8:44am
6/22/21 8:53am
6/22/21 2:43pm