Sorry first line second paragraph
I just think it shows that natural antibodies eventually erode over time. I donât think that was a big revelation. I also believe those from the vaccine will probably erode also.
Thatâs what memory cells are for.
Iâm not real clear on the process, but think it has to do with antigens naturally occurring in the body verses a vaccine induced response creating antibodies.
Which goes back to either you have the ability to fight the infection or you donât. If you donât, the vaccine is necessary for living. If you do, itâs not necessary, but it gives you a leg up on fighting the virus and avoiding chronic illnesses associated with Covid.
The only problem with finding out which one you are is that you have to get Covid. Additionally, the Covid response vs the vaccine response is more damaging to your body overall.
I am not suggesting it is preferable to get covid vs getting a vaccine. But I canât see any mechanism which would make the vaccine superior in providing protection against
future infection than having had covid.
Not unless the vaccine included unique parts of variants that didnât exist when it was formulated at any rate.
We now see suggestions that a booster shot for those who had the vaccine would help. Wouldnât having Covid and then getting the vaccine later be comparable to getting a booster shot?
1 Like
Study I read, canât be bothered to look it up, said if you had covid one dose had better results than none but that two wasnât a good idea.
I wasnât implying that was youâre argument, just explaining my rationale.
Itâs been said that it promotes a more robust immune response than Covid. Not sure of the documentation supporting that, but itâs been bandied about.
I think the more robust immune response covers that. The variants contain the same spike protein from the original, and the immune system treats them the same and attacks them.
Isnât the what this study is looking into?
Just saying provides a more robust response is not saying anything about how that could be possible. Does the vaccine produce more spike protein then an actual infection? I donât think that would be the case. If it were the side effects of the vaccine would be as bad as having the infection as well.
How long does immunity last from being infected? From vaccination?
Immunity from natural infection starts to decline after 6 to 8 months. We know that fully vaccinated people still have good immunity after a yearâand probably longer.
Why is it that the vaccine leads to better immunity than natural infection?
The honest truth is, we donât know. The immune system of people who have been infected has been trained to target all these different parts of the virus called antigens. Youâd think that would provide strongest immunity, but it doesnât. The Pfizer or Moderna vaccines target just the spike proteinâthe part of the virus that is essential for invading cells. Itâs like a big red button sitting on the surface of the virus. Itâs really sticking out there, and itâs what our immune system sees most easily. By focusing on this one big antigen, itâs like youâre making our immune system put blinders on and only be able to see that one piece of the virus.
Like I said, those results donât make sense. And they wonât make sense until someone figures out how such a thing is possible. I tend to cast a skeptical eye at studies that prove the impossible.
I think they have a good hypothesis going in the second paragraph I posted above.
Just because we donât know doesnât make it impossible.
Itâs hard to argue with the results. But doubting them because we donât understand the mechanism isnât science.
No, they donât, an infection would have more spike proteins, not less. This reminds me of when the scientists said they could tell for sure covid wasnât made in a lab and I said it was impossible for them to know.
And the immune system in natural infection is trained to attack many different parts of the virus when, in their hypothesis it seems to be more effective to only target the spike proteins. You can say itâs not a good hypothesis, but unless you are a virologist or some related expert, your opinion is probably not of the expert caliber.
Sorry, just canât see any reason introducing fewer spike proteins than an infection would cause a stronger response than introducing more of them by infection. It doesnât pass the logic test.
Respectfully, some are skeptical of putting things in their bodies that no one understands the mechanism by which it works. People are afraid of side effects for good reason, see Zantac.
Doesnât matter, the results speak for themselves. For now, it is not fully understood.
I think that is the case for many people. The natural repsonse in some people is limited by the limits of their immune system. The vaccine is like a clear cut code that everyoneâs cells will respond to. But Iâm not sure where or when I heard that.
Maybe @toreyj01 could chime in.
