Ok so when are you going to get a booster shot or your first COVID shot? Or are you planning on getting the disease again and letting it run its course?
Any why would you treat this vaccine any different than the flu vaccine or w/e? It makes absolutely no sense. If you don't understand the science, how are you making informed decisions?
> nobody wears masks in business
False? Who cares? I'm in business and wear a mask all the time when meeting with clients if we even meet on-site.
> which suggests they are renewing given regular contact
Which also suggests you are getting the virus again and giving it to people you interact with who may now be getting COVID-19 for the first time. You're literally perpetuating the disease! But hey screw everybody else right? Those who might not be able to get the vaccine, like, oh idk, my nephew? Or maybe kids who BTW aren't immune from getting sick.
Your mentality around this is selfish and bizarre.
> How can we possibly suspect my immune system still has not enough clue and an instruction can be better than what it already knows?
The person you are replying to was discussing your complete misunderstanding of how vaccines work. Not commenting on naturally acquired immunity, which BTW doesn't mean you're 100% immune because that's now how things work.
I consider every interaction with the virus a booster shot. So I guess every day.
> False? Who cares? I'm in business and wear a mask
Perhaps the right question would be where. I personally insist on masks every time I feel even slightly imperfect (which mostly is because I didn't sleep enough) even if the other people feel too confident. In fact I believe masks make the most sense out of all the measures deployed and allowing people use public transport and supermarkets without masks once most of them are vaccinated is going to be a huge mistake.
> Which also suggests you are getting the virus again
How is this getting it with natural immunity proven by a lab antibody test worse than getting it being vaccinated?
> But hey screw everybody else right?
Nobody experienced any symptoms after contacting me. Everybody I talked to still feels fine. I test. I wear FFP2. I use hand sanitizers. I avoid meeting anyone without a necessity (as I always did). And by the way I have also heard a rumor (though I don't rely on it as I never cared to check) getting an infection from a light/asymptomatic-symptomatic person means higher chances to overcome it without light symptoms too.
> Your mentality around this is selfish and bizarre.
No, I just the question above. I do everything I see logical reason in but I don't understand how is a vaccine better than immunity I have already developed naturally. Why is it supposed to protect the people around me better than the antibodies I already have?
> The person you are replying to was discussing your complete misunderstanding of how vaccines work. Not commenting on naturally acquired immunity, which BTW doesn't mean you're 100% immune because that's now how things work.
Ok. Would you be so kind to tell me how is a vaccine supposed to be better than contacting all the mutations of the actual live virus besides the fact the latter gives you less chances to survive unharmed and enjoy the immunity?
> Nobody experienced any symptoms after contacting me.
Sure except you know people can transmit diseases without showing signs of symptoms. It's called being asymptomatic.
> Ok. Would you be so kind to tell me how is a vaccine supposed to be better than contacting all the mutations of the actual live virus besides the fact the latter gives you less chances to survive unharmed and enjoy the immunity?
You're familiar with the concept of a straw man right?
Nobody is arguing this point. What we are arguing is your misunderstanding of "whatever is in a vaccine" from your original post.
Here's what you said:
> I trust my immune system more than I trust whatever the vaccine does
It's clear from the start that you don't even know what a vaccine does. The vaccine does the exact same thing as obtaining the virus "naturally". It's a living virus, put into you, to train your immune system. It's the same thing. Trying to separate that out into a "natural" immunity versus an "artificial" immunity is not only incorrect scientifically but pretty comparable to believing the earth is flat or something.
Here's another thing you said:
> I never ever resisted any vaccine before and was always willing to get vaccinated against everything.
So again, why is COVID-19 different? Explain the exact scientific and logical reasoning for resisting this vaccine and not others.
> Why is it supposed to protect the people around me better than the antibodies I already have?
So your plan is to just get COVID-19 + variants every year instead of getting a vaccine? Why? Why get yourself sick when a vaccine will do the exact same job? Doesn't seem very logical to me. Do you not get flu shots either? Do you realize that even if you didn't get extremely sick from your first interaction with COVID that it doesn't mean the next time you get a variant you won't be in a coffin? I don't understand at all the point of taking an unnecessary risk here.
No. Just only get vaccinated if I understand why I should (I mean why I should, not why everybody should). Avoid everything if I don't understand why it is going to help me or anyone around me in my particular case. "Let's just apply the measure to everyone to get a better total result" approach doesn't convince me, I'm a strong proponent of individual approach in everything.
> The vaccine does the exact same thing as obtaining the virus "naturally". It's a living virus, put into you, to train your immune system. It's the same thing.
It's not THE virus. And not even a virus, it's an mRNA which tells the cells to produce something modeled by something they caught in a lab somewhere far away more than a year ago. I actually prefer the real viruses in the circulation given I've been lucky enough to resist any harm they could do. I know "natural" and "artificial" immunity work the same way, but the former is against the real viruses and the latter is against a model.
>> I never ever resisted any vaccine before and was always willing to get vaccinated against everything.
> So again, why is COVID-19 different? Explain the exact scientific and logical reasoning for resisting this vaccine and not others.
Okay, not everything, only the diseases I'm not already immune to. I have chickenpox antibodies (because I had chickenpox when I was a child) so I don't feel like vaccinating against it. I have covid antibodies (because I had light covid obviously, how else could I get them? but the government doesn't believe I had it despite the antibody test, they only accept positive PCR tests taken during the sickness, to me this seems absurd) so I don't feel like vaccinating against covid. The moment when I probably caught it the vaccines were just invented and not available in my country. But I wouldn't hurry even if they were because not tested enough. I really want a vaccine against Lime's disease but am not going to hurry with it as soon as it gets approved, I'll wait some years anyway. Perhaps my logic is imperfect but can you really see no logic in this?
> So your plan is to just get COVID-19 + variants every year instead of getting a vaccine?
So again you believe a vaccine developed against some of the first variants is better than whatever immunity I already have (after surviving waves of all the known strains and having antibodies on a level higher than people I know got after serious sicknesses and vaccines)? I still don't understand why.
> Why get yourself sick when a vaccine will do the exact same job?
I don't get sick. Just slightly sick once long ago and still reliably high level of the antibodies.
> Do you not get flu shots either?
Flu isn't around me all year round. I never tried but I probably wouldn't find particularly high level of flu antibodies if I tested in summer. I don't think I would get the shot if I actually tested and found a reasonable amount of the antibodies. Or maybe I would because flu is more sophisticated AFAIK - there are more diverse varieties. Covid is always around and I think contacting it regularly works like booster shots.
> it doesn't mean the next time ... you won't be in a coffin
Nothing does.
> I don't understand at all the point of taking an unnecessary risk here.
I agree my understanding of the immune system and the vaccines is futile but again I'm not sure tuning it against an old strain can decrease my risk as compared to leaving it as it is after it has successfully tuned it against all the live strains in circulation.
If you’re worried about mRNA for absolutely no scientific or educated reason whatsoever then why not get JnJ?
Even if you somehow know that you got a “newer” strain eventually there will be even more new strains. Are you just planning on getting yourself sick forever? What about when we are able to predict the strains that will become prevalent and we can just send out boosters shots for those? Are you going to sit it out and try and get sick instead?
By that logic you should go get Lyme Disease and not the vaccine before it. Build up your immunity.
> But I wouldn't hurry even if they were because not tested enough.
Describe exactly the scientific reasoning that explains what is “tested enough” and your educated and scientific basis for this. Every physician and scientist says that if there are troubles with a vaccine they appear shortly after (a month or maybe slightly longer) the vaccine goes into the population. Please explain the exact scientific details explaining why the mRNA vaccines or the Johnson & Johnson vaccine would not follow this pattern.
Because the immunity still works. Both empirically and according to the antibody tests. Despite (or thanks to, if this actually works like booster shots) regular contact with many new people and all strain waves declared. If by some miracle all my immunity comes from the first contact and has nothing to do with anything newer then Ok, cool, but this doesn't mean the vaccine based on the same or older strain is better. Given the antibodies level I don't think need to boost it or have higher chances of infecting anybody than vaccinated people do.
> What about when
Perhaps I will get a shot once an updated vaccine gets released and about a year passes.
> By that logic you should go get Lyme Disease and not the vaccine before it. Build up your immunity.
AFAIK with the Lyme disease the chances it will work out this way - without harm and with reliable immunity as the result are very low if any. With coronaviruses the chance is well above 50% when you are young and fit. Nevertheless I still recommend everyone who doesn't have much antibodies yet go and get the shot already.
> Describe exactly the scientific reasoning that explains what is “tested enough”
Not exactly scientific, just intuitive: it has been deployed to large diverse population in diverse set of places, some reasonable time passed, it helped a lot, no bugs found.
You write a lot (for what I want thank you, and I would feel very grateful if you managed to change my mind, I really value input which can correct or expand my understanding), mostly reasonable, but seemingly ignore (or excuse me if I missed a clear answer) the key question of mine: what's the reason (strictly scientific or speculative, I don't insist) to believe the vaccines will get me better antibodies than those I already have? As for my worry it can actually weaken my immunity I'm perfectly aware it's just a superstition based on nothing else but lack of knowledge + "don't mess with what works" mentality so I don't ask for any counterarguments to this.
And by the way, vaccines are not just a virus/mRNA, there also are adjuvants (a word even the spell checker doesn't know) which contribute a lot to both the intended effect and adverse reactions AFAIK. AFAIK this is why many people (including many of those I know personally) still feel terribly sick the day after a the shot even if they were already immune.
Fun fact: there are places in Europe where you can get vaccinated (legally, with ab approved vaccine) but won't be given the certificate so all the places requiring vaccination will still demand you to get vaccinated again. No matter the antibodies you've gotten in response to the vaccine.
The second is this:
> … to believe the vaccines will get me better antibodies than those I already have
My point isn’t that you need to rush out and get the vaccine right this second - it’s that your immune response is equivalent to having got the vaccine except that in the future, just like those who received the vaccine you will need some sort of re-exposure via contracting the virus from another person or via a vaccine in order to maintain your immune response.
You’re suggesting you won’t get a vaccine as this occurs - instead of obtaining a booster shot equivalent which would train your immune system without risking severe illness you’d prefer to contract COVID again and roll the dice. No clue when you obtained it, maybe even walking around spreading it asymptotically…
Your strategy works for the short term, but fails in the medium to long term.
> in the future, just like those who received the vaccine you will need some sort of re-exposure via contracting the virus from another person or via a vaccine in order to maintain your immune response.
I just believe I contact it every day (or every week - I don't really know what the percent of infected people around is) and maintain my immune response this way. I use crowded public transport several times a day (wearing a mask of course), also meet many people and they mostly don't wear masks outside public transport and groceries (and even there many people leave their noses uncovered).
And I don't even have to speculate about this as long as I watch the level of the antibodies.
I don't say I am going to avoid the vaccine forever and rather go get infected when my immunity wears off. I just believe I only should go and get the shot once I see the level of the antibodies decreased. E.g. the Austrian government thinks the same.
Am I wrong?
But it knows! Why should I now train it on a picture if there are live viruses of all the mutations all over around which I have already encountered countless times and keep encountering every day?
I would certainly vaccinate if I were going to an infected place from a place where there is no such virus. Or if the disease was widespread somewhere else and coming to my place while there already was a vaccine.
But I have been living emerged deep in the infection intensively for over 2 years already! I have never even decreased (even increased actually, meeting many new people every day, and nobody wears masks in business) my social interactions, just tested regularly and wore a mask in public transport. I even drank from the same cup with an sick and positive girl once, then self-isolated for some days, tested regularly (incl. in-lab PCR) - all negative, no sickness. And even lab tests objectively show I have been maintaining high level of antibodies for already a year (which suggests they are renewing given regular contact). How can we possibly suspect my immune system still has not enough clue and an instruction can be better than what it already knows?
> apply iterative mutations to the best solutions in order to find a successful match.
But I apparently applied very successful matches to every mutation!
> What in the world do you think a vaccine is? Vaccine-based immunity is natural immunity.
To something specific, more precisely - a specific model (not even a real object) isn't it?