Until the CDC changed the definition of vaccine in Sept 2021, most vaccines were understood to provide sterilizing immunity against infection, not only "protection" against illness/death.

Intramuscular/serum vaccines cannot stop respiratory infections, by definition. They are non-sterilizing. Only a nasal/mucosal vaccine or nasal infection can provide sterilizing immunity against a respiratory virus.

Immunoglobulin A versus Immunoglobulin G, we still don't know how to stimulate a response (outside of exposure to a virus) to create Immunoglobulin A, which protects our upper respiratory tract.

This is the technological limits of what vaccines are capable of. Vaccination limits the damage, ensuring a much lower likelihood of catching a 1 to 3 day cold affecting only my upper respiratory tracts rather than risking the lungs and the rest of my body on a potentially multi-week infection.

The longer the infection, the more likely pneumonia or another co-infection will injure or kill you.

This didn't happen all of a sudden in Sept 2021. The flu vaccine has always been about harm reduction and began seeing widespread civilian use in 2007-2008.

Maybe it's just where I live, but I've never heard the "flu shot" called a vaccine.

The CDC calls them "Seasonal Flu Vaccines":

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/flushot.htm

So does the Mayo Clinic:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/flushot.htm

I won't go on, but by definition, a medicine that you take that's intended to build up your immune response to a disease is a vaccine. I saw someone upstream write "Intramuscular/serum vaccines cannot stop respiratory infections, by definition," and as far as I can tell this is just point-blank wrong. Whooping Cough -- pertussis -- is a respiratory bacterial infection we've been vaccinating against with intramuscular shots since the 1940s.

“Most” vaccines. The reason why they didn’t have to invent “non-sterilizing” as a term just for COVID vaccines, is because some existing vaccines had this same property. The acellular pertussis vaccine (the aP in TDaP) is non-sterilizing for example, yet I bet you never took any issue with it.

Does measles count as a respiratory infection? It causes coughing, is airborne, and infection happens via nasal passages. The intramuscular measles vaccine seems to work pretty well.

You rewriting history? The vaccine was never said to be 100% effective. Stop trying to twist reality to face your own political views.

A collection of headlines on vaccine efficacy, https://youtube.com/watch?v=TSZMtSPX3iE

pretty much all those quotes are "very effective", which is not really quantitative enough to say that fauci and the media were "wrong".

Is it super important that they are technically wrong on something, anyway? Like, do you think Fauci is going to be cancelled because he said something wrong? I doubt that's going to occur based on his prior messaging.

This is simply a lie and you know it.

"If you're vaccinated, you won't get COVID" - Joe Biden

Joe Biden, well known epidemiologist.

From the beginning, there has not been a COVID-19 vaccine that purported to be 100% effective. There are vanishingly few vaccines that provide 100% immunity, if for no other reason than the immune system is not perfect.

In human history, we have only completely removed 1 virus from humanity: smallpox. That is literally the only 100% effective vaccine ever produced. And even then, it is only 100% effective after the fact.

delusion is a funny thing.

I hope this is sarcasm

If you were infected with the original strain, you'd have had less immunity to Delta than if you were vaccinated. The exact same thing for Delta vs Omicron.

The mRNA vaccines give a broader immunization that covers more. That's not even up for debate, you're only pretending it is.

I hope your comment is sarcasm.

This is wrong according to the CDC. Prior infection is better than the vaccine by itself but vaccine + prior infection is best. https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2022/01/19/cdc-prior-c...

It's been awhile since I read about that study but didn't it determine that previous infection provided better resistance to infection than vaccination without a booster, but that vaccination provided better resistance to serious illness and death?

Either way I find it weird that the study clearly shows vaccination + infection provides the best protection yet people are using this to argue that they don't need a vaccination at all.

It is also the combo most likely to give you side effects.

What do you mean by "broader"? The mRNA vaccines present the original spike protein to your immune system. A viral infection exposes you to the spike protein as well as every other piece of the virus.

Source? Because the CDC disagrees https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2022/01/19/cdc-prior-c...