General Discussion

FBaggins

(28,772 posts)

62. That isn't really true... but also isn't relevant

Tue Mar 30, 2021, 06:54 PM

Mar 2021

Whether it's billions of samples or merely hundreds of millions... There have been more than enough cases out there to identify whether your likelihood of catching a virus actually goes up for a short time after vaccination.

But it isn't really true. Most vaccines with global application were developed and distributed while the illness they targeted was active in the population.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Vaccination question not asked by the MSM [View all] Shermann Mar 2021 OP

Delete uponit7771 Mar 2021 #1

The post you linked to says the exact opposite. Mariana Mar 2021 #22

Exactly. LisaL Mar 2021 #27

Thx, fixing post uponit7771 Mar 2021 #35

Here is a report of hospitalization of a fully vaccinated person - i think it's a good question womanofthehills Mar 2021 #56

That sounds almost Sgent Mar 2021 #59

That's what I think. Mariana Mar 2021 #68

The poster I responded to did not ask a question. Mariana Mar 2021 #67

As already has been pointed out to you, you are completely mischaracterizing LisaL Mar 2021 #28

Thx, post fixed uponit7771 Mar 2021 #37

A DU thread about Michigan's latest surge touches on this. Eugene Mar 2021 #2

I'm aware of the Michigan article Shermann Mar 2021 #3

Partially vaccinated INCLUDES the period you are concerned about. Ms. Toad Mar 2021 #40

Insufficient data, see post #5 nt Shermann Mar 2021 #41

Then I'll just fall back on the reason that the question isn't being asked Ms. Toad Mar 2021 #42

That's helpful, thanks Shermann Mar 2021 #44

Some scientists have said that because the spike protein is so specific it dominates your natural womanofthehills Mar 2021 #57

Always a good idea to STFH if you can Shermann Mar 2021 #69

No, the data does not suggest this DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #4

It doesn't, nor does it rule it out in a statistically significant way Shermann Mar 2021 #5

Those infections were not increased in vaccine group compared to placebo group. LisaL Mar 2021 #9

Which completely nullified your argument DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #49

Generally True ProfessorGAC Mar 2021 #53

The 40,000 number is misleading Shermann Mar 2021 #64

Agreed! ProfessorGAC Mar 2021 #70

You not understanding how something works... FBaggins Mar 2021 #6

My statement was "seems plausible" Shermann Mar 2021 #10

What seems plausible to you doesn't actually make it plausible. LisaL Mar 2021 #11

And my response was that it does not, in fact, seem plausible FBaggins Mar 2021 #33

To expand upon this.... DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #50

So in the short term the vaccine can suppress the mechanism of the virus in a different way? Shermann Mar 2021 #52

Here DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #60

The paper covers infections occurring 12-37 days after the first dose Shermann Mar 2021 #63

The paper clearly shows a reduction of viral load DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #65

Direct opposition? Not really, there is a huge 11 day hole in this rebuttal of yours Shermann Mar 2021 #66

Your immune system, esp. soreness of your arm, is also responding to the adjuvants in the vaccine womanofthehills Mar 2021 #61

Your initial premise that media didn't "ask the question" was wrong Hortensis Mar 2021 #45

I see Shermann Mar 2021 #55

Never before have we been vaccinating so many people during a pandemic womanofthehills Mar 2021 #58

That isn't really true... but also isn't relevant FBaggins Mar 2021 #62

From everything I've seen, read and heard... secondwind Mar 2021 #7

Why would anyone ask this question? LisaL Mar 2021 #8

I rejected the soundness of that assertion in post 5 nt Shermann Mar 2021 #12

Because you are refusing to accept what is already available evidence. LisaL Mar 2021 #26

Anecdotal at best, but, I was looking at the curves... Hugin Mar 2021 #13

Interesting, thanks Shermann Mar 2021 #14

What I'm finding interesting are the reports the vaccinations may help... Hugin Mar 2021 #43

There are no antibodies to covid in those who haven't been exposed to it. LisaL Mar 2021 #15

Did you miss where I said, "ALWAYS BETTER THAN NOTHING"? Hugin Mar 2021 #17

I don't know what curves you looked at. LisaL Mar 2021 #18

This is a good question. hamsterjill Mar 2021 #16

I guess I should state I'm not an anti-vaxxer? Shermann Mar 2021 #19

It's not an interesting question DenaliDemocrat Mar 2021 #51

Here's an actual reader question posted on CNN: Shermann Mar 2021 #54

Because there is no need to ask something that makes no sense. LisaL Mar 2021 #20

So your assertion is that the protection goes straight up immediately following the first shot? Shermann Mar 2021 #21

Your question makes sense to me. hamsterjill Mar 2021 #24

The question has already been answered during clinical trials. LisaL Mar 2021 #29

What? There's not a trace of a hint of that in LisaL's post. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #32

If there's a question, let it be asked. hamsterjill Mar 2021 #23

If I told you that I am an expert, you'd really have no way to verify it, would you? LisaL Mar 2021 #30

So your assertion stands because if you supported it, the support couldn't be verified? Shermann Mar 2021 #36

No, my assertion is that you are wrong based on available evidence. LisaL Mar 2021 #38

No, but I think you've answered my question. hamsterjill Mar 2021 #47

And I don't want to be "shit out of luck". hamsterjill Mar 2021 #25

It's like you're trying to find any little wedge, lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #31

Improbable Little Wedges Shermann Mar 2021 #34

Mask wearing was never an improbable wedge, except to Trumpers. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #39

Actually, your question is not asked because vaccines actually stimulate immunity generally andym Mar 2021 #46

Good enough, thanks! nt Shermann Mar 2021 #48

Here's an anecdotal example FakeNoose Mar 2021 #71