[fivea]

> Natural immunity works. It's settled science, and has been for some time.

What exactly do you mean by "works"?

I mean, it's well established that those who contract COVID and didn't died from it will have a good immunity response for subsequent infections.

But that is not the point of a vaccine, is it?

The point of the vaccine is that it trains your immune system to fight an infection without undergoing the risk of a real infection. So that the odds you die from COVID are lower, if not residual.

Consequently, we see the bulk of all deaths from COVID comprised of unvaccinated individuals.

But other than all the dead, those who survive a COVID infection do end up with an immune system that is able to handle COVID.

Is that what you mean by "Natural immunity works"? That if you ignore all those unvaccinated people who died then the ones that lived through a COVID infection didn't died?

Because the whole point of a vaccine is that people don't have to die from a preventable disease, isn't it?

[disambiguation]

Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it!

Let me make it easy:

1. majority of infections happened pre-vaccine rollout.

2. we created a system that locked people out based on vaccine status.

3. the system should have included those with natural immunity.

/q

[fivea]

> Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it!

There is no nuance. The message couldn't be clearer: if you take the vaccine then the odds you'll die from COVID are way lower than if you do not.

And reality does not lie: the bulk of COVID deaths come from unvaccinated people.

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/scicheck-covid-19-data-com...

Enough with all this misinformed or disinformed bullshit.

[slibhb]

You've chosen not to address the (very clear) point made by the previous poster. Instead you retreat to familiar talking points. Genuinely disturbing to witness an interaction like this.

[disambiguation]

What did I say that was misinformation?

> it's well established that those who contract COVID .. will have a good immunity response for subsequent infections.

> those who survive a COVID infection do end up with an immune system that is able to handle COVID.

It seems like we're on the same page here.

[jjeaff]

There is more nuance in your fact that a person who survives a COVID infection has immunity. That nuance is that most people who think they were infected actually did not ever get tested. Additionally, testing for previous infection takes more time and is more costly and adds additional complexity to the cheaper and simpler one step plan of "just go get vaccinated".

[disambiguation]

yes .. I cover that a few comments ago -- hence the "noble lie".

i.e let's lie and say natural immunity does _not_ work, that way people are more likely to get vaccinated. It's for their own good, the common folk don't know any better!

[jjeaff]

So in your opinion, is there no such thing as a noble lie? While I don't know if I would consider this one of those cases or not, I do know with a pretty strong certainty that this particular lie can and most likely did save lives.

[bradknowles]

Natural immunity will only work if the virus doesn't mutate quickly, and what your immune system learns about the virus can be applied to future infections.

The former is clearly not true with regards to COVID. That is why we have been having waves of high infection rates, as the new variants get quickly distributed widely.