NFL says coronavirus outbreaks among unvaccinated players may lead to forfeits this season

[jem]

13 fold superior...
you called the best study with the best data set we have... fringe nonsence. you anti science troll moron. deadly pharma shill.

you need to read and comprehend the studies...

First sentence in the study... which the article covered.



Results SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1


2. natural immunity plus one dose... did well too... but we were comparing natural immunity to those with no previous infection and the vaccine.

hence... natural immunity is 13 times superior.
So you lying your ass off and proven were wrong again... moron.

Your link actually states this...

The researchers also found that people who had SARS-CoV-2 previously and received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine were more highly protected against reinfection than those who once had the virus and were still unvaccinated.

And not a thing about natural immunity being 7 to 13 times better than vaccine immunity.

I will not the bold print in the title which says -- but vaccination remains vital

 

[gwb-trading]

13 fold superior...
you need to read and comprehend the studies...


First sentence in the study... which the article covered.



Results SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1


2. natural immunity plus one dose... did well too... but we were comparing natural immunity to those with no previous infection and the vaccine.

hence... natural immunity is 13 times superior.
So you were wrong again... moron.

Let's take a look at the what the article you posted actually stated:

• Those who get infected once and got one vaccine dose have superior protection than people who got two vaccine doses (Well, OK - I can understand this).
• Those who got two vaccine doses have superior protection those who got infected and no vaccination.
• The researchers also found that people who had SARS-CoV-2 previously and received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine were more highly protected against reinfection than those who once had the virus and were still unvaccinated.

https://www.science.org/content/art...er-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital

 

[jem]

by the way did you see the clarification...
so if they got the dose before... its an absolutely worthless stat for our analysis.



*Clarification, 28 August, 1:20 p.m.:This article has been updated to reflect that in an analysis involving previously infected people who received one vaccine dose, not all people received that dose after, rather than before, becoming infected. It has also been updated to clarify that the vaccinated people in the other two analyses had never been infected prior to being vaccinated.


2. Your second point is a lie. ... the exact opposite of what the study found...
go read the study and see that natural immunity was 7 x better than 2 doses.

• "Those who got two vaccine doses have superior protection those who got infected and no vaccination."

Your link actually states this...

The researchers also found that people who had SARS-CoV-2 previously and received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine were more highly protected against reinfection than those who once had the virus and were still unvaccinated.

And not a thing about natural immunity being 7 to 13 times better than vaccine immunity.

I will not the bold print in the title which says -- but vaccination remains vital

Let's take a look at the what the article you posted actually stated:

• Those who get infected once and got one vaccine dose have superior protection than people who got two vaccine doses (Well, OK - I can understand this).
• Those who got two vaccine doses have superior protection those who got infected and no vaccination.

https://www.science.org/content/art...er-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital

 

[jem]

and fuck you with your only 90 days of immunity lie...


https://www.science.org/content/art...er-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital




Nussenzweig’s group has published data showing people who recover from a SARS-CoV-2 infection continue to develop increasing numbers and types of coronavirus-targeting antibodies for up to 1 year. By contrast, he says, twice-vaccinated people stop seeing increases “in the potency or breadth of the overall memory antibody compartment” a few months after their second dose.

 

[gwb-trading]

by the way did you see the clarification...
so if they got the dose before... its an absolutely worthless stat for our analysis.



*Clarification, 28 August, 1:20 p.m.:This article has been updated to reflect that in an analysis involving previously infected people who received one vaccine dose, not all people received that dose after, rather than before, becoming infected. It has also been updated to clarify that the vaccinated people in the other two analyses had never been infected prior to being vaccinated.


2. Your second point is a lie. ... the exact opposite of what the study found...
go read the study and see that natural immunity was 7 x better than 2 doses.

• "Those who got two vaccine doses have superior protection those who got infected and no vaccination."

I think you better go read all the comments & feedback from other scientists listed in the study -- who demonstrate all the problems with the study including the study's failure on the definition of previously infected, bias on sample size, and many other issues.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

 

[jem]

the top comment right now says that the way they excluded asymptomatic means that natural immunity was actually 27 times better.



"The health system never had a requirement for asymptomatic employee test screening. Most of the positive tests, therefore, would have been tests done to evaluate suspicious symptoms."
What this means is that this Maccabi data study is actually setting the lower limit for the multiple of protection of natural immunity over vaccinated, i.e., at least 27X better, and likely orders of magnitude greater than that.

I think you better go read all the comments & feedback from other scientists listed in the study -- who demonstrate all the problems with the study including the study's failure on the definition of previously infected, bias on sample size, and many other issues.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

 

[gwb-trading]

i think you better stop lying about natural immunity be better than vaccine immunity.
the best data we have shows it 13 fold better and 7 times better with respect to severe illnes.

you are a fucking asshole liar... for calling our best study and best data set fringe nonsense.

you are a dangerous douchebag... spawn of satan.


if the data changes... then we can reevaluate but s of now you are once again proven lying asshole.

Scientists even stated in the comments that releasing this study as pre-print without peer review was completely irresponsible due to the likely news coverage it would get.

 

[jem]

yeah its a terrible thing to inform the people
who putting their healthy immune system on the line...

they should listen to approved messaged from
proven liars like you who have no problem lying about study results showing natural immunity is far superior... at least for now with these variants.

fucking pharma shill liar.

--

God Bless Israel for not being little satan's like you and sharing important data which cuts against their political priorities.

Really... that takes integrity.

Scientists even stated in the comments that releasing this study as pre-print without peer review was completely irresponsible due to the likely news coverage it would get.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Didn't you say this would cancel the last season as well?

 

[gwb-trading]

yeah its a terrible thing to inform the people
who putting their healthy immune system on the line...

they should listen to approved messaged from
proven liars like you who have no problem lying about study results showing natural immunity is far superior... at least for now with these variants.

fucking pharma shill liar.

--

God Bless Israel for not being little satan's like you and sharing important data which cuts against their political priorities.

Really... that takes integrity.

If you disagree with the comments about the study -- then you can go contact the authors of the comments and raise your concerns.