/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12678123]

If I’ve already been sick with the chink virus and now was antibodies for it, why do people insist that I still need to get vaccinated? From what I’ve read, acquiring immunity from natural infection is better because you have multiple types of antibodies for the virus; meanwhile, immunity through vaccination only gives you one type of antibody that targets only one part of the virus—this carries the risk of that part of the virus mutating and making the vaccine useless. Am I wrong or right? And why can’t an antibody test showing you have antibodies be used for these bullshit covid passports that are being mulled and inevitably jammed down our throats if we ever want to go out/travel?

[Anonymous No.12678140]

Cuz the chinkvirus was an intentional neglect. Everyone in head of the health system turned a blind eye on purpose so the virus could spread all over the world, the system was robust enough to prevent a pandemic from the beggining, like it did with every other virus in the past couple of years.

[Anonymous No.12678484]

Vaccines lead to a multi-faceted immune response. Immunity through infection can be incomplete if the infection was mild, though this is still being explored (antibodies drop quickly in mild cases, but there's other forms of immunity). I don't know how accurate the antibody tests are. When they were first introduced, there was concern that prior exposure to other coronaviruses may cause false positives. If you had both a positive PCR and antibody test, then I'd trust the results.

[Anonymous No.12678675]

>>12678484

[Anonymous No.12678696]

The narrative this week is that the pandemic will continue for seven to ten years. At some point during those years, your immunity will wear off and you'll once again be a disease vector.

[Anonymous No.12679004]

This thread was moved to >>>/pol/307059300