Politics - do not open if you are tired of it

natural immunity. interesting

https://twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1437793535688908806

tps wrote:natural immunity. interesting

https://twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1437793535688908806

What the CDC tweeted has absolutely nothing to do with "natural immunity." Look it up.

ramblinman wrote:

tps wrote:natural immunity. interesting

https://twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1437793535688908806

What the CDC tweeted has absolutely nothing to do with "natural immunity."  Look it up.

are you an attorney?

i don't know how else to read this (from cdc website)
Active Immunity
Active immunity results when exposure to a disease organism triggers the immune system to produce antibodies to that disease. Exposure to the disease organism can occur through infection with the actual disease (resulting in natural immunity), or introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination (vaccine-induced immunity). Either way, if an immune person comes into contact with that disease in the future, their immune system will recognize it and immediately produce the antibodies needed to fight it.

Active immunity is long-lasting, and sometimes life-long.

tps wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

tps wrote:natural immunity. interesting

https://twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1437793535688908806

What the CDC tweeted has absolutely nothing to do with "natural immunity."  Look it up.

are you an attorney?

i don't know how else to read this (from cdc website)
Active Immunity
Active immunity results when exposure to a disease organism triggers the immune system to produce antibodies to that disease. Exposure to the disease organism can occur through infection with the actual disease (resulting in natural immunity), or introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination (vaccine-induced immunity). Either way, if an immune person comes into contact with that disease in the future, their immune system will recognize it and immediately produce the antibodies needed to fight it.

Active immunity is long-lasting, and sometimes life-long.

To be fair, there do seem to be differing definitions about natural immunity within the scientific community. Here are a few that I found that support my earlier post:

From Merck website: "Innate (natural) immunity is so named because it is present at birth and does not have to be learned through exposure to an invader. It thus provides an immediate response to foreign invaders."

From technologynetworks.com: "Innate immunity, also known as natural or genetic immunity, is immunity that an organism is born with. This type of immunity is encoded in one's genes. Genetic immunity protects an organism throughout their entire life."

From medicinenet.com: "Natural immunity: Immunity that is naturally existing, Natural immunity does not require prior sensitization to an antigen. See: Innate immunity."

From medical-dictionary.thefreedictionarycom: "natural immunity
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Related to natural immunity: acquired immunity
in·nate im·mu·ni·ty
resistance manifested by a species (or by races, families, and individuals in a species) that has not been immunized (sensitized, allergized) by previous infection or vaccination"

From merriam-webster.com: "Medical Definition of innate immunity: immunity possessed by a group (as a species or race) that is present in an individual at birth prior to exposure to a pathogen or antigen and that includes components (as intact skin, salivary enzymes, neutrophils, natural killer cells, and complement) which provide an initial response against infection
— called also natural immunity"

sounds like what the CDC tweeted absolutely does have something to do with natural immunity.
to be fair, since the cdc tweeted it, let's go with their definition.

tps wrote:sounds like what the CDC tweeted absolutely does have something to do with natural immunity.
to be fair, since the cdc tweeted it, let's go with their definition.

Um, let's not.

What the CDC tweeted was, "If you’ve had #COVID19 in the past 3 months and you’ve been exposed to someone with COVID-19, you don’t need to get tested if you don’t have new symptoms."  That's it.  They didn't say, nor did they imply, ANYTHING about natural immunity.  The operative words are "if you don't have new symptoms"  (italics and bold face added by me for emphasis).  The second word IF in that tweet absolutely implies that you CAN be infected with COVID multiple times.  Indeed, the CDC website says that, "Cases of reinfection with COVID-19 have been reported, but remain rare​.​"

Here you go...a study on how sick COVID patients really are in the hospitals. Nearly half have are asymptomatic or have mild cases.

https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-898254/v1

ramblinman wrote:

tps wrote:sounds like what the CDC tweeted absolutely does have something to do with natural immunity.
to be fair, since the cdc tweeted it, let's go with their definition.

Um, let's not.

What the CDC tweeted was, "If you’ve had #COVID19 in the past 3 months and you’ve been exposed to someone with COVID-19, you don’t need to get tested if you don’t have new symptoms."  That's it.  They didn't say, nor did they imply, ANYTHING about natural immunity.  The operative words are "if you don't have new symptoms"  (italics and bold face added by me for emphasis).  The second word IF in that tweet absolutely implies that you CAN be infected with COVID multiple times.  Indeed, the CDC website says that, "Cases of reinfection with COVID-19 have been reported, but remain rare​.​"

yep, attorney...

you've had the disease in the last 3 months and have been exposed, you don't need to be tested if you have no new symptoms. no new symptoms, no test required. that means immunity (no new symptoms) caused by already having the disease (natural immunity per their website).

tps wrote:Gen Mark Milley is a traitor. Trump f*cked up that choice.

milley called the chinese "Gen. Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we're going to attack, I'm going to call you ahead of time," Milley added
looks like pelosi was involved.
who else was involved?
if true, this is a real coup.

blinken does not know (still) if the drone strike killed a terrorist or an aide worker. wtf
clown show

tps wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

tps wrote:sounds like what the CDC tweeted absolutely does have something to do with natural immunity.
to be fair, since the cdc tweeted it, let's go with their definition.

Um, let's not.

What the CDC tweeted was, "If you’ve had #COVID19 in the past 3 months and you’ve been exposed to someone with COVID-19, you don’t need to get tested if you don’t have new symptoms."  That's it.  They didn't say, nor did they imply, ANYTHING about natural immunity.  The operative words are "if you don't have new symptoms"  (italics and bold face added by me for emphasis).  The second word IF in that tweet absolutely implies that you CAN be infected with COVID multiple times.  Indeed, the CDC website says that, "Cases of reinfection with COVID-19 have been reported, but remain rare​.​"

yep, attorney...

you've had the disease in the last 3 months and have been exposed, you don't need to be tested if you have no new symptoms. no new symptoms, no test required. that means immunity (no new symptoms) caused by already having the disease (natural immunity per their website).

Your logic, such as it is, is flawed.  Simply because you have been exposed to the virus does not mean that you are automatically going to contract it. Simply because you have recovered within the past three months and are currently asymptomatic and do not need to be tested does not necessarily mean that you are immune to the disease....nor does it mean that you don't have the disease!  You could have the disease and be asymptomatic.

Read it and weep:  "On August 3, 2020, CDC updated its isolation guidance based on the latest science about COVID-19 showing that people can continue to test positive for up to 3 months after diagnosis and not be infectious to others.  Contrary to media reporting today, this science does not imply a person is immune to reinfection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in the 3 months following infection.  The latest data simply suggests that retesting someone in the 3 months following initial infection is not necessary unless that person is exhibiting the symptoms of COVID-19 and the symptoms cannot be associated with another illness."  

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/s0814-updated-isolation-guidance.html

California Democrat Governor has easily beaten back Republicans effort to recall him. His principal opponent, Larry Elder is suggesting that the election may have been rigged. Are we going to hear this every time a Republican loses an election now?

tps wrote:natural immunity. interesting

https://twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1437793535688908806

Most medical reports from reputable sources I've read refer to natural immunity for COVID-19 as right at or around 3 months. That's what our Doctors told us when our family was infected.

OSUBucks wrote:California Democrat Governor has easily beaten back Republicans effort to recall him. His principal opponent, Larry Elder is suggesting that the election may have been rigged. Are we going to hear this every time a Republican loses an election now?

Tough to not argue this point.  Republicans seem to be the one's who are constantly trying to take the vote away from certain demographics of people.  Granted, I am of the argument that some sort of tighter restrictions probably need to be enforced, more so than what Democrats are saying, but some of the stuff the Republican state legislatures are putting out there is absolutely ridiculous.

Biden has great confidence in milley. Clown show

gavin newsome recall failed. democrats want drug addicts pooping on the sidewalks, wildfires and crime. they have that now and voted to keep it the same

I was out for dinner with friends tonight, one who is a pretty strong Republican. He agrees that Trump was unstable after his election loss and says that the party will distance themselves from him before 2024 election. Besides he’d be too old anyway.

If the party was smart they would distance themselves but I wouldn't put it past him to attempt to run as a 3rd party candidate, which would not end well for the Republicans.

No matter who runs in 2024, they will likely be a weak President because Congress does not have any unity and any attempt by either a Rep or Dem president will be blocked.

As for elections, every election from here on out will be challenged by both sides. Dems did it in 2016, some could say that was the beginning, Reps did it in 2020, and we will undoubtedly see it again in 2024. It's because people are so one sided and they only see or read what they want so it is easy for candidates to maintain their base by saying the election was rigged. It also keeps them relevant in the news cycle which gives them name recognition and more followers on social media which results in helping push their platform.

OSUBucks wrote:I was out for dinner with friends tonight, one who is a pretty strong Republican. He agrees that Trump was unstable after his election loss and says that the party will distance themselves from him before 2024 election. Besides he’d be too old anyway.

I'm curious if your friend is a Trump Republican or a Sasse/Romney/Murkowski/Cheney/Kitzinger/DeWine/Hogan/Kasich Republican. I ask not because I want to know what kind of friends you have, but more because of my curiosity about what type of Republican is saying that the party will distance itself from Trump. I assume the latter group of Republicans would say that, but I'm hopeful that there are those in the former group who are saying it too.

tps wrote:Gen Mark Milley is a traitor. Trump f*cked up that choice.

What?

Why would you say that about this highly decorated general? He is the sort of top military officer I hope we always have. It was a part of his job to call and talk to his counterparts in lots of various countries. It was the position of the Trump Administration that we were not attacking Iran or China...unless you know of some other position they had?

Telling the Chinese what our position was and that it was not changing because of the election outcome would be a key part of his job.

In the United States we have a punishment for traitors. They hang. Is that what you are suggesting? Hang Gen. Mark Milley for doing his job?

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter115&edition=prelim

By the way...here is the definition of Sedition. I think it fits the 1/6/21 Capitol attackers.

§2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, §1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

There is a protest scheduled this Saturday in DC. They are protesting the treatment of those arrested on January 6th. I hope law enforcement doesn’t get caught unprepared this time around. If I recall, they were badly outnumbered when our Capitol was attacked on January 6th.

party in del rio tx. no vaccine required
https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1438488795398250500?s=03

an interesting read. from March 2021.
https://dailysceptic.org/interview-with-mattias-desmet-professor-of-clinical-psychology/

tps wrote:party in del rio tx. no vaccine required
https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1438488795398250500?s=03

an interesting read. from March 2021.
https://dailysceptic.org/interview-with-mattias-desmet-professor-of-clinical-psychology/

Without a doubt this country has a big mental health problem. Years ago mentally ill folks were institutionalized. We decided that we wanted to be a more humane country and most mentally ill folks are free to roam around the country. Almost every mass school shooting in US history was committed by people who had been treated for mental illness. Not much is being done to address this problem other than gun control, which will have very little or no effect on the violence.

Two FDA vaccine specialists resigned today and immediately published a paper telling of the potential problems of vaccine boosters.  Unless you absolutely need it, you may want to skip the boosters.  This is exactly why we can't just blindly accept the FUTURE vaccines worked and not weigh the potential negatives outcomes.  

A quote from the article....I'm sure this will be called misinformation and that is sad because I am sure the politics is the reason behind these individuals leaving.

“Although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines). If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate… Current evidence does not appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high."

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/what-should-we-make-of-two-fda-experts-skepticism-about-covid-19-booster-shots/

dusty7 wrote:Two FDA vaccine specialists resigned today and immediately published a paper telling of the potential problems of vaccine boosters.  Unless you absolutely need it, you may want to skip the boosters.  This is exactly why we can't just blindly accept the first vaccine worked and not weigh the potential negatives outcomes.  

A quote from the article....I'm sure this will be called misinformation and that is sad because I am sure the politics is the reason behind these individuals leaving.

“Although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines). If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate… Current evidence does not appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high."

I’m not about to label that misinformation. It seems to make great sense.

You say we can’t “just blindly accept the first vaccine worked”…but I don’t think anyone was doing that blindly. It was based on evidence. Those two scientists that quit agree that the first vaccine worked.

Teetime wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Two FDA vaccine specialists resigned today and immediately published a paper telling of the potential problems of vaccine boosters.  Unless you absolutely need it, you may want to skip the boosters.  This is exactly why we can't just blindly accept the first vaccine worked and not weigh the potential negatives outcomes.  

A quote from the article....I'm sure this will be called misinformation and that is sad because I am sure the politics is the reason behind these individuals leaving.

“Although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines). If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate… Current evidence does not appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high."

I'm not about to label that misinformation. It seems to make great sense.

You say we can’t “just blindly accept the first vaccine worked”…but I don’t think anyone was doing that blindly. It was based on evidence. Those two scientists that quit agree that the first vaccine worked.

Let me correct myself…blindly accept that the future vaccines will work without negative outcomes.

Is the booster vaccine really needed 6/8 months after you’re fully vaccinated? I don’t know, some experts say no and some say yes. What I do know that in the Southern Illinois region there are some ICU units that have few available beds because they are occupied by unvaccinated Covid patients. We have actually had non Covid patients who have died waiting for ICU beds. The unvaccinated have actually been responsible for the deaths of some innocent people.