Thread: Covid Mk ll

Originally Posted by BradC

The problem is that requires subtlety and that is often either mis-communicated or misunderstood (or both).



Seeing as it's Rabbit season rather than Duck season, can I have a stab at this and see if my understanding is correct? I'm procrastinating so this might ramble.

As I understand it, "Immunity" as defined by the Oxford dictionary sounds like an absolute term. "Immunity" : "the body's ability to avoid or not be affected by infection and disease". The "or not be affected by" does provide a bit of leeway though. That possibly could apply to someone who was asymptomatic, although you'd have to worry about any potential un-diagnosed long-covid effects. Anyway, back to the ramble ....

The MMR vaccine gives me immunity against Measles. I can rub up and down against someone who has it and "I'm alright jack" although I might be arrested later if she makes a complaint. It is also my understanding that the current crop of COVID Vaccines are more like training wheels for the immune system. They won't stop me getting it, they won't stop me passing it on, they won't stop me dying from it if I'm particularly unfortunate, but the likelihood is they will result in a reduced viral load (meaning I'm far less likely to pass it on) and significant reduction of severe symptoms and long COVID effects.

What the vaccine(s) won't currently provide is the Oxford definition of Immunity.

As for an infection providing any form of immunity, you'd have to ask my Niece who has had it several times in several months. Having said that we believe the first infections were Delta and the last Omicron, but as they're a bit lax in testing across the UK can't really confirm specifics.

Sound reasonable or am I wide of the mark?

Well, WHO would appear to regard it as a non-absolute term:

What is the difference between the immunity you develop from getting COVID-19 and immunity from getting a COVID-19 vaccine?

We are still learning about how long immunity to COVID-19 lasts from natural infection, and from vaccination. We are now starting to see evidence that the immunity you get after having COVID-19 can be strong. However, the type of immunity that's developed after infection varies from person to person, making it less predictable than immunity after vaccination. Scientists are working hard to understand this better.

What we do know is that COVID-19 is a life-threatening disease that can have long-term consequences. We also know that the WHO-authorised COVID-19 vaccines have been safely given to billions of people. It is much safer to get vaccinated than it is to risk getting COVID-19. Get vaccinated as soon as it’s your turn and keep doing everything you can to protect yourself and others.

As we learn more about COVID-19 and immunity, WHO continues to update our guidance and recommendations.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Vaccines

As does the CDC:

FACT: Getting a COVID-19 vaccination is a safer and more dependable way to build immunity to COVID-19 than getting sick with COVID-19.

Myths and Facts about COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC

Originally Posted by Arapiles

Well, WHO would appear to regard it as a non-absolute term:

"immunity you get after having COVID-19 can be strong."

That quote illustrates the point pretty clearly. Strong is very much a "shade of gray" term rather than an absolute.

Personally I've been triple jabbed and I don't believe I have any form of immunity. What I hope I have is sufficient immune system response to significantly soften the blow when it comes around.

I think perhaps the Oxford University Press and the WHO & CDC need to have a bit of a chat to sort this out. It's a bit out of my wheelhouse. It did successfully distract me from other more troubling stuff however, so that was a win.

Originally Posted by BradC

That quote illustrates the point pretty clearly. Strong is very much a "shade of gray" term rather than an absolute.

Personally I've been triple jabbed and I don't believe I have any form of immunity. What I hope I have is sufficient immune system response to significantly soften the blow when it comes around.

I think perhaps the Oxford University Press and the WHO & CDC need to have a bit of a chat to sort this out. It's a bit out of my wheelhouse. It did successfully distract me from other more troubling stuff however, so that was a win.

I think it is simply another example of a word that has a meaning in the general English speaking world - and a similar but not identical meaning in the expert field of medicine. Every field of expertise has comparable differences in meaning; one that I keep running across is "theory". In general English it often means "a speculative (esp. fanciful) view", but in science it means "a supposition or system of ideas explaining something, esp. one based based on general principles".

And in fact my copy of the Australian COED gives the medical meaning of "immune" as "protected against an infection owing to the presence of specific antibodies". Protect is not an absolute either, although this is probably opening another can of worms.

They have little chocolate flavoured tablets for that one.

Originally Posted by superquag

.. ... ...

Bonus is a video from the UK, a short (?) interview with an undertaker. Interesting. Impressive is his wide knowledge-base. - For an undertaker, a bloke who has limited conversations with his .... clients. Interviewed by an American, so it tends to be a bit on the wide side...


I've Never Seen as Many Deaths... It's Around a 500 or 600% Increase

Rumble is an extremely unreliable source of information.

2022-02-09 07.37.43 mediabiasfactcheck.com cff3cad1b0f2.jpg

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Protect is not an absolute either, although this is probably opening another can of worms.

Agree, JD. A vehicle's seatbelt can 'Protect' a passenger, in certain cases, but it won't necessarily do so, in others.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I think it is simply another example of a word that has a meaning in the general English speaking world - and a similar but not identical meaning in the expert field of medicine.

Given a not-insignificant proportion of Medicine is "highly educated guesswork" I suppose that makes sense.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

although this is probably opening another can of worms.

Sounds like just what we need to go fishing and forget about semantics.

I think there are a few who go fishing here, as it is!