How silly would it be to get infected at this point for purely political reasons!

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-pandemic-what-we-know-about-coronavirus-reinfections

Please provide reference to this research indicating that once you had Covid, you can't be infected again.

 

No idea what you're talking about. Cuomo did handle the pandemic very well AFTER he realized he couldn't count on the Trump administration for any help. And I don't think anybody has handled the pandemic worse than Florida. Maybe there is some state out there that did it worse. But not many.

I did kinda admire Cuomo before we knew about his sexual harassment cases. Not anymore. I don't think he can do an effective job as governor anymore.

 

It appears few people do. Masks do not prevent transmission of a virus from normal breathing because they don't block aerosols. If they did, you wouldn't be able to breathe through them. They do reduce the distance airborne viruses can travel from coughs and sneezes. They handle big droplets pretty well. That is why they are required equipment in operating rooms.

If one can cough or sneeze into an elbow then that produces an effect that is close to that of a mask. That is why epidemiologists recommend coughing and sneezing into elbows. There is no harm in masks and, if they make people feel safer, that is a worthy purpose. But they have certainly been taken to extremes by the hysteria surrounding this outbreak. This information comes from my favorite surgeon and is backed up by my favorite family physician.

 

Your media must have missed the speech in which he praised Trump for the help he had received from federal government in getting equipment to help fight Covid. He got upset when Trump wouldn't send him money. He did an average job of dealing with the virus aside from the decision to force old folks home to accept infected old folks. That was disaster but, to be fair, it was a disaster for other governors that did the same thing.

Florida's numbers are similar to the numbers in most other states. He handled it in an average manner and handled the economic disaster of closing businesses better than most.

The day I start admiring a politician is the day I will ignore politics even for its entertainment value. To me politicians are the dregs of society for me. That is why it is so much fun to beat up on them figuratively.

 

What your source says is that re-infection is possible but rare. I think it is an acceptable position.

 

You said in this thread Cuomo mishandled the pandemic. Did he or didn’t he? Make up your mind.

Have you compared deaths per million stats on your states you compared to NY lately?

 

He better praise Trump. We all know that nobody would get anything whatsoever from Trump unless Trump got something in return.

Again: no guidance from the experts in the Executive power that we ALL pay to provide guidance. The federal government handled the crisis on the basis that Trump needed to get re-elected, instead of focusing on science.

There is no pint of comparison. New York was hit before we knew ANYTHING about the virus. We knew much much more when the virus spiked in Florida. Florida has subtropical climate. New York experiences heavy winter weather. Florida should never have been anywhere near NY. It was poorly mishandled by an incompetent governor.

I think it's the other way around. I think you probably claim they are all dregs because you find it fun to "beat them up". I try to steer away from absolute generalizations. It's easier to make general statements and blindly apply them. But I learned to avoid dogma around the same time I abandoned religious beliefs. It requires more of an effort, and is probably not as fun, but it keeps me more aligned with reality.

 

It has been rare after less than a year of following infected people (https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/54/eabf8891). We don't know much more than that other than that the antibodies and other protections continue declining. Until we achieve herd immunity through vaccination, the pandemic will still be alive. Consequences of this are unknown. But it stands to reason that people will still get sick... maybe die. And many may be afraid to lead a normal life if there is another spike . Which will not help the economy. At this point in time, people who refuse to vaccinate are the main risk. They work against both reducing the number severe cases (and deaths) and of recovering the economy.

 

There is no viral disease for which 100% immunity after infection exists. There is no viral disease for which 100% immunity after vaccination exists. So I’m uninterested in your strawmen and goal post moving arguments. Let’s focus on your original claim, not your typical goal post relocation tactic when you make false claims.

Nobody has claimed reinfection is impossible.

Your link demonstrated the ability of natural immunity to confer long lasting immunity—a combination of sterilizing and non sterilizing immunity in convalescents. Every new study concludes immunity conferred lasts as long as the study can gather data. We now know it lasts in excess of eight months because we have only had a year to study immunity. Your claim of a “few months” is patently false.

Here is your claim:

Here are the facts that are in conflict with your claim. This is one study referenced in your link.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19

 

I have no idea where you think anything I have said is contradictory. He mishandled it at the start. In part because of lack of guidance and the lies. But I think there were also missteps on his part. And, as far as we know at this point, he handled it well later.

I think those of you who have a frame of mind that tends towards dogmatism like to perceive everything as black or white, with nothing in between. But what I'm saying today is my position today. I steer away from dogmatism. So I'm aware that, if tomorrow we learn that Cuomo mishandled something else, I might have to change my mind. I'm pretty sure you would find it horrific to change your mind. But I don't. So you'll know when I do. As far as the handling of the pandemic, at this point I have no reason to change anything I have said.

Yes! And Florida loses to NY by a mile. But, from past debates with you, I'm sure that you believe that "comparing" refers only to the numbers. And that other different circumstances should not be considered. Knowing you, here is where you reference a meaningless graph or stat about the absolute numbers of dead and infected. Save it. By itself it's meaningless.

 

So we can all agree the masks will not stop you from getting covid 19?

 

So you think he should resign over initial mishandling of the pandemic. What specifically did he do incorrectly?

Well, we would all be interested to hear about how more deaths is preferable. I see no reason to try and dissuade you from making such a bizarre argument. Please elaborate on why less death is bad and more death is good.

 

Trump got nothing from Cuomo for the response to the equipment request except for his thanks.

Partisan opinion. You could have saved the effort of writing it.

So science and numbers are no longer what should guide us now? I wonder what changed that.

You make a reasonable point. Most of the politicians are educated and smart. The quagmire in which they work causes them to become the dregs of society. Politics is ugly, dirty work. Pretty hard not to get soiled by it. There may be some politicians that deserve my respect but not many. The only one that comes to mind is Rand Paul who is 100% consistent. I would say the same thing about Sanders who is also consistent but his views are anathema to me. Your religious beliefs are yours and have nothing to do with the subject or politics.

 

And yet, you said before that my claim that people could be re-infected contradicted current research. But you have not shown this "research" my statement contradicts.

Anyway... that's off-topic.

I said that if you are infected, you could become re-infected after a few months. You said that this contradicted research.

It's absolutely fine to retract your statement. But don't deny making it.

This is totally off-topic. I'll just comment on it this one time.

From your quote

"But, promisingly, their levels remained fairly stable over time, declining only modestly at 6 to 8 months after infection." ​

We do know that some people can get infected even within those 6 to 8 months. And we don't know that the above quote applies to the new variants.

So, what happens after 8 months?

"...however, our results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 infection generates long-lasting B cell memory up to 8 months post-infection that could be protective against systemic disease upon reinfection."
https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/54/eabf8891​

Or what happens after a year... or two years... Bottom line: we don't actually know.

Vaccination has become a political issue. It's sad, but it's true. Therefore the discussion I opened belongs in the "Political Opinions" Forum. If you want to discuss how durable protection remains after infection, open one in the Covid 19 Forum. And if I have anything to contribute, I'll do it there. But if you turn this into a discussion about Covid 19, moderators might move it there. And I prefer it to stay here.

My point is that getting infected at this point for purely political reasons is a dumb thing to do. And it will only extend both the health crisis and the financial crisis. When this crisis will end is in the hands of those who view it as a political football. And that's scary.

If you have anything to say about the topic, I'm all ears...

 

No! Nobody who understands what the purpose of wearing masks is would agree with that.

 

No!

I have commented on that in threads where Cuomo is the topic. This is not one of them. Why are you so intent on going off-topic?

 

Again. here is your incorrect claim.

You admit infected people are protected in the above statement. You then claim that protection only lasts a few months. That is demonstrably false as your own link demonstrated.

We know that protection lasts much longer than your claim of a few months. You presented misinformation or disinformation whatever the case may be. If you really do actually do any research it was disinformation on your part because you knew protection lasts 8 months and longer. Yet you still claimed a few months.

If you don’t want durability of protection discussed you should not have made a false claim about it in your post. You continuously make false statements and then whine like a small child when you are corrected. When will you learn not to post content you don’t want people to comment on? I remind you all the time this is an open forum where everything you write and post is up for debate. If you don’t want immunity discussed here—-DON’T BRING IT UP AND POST INACCURATE INFORMATION WHEN YOU BRING IT UP.

When your “points” are predicated on disinformation provided by yourself in the same post you claim to be making a point, why should anyone care about your point?

I think it was dumb to get infected at any point for any reason. That’s why I designed my life to make getting infected nearly impossible and only possible on my terms. But of course you are on record opposing mitigations that could have prevented many infections and deaths from Covid, so again your point is kind of silly. You blatantly deny science on Covid, so you probably aren’t the best apologist for vaccines or anything else mitigation related.

 

So why did you say this? LOL

The above quote is YOU IN THIS THREAD. YOU BROUGHT UP CUOMO NOT ME!

Look at you whining AGAIN about people discussing topics YOU introduce. Not a good look Golem. Not a good look.

 

You just quoted what Trump got from Cuomo: praise. Trump wouldn't give the time of day to a governor who wouldn't praise him.

You can call it "partisan" if you want. But you can't call it wrong.

I have no idea what you're saying. Unless you don't believe that epidemiology is a science.

 

Oh for Pete's sake.

I call it wrong.

Of course you do. You have been preaching science and numbers since the beginning of the outbreak.

 

You quote me saying

"...you are protected from becoming infected again for only a few months."

What is the difference between that and (from this post)

"...protection only lasts a few months"

Try to focus a bit more when you read. Remove distractions. Turn off Alex Jones (or whatever misinformation show you are listening to) for a while!

I hope you're not trying to build some sort of case on the semantics of "a few months"

1- I "know" no such thing. For example, we have to see how this works with the new variants. And, of course, we know of people who have been infected after 3 or 4 months.
2- You seem to think that 8 months is a lot. I think 8, 9 and 10 months are a few. They do say that younger people perceive time different. However, the point was that not getting vaccinated at all would mean the pandemic would still remain a pandemic for a long time. Maybe long enough for more mutations. But, even if there are no new mutations, certainly long enough to keep slowing down the nation's economy.

I did not make a false claim. The two statements mean exactly the same. Here they are side by side.

"...you are protected from becoming infected again for only a few months."
and
"...protection only lasts a few months"

Now... SHOW what the false claim is, or retract!

 

You made the claim. Your own link shows you to be incorrect. I have shown immunity lasts at least eight months. Likely much longer as the research shows.

Does Alex Jones know about immunity? I doubt it. My information comes from documented empirical evidence. That’s why you have to resort to fallacious arguments.

You can try to convince us “a few months” is 8 months or longer—but your claims of admiring linguists in other threads would be destroyed. LOL

 

You're going to need to start paying more attention to what you read. Let me try to put it at an elementary school level.

For the mishandling of the pandemic, no
For the mishandling of the pandemic and his "adventures", yes

One question: how can you be so consistently wrong every time you try to argue with me, and still insist on coming for more?

 

Well, the caveat here was that only an honest poster (which I thought you were) would not just SAY that it's wrong. they would. They show how it's wrong with counter-arguments. Or at least state what is wrong about it.

Alas! You didn't... What a shame...

I have been preaching Science. NOT numbers. Numbers are meaningless outside of a complete scientific analysis.

 

Now THAT'S a lie. The study you referenced says that they COULD last 8 months or more. Other studies show they can last less.

Besides the studies I reference before, here is another that concludes that after 6 months (and, of course 6 months is "a few") protective immunity was 80% to 83% for people under 65 BUT only 43% for people 65 or over

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00575-4/fulltext#bib3

And this one that concludes that protection is generated up to 8 months after infection.

https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/54/eabf8891

Notice I said "concludes". Not "shows", like you do. None of these studies is definitive. There has not been enough time. But it is characteristic of pseudoscience advocates like yourself to find a study that concludes what you want, and treat it as if it were the "ultimate word".

Now... you claimed I LIED. You said it! I have shown multiple studies concluding the same thing I said. You could now claim (as any fan of the pseudosciences would), that they are wrong. I don't care! What I said was based on studies. So, even if it were wrong, it most definitely is not a lie!

Retract!

Probably about as much as you do.