My Doctor says I don’t need the vaccine after contracting covid.

When your body fights an infection, the pathogen is recorded in immune systems memory. I believe those are B cells. So, after several months your body naturally removes the antibodies, because they thicken the blood and if we had the antibodies floating in our blood stream for all viruses we encountered in our lifetimes, the blood would be so thick, it would have difficulty flowing. Luckily, those memory cells reside in your tonsils. Those organs act as sensors that sample air and food that enters your body for pathogens. Once your tonsils sense a virus, the B cells inside of the tonsil tissues start producing the antibodies to fight the virus long after the original antibodies were removed. It takes your body just a few hours to start producing appropriate antibodies when it remembers the virus, unlike weeks when it tries to fight something it never encountered before. So, even if someone, who already had covid a long time ago, has no antibodies in their blood stream, it doesn’t mean they won’t have them out in full force in a very quick period of time when they are actually needed.

 

Remember what Abortion Pro-Choicers used to say? "It should be a decision left to a woman and her doctor"

Now we find out after all those years it was just a talking point and many of them did not actually believe that.

 

So, which is more important to you. Your health or your job?

You now have your answer.

 

The science does not even really strongly support the concept enough to justify ordering people to take it.

These politicians are brain dead and stupid, and are as stupid and gullible as half the people, getting all their information from the news.

People keep talking about "the science", but let's face facts, 90% of these people are stupid. Virtually no one keeps up on the actual science. It's just too technical.
They think what they're reading and hearing is "science", but it's just a conveniently neatly packaged interpretation of information.

Let them completely dismiss any information they obtained from the news, and then tell us what they think of "the science". (sarcastic comment)

I'm thinking this "vaccine" might only reduce the chance of needing a hospital by 70%, but it drops down rapidly after several months.
And it might even be lower that that because some of this observed statistical "protection" may simply be those who decided to get the vaccines being overall more cautious than those who decided not to.
How much it prevents infections or spread if someone is already infected, the effectiveness rate is probably much lower than that. But good scientific studies don't really exist so much for that.

But of course if all it does is eliminate hospitalizations, then there really isn't much good logic to be forcing it on people. (Individual decision, individual consequences)

 

Doctor. Shouldn't be any of the government or the employer's business.

 

So you appeal to the majority.

 

Well other things to keep in mind being good at school does not mean you're good at your job. And why would somebody need a second opinion? If he gets attendance in agreement with the first should we just go fishing until he gets your opinion?

 

Yes, I case I have no knowledge about the subject like medicine , quantum mechanics or climate I let to majority scientist to make decision.
Why? Statistically majority of scientists in democratic countries in most cases were right. Yes I know, sometimes the majority were wrong, but I have no ability to verify who is right.

 

I have my own opinion who is brain dead, stupid and gullible. If someone one day believes the coronavirus is a Democrats hoax and the next day it is a China virus, I think he is brain dead, stupid and gullible.
I use very simple logic: if vaccine helps even only 10% and casing no damage, I will take it. If unvaccinated people infect other people in greater numbers than vaccinated people, there is a logic to force them to vaccinate or to demand a proof they are not infected in work or in restaurants.

 

That isn't really comparable. Clinically speaking, abortion (and indeed pregnancy in general) only impacts the mother (and the foetus). A pandemic and vaccination is a wider public health question.

There is also the aspect that the purely clinical decision of whether you have a vaccine or not (and indeed which one) still remains entirely down to the individual patient, it's just that the decision can and will have impact on other aspects of their lives. There will be other personal medical choices that could impact a person's professional or personal life too. Note that I'm not necessarily saying this is a good thing, just pointing out the factual differences.

 

why do you have no knowledge learning things something you are incapable of?

so without any knowledge of anything as you claimed you would tell the doctors screw you I'm listening to the majority opinion?

I know you said you don't know anything at all but believe it or not individuals have an individual health profile. Doctor's advice isn't a one-size-fits-all that's why you make an appointment instead of just read about it.

 

In order to argue with a scientist you need to know a bare minimum of facts and theories, which take few years of studying, and have no spare time. I have my areas of interests. Recently I made an experiment which proved that in creating a tiramisu you can replace dark rum with Rowanberry Mernaya, the results were approved by a peer review of my family members.

I always listen to arguments of both sides and try to understand, but if I don't understand, I go with majority.
As to medicine - IMHO the individual medicine diagnosis not a science, it is an art.
For example if my doctor will tell me I don't need a vaccine because I had covid and majority of scientist will tell me a vaccine will not hurt me and maybe will help because it will help my body to relearn to create to fight the virus, I would go with majority.

 

Even those who were previously infected benefit from the vaccine. However, being previously infected is probably about as good as being vaccinated (studies vary on which is better), so in terms of mandates I don't understand why there is no exception for the previously infected. I haven't looked very hard for it, but I haven't seen any kind of response about this from those requiring the vaccine.

To be clear, given the choice between getting infected and vaccination it's much safer to get the vaccine. But if you were already infected, your protection level should be about as good. Given that you will benefit even if previously infected, it's probably better just to get the vaccine than fight it.

 

You can often find the truth hidden behind what MSM and official sources DO NOT print. The stories they suppress are often the truth.

The VAERS data, as undercounted as it is, shows the shots to be dangerous to all and fatal to many. Those who think for themselves understand that.

 

Good thing I'm not arguing with scientist s just people on the internet.

That's called bandwagoning.

Fair enough I choose to do my own thinking but that's your business.

 

Lmao, well played.

 

If any given doctor is more loyal to pharma than to his patients, "doctor" might be the wrong answer.

 

Pharmaceutical companies often bribe doctors to push their drugs.

 

Yes, and it's been going on for my entire life. It was painfully obvious in the early days of the opioid crisis. Now it's painfully obvious with the Plandemic.

 

And baked into this "logic" is an implicit admission that the vaccines DON'T F***ING WORK!!

 

I don't understand why people want to force others to take the vaccine. Mind your own business.
I also don't understand why people don't want the vaccine.

I'm getting my booster on Monday. My doctor suggested I get Moderna booster after having Pfizer for my first two. Evidence is growing that this is a good combo.

I've no issue with boosters, either. I get a flu shot every year. My tetanus shot also expires.

 

One of the few good things that came out of the ACA was the ability to see how much money and gifts doctors received from drug companies.

 

same reason anybody wants to force something on others. Those who do not comply have strength of character. And their strength shines light on other people's weaknesses.

well a booster is a little different than an annual vaccine. An annual vaccine for the flu is for different strains of it. The booster for covet is because of lack of durability of the immunity. I don't fault you for getting boosters and if you want to stay vaccinated that's probably the best thing you can do.

 

I'll keep my actual opinion to the anti vaxxers to myself, however, having strength of character is not in that opinion, anywhere.

 

Resisting following orders shows strength of character. The people who want to interfere with other people's choices are only doing that because the strength of the people who don't obey shines a light on the weakness of those who do.

It absolutely is there.