Your fact check is a logical fallacy. Natural immunity is superior to vaccine induced immunity even though it is riskier. Natural immunity elicits production of long lived plasma cells. Vaccination does not. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8703557/ Natural immunity results in more antibody affinity maturation and protection from variants. Even the CDC had to acknowledge this fact and the effect it has on infection rates. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm Too bad the “fact checkers” resorted to fallacy instead of following the science.
As is often the case your opinions are unsubstantiated. Reviews of existing data do not support your opinion bolded above. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab903/6397523 Here is a study that shows viral load of index cases was not associated with outcomes of secondary cases. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.646679/full Unfortunately both public opinion and public health strategy were predicated on the thin anecdotal evidence that existed for this theory. Just another case of those who are supposed to know better not following the “science “.
Natural innate immunity is a thing. For example, individuals who were breast fed as babies are less susceptible to Covid. Natural acquired adaptive immunity to Covid is also superior to vaccination as I pointed out in an above post. Science denial is common, and it’s not just in anti maskers etc. Most information in this thread criticizing the OP is easily demonstrated to be false.
So if you are relying on natural immunity you are going to have to be reinfected every so often since the immunity doesn’t last and the virus is constantly mutating. People who have been exposed to this virus often show side effects like the inability to regain taste, shrinking brain mass etc. it’s pretty risky.
Same as vaccination. Except a little more effective. Everyone, vaccinated or not is going to be infected numerous times throughout their life. Now is the time to get your immune system healthy so those “risky” side effects don’t have profound effects. Eat right. Get adequate sleep. Reduce stress. Maintain a healthy weight. Exercise. Your chance of adverse effects plummet. Neither vaccination or natural infection are sufficient for the most complete production.
Jen Psaki is vaccinated and boostered and has tested positive for the second time in a five month period. And you are worried about natural immunity being risky?
"Innocent until proven guilty" relates to the time before a trial. Once a verdict is reached, it is either "Guilty" or "Not Guilty" or "Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity".
And now, after the trial, they failed to prove him guilty, he's still innocent. Not guilty doesn't mean "not innocent".
OK. I'm glad it helps you in some way to make up your own special rules. My comments are based on our actual judicial system.
Show us the law that says everyone in the country is guilty of a crime, even after being acquitted. I'll help you: there isn't one. Believe what you want about someone's guilt, or innocence, but when he is acquitted, he is innocent in the eyes of the law.
Not guilty does not mean innocent. It merely means the state couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. A murderer can be set loose because the cop failed to issue Miranda. Key evidence can get thrown out because a search warrant wasn't properly executed. There's tons of reasons guilty people are set free. In the eyes of the law; someone is either not guilty or guilty. There is no innocent. OJ Simpson, anyone?
And in the eyes of the law, that person is innocent. No innocent? We're all guilty, but the government can't prove it...yet?...lol
There is no mechanism for a jury to declare a person innocent. Are you willing to believe the Dept of Justice? https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-l...hile in lay usage the,met its burden of proof. Jury members must understand the legal definitions of the terms guilty, not guilty, and innocent, as well as beyond a reasonable doubt. While in lay usage the term 'not guilty' is often synonymous with 'innocent,' in American criminal jurisprudence they are not the same. 'Not guilty' is a legal finding by the jury that the prosecution has not met its burden of proof. Often; not always. For Rittenhouse, the state failed to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you believe OJ is innocent?
