Has there been any study of people who've been vaxxed, got a breakthrough infection, and then had long covid?

A buddy's wife was vaxxed & boosted got covid. She never went to the hospital but was pretty sick for a while and for the last 6 weeks or so has been dealing with lingering symptoms and has had some sort of cardiac inflammation.

In reply to bay fan

bay fan said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

Pokgai said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/10-biggest-covid-mistakes-americans-apology-dr-marty-makary

Many claims were made on this articles. However, I am only interested in one claim:

"Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone."

At this point, I think we need to stop pointing fingers and focus on what is truly important, which will benefit our future generations.

Do we have actual data that can support this claim?

---

It was a HUGE mistake and added only to the distrust the public has over all of this. Fauci, from the start, went with the strategy of the white lie to accomplish the goals he had. From the masks don't work comment to stop the public from hoarding masks to the lies about needing 80% vaccination rate only to come back and say 70% is good enough, he has constantly taken the wrong approach to all of this. The fact that natural immunity was essentially ignored or in some cases flat out denied by some doctors as beneficial is one of the benchmark problems issues in all of this. That is the idea that people's children were in any way threatened by this virus outside of an extremely small number of cases. They essentially used fear of children dying as a way to convince people to get their children vaccinated when an overwhelming majority would be totally fine if they caught covid. Again, this still persists as I heard an ad the other day claiming the vaccine would greatly reduce the chances a child would be hospitalized. Ok, sure. But just being a child greatly reduces the chances that they will be hospitalized unless the child has severe health issues.

Back to the issue, I have had covid twice. Once last January and once this past December. I have had the vaccine, both shots. At this point, I see no need to get a booster. K have the necessary natural immunity I need plus the vaccine. As for the data, I think there have now been multiple studies that have shown natural immunity to be superior.

---

Yet you've had it twice……I don't think your substantiating your premise on natural immunity.

Also, what people fail to factor into the equation is vaccines can be tracked by lay people. It is what it is but it is a factor in why vaccination was pushed.

---

Good point.

The second time was extremely mild (Was it milder b/c of vaccination or from formerly having Covid? Both? Or just b/c it was Omicron? Not confirmed Omicron but had all the tail tail signs of Omicron). The first infection wasn't bad either honestly. I trained hard with weights through both bouts. They were about a year apart. Vaxed in Feb and March 2021. Probably got vaccinated too close to the 1st infection as that was mid January '21. They'd have me wait 3 months now I think...2nd infection was late Dec. 21. Almost 12 months. Not unusual with a virus. I see no reason to be boosted at this point given the time frame.

Point is that studies are showing that patients who have had Covid already are having much milder infections the 2nd time around whether vaccinated or not. And that they are milder than the ones who were only vaccinated but never actually had covid. I do believe that the vaccine does provide protection against severe illness. Studies have shown this. It's just that natural immunity is better overall.

But I think the issue overall is that there was a real push to diminish natural immunity only for them to turn around and seemingly begrudgingly admit the importance of it as a strategy to encourage more vaccinations, which I think is dishonest if they actually knew the truth and is bad b/c it leads to mistrust of our healthcare experts. It really does seem to be more robust protection. And, from what I understand, this is typical with many viruses. Natural immunity being more robust protection overall compared to vaccines. Doesn't mean the vaccine is worthless at all. I am good with it. I am not good with the push to boost healthy people and those who have had covid and vaccinated, not ok with vaccinating under 12 yet and especially boosting under 30. Heck, under 50 really. Get the most vulnerable boosted first. The biggest reason to vaccinate young people is the chance that they could spread covid to the vulnerable. Covid itself is shown to be very mild to young people and kids with less children dying since March 2020 than a single year of the flu normally kills. Horrible but rare. Is that ( (children spreading Covid to others) a real threat at this point even when there is another spike? B/c that raise in infections should be much more mild overall given how many are naturally immune, vaccinated and boosted and who have natty plus vax and/or booster. Factor them out and now you're left with a very few number of people in real harm's way who would potentially fill up an ICU. The argument now is, instead of everyone overreacting and just counting cases, limit Covid policies and restrictions to only the areas and places most in need (certain hospital areas, nursing homes etc) and leave pretty much everywhere else, including and especially schools, alone and have no mandates going forward...

In reply to Capitol Ag

Capitol Ag said:

---

Pokgai said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/10-biggest-covid-mistakes-americans-apology-dr-marty-makary

Many claims were made on this articles. However, I am only interested in one claim:

"Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone."

At this point, I think we need to stop pointing fingers and focus on what is truly important, which will benefit our future generations.

Do we have actual data that can support this claim?

---

It was a HUGE mistake and added only to the distrust the public has over all of this. Fauci, from the start, went with the strategy of the white lie to accomplish the goals he had. From the masks don't work comment to stop the public from hoarding masks to the lies about needing 80% vaccination rate only to come back and say 70% is good enough, he has constantly taken the wrong approach to all of this. The fact that natural immunity was essentially ignored or in some cases flat out denied by some doctors as beneficial is one of the benchmark problems issues in all of this. That is the idea that people's children were in any way threatened by this virus outside of an extremely small number of cases. They essentially used fear of children dying as a way to convince people to get their children vaccinated when an overwhelming majority would be totally fine if they caught covid. Again, this still persists as I heard an ad the other day claiming the vaccine would greatly reduce the chances a child would be hospitalized. Ok, sure. But just being a child greatly reduces the chances that they will be hospitalized unless the child has severe health issues.

Back to the issue, I have had covid twice. Once last January and once this past December. I have had the vaccine, both shots. At this point, I see no need to get a booster. K have the necessary natural immunity I need plus the vaccine. As for the data, I think there have now been multiple studies that have shown natural immunity to be superior.

---

Surprised this post is allowed to stay up here.

In reply to TheEternalPessimist

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Yes it was important to be able to track who complied and who didn't as though we had any control over covid

---

I did not comply and will never EVER comply with any health related edicts that emerge from the federal government EVER again. EVER.

I will [n]ever listen to CDC, NIH, or FDA advisement without absolute rigorous research and verification.

---

This should be demanded going forward. And even if we need to start mitigation early, I might be on board with that. But only if there is a policy in place that actual scientific testing and research goes into whether we need this mitigation at all and if it actually works and if it cannot be shown conclusively to work, it goes. Take masking. There still has yet to be a conclusive cluster randomized control trial for masking. And there are many that think it is possible to do one. But I think that the powers that be are avoiding it realizing that there is a very good chance if one was done it would cast doubt on the effectiveness of a masking policy. In my situation, government agencies would be forced to do such a study to see if a mandate even works and if shown to not be really effective, it's gone. And there would need to be a bipartisan panel to oversee the administration of these to ensure validity.

A lot of this is about power AND ego. Science has plenty of people not mature enough to admit when they were wrong. Something like this could help to allow for that...

In reply to Capitol Ag

Capitol Ag said:

---

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

Pokgai said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/10-biggest-covid-mistakes-americans-apology-dr-marty-makary

Many claims were made on this articles. However, I am only interested in one claim:

"Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone."

At this point, I think we need to stop pointing fingers and focus on what is truly important, which will benefit our future generations.

Do we have actual data that can support this claim?

---

It was a HUGE mistake and added only to the distrust the public has over all of this. Fauci, from the start, went with the strategy of the white lie to accomplish the goals he had. From the masks don't work comment to stop the public from hoarding masks to the lies about needing 80% vaccination rate only to come back and say 70% is good enough, he has constantly taken the wrong approach to all of this. The fact that natural immunity was essentially ignored or in some cases flat out denied by some doctors as beneficial is one of the benchmark problems issues in all of this. That is the idea that people's children were in any way threatened by this virus outside of an extremely small number of cases. They essentially used fear of children dying as a way to convince people to get their children vaccinated when an overwhelming majority would be totally fine if they caught covid. Again, this still persists as I heard an ad the other day claiming the vaccine would greatly reduce the chances a child would be hospitalized. Ok, sure. But just being a child greatly reduces the chances that they will be hospitalized unless the child has severe health issues.

Back to the issue, I have had covid twice. Once last January and once this past December. I have had the vaccine, both shots. At this point, I see no need to get a booster. K have the necessary natural immunity I need plus the vaccine. As for the data, I think there have now been multiple studies that have shown natural immunity to be superior.

---

Surprised this post is allowed to stay up here.

---

While I understand the need in the past to keep politics off this forum (though I am sure I broke that rule a lot, lol) at this point it really is beyond that. There are many left leaning folks along with those on the right that have started questioning policy and how that policy directly effects how we are treating this, so it is starting to become a bipartisan issue. Sure, things can drift into political only debate, but also there needs to be a real questioning of the current policy as taking the correct approach will save more lives (from not just Covid but from our reaction to the virus and the issues that have arisen as a result that are very real and measurable) long term. And that will directly effect even how Covid patients are treated and how these other equally important and dangerous side effects of our policies are treated as well. And trust me, there is a lot of medical side effects that need to be and are currently being treated. If this is a medical forum regarding Covid, it is time that all issues related to Covid like mental, physical and emotional problems caused by the policy also need to have a place to be addressed as well as a real questioning of what we are doing at this point. As long as the conversation can stay reasoned and respectable, I see no problem with it and I think the moderators of this forum seem to agree given what is left up and not edited. I never have an issue with how they edit my posts. I show one of mine was edited in the last couple of days. Honestly could not see what was changed lol...

---

I agree with you 100%, but based on what I have seen removed over here as late as yesterday, the moderators are no where close to allowing that conversation to happen. Sometimes it is hard to let go.

In reply to 96ags

96ags said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

Pokgai said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/10-biggest-covid-mistakes-americans-apology-dr-marty-makary

Many claims were made on this articles. However, I am only interested in one claim:

"Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone."

At this point, I think we need to stop pointing fingers and focus on what is truly important, which will benefit our future generations.

Do we have actual data that can support this claim?

---

It was a HUGE mistake and added only to the distrust the public has over all of this. Fauci, from the start, went with the strategy of the white lie to accomplish the goals he had. From the masks don't work comment to stop the public from hoarding masks to the lies about needing 80% vaccination rate only to come back and say 70% is good enough, he has constantly taken the wrong approach to all of this. The fact that natural immunity was essentially ignored or in some cases flat out denied by some doctors as beneficial is one of the benchmark problems issues in all of this. That is the idea that people's children were in any way threatened by this virus outside of an extremely small number of cases. They essentially used fear of children dying as a way to convince people to get their children vaccinated when an overwhelming majority would be totally fine if they caught covid. Again, this still persists as I heard an ad the other day claiming the vaccine would greatly reduce the chances a child would be hospitalized. Ok, sure. But just being a child greatly reduces the chances that they will be hospitalized unless the child has severe health issues.

Back to the issue, I have had covid twice. Once last January and once this past December. I have had the vaccine, both shots. At this point, I see no need to get a booster. K have the necessary natural immunity I need plus the vaccine. As for the data, I think there have now been multiple studies that have shown natural immunity to be superior.

---

Surprised this post is allowed to stay up here.

---

While I understand the need in the past to keep politics off this forum (though I am sure I broke that rule a lot, lol) at this point it really is beyond that. There are many left leaning folks along with those on the right that have started questioning policy and how that policy directly effects how we are treating this, so it is starting to become a bipartisan issue. Sure, things can drift into political only debate, but also there needs to be a real questioning of the current policy as taking the correct approach will save more lives (from not just Covid but from our reaction to the virus and the issues that have arisen as a result that are very real and measurable) long term. And that will directly effect even how Covid patients are treated and how these other equally important and dangerous side effects of our policies are treated as well. And trust me, there is a lot of medical side effects that need to be and are currently being treated. If this is a medical forum regarding Covid, it is time that all issues related to Covid like mental, physical and emotional problems caused by the policy also need to have a place to be addressed as well as a real questioning of what we are doing at this point. As long as the conversation can stay reasoned and respectable, I see no problem with it and I think the moderators of this forum seem to agree given what is left up and not edited. I never have an issue with how they edit my posts. I show one of mine was edited in the last couple of days. Honestly could not see what was changed lol...

---

I agree with you 100%, but based on what I have seen removed over here as late as yesterday, the moderators are no where close to allowing that conversation to happen. Sometimes it is hard to let go.

---

Ya, I do see I was edited. Again, not sure what was edited. Probably some such thing like "stop masking kiddos". Not sure why if it was but might just be people flagged it. Obviously I see kids masked all the time at school and when out so there are a few adults that still hold on to that belief so maybe someone on here complained.

My issue with F16 is that it gets crazy over there. Here at least it's one subject, so I would like for policy to be allowed to be discussed. As long as threads focusing on actual treatments and questions for medical experts aren't left invisible or buried, having a place to discuss the newest views on things is also important. It's interesting as this virus wasn't the type that would take out 50-75% of a community like the Black Death or other horrific plagues of the past. Part of that though is modern medicine and hygiene practices which weren't around in the middle ages when plagues wiped out massive amounts of populations. If it had been that bad, no one would question most of the policies in place and would likely demand more. But this one was different, might kill one here or there, or effect one person one way and another person totally different. But nothing like the plagues of old. Also, THANK THE LORD, it didn't effect children severely which is a massive blessing and also changes the way things are approached by most. Fact is that if the majority of people dying are over 70 years old the level of urgency is much different in terms of the way the population views the virus than if the majority were under 10 or 15 years old. Right or wrong, that is indisputable in almost all societies. This will be interesting to study years down the road in terms of how fractured as a nation we are politically regarding Covid.

In reply to Pokgai

Pokgai said:

---

96ags said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

Capitol Ag said:

---

Pokgai said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/10-biggest-covid-mistakes-americans-apology-dr-marty-makary

Many claims were made on this articles. However, I am only interested in one claim:

"Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone."

At this point, I think we need to stop pointing fingers and focus on what is truly important, which will benefit our future generations.

Do we have actual data that can support this claim?

---

It was a HUGE mistake and added only to the distrust the public has over all of this. Fauci, from the start, went with the strategy of the white lie to accomplish the goals he had. From the masks don't work comment to stop the public from hoarding masks to the lies about needing 80% vaccination rate only to come back and say 70% is good enough, he has constantly taken the wrong approach to all of this. The fact that natural immunity was essentially ignored or in some cases flat out denied by some doctors as beneficial is one of the benchmark problems issues in all of this. That is the idea that people's children were in any way threatened by this virus outside of an extremely small number of cases. They essentially used fear of children dying as a way to convince people to get their children vaccinated when an overwhelming majority would be totally fine if they caught covid. Again, this still persists as I heard an ad the other day claiming the vaccine would greatly reduce the chances a child would be hospitalized. Ok, sure. But just being a child greatly reduces the chances that they will be hospitalized unless the child has severe health issues.

Back to the issue, I have had covid twice. Once last January and once this past December. I have had the vaccine, both shots. At this point, I see no need to get a booster. K have the necessary natural immunity I need plus the vaccine. As for the data, I think there have now been multiple studies that have shown natural immunity to be superior.

---

Surprised this post is allowed to stay up here.

---

While I understand the need in the past to keep politics off this forum (though I am sure I broke that rule a lot, lol) at this point it really is beyond that. There are many left leaning folks along with those on the right that have started questioning policy and how that policy directly effects how we are treating this, so it is starting to become a bipartisan issue. Sure, things can drift into political only debate, but also there needs to be a real questioning of the current policy as taking the correct approach will save more lives (from not just Covid but from our reaction to the virus and the issues that have arisen as a result that are very real and measurable) long term. And that will directly effect even how Covid patients are treated and how these other equally important and dangerous side effects of our policies are treated as well. And trust me, there is a lot of medical side effects that need to be and are currently being treated. If this is a medical forum regarding Covid, it is time that all issues related to Covid like mental, physical and emotional problems caused by the policy also need to have a place to be addressed as well as a real questioning of what we are doing at this point. As long as the conversation can stay reasoned and respectable, I see no problem with it and I think the moderators of this forum seem to agree given what is left up and not edited. I never have an issue with how they edit my posts. I show one of mine was edited in the last couple of days. Honestly could not see what was changed lol...

---

I agree with you 100%, but based on what I have seen removed over here as late as yesterday, the moderators are no where close to allowing that conversation to happen. Sometimes it is hard to let go.

---

That's what I am a bit confused about for this forum. I just posted an article about how CDC withheld critical information from the public. The article was referring to an article from New York Times. My post was deleted and I got an email saying I was trolling. I'm honestly confused on what exactly did I do wrong? I really hope to post that article because I think the public deserves to know the truth. But somehow the mods in this forum has different opinion.

[You posted a link behind a pay wall and please review WatchOle's post on purpose of this forum stickied above. We do not want the non-civil, negative political rhetoric/discussions here - there are other forums for that. Email us with any further questions on moderation - grandstanding is unwise. - Staff]

---

Fair enough. I apologize for that.

In reply to Capitol Ag

Capitol Ag said:

---

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Yes it was important to be able to track who complied and who didn't as though we had any control over covid

---

I did not comply and will never EVER comply with any health related edicts that emerge from the federal government EVER again. EVER.

I will [n]ever listen to CDC, NIH, or FDA advisement without absolute rigorous research and verification.

---

This should be demanded going forward. And even if we need to start mitigation early, I might be on board with that. But only if there is a policy in place that actual scientific testing and research goes into whether we need this mitigation at all and if it actually works and if it cannot be shown conclusively to work, it goes. Take masking. There still has yet to be a conclusive cluster randomized control trial for masking. And there are many that think it is possible to do one. But I think that the powers that be are avoiding it realizing that there is a very good chance if one was done it would cast doubt on the effectiveness of a masking policy. In my situation, government agencies would be forced to do such a study to see if a mandate even works and if shown to not be really effective, it's gone. And there would need to be a bipartisan panel to oversee the administration of these to ensure validity.

A lot of this is about power AND ego. Science has plenty of people not mature enough to admit when they were wrong. Something like this could help to allow for that...

---

A pretty solid population based evaluation showed mask efficacy in school mandates.

School Masking Policies and Secondary SARS-CoV-2 Transmission | Pediatrics | American Academy of Pediatrics (aap.org)

I still don't think they should be mandated especially now with vaccines and treatments available for the high risk population.