It is also not intellectually interesting, as it is just a rehash of what is essentially facebook COVID reporting.
At the very least you should not try to infect others with your harmful information. It is very antisocial to do so.
What advice did I give? I said, " If you don't have natural immunity, yes, some vaccine is recommended".
My whole family came down with COVID at once. I am not jabbing my young, healthy children with an experimental mRNA virus with no long-term studies available given it has only been in circulation for less than 2 years. Tell me why I should if you think you know better. If their health got them through an initial infection without any complications, why shouldn't I think their health and the fact they now have antibodies, and a deeper B and T-cell memory of the virus, is sufficient?
I am not on FB, so I don't know what you mean "essentially facebook COVID reporting."
Here's just one medical paper citing long-Term persistence of antibodies in people who had SARS in 2003-4. Do your own searches on 2003 SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. You'll find more than enough to say it's legit, and not FB reporting.
Here are some papers about persistence of antibodies, or immunity in the form of B and T-cell immunity in SARS-COV-2 or COVID-19 subjects:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35150319/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258900422...
The CDC, the so-called experts, have been wrong so many times on COVID I have lost count. They ignored natural immunity throughout the entire epidemic. I still test over 15 in an IgG antibody test (over 15 is considered a positive in the test). Last test result was 113 a whole year after infection.
I said I didn't trust that the persistence of the mRNA and spike protein was temporary after vaccination. The CDC had up on its site that the mRNA and spike protein did leave the body shortly after vaccination. How come they deleted that statement from their current page? Check the archives to see it before they deleted it. They didn't note why this important point was quietly removed so we could understand the edit. I can only assume it was proven incorrect, which is astonishing, since there were studies in Japan about biodistribution that should have raised the call for more studies, but instead it was buried or stigmatized as anti-science. Anti-science is deciding not to test if a hypothesis is true or false, and just ignoring it.
SAR-CoV 2003 infected individuals still test positive for antibodies 19 years after. I know it's not the exact same virus as COVID-19, but nonetheless it is a coronavirus and natural immunity is persistent. Also natural immunity is based on being exposed to the whole virus, not a select set of the spike proteins. I'll go with natural immunity on this one; I'm not advising people seek to get COVID, but if you have, your choice to vaccinate should be based on this as a factor along with your age, health, and doctor's advice.
[1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20021386v...
edit: Since you're unvaccinated, go get a covid antibody test and check for yourself how good (or terrible) your immunity is to the virus. You can take either one, the S type or N type test, since you won't get a false positive from vaccine antibodies. Put your money where your mouth is and find out exactly how little protection natural immunity from 3 years ago is providing you.
This is factually incorrect. You don't have perhaps protection against infection, nor probably symptomatic disease, but there is working natural immunity, in the form of immune memory and cell based immunity (T lymphocytes). That is far, far more resistant to variants than humoral (antibody based) immunity, mainly because only antibodies neutralizing the S protein are able to prevent infection (so more vulnerable to mutations).
Cell based immunity can't prevent infection, and can not necessarily prevent disease (as in, having fever, cough...), but it is very effective in dampening the effect of infection (either through recruitment of other immune cells, or by killing infected cells). Memory T and B cells generally last quite a lot of years (and with SARS-CoV-2, up to two years at least), so this memory is long-lasting.
T cells will save us has been a big coping strategy from people trying to claim the pandemic is over too soon. Hucksters like Monica Ghandi have been saying T cells will save us for years now.
When... when will it happen I ask. Over a million dead bodies and people still racking up infections. Back up to an average of 500 people dying a day even in our summer lull right now, and it's climbing again.
Where is the T cell protection?
To your "lucky" point, I can't qualify that. If I have an asymptomatic case, that tells me my natural immunity must be pretty good, given my multi-vaccinated colleagues, at least three of them, have lost work due to second and third infections. They had the vaccination before getting COVID, so I wonder if they have weak immune systems, or the vaccine somehow is not as good as natural immunity. The CDC finally admitted natural immunity was as good or better after a year of ignoring natural immunity, and after they pushed it on healthy children, and Pfizer makes tens of billions of dollars with every booster or new series of vaccines.
I truly believe in the next 5 years it will become more clear that the majority of people who suffered from COVID that were under 55 years old was because of obesity, diabetes, and hypertension, or other immune-compromised patients. The numbers are already in the CDC datasets and other datasets from around the world showing this trend. Everyone has a horror story of a young, healthy person who died, however it is the thin tail of the distribution, and not the norm, and it is a very statistically insignificant number to push a one-size fits all mandate to vaccinate.