Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (175474)	7/28/2021 5:07:54 PM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219524

achieve vaccination by letting the virus burn through, and get to herd-immunity the resultant immunity may hold better against further variants... I've looked at that... Unlike some, claiming the natural immunity functions mean the virus and the response to it are "fake"... ? It is a problematic bug. It's not just that it kills people... it also "slows them down" a lot. People who've had the bug are often slow to recover... it taking 4 to 6 months or more to restore a semblance of normalcy... But, it also clearly does re-infect those who've had it... or those with "vaccinations"... So, I think the numbers are showing that the natural immunity functions are kicking in... but, they aren't particularly efficient. Immune systems are slow to ramp from initial infection into an adequate short term immune response... and the longer term immune functions are only partially effective in preventing re-infection or future infections by variants. It is a known that less concentrated exposures... give more time for the immune system to respond... So, you can get a "mild" case... with a small exposure... that gives your immune system time to mount a defense... or a "more problematic" case... with a more concentrated exposure... that simply over-whelms natural immune functions. That's probably why bottling people up in "quarantine" on a ship... ensuring more concentrated exposures... resulted in more infections and worse cases... not fewer with lesser impacts ? The preventive measures taken... have slowed the spread enough to prevent hospitals being over-whelmed. You don't hear about that happening any more... and it is that event which contains the parallel risk of a wide-spread outbreak imposing more concentrated exposures... and driving a ramp in intrinsic mortality rates from 4% towards 14% or more.. which was the issue in Wuhan. But, those same features in the virus do persist... causing slower development of immunity on both an individual and whole of population scale. Get it... take good care of yourself... survive... but, you will still have inflammatory issues that persist, that leave you weakened and slow to recover... and subject to re-infection by the same or other variants. The slow rise in long term immune functions... and their only partial efficacy... means "surviving" doesn't tell the whole story. It may take six months to recover... and then you get it again ? It might take two or three such exposures... and six months to two years... before the natural immune functions can generate a sufficiently functional response that it might generate a functional barrier to re-infection... IF it ever does. The impact... is that you need to redo the maths for the natural events evolving on a time line... that provides a long enough window that survival, recovery, and immune functions are optimized... while expecting multiple exposures will be a part of the natural course. We might have been close to that already... before they started inoculating people... just because of the utility of the preventive measures being taken that have reduced exposure concentrations and "slowed" the spread enough to also allow for some bit of recovery time between bouts ? So, if the natural immunity route is the one that gets us to herd immunity... that's likely to take 2 years... more, now, up to 3 years... because of the variant problem a non-functional vaccination has created. That could perhaps be accelerated by dropping the preventive measures incrementally... but, you'd not want to do that too soon... before attaining a "round 1" level of immune response in the population ? And, you should not do that... without CORRECTING the horrible errors already made in denying access to drugs that work... Bottom line: the experimental immunization effort has FAILED. It is a near total failure... that is no longer justified in being continued. A jab that doesn't provide immunity... is WORSE than doing nothing... as far as aggregate impacts in the population. When mortality risks can be contained by other means easily enough... a jab with only that function is counter-productive (and a violation of medical ethics)... which is a gross understatement. It only fosters the development of new and more resistant variants by converting people who are not immune into a population of petri dishes propagating new variants... when, without the jab, the rate of mutation would likely be a lot lower... making fewer and less diverse variants... and likely lesser overall risk... while enabling a far more rapid resolution. Add, on top of that, the harms being done by the jab... that can be avoided without any reduction in safety ? It might also prove true that the virus will be made endemic... by the vaccination program... when that might have been avoided with a functional small molecule drug program... I've seen discussion of that in relation to the Spanish Flu... essentially claiming that it never went away... that the annual flu bugs we get each year are the progeny of the Spanish Flu as "variants" that persist, with lesser lethality being a combined function of changes in the virus... and changes in our own immune responses to that family of Spanish Flue derivatives... It sounds reasonable as a potential... but, I've not dug into it enough to validate or debunk the claims...