- Reaction score
- Cozumel & Pennsylvania
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
A recent study of subjects recovered from SARS 17 years ago showed strong T-cells in bone marrow, suggesting the protection may be lifetime. And while the vaccine produces more antibodies it only generates them in response to the spike protein not an array of virus characteristics and it is not known yet whether it produces strong T-cells.
But whether one is slightly better than the other is not really the point. If there is a difference it is marginal. The data clearly shows that both have strong protection levels and mild symptoms on breakthrough cases. My beef is how we are divided into the vaccinated or the not vaccinated, and from that presumed protected and responsible or unprotected and irresponsible. My original point still stands - if the vaccinated are excepted from certain protective protocols then so should the recovered.
Well, I don't entirely disagree. If there is a difference it may be marginal. Or the vaccine or prior infection might turn out to be a lot better than the other. I don't think the book on that is finished.
And it seems to make sense that a vaccine and a prior infection might be better that one or the other.
I also read scientific postulation and getting one shot of one vaccine and then the second shot from another vaccine might actually widen the over all protection.
I think there is a lot to be known yet.
I think its clear the policy thinking is that a vaccine for everyone, prior case or not, is not a bad idea, but your point of no respect for those that got antibodies the hard way is not without merit. Its hard to set a policy when science keeps changing the assumptions.
Oh and if I had nickel for all the people that said, you know I have the covid fall of 2019, etc etc. I actually made some money betting on that.