[dmitrij]

You are talking about two different topics.

The first case: this story is not an article. It's a press release, and I wish we would stop treating these like "scientific publications".

The second case: there is a real debate going on, on a global level: should we use vaccines for booster vaccinations, or shouldn't we first vaccinate the whole world to get control of the pandemic. This is not only a question of medicine, this is also global politics, the rich North versus the not so rich rest of the world, patents and corporations versus saving lifes – debate is inevitable.

[MontagFTB]

Well, yes and no. While they are different topics, both are trying to present facts to back up their viewpoint. Is it a _fact_ that a rhinovirus infection helps fight Covid? Is it a _fact_ that booster shots are necessary, or is the current vaccine regimen sufficient? The facts seem to be changing in headlines faster than I can recall.

[IMTDb]

> Is it a _fact_ that booster shots are necessary, or is the current vaccine regimen sufficient?

The issue is that the words "necessary" and "sufficient" are left to the reader, and are deeply political.

Some people will argue that we must do every possible thing in our power to save every possible life, so even a 0.01% of increased protection would be enough to make booster shots "necessary" and the current regiment "insufficient".

Some other will accept loss of life, and will even call vaccine shots "unnecessary" since the vast majority of the population - especially the non fragile part - doesn't seem to suffer from covid. In their mind, our our natural immunity itself is "sufficient".

Most people arguing on this subject are actually not arguing over scientific arguments, but are arguing over their own position between those two extremes. And they throw in some numbers / quote experts to sound more scientific than they really are in the vain hope to convince the other part that they are somehow more "right".

[skyde]

What you are calling fact is interpretation on statistic. But the statistics themself are fact. ex: number of case and hospitalization for vaccinated people vs unvaccinated people. So when you look at box ploy or histogram those are the facts.

The fact don’t change every week only the interpretation.

The only fact that we can say is really changing is the R0 value of the virus but this is expected because it change over time because of our actions!

It’s more like the current price of a company stock on the NeeYork stock exchange will change every week. It change when we get new data about that company and reinterpret how much it”s worth

[RobertRoberts]

Third case: Natural immunity needs to be required part of the discussion on any/all pandemic planning.

[goinfar]

Inoculate the whole world against a coronavirus.. preposterous. Aren't the current EUA shots for targeting the initial alpha strain?

[swader999]

Yes, it's impossible to produce, distribute and vaccinate eight billion people for a virus that mutates every few months and one that can persist in animal reservoirs.