Added context: you are wrong, and uneducated.
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025
1265 points (99.0% liked)
Science Memes
16191 readers
2019 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean, isn't she technically right? If presented out of context, that statement seems true and the community note doesn't contradict it. At least if we consider "normal" to be some baseline value without the vaccine. It's not explicitly stated that "normal" would be preferable.
No, she’s not technically right.
If I have a white shirt and suddenly it turns blue, that’s not normal.
If I have a white shirt and I dye it blue, and then it is blue, that is 100% normal and expected.
Antibodies increasing after vaccination is how vaccines work. It would be abnormal if the antibody levels stayed the same.
That's up to what one considers normal in a given situation. I think I was quite clear about how I was using the word "normal" in my comment there. If I down a sixpack of beer, then I think most would agree that my blood alcohol content would be above normal, no matter how much that is to be expected. Yes, it would be normal for a person who just drank six beers, but not normal for humans as a whole. Oh and the amount of microplastics in both our brains might as well be considered "normal", given that the world is as fucked as it is.
Now, the argument can obviously made that being vaccinated is a lot more normalized than being drunk is, but since she's talking about the concept of vaccination as a whole, I think the current standards of normalcy are not what she's using. By the standards she might be argued to be using, it's a lot more normal to die of polio. In the history of our species, it's quite abnormal to be able to talk to people on the other side of the planet or to live past 60 or to get vaccinated.
I fully agree that the tweet is misinformation at best. I've just seen way too many of these fuckers weasel their way out on technicalities when confronted about it.
Your suggestion of a baseline unvaccinated value is worthless in this context, I think my analogy makes that clear.
If you were comparing two different vaccines for the same virus, and one had an initial massive increase in antibody levels that then fell off, and the other just showed an increase with no falloff, that would be a meaningful comparison.
load more comments
(1 replies)
By the way the sentence is built up it gives the implication that it is definitely not preferable. So why she’s technically correct, she’s socially (?) incorrect
She's either trying to deceive the gullible or needs her license to be revoked.
Devil's advocate, is she trying to say compared to those unvaccinated but still exposed to/have had the virus? Or people who were never exposed? Because that could maybe change the context. You would think antibodies from a vaccine would stay around the same length of time as those exposed to the live virus directly.
If she is talking about people never exposed than I have no idea what she is talking about.
No. Just no. For many reasons. Don't be part of the problem. "You would think..." stop there. You don't need to use conjecture when there is research at your fingertips. Signed - worked in bacterial and viral genetics and vaccine development for decades.
I doubt asking questions is being part of the problem. Making claims of authority/expert on the topic, while no providing no additional however..
Have you considered providing credible sources instead? Might be easier for you to discern them compared to the rest of us and would be much appreciated.