I had 2 Pfizer shots and then 4 months later I had Covid-19.
That's probably what's known as a breakthrough infection. You know all those stories about Pfizer and Moderna being over 90% effective? As it turns out, 90% is not 100%...
My 3 sons had breakthrough too. My wife was the last to get it had no shots.
For some - the immune system simply 'handles it'.
Does that mean they're 'immune' ?
There's a great deal of trouble that's been caused by that word.
Words shouldn't be smarter than people - but it often works out that way.
Its a race - your 'immune' system has to kill the virus before the virus kill you.
And - interesting about Norway. A lot of testing.
Maybe they quarantined a lot of the people after testing positive.
Or they quarantined themselves.
An idea I wasn't able to find on the net was - in addition to testing for Covid - what about testing for Covid antibodies?
If you've already got the antibodies ...
but there's a catch. Variants.
My 3 sons had breakthrough too. My wife was the last to get it had no shots.
All of you were tested, whenever you had symptoms? And you all isolated when you had positive tests? How do you know your wife didn't already have Covid-19 previously and was the last to get it due to natural immunity? I've honestly never heard of a case like your family.
I suppose it could be that genetically your side of the family has some gene that comes into play, whereas your wife would not have it.
As for Raoult, you guys are allowed to believe whoever but there are several reasons why I believe him:
1) He's quite experienced
2) His ADE theory has been seen with another vaccine, he doesn't speak illogically or create surprising theories (at least for the part I watched him for, I don't necessarily listen to what he says about hydroxychloroquine, because I would be disobeying my own logic, that a drug/vaccine has to be tried enough and complete all the phases)
3) He's independant
But again just a humble opinion.
Pug....... those dependent & independent variables keep changing. 150 pages back,.. Exploring WA use to post "go outside". Now we know the darn virus is air born. 
So what are the ones currently.
By independant I meant independant of the authorities.
In fact, @MarieAnne-Liz mentioned the fact that the credibility when vaccines are debated in France is a joke right now. It is true because they're being hostile to knowledgeable people like him.
In #3604
I hope Covid ends But Please join my forum if ya play these game just asking
[link removed] If you can
No spamming, please.
I’m talking about numbers….
As for Raoult, you guys are allowed to believe whoever but there are several reasons why I believe him:
1) He's quite experienced
2) His ADE theory has been seen with another vaccine, he doesn't speak illogically or create surprising theories (at least for the part I watched him for, I don't necessarily listen to what he says about hydroxychloroquine, because I would be disobeying my own logic, that a drug/vaccine has to be tried enough and complete all the phases)
3) He's independant
But again just a humble opinion.
We're allowed ?
Experienced and 'independent' are 'reasons to believe' ?
The real vaccines (not the other one that had 'no reason to believe')
have saved many millions of lives.
A fully vaccinated person who gets Covid is apparently 97 times as likely to survive as an unvaccinated person ...
but ... 'experienced and independent' survives that statistic?
'Independent' is a reason to 'believe' somebody ?
And - its 'all about believing' ?
(I can almost anticipate) ... "so you're suggesting only the mainstream is to be believed?" - as if the question deserved an answer? Someday - whoever will discover what something 'doesn't mean' as opposed to what something does.
He might discover that the negation of something - doesn't mean that the converse or opposite is the only thing that can follow. Or - stop pretending that it is.)
Its unfortunate that Raoult became an 'authority'.
But fortunate it seems - that he will be retired from his job.
As for the lawsuits pertaining to him - their status or results weren't so easy to find on the web.
Regarding 'pingpong' that happens when persons such as Mercola and Raoult are exposed and their doctrines are debunked ...
I imagine that'll continue.
And that we'll see many tactics - like arguing that 'independent' is a 'reason for believing'.
Are forums like this made so that such pushing can be interfered with?
I think so - among other reasons.
But there's a flip side. Such forums can be used to promote that which should be interfered with. And push it hard.
All the Disinfo people have to do - is just keep pingponging ...
and then will other people have the time?
Suggestion: people who do care about interfering with the spreading of Covid disinformation and prefer to interfere with the promotion and lionization of Covid disinformation gurus and politicians ...
don't have to conduct their postings on the terms of the disinfo people.
We might see quite a bit of 'you ignored -' or invalid 'so you mean -' (that wasn't said) - or 'you didn't answer my question' or ...
the immortal " 'We' are talking about ... "
and 'lets put it behind ...' while whoever continues with Exactly what he is authoritating as to 'put behind'.
Issue: interfering with - and how to interfere with Covid disinformation and how to interfere with promotion of Covid disinformation leaders.
Perhaps the disinformationers will want to suggest 'how' ??
Remark: the worst thing - could be to accomodate any suggestion they make.
Why do they have the unofficial name "Deltacron?" I thought all variants were named after Latin words.
"Its unfortunate that Raoult became an 'authority'."
How did he become an authority literally barely anyone listens to him
Plus the stuff I quoted him for isn't only what he says:
Here about post-vaccination cases:
https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/covid-19-epi-confirmed-cases-post-vaccination.pdf?sc_lang=en
Here about ADE: https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/antibody-dependent-enhancement-and-vaccines
This isn't his creation nor is this new/fake
And btw how exactly is this "97 times more"?
0.01 per 100 000 people for people between 12-17 years old, so 1^-7% chance of dying from COVID
0.02 per 100 000 people for people between 18-29 years old, so 2^-7% chance of dying from COVID
Apparently, risks of dangerous side effects mentioned by the advisor of the COVID cabinet in the ministry of health in France are 0.025% https://lecourrierdesstrateges.fr/2022/02/08/olivier-veran-reconnait-enfin-lexistence-deffets-secondaires-graves-lies-a-la-vaccination/
30 000 officially counted by ANSM out of 136M doses at the time.
Being dependent alone isn't a reason for believing, but trying to study an alternate drug isn't a reason to stop believing one of the most important virologists in France either when he talks about infectious diseases. I talked to the OP about the subject and promoting hydroxychloroquine is not allowed (which I'm not doing) but quoting a virologist when he talks about science/logic isn't forbidden so please stop coming back to it and accusing me of using tactics and I don't know what.
@btickler please solve this I'm starting to feel hostility towards me in here.
About the experience:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/magazine/didier-raoult-hydroxychloroquine.html
Outside of the COVID-19 drug controversies, he's always been an extremely eminent scientist. Plus, his overall career is immense, his publications, the experience gathered to deal with infectious diseases in his military service that he talks about etc...
And alternate drugs for COVID were never promoted without sanction here.
@playerafar has been pointing out the Trump praise. The former US president has been one of the main anti-vax influencers in 2020 https://www.psypost.org/2021/06/study-indicates-donald-trump-was-the-main-anti-vaccination-influencer-on-twitter-in-2020-61032
So it is normal that someone like him would support alternate drugs, but there is no evidence of any sort of relationship between Raoult and the latter.
And Raoult is far from being an anti-vax:
True definition of an anti-vax:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer
Proof he's not an anti-vaxxer:
But of course, as soon as there are controversies related to him, he just gets called an anti-vaxxer who spreads misinformation about the virus.
EDIT: Forgot to talk about the dependence:
Just an example. Not necessarily accusing him of corruption but I personally wouldn't trust because he's the President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Thomson Reuters Corporation who do fact-checks about the vaccine and at the same time a member of the pfizer team.
I don't see any problem with Chamo2074 talking about Raoult as long as there's no willful promotion of misinformation. I don't currently see him as being on the level of a Mercola, or say...Alex Jones, who sold bogus cures fraudulently. I do think he's past his prime and somewhat misguided...but he has credentials and a reputation, and dissenting scientific opinions are how we reach a consensus.
Note that I said "currently" 
.
Thanks.
And I promise to avoid promoting him unless what he's saying is based on a study he's referencing or is something that is well-known in medicine/biology and in those cases I would link the study/article explaining the medical fact.
"@playerafar has been pointing out the Trump praise."
I never said 'Trump praise'.
"And I promise to avoid promoting him unless ..."
"unless"
apparently means - 'to Keep promoting Raoult'
//////////////////////////////
Mercola is definitely higher in the Covid Disinformation hierarchy than Raoult.
But Raoult is no 'little fish'.
There are so many people in the Disinfo campaign.
Its 'easier' to talk about Mercola and Raoult - and expose them -
that it is to talk here about politicians like Trump and Marjorie Greene and Rand Paul.
Politics is extra-sensitive. And there's a tremendous number of Trump supporters on this website.
Disagreement - criticism of postings - exposure of gross illogic in the forum ...
somebody only has to say 'hostility' in order to mischaracterize such disagreement ?
Looks like yet another 'method'. Its called 'play victim'.
Well known.
Somebody - anybody wants to promote Mercola or Raoult here - misrepresent who they are ... misrepresent and downplay the effectiveness and importance of vaccination ...
perhaps will 'have feelings' that they're not supposed to be disagreed with.
Suggestion: deal with your feelings that aren't based in reality.
In politics - 'feelings' can run so strong ... that there's a big leap.
Which is to turn illogic - unreality - falsehood and the like into Reality by electing or promoting the leaders of same. Or other power plays.
Whether its electing politicians - promoting Mercola (money and indoctrination) or violent insurrection.
One of the prominent leaders of the January 6th 2021 Capitol insurrection - was/is a person who had a policy of harassing people getting vaccinated.
Raoult became a danger and 'authority' via an academic route.
As did Mercola.
Use of the word 'authority' constitutes 'hostility' ?
I've said this next before ...
Every now and then - maybe its good to repeat it ... with some timing.
'We here weren't all born yesterday'.
For a oversimplified version of what I’m trying to use with my question. What would be the independent and dependent variables for spread of Covid (carriers). And the conditional variables as well, like secondary requirements that must be met to add to the number of Covid being spread.