The "beauty" of all this covid nonsense is that many are questioning EVERYTHING. I never identified as anti-vax before 2020. Now I'm full blown anti-allopathic medicine!

And I'm not alone...

Instead of antivaxxer - which has all manner of political overtones. Why don't we just stick to science. Once we show and tell folks that a vaccine has no real way of working, that memory cells were a flawed assumption from yesteryear - this would go a long way to stopping the making of these items.

The Corporate Media will not allow it! Pro-lifers have been called "anti-abortion" by them while calling the opposite, pro-abortion or reproductive rights (what about the human baby's rights?) instead of anti-life or anti-birth.

It does remind me of Anti-Slavery vs States Rights - another time where human beings were depersonalized to being someone else's "rights."

I hear you, but still, all that stuff is less than "science". If we stuck to molecules, to antibodies, to memory cells (which don't exist), to why any modified form of a virus or bacteria can't, won't, generate the proper and needed immune response - this then would have to addressed, challenged. When the forum is about vaccine efficacy those who make vaccines will be better exposed once we go deep into details about how vaccines working is an impossibility of physics, chemistry and biology. Ac…

To say a vaccine is "safe and effective" is an inherent contradiction in concepts. Every governmental or private medical science institution will say something to this effect: "All vaccines introduce into the body a harmless piece of a particular bacteria or virus, triggering an immune response." Note the word "harmless".  

The problem with the idea, fact or reality, of "harmless" is that in order for an immune response to be solicited, triggered, there needs to be some harm. There needs to be a…

how do you respond to their claim that the vax is effective by showing antibody titers in the injected

Can you elaborate on antibody dependent enhancement.

And yes, a cellular response is what happens once the innate response fails to do the job.

There are two phases of immune response, the first response is the innate, which most times can handle things, cuts, sores etc. With bacterial and viral, ones that impact cells and turn them rogue, the innate can't defeat these antigens so easily and many times calls on the killer Ts and Bs - the adaptive immune response (the secondary, not primary response. As for the marker, if you are referring to "memory" cells, they don't really exist, that was a bit of poor science understandings from yesteryear aka assumptions.

No, cellular is not both. Are cells involved with both, always, that's how the body works, cells run the body, but there are still separate known immune responses - a primary/general first response and then a second/specialized response.

Asking is part of how i do research, and many times, i ask rhetorically...

You're the one that's confused - any text book will speak to innate and adaptive immune responses. Duh

You also missed the point of my whole comment on safe vs effective...