Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 342 posts

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#321

Post by singhrac »

saalweachter wrote: post #89
singhrac wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So not to pour more anecdotal fuel on the fire, so to speak, but I know of someone who had a confirmed case of COVID last spring in the US, then was tested for antibodies this spring and had few, and then caught it again in India a few weeks ago. Each time was symptomatic. Again, a single data point, I'd be happy to believe that there's lasting immunity.

With the re-infection rate given above -- 1 in 1000 -- if people ~know about 100 people, you'd expect about 1 in 10 people to have an anecdote about someone getting COVID twice.

I appreciate the attempt at analysis, but I'm not sure the numbers are so easy. The number of people I know of who had COVID a year ago runs around 5-10 (this is all second degree connections), so that'd be 1 in 100-200. True, we don't know how many people visiting this page are willing to share similar anecdote. But as a personal matter it's enough to change my behavior and concerns.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#322

Post by sharken »

tomc1985 wrote: post #210
ithkuil wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yup, that’s the point. I don't understand. If we know that people who recovered from covid are effectively as if they were vaccinated, why do they have to wait until they have the privilege to be in the lucky age group to receive the vaccine before they can go visit a loved one they don't see for more than one year? Are you assuming that everyone in the world is living in a privileged country where people as young…

Just want to interject that a lot of us Americans are pleasantly surprised with just how quickly and effectively the vaccine rollout has gone. It has been a real turnaround for those living in states whose government was able to pull it off. (But it should be noted that many states are not doing as well)

Yes kudos to America for actually having an effective rollout, even with all the Trump drama.

There are also many diverse ways the individual states have handled restrictions, it will be interesting to see if some consensus will be reached regarding keeping restrictions or not.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#323

Post by walterbell »

NullPrefix wrote: post #312
walterbell wrote: post #119

For those in the EU, the upcoming travel pass will cover three categories of people: vaccinated, PCR-tested negative, and recovered (i.e. positive antibody test of immunity), https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/all-your-questions-on-... > For travellers who have recovered from the virus: date of the positive test result, an issuer of the certificate, date of issuance, validity date The bureaucratic stumbling block…

> the upcoming travel pass will cover ... and recovered (i.e. positive antibody test of immunity) From the linked article: >For travellers who have recovered from the virus: date of the positive test result, an issuer of the certificate, date of issuance, validity date EU Travel Pass doesn't care about your antibodies.

> EU Travel Pass doesn't care about your antibodies.

Hmm, you are right :(

The rules are still evolving. They will need to care, since the people who recovered after a positive test are much fewer than people who recovered without being tested.

From https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_...

> The period of relevance of certificates depends on scientific evidence and will be determined by the verifiers following their national rules. As new scientific evidence is emerging, the periods for which certificates are relevant for waiver of applicable public health requirements could be adjusted ...The regulation also introduces some basic principles, for example, setting the maximum validity period of the certificate of recovery at 180 days. These principles could be adjusted by the Commission through delegated acts to align with new scientific evidence once it is available.

Going strictly by the text above, what would happen to the recovered people after 180 days? If they have immunity they cannot get another positive test, so no recovery certificate and no travel? Or if you already recovered more than 6 months ago, you cannot travel?

It will come down to some metric of immunity, which is apparently "TBD" but will almost immediately be a concern, as all stakeholders look more closely at the rules, logic and implications.

The EU and many western governments are not dictatorships, relying on human judgement to enforce policy. If proposed policies fail basic checks of reason and fairness, humans at border checkpoints can exercise judgement. If and when policy makers find their policy is not enforceable, they can improve the policy until it is supported by science, citizens and enforcers.

The travel industry expects these passes to bring their customers back. They will not sit quietly while their recovered/immune customers are blocked by incompetent bureaucracy from spending money across the EU, without a substantive scientific case.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#324

Post by virgilp »

walterbell wrote: post #323
NullPrefix wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the upcoming travel pass will cover ... and recovered (i.e. positive antibody test of immunity) From the linked article: >For travellers who have recovered from the virus: date of the positive test result, an issuer of the certificate, date of issuance, validity date EU Travel Pass doesn't care about your antibodies.

> EU Travel Pass doesn't care about your antibodies. Hmm, you are right :( The rules are still evolving. They will need to care, since the people who recovered after a positive test are much fewer than people who recovered without being tested. From https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... > The period of relevance of certificates depends on scientific evidence and will be determined by the ver…

I wouldn't bank on them extending "recovery" duration... they'll simply ask for proof of vaccination after those 180 days.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#325

Post by virgilp »

chopin wrote: post #301
mns wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one is giving up any "liberties" by getting vaccinated, but it's more likely they are acquiring liberties by getting vaccinated. At the very least it's the liberty of reducing the risk of dying. As a person waiting to get his booster shot next week, I find this quite concerning. Those liberties we had and were taken away from us. Nobody cares about people dying. I am sitting now next to my mom who 1 month ago wa…

To add to your argument: I've never encountered a discussion, much less a proposal to throttle all cars at 10 km/h. That would save around 4000 lives here in Germany alone and spare many more severely injured, scarred for their life. It's not about saving lifes, it's about getting re-elected.

Would it, though? Sure, 4000 _might_ be saved from car crashes. But how many would die by not making it in time to a hospital? From the likely collapse of transportation, and distribution of goods? From the extra pollution of going that slow? From the general economic impacts of such a measure?

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#326

Post by saalweachter »

singhrac wrote: post #321
saalweachter wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the re-infection rate given above -- 1 in 1000 -- if people ~know about 100 people, you'd expect about 1 in 10 people to have an anecdote about someone getting COVID twice.

I appreciate the attempt at analysis, but I'm not sure the numbers are so easy. The number of people I know of who had COVID a year ago runs around 5-10 (this is all second degree connections), so that'd be 1 in 100-200. True, we don't know how many people visiting this page are willing to share similar anecdote. But as a personal matter it's enough to change my behavior and concerns.

Yeah, as per the other person's reply, it's probably more accurate to estimate that 1 in 100 people will have anecdotes of someone catching COVID twice, based on the measured reinfection rate. If we knew the number of distinct people reading this, we could estimate how many people we could get anecdotes from, but I would be unsurprised if 10 or more people could chime in.

There might be other factors that would push the reinfection rate higher (eg, if people are less likely to get another COVID test after having had it once, because they assume that's the one thing it can't be), and it's also worth remembering that a 1-in-1000 reinfection rate combined with ~10% of the population catching it means that closer to 1-in-100 people don't develop a lasting immunity [and the other 9-in-1000 just didn't catch it a second time].

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#327

Post by walterbell »

virgilp wrote: post #324
walterbell wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EU Travel Pass doesn't care about your antibodies. Hmm, you are right :( The rules are still evolving. They will need to care, since the people who recovered after a positive test are much fewer than people who recovered without being tested. From https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... > The period of relevance of certificates depends on scientific evidence and will be determined by the ver…

I wouldn't bank on them extending "recovery" duration... they'll simply ask for proof of vaccination after those 180 days.

They cannot legally force/mandate vaccinations, and they repeat that statement throughout the docs.

At most, they could insist that recovered people continue to get PCR tested: either you're negative and free to travel, or it will be a false positive, then you wait two (?) weeks and get a magical DHCP lease for 6-month "recovery certificate".

That would equate to a PCR-test industry tax on travel, which opens up several avenues for legal/policy challenge, e.g. test types, costs, subsidies, profit margins, supply chain ownership, benefits, numerical parameters, equipment calibration, performance (false positives/negatives).

Ludicrous rules don't punish people (who find workarounds), they decrease state power and credibility, reducing compliance with other, sensible, regulations. Sanity will eventually prevail, as long as citizens hold all policy proposals to high standards of transparency, reason and science.

Airplanes and hotels and tourist-destination cities want their customers back, and they will advocate on their behalf. The key is to avoid fights about specific interventions (like decade-old vaccines) and focus on laws (including liability) developed over centuries, and immune systems battle-tested even longer than laws.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#328

Post by anoncake »

withinboredom wrote: post #187
Thorrez wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I, for example, don’t ever have to worry about my safety because the “freedom” of others have been curtailed on several points, and I deeply appreciate that. Isn't is possible for someone to stab you? So in theory you could have some small degree of worry about your safety. Different people have different places they draw the line for an acceptable amount of worry vs an acceptable amount of freedom restrictions.

> Isn't is possible for someone to stab you? In (most of) the EU, it’s illegal to carry a weapon of any kind unless you have a reason to do so (ie, going hunting). You can’t even carry pepper spray.

Fun fact: In Germany, anti-people pepper spray is considered a weapon but anti-animal pepper spray is not. There is no difference of course, and you're allowed to use anti-animal pepper spray in self defense.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#329

Post by MAGZine »

StavrosK wrote: post #126
MAGZine wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i literally selected "SARS-CoV-1 still have a strong immune response almost 20" from OP's questioning comment, right clicked, selected "Search Google for..." and the same article was the first result. Nature is a reputable publication. I think this boils down to internet folks assuming their conversational partner has the same level of knowledge they do, don't believe the other party, and then ask for proof, rather t…

> i literally selected "SARS-CoV-1 still have a strong immune response almost 20" from OP's questioning comment, right clicked, selected "Search Google for..." and the same article was the first result. I don't know why you think that's obvious. In fact, I wouldn't have expected that query to yield anything relevant, so I wouldn't have even thought to try it. That's what "knows what to search for" means, it doesn't s…

My demonstration was to prove that you don't even need to know what to search for. I literally took the words he typed into a comment box and put them into a search engine instead. And that was WITHOUT trying to massage it to get better results.

Re: Lasting immunity found after recovery from Covid-19

#330

Post by MAGZine »

Buttons840 wrote: post #237
MAGZine wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i literally selected "SARS-CoV-1 still have a strong immune response almost 20" from OP's questioning comment, right clicked, selected "Search Google for..." and the same article was the first result. Nature is a reputable publication. I think this boils down to internet folks assuming their conversational partner has the same level of knowledge they do, don't believe the other party, and then ask for proof, rather t…

As the parent comment mentioned, there are "both sides" out there, making it difficult and unreliable to expect people to educate themselves. If someone is asking for citations in bad faith, they probably have "educated themselves" already, just with the wrong education. If someone believes a conspiracy, and they "educate themselves" as you propose, they will probably come to believe even more strongly in the conspir…

Sure, people should be able to identity what is a valid source and what isn't. It's fine to ask about what classifies as good or bad sources (format, publications, etc), how to search, or whatever.

But this isn't what happened. It wasn't "help me to find good articles on the topics like these" it was "citation needed." In fact, I don't think I have EVER seen anyone ask how to find reputable publications on a certain topic.

I also like sources, and when I'm saying things that have provable claims, I like to back them up. Still, what I DON'T go into the comments for is a long list of people going "citation needed!" I come for interesting debate and perspectives. But that's not what i'm getting—i'm getting people disagreeing with each other by putting the onus on the other party.

Post reply on HN