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

Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 426 posts

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#271

Post by unanswered »

zamalek wrote: post #246
beagle3 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the body cleared the virus, then what it chose is effective whether that’s the spike or the nucleocapsid. It is actually more likely to be robust than vaccine induced immunity. The claims about superiority of vaccine induced immunity that I’ve seen all rely on antibody counts, and in the very short term that may very well be true - but the importance of T-cells is not sufficiently well characterized to say it with…

... which hinges completely on the virus not evolving at all, which is outside of the realm of reality. Evolving a new spike is extremely disadvantageous for the virus. Widespread natural immunity is not enough to prevent a repeat of this this or next year, especially when we have evolutionary hotbeds in countries which could not (or would not) do anything to prevent the spread.

> Evolving a new spike is extremely disadvantageous for the virus.

... Right up until almost everyone has an immune response to the spike and not to any other feature, at which point a virus which changes the spike and potentially keeps its other features is a winner. We are creating an immune monoculture.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#272

Post by trompetenaccoun »

anoncake wrote: post #242
dustinmoris wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither the vaccine nor a previous infection will prevent you from catching the virus again, but it will prevent you from falling ill which is all that really matters.

You'll obviously get some virus in your body, but a lot less because most of it (hopefully) gets destroyed before it can reproduce.

It will still be picked up by a PCR test depending on the number of replication cycles. Which is why mass testing everyone, including healthy people, is such a dumb idea.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#273

Post by Guvante »

ultralite wrote: post #268
DC-3 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural immunity was never a dangerous conspiracy theory. It was simply the case that it was too early to have blind faith in it. No-one credible ever denied that it was possible or even that it was likely that people would gain natural immunity.

> No-one credible ever denied that it was possible or even that it was likely that people would gain natural immunity. Let's not rewrite history. It was clear that the media (e.g. BBC, below) chose to amplify messages that discredited natural immunity. [Prof Wendy Barclay said:] "On the balance of evidence, I would say it would look as if immunity declines away at the same rate as antibodies decline away, and that th…

I don't know that discrediting is a fair assessment. There is evidence of fewer or no markers in blood tests of patients who previously tested positive. Unfortunately it was impossible to tell whether that impacted immunity due insufficient time to collect data.

If losing markers is often an indicator of lost immunity then saying the expectation is lost immunity isn't wrong, even if that like ends up being false.

For instance data around infections from recovered and vaccinated people to others is still scarce to my knowledge. While we know that the health benefits for you are there whether it is enough immunity to completely prevent spread is still hard to examine.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#274

Post by Guvante »

dsyrk wrote: post #270
Guvante wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically the wild and crazy ones were "it was bio engineered" and "let's ignore it and gain herd immunity". The former was being touted as justification for violence against Asians and the latter would involve millions of deaths in most countries. Tens of millions world wide.

Would being a result of gain of function research with a particular furin cleavage site be considered “bio engineered”?

I don't feel like playing "there isn't enough evidence to prove me wrong"

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#275

Post by dmlittle »

loveistheanswer wrote: post #189

It almost seems like a lot of people don't want the data to indicate that natural immunity is strong and long lasting, even though the data shows that reinfection is extemely rare. Similar to how so many people have been unwilling to even consider a lab leak was a possibility, until just now it seems, because that idea was heresy to the orthodox dogma that ordained Scientists are Saviors. Humans have equated sickness…

I’m not sure if all natural immunities are stronger, or even strong. I’m not denying those exists but I also personally know 3 people that have gotten COVID-19 twice.

If natural immunity only protects against a particular strain and the vaccine against a group of them I think that’s still a solid reason to continue pushing for people to get vaccinated.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#276

Post by i386 »

ultralite wrote: post #268
DC-3 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural immunity was never a dangerous conspiracy theory. It was simply the case that it was too early to have blind faith in it. No-one credible ever denied that it was possible or even that it was likely that people would gain natural immunity.

> No-one credible ever denied that it was possible or even that it was likely that people would gain natural immunity. Let's not rewrite history. It was clear that the media (e.g. BBC, below) chose to amplify messages that discredited natural immunity. [Prof Wendy Barclay said:] "On the balance of evidence, I would say it would look as if immunity declines away at the same rate as antibodies decline away, and that th…

> media [sic] chose to amplify messages that discredited natural immunity

The media is not a recognised scientific body.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#278

Post by epakai »

xienze wrote: post #261
loveistheanswer wrote: post #189

It almost seems like a lot of people don't want the data to indicate that natural immunity is strong and long lasting, even though the data shows that reinfection is extemely rare. Similar to how so many people have been unwilling to even consider a lab leak was a possibility, until just now it seems, because that idea was heresy to the orthodox dogma that ordained Scientists are Saviors. Humans have equated sickness…

> It almost seems like a lot of people don't want the data to indicate that natural immunity is strong and long lasting, even though the data shows that reinfection is extemely rare. I too remember when the concept of "natural immunity to Covid" was a wild, dangerous conspiracy theory, along with the "came out of the Wuhan lab" theory. Funny watching the narrative change in real time.

They probably just don't want a repeat of the mis-steps that characterized early covid response. Early information changed a lot and resulted in distrust, and poor adherence to recommended measures. Rolling back precautionary measures is a one time thing. They don't get to say "hey we messed up, put those masks back on" because nobody will comply. It just makes sense to come up with a sure consensus before natural immunity is bandied about.

The lab leak theory is still not proven. Collected evidence over time points to it being more likely. The "narrative" was there early on, but attacking China as leverage in a trade war surely cemented any desire to hide their own faults. What did we stand to gain by pointing fingers without proof or even a preponderance of evidence? Even now is it likely to lead to reform in virus and gain of function research?

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#279

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

santiagobasulto wrote: post #251
seren wrote: post #86

From my understanding if you had an mRNA vaccine, your body was only exposed to an artificial spike protein, so effectively you have spike specific antibodies. On the other hand, if you had a real infection by the virus, you likely have antibodies for the spike protein and other part of the virus like the shell. So from my layman understanding, the immunity should be more resistant to a mutation of the spike protein.…

Some time ago i listened to a respected Argentina scientist (that lives and works in France) saying something: “we can’t confirm nor deny anything about COVID, given the poor quality of scientific procedure we follow in testing” He was complaining of lack of scientific rigorousity with testing (at least in France) and he compared it to the “behind the scenes” of a restaurant’s kitchen. For example, he was saying that…

This is also why you never want your DNA to end up where it can be used for false accusations against you. Lab work isn't trustworthy against mistakes.

Re: Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

#280

Post by ultralite »

i386 wrote: post #276
ultralite wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No-one credible ever denied that it was possible or even that it was likely that people would gain natural immunity. Let's not rewrite history. It was clear that the media (e.g. BBC, below) chose to amplify messages that discredited natural immunity. [Prof Wendy Barclay said:] "On the balance of evidence, I would say it would look as if immunity declines away at the same rate as antibodies decline away, and that th…

> media [sic] chose to amplify messages that discredited natural immunity The media is not a recognised scientific body.

The BBC in this case were covering research by Imperial College London, one of the leading contributors to UK COVID-19 research.

In Oct 2020, if someone saw https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54696873 and commented, as you just have, "The media is not a recognised scientific body.", what would you have said?

Post reply on HN