Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
1–10 of 361 posts
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#2Punchline:
“The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated.
Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study.”
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#3this is a bit ambiguous in title.
This is about vaccination not providing any further benefit to those who have recovered and cleared from covid.
this is ^not^ saying you need to be vaccinated even if you have gone through covid
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#4this is a bit ambiguous in title. This is about vaccination not providing any further benefit to those who have recovered and cleared from covid. this is ^not^ saying you need to be vaccinated even if you have gone through covid
Ok, I've consed an 'evaluating' onto the title above in the hope of communicating this.
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#5Punchline: “The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained u…
In that case it seems like the headline reads wrong based on a colloquial and imprecise but often correct heuristic. Should read more like "non-necessity of C19 vaccination for previously infected..."
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#6this is a bit ambiguous in title. This is about vaccination not providing any further benefit to those who have recovered and cleared from covid. this is ^not^ saying you need to be vaccinated even if you have gone through covid
Ok, I've consed an 'evaluating' onto the title above in the hope of communicating this.
thanks dang
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#7I have confirmation bias here because this is a result I would have expected BUT..
Preprint, non-peer reviewed.
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#8Note this is to inform public health / prioritization in the short term. (Which is less necessary places like the US where there is excess vaccine supply).
We know that past infection greatly reduces risk (and this helps quantify it). At the same time, vaccination is thought to cause a much broader and more durable immune response than natural infection. We'd like people who were previously infected to get vaccinated eventually for these benefits, but they're not who you'd want to vaccinate first.
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#9Note this is to inform public health / prioritization in the short term. (Which is less necessary places like the US where there is excess vaccine supply). We know that past infection greatly reduces risk (and this helps quantify it). At the same time, vaccination is thought to cause a much broader and more durable immune response than natural infection. We'd like people who were previously infected to get vaccinated…
> vaccination is thought to cause a much broader and more durable immune response than natural infection
Why? Is there any data to support this assertion?
If anything, being ill (symptomatic) means the viral load was high in the body, so the immune system response should be as well, and in addition, infection should cause the immune system to produce antibodies to all parts of the virus, not just the spike protein, as with mRNA vaccines.
Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
#10Note this is to inform public health / prioritization in the short term. (Which is less necessary places like the US where there is excess vaccine supply). We know that past infection greatly reduces risk (and this helps quantify it). At the same time, vaccination is thought to cause a much broader and more durable immune response than natural infection. We'd like people who were previously infected to get vaccinated…
Not that I have any knowledge on this subject, but why would a vaccine that stimulates the creation of a bit of spike protein create a "much broader and more durable immune response" than the actual virus which I presume creates a hell of a lot more of that exact same spike protein? Genuinely curious, because my simpleton assumption would be the opposite.