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

Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 361 posts

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#41

Post by version_five »

isaacremuant wrote: post #27
joshuahughes wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds uncomfortably like coercion...

It is coercion. People have been coerced at every step of this crisis, by the threat of police violence, by the threat of reputation or job loss, by the the threat of fines and more. Hopefully, like we see with the wuhan lab theory suppression, as time goes on, a lot of what people suffered will come to light, and be contrasted by the benefit of the elite and political class during all this.

I agree 100% - whatever reaction posts like yours get, it's important to realize that a lot of people think this way, quite possibly a majority if you could talk to them on their own, despite efforts to pretend anyone against whatever government / corporate orthodoxy is pushing this week is some kind of conspiracy nut

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#42

Post by teachingassist »

pmoriarty wrote: post #26
reducesuffering wrote: post #2

Punchline: “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…

"Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study." The duration of the study being 5 months. There's no indication from this study what would happen after 5 months.

This comment is right - and the study began shortly after Ohio's peak of infections.

As such, most infected participants would have been recently infected in a situation with low and decreasing virus circulation. Nobody thinks there's any risk of reinfection at that point.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#43

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

np_tedious wrote: post #11

I did have covid (not diagnosed while active but shown in antibody test), and I got vaccinated significantly later. This was not driven by belief in medical need, but by social/rules need. You get no "points" for being recovered like you do for a proof of vaccination.

For the EU certificate, proof of prior infection can be used, although I believe you need a positive PCR test for that, an antibody test is not sufficient.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#44

Post by rolph »

takeda wrote: post #33
rolph wrote: post #3

this 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

On the other hand this says the opposite: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.15.440089v4?...

The abstract actually contradicts itself.

not only that there is a comparison of vaccine generated Ab titre reacting with spike receptor domain

vs naturally generated Ab titre reacting with spike receptor domain, and with nucleocapsid features thus the naturall immunity is broader, and is long lasting based on opsonizing immunity.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#45

Post by somewhereoutth »

isaacremuant wrote: post #27
joshuahughes wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds uncomfortably like coercion...

It is coercion. People have been coerced at every step of this crisis, by the threat of police violence, by the threat of reputation or job loss, by the the threat of fines and more. Hopefully, like we see with the wuhan lab theory suppression, as time goes on, a lot of what people suffered will come to light, and be contrasted by the benefit of the elite and political class during all this.

You have been, and will continue to be, coerced (as you put it) every day of your life. For good reason.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#46

Post by mabbo »

A close friend of my family nearly died of what we presume was Covid-19 in February of 2020. All the right symptoms, but nobody had enough tests at the time. By the time they gave her a Covid-19 test, she was negative for Covid, but severely ill from the damage to her lungs.

She presumed she couldn't get it again. She did in May of 2021. Less serious, but tested positive this time with mild symptoms.

Perhaps the first infection wasn't covid-19, but something very similar. My guess is that immunity after infection doesn't last as long as we might all like. Which is why we all need to get vaccinated as quickly as possible.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#47

Post by epgui »

OJFord wrote: post #40
epgui wrote: post #21

Any other result would have been surprising. Why is this interesting, beyond just confirming what we were already 99.99% certain we knew? -- biochemist

Because it's not public health policy anywhere that I'm aware of? But vaccine rollout would be way quicker, and 'positive test or vaccinated' proportion of populations would be way higher, and that would influence discussion of other aspects, like 'herd immunity' for example.

I don't think this is incompatible with public health policy even if public health policy treats previously-infected people the same way as never-infected people.

Owing to the dramatic risk asymmetry between vaccine and disease, it's probably better to implement a policy that optimizes more for expediency, simplicity (fewer rules and fewer exceptions) and, in this case, minimizing the number of false assumptions made about the status of individuals. ie.: in the context of vaccination it's sometimes better to not assume that everyone who claims to have been previously infected was actually infected, even if we have lab data to back up this assumption.

I'm not saying current policies all make perfect sense or anything, but it doesn't particularly surprise me that everyone is being accounted for in the same way WRT the vaccine.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#48

Post by stephc_int13 »

onionisafruit wrote: post #37
stephc_int13 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got covid twice. 10 months separated the first and the second infections. Both were mild, the second was worse (English variant).

Now I know two things about you: 1. you got covid twice 2. you weren't part of this study

This is only one data point. My partner also got the covid twice, at the same time obviously.

The important point here is that we got re-infected almost a year later with a variant.

From my experience, it looks like the flu.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#49

Post by AndrewBissell »

epgui wrote: post #21

Any other result would have been surprising. Why is this interesting, beyond just confirming what we were already 99.99% certain we knew? -- biochemist

My brother-in-law who recovered from Covid was told that it actually put him at higher risk from a subsequent infection, and therefore taking the vaccine was even more important than if he had never had it. Every time someone with any prominence says, "I'm not getting vaccinated because I was already infected" there's a whole "well ackshually!" army that descends to insist that yes it's still SUPER IMPORTANT to get the shot. So I think your 99.99% number is overstating certainly the general public's level of knowledge on this question.

Re: Evaluating necessity of Covid-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

#50

Post by lebuffon »

mabbo wrote: post #46

A close friend of my family nearly died of what we presume was Covid-19 in February of 2020. All the right symptoms, but nobody had enough tests at the time. By the time they gave her a Covid-19 test, she was negative for Covid, but severely ill from the damage to her lungs. She presumed she couldn't get it again. She did in May of 2021. Less serious, but tested positive this time with mild symptoms. Perhaps the firs…

I don't know much about naming viruses but if Covid-19 is from 2019, then we might be able say with some validity that we are now encountering Covid-20 and the delta strain is Covid-21. That might explain some of the second infections. (?)

Since we are dealing with a corona virus and the common cold corona virus forms have been with us for many years I am not expecting that this will ever be completely gone, just managed.

Post reply on HN