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

241–250 of 361 posts

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

#241

Post by whizzter »

qrybam wrote: post #235
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…

That’s interesting. Maybe the duration of the trial was too short or sample size too small, because I know two people personally who were re-infected pre vaccination.

Maybe too short, but also Covid-19 isn't really just one disease anymore, but rather a family of strains.

Just yesterday the news had an article about how a national level soccer player for Sweden who had been infected previously in the past managed to get infected again and infect parts of the team.

The player in question had been infected about a year ago initially (before the British strain was found) and with the British strain now being the main one in Sweden I don't think it's a far fetch to say that re-infections of a different strain is actually quite likely once a certain amount of time has passed.

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

#242

Post by Reason077 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #232
Reason077 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you've had Covid, you'd disagree that its symptoms are similar to other common diseases. It feels quite different from any cold/flu I've ever had - unlike most flus I've experienced, there was no bronchitis, no throat pain, no sinus congestion, only a mild intermittent cough, little snot/phlem, etc. But it has some distinct features: high fever/temperature which lasts < 24 hours, changes in taste (foods wh…

Did you also have a super-dry cough and/or an irritation in the lungs bordering on a burning feeling? That was like no other illness in my experience.

I didn't have any burning sensation. More like a sort of tingling discomfort, and the "shortness of breath" feeling where I'm breathing normally but it doesn't feel like you're getting the normal amount of oxygen from each breath?

Also I never really had that much of a cough. Just a mild, intermittent dry cough.

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

#243

Post by paedubucher »

rectang wrote: post #107
briefcomment wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most authorities are downplaying natural immunity, despite evidence like this. The more widely this spreads, the more people will realize it's ok to rely on natural immunity, and to not blanket demonize those who are unvaccinated.

The unvaccinated are still vectors for the infection of those who cannot be vaccinated, such as the immunocompromised. I personally don't think in terms of "blanked demonizing" people, but neither am I going to blanket-absolve all the unvaccinated — especially willful anti-vaxxers. Regardless, this study is good news — because it means that every person who is infected and then recovers contributes towards herd immun…

If you are immunocompromised, you're not only vulnerable to COVID-19, but to a plethora of other viruses going around all the time.

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

#244

Post by falcor84 »

whizzter wrote: post #241
qrybam wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s interesting. Maybe the duration of the trial was too short or sample size too small, because I know two people personally who were re-infected pre vaccination.

Maybe too short, but also Covid-19 isn't really just one disease anymore, but rather a family of strains. Just yesterday the news had an article about how a national level soccer player for Sweden who had been infected previously in the past managed to get infected again and infect parts of the team. The player in question had been infected about a year ago initially (before the British strain was found) and with the…

>...with the British strain now being the main one in Sweden

Off topic, but at this stage I find this geographical naming of strains being much more confusing than useful.

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

#245

Post by Reason077 »

ping_pong wrote: post #231
Reason077 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you've had Covid, you'd disagree that its symptoms are similar to other common diseases. It feels quite different from any cold/flu I've ever had - unlike most flus I've experienced, there was no bronchitis, no throat pain, no sinus congestion, only a mild intermittent cough, little snot/phlem, etc. But it has some distinct features: high fever/temperature which lasts < 24 hours, changes in taste (foods wh…

I know some people who got COVID and said they felt fine, except for a stuffy nose. Almost everyone I know that had COVID said that the flu was worse. All the symptoms that you mentioned apply to the flu as well. There might have been one day where they felt really worn out, but that was it. I felt the same way after taking the vaccine. Change in taste can be attributed to blocked nose which radiacally changes the ta…

Yes, same here. My housemate was convinced she must have been infected, but her only symptom was losing her sense of smell & taste. Positive PCR test.

> "Almost everyone I know that had COVID said that the flu was worse."

I'm inclined to agree. I've had a few severe flus in my lifetime that felt worse and more intense, but again, in my experience the symptoms of flu feel quite different to Covid.

That said, I certainly don't recommend getting Covid!

> "Change in taste can be attributed to blocked nose which radiacally changes the taste of food."

I did not get a blocked nose/sinus from Covid.

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

#246

Post by nicoburns »

khazhoux wrote: post #215
Causality1 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I caught it from sharing a thirty minute meal with an in-law who didn't divulge that she had attended a party and had woken up coughing that day.

"It's just a cough, couldn't possibly be the respiratory disease that's defined the planet for the last year."

It boggles my mind how many people I've heard coughing followed by "don't worry, it's not covid". How on earth would they know?

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

#247

Post by f6v »

rolph wrote: post #25

the problem with live covid as the antigenic character is of course the mortality, and the morbidity risk. there is also the instability of the spike protien in its natural form. when spike is cloven at it cleavage site it changes conformation, thus there are two faces available to the immune system; the default state, the cloven prefusion state. This makes a Naturally aquired immunity biased toward opsonizing antbod…

> the vaccine version of spike has been stabilized so as to remain in the default state resulting in a bias toward neutralizing antibodies.

I'm not strong in molecular immunology. Does that also hold for the mRNA vaccines? Or only those that ship the spike protein itself?

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

#250

Post by f6v »

mikedilger wrote: post #10
mlyle wrote: post #8

Note 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.

I think the key is that you get 2 shots. The second one might result in antibodies that bind the antigen better. This might happen because the immune cells undergo another round of mutation and selection after a second round of antigen exposure.
Post reply on HN