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

Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

cell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 222 posts

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#11

Post by not2b »

School-Cotton wrote: post #4
csours wrote: post #3

Just a note to non-immunologists - Immunity means different things to health and science professionals vs the general public. Edit: I'm not going into detail in this comment because I am not an immunologist and I cannot express clearly and correctly what the difference is, but just be aware that "Immunity" may not mean 100% protection in the way that the general public thinks that word means.

Don’t leave us hanging - what does it mean?

If I understand correctly, it means that the immune system launches an immediate response to the new infection, it doesn't mean that the immune system successfully defeats the new infection, just makes it more likely. And then there's the problem of variants.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#12

Post by hprotagonist »

keneda7 wrote: post #10
hprotagonist wrote: post #6

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2 vaccines also produce durable and persistent immune responses. Primary antibody titers wane, but the system itself remembers and can regenerate them when challenged. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28107714 for contra "but muh boosters", which i suspect is what's helping me collect downvotes.

Please stop spreading misinformation. IMO 15 weeks is not long enough to determine if its durable and persistent. There would be no talk of booster shots if what your saying is true.

not so, see my other thread in this story here, and cool it on the personal attacks, thanks!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28107714

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#13

Post by JimBlackwood »

keneda7 wrote: post #10
hprotagonist wrote: post #6

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2 vaccines also produce durable and persistent immune responses. Primary antibody titers wane, but the system itself remembers and can regenerate them when challenged. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28107714 for contra "but muh boosters", which i suspect is what's helping me collect downvotes.

Please stop spreading misinformation. IMO 15 weeks is not long enough to determine if its durable and persistent. There would be no talk of booster shots if what your saying is true.

Bit of an overreaction. Stating that the testing period of 15 weeks is, in your opinion, too short to determine long-term immunity would’ve sufficed as comment.

No need to be uncivil to eachother when you don’t agree.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#14

Post by URSpider94 »

School-Cotton wrote: post #4
csours wrote: post #3

Just a note to non-immunologists - Immunity means different things to health and science professionals vs the general public. Edit: I'm not going into detail in this comment because I am not an immunologist and I cannot express clearly and correctly what the difference is, but just be aware that "Immunity" may not mean 100% protection in the way that the general public thinks that word means.

Don’t leave us hanging - what does it mean?

I’m still learning, but the concept of “sterilizing immunity” has started to come up recently. What I infer from cursory reading is that “immunity” means the body will mount an immune response immediately upon exposure to the virus, but it doesn’t mean that an infection won’t take hold. “Sterilizing immunity” means immunity strong enough to prevent the virus from growing at all.

The issue at hand is that those who have been vaccinated and/or recovered from COVID seem to be able to contract the disease again, even to the point where they can be infectious to others, even if they don’t get terribly ill or even show symptoms.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#15

Post by ajross »

wpasc wrote: post #2

Can any of the findings from the properties of how natural immunity works be guided in to future COVID 19 vaccines? Given how the pharma companies are examining anti-body half life, exploring booster shots, and considering vaccinations against variants (like lambda), can any of the learnings go into a more durable, more broad vaccine?

Vaccine immunity IS "natural" immunity. It works the same way, by exposing the body's immune system to virus components such that they product a response. The only difference is that with a vaccine those components don't add up to a viable organism.

But yes: expect newer vaccines tailored to currently-circulating strains to appear; the existing mRNA vaccines produce copies of the spike protein sequenced more than a year ago. That's what we've done for influenza for decades, though not with the same kind of precision.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#16

Post by artursapek »

hprotagonist wrote: post #6

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2 vaccines also produce durable and persistent immune responses. Primary antibody titers wane, but the system itself remembers and can regenerate them when challenged. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28107714 for contra "but muh boosters", which i suspect is what's helping me collect downvotes.

Why are you trolling this thread and shilling vaccines? Does the sight of people discussing the wonder of our natural immune system bother you?

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#17

Post by chuinard »

ajross wrote: post #15
wpasc wrote: post #2

Can any of the findings from the properties of how natural immunity works be guided in to future COVID 19 vaccines? Given how the pharma companies are examining anti-body half life, exploring booster shots, and considering vaccinations against variants (like lambda), can any of the learnings go into a more durable, more broad vaccine?

Vaccine immunity IS "natural" immunity. It works the same way, by exposing the body's immune system to virus components such that they product a response. The only difference is that with a vaccine those components don't add up to a viable organism. But yes: expect newer vaccines tailored to currently-circulating strains to appear; the existing mRNA vaccines produce copies of the spike protein sequenced more than a y…

Damn you got downvoted real quick.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#18

Post by csours »

School-Cotton wrote: post #4
csours wrote: post #3

Just a note to non-immunologists - Immunity means different things to health and science professionals vs the general public. Edit: I'm not going into detail in this comment because I am not an immunologist and I cannot express clearly and correctly what the difference is, but just be aware that "Immunity" may not mean 100% protection in the way that the general public thinks that word means.

Don’t leave us hanging - what does it mean?

Sorry this is incomplete, but "Natural Immunity" means a person's immune system will mount an effective response to an infectious agent. However, that person may still be infected, and may be contagious to some degree while the body is fighting off the contagion.

I'm not a doctor or biologist, but I've been learning over the past year. For instance, people generally think of things like "infected", "sick", and "contagious" as being the same thing (or nearly the same thing). If you're talking about one person in everyday context, that's fine. If you're talking in a clinical or epidemiological context, you have to be more careful.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#19

Post by 015a »

Its important to keep studies like this in mind when talking with people who refuse to take the vaccine because they "already had COVID". In a very real sense, if natural antibodies are durable, persistent, and effective; the vaccine is an unnecessary medical procedure. Doctors would not cut off your legs for no reason; that would be unethical. The vaccine is a medical procedure like any other; if the benefit is questionable, it would be unethical for doctors to administer it.

Yet, we have an increasing number of venues, workplaces, and events which are requiring proof of vaccination to participate. This is forcing both people who already have antibodies, and even people who can't make antibodies (e.g. immunocompromised, solid organ transplant, etc), to undergo a medical procedure for little to no benefit.

Primum non nocere

Post reply on HN