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

Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

directorsblog.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 250 posts

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#161

Post by [deleted] »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #14
anonuser123456 wrote: post #9

Antigen targets aside, there is also a difference in the production of antibodies in the mucosal system. Current vaccines are intra muscular and lacks a robust mucosal response while natural infection will provide mucosal immunity as well. As one can imagine, mucosal immunity is very important in an upper respiratory track disease w.r.t. symptomatic infection and transmission.

Yeah, why aren't we putting more effort into getting an intranasal vaccine approved for emergency use? An intranasal vaccine would confer mucosal immunity and might also be more acceptable to the vaccine hesitant. They're talking about 3rd shot boosters, but I'd really like to be able to get an intranasal vaccine as the third booster.

[deleted]

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#162

Post by jyounker »

root_axis wrote: post #155
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For spike proteins. Not for the other targets you get with natural immunity From the article: "the new evidence shows that protective antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2 variants carrying 'single letter' changes in a key portion of their spike protein compared to antibodies acquired from an infection." The study discussed in the article unequivocally states…

The quote you're highlighting is specifically referring to 'single letter' variants of the spike protein . Immunity from infection gives a wider variety of protections beyond just the narrow targeting of the spike protein.

The RDB portion of the spike protein is the part that allows the virus to latch onto your cells. We therefore expect strong limitations on how much this portion of the virus can change while still remaining infectious.

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#163

Post by bananabiscuit »

jyounker wrote: post #160
bananabiscuit wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That mechanism of action is just what I’ve seen put forth by immunologists commenting on the these kinds of results. While the author’s opinions on the necessity of vaccines do differ, they do agree on my main point: that empirically, natural immunity is indeed robust and tentatively even better than vaccine acquired immunity. It looks like getting a vaccine helps boost immunity in all cases, whether you had a previo…

To acquire immunity naturally you have to get sick. In oder to acquire that immunity you have a 1% chance of dying, 2% chance of ending up in the hospital on a ventilator for a month, and a 20% chance of long haul covid. To acquire immunity from a vaccine you have a 0.001% chance of an allergic reaction. Which risk do you choose?

Sorry. I never said and never even meant to imply that you should try to get sick instead of getting the vaccine. Only that if you were already sick, that it greatly shifts your own risk/benefit profile in the direction of not getting the vaccine.

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#164

Post by geoduck14 »

oldgradstudent wrote: post #67
bananabiscuit wrote: post #3

The spike protein targeting antibodies produced by the vaccine do indeed target a wider range of spike mutations than the spike protein antibodies from previous infection. However, vaccines only target spike protein, while a previous infection will cause your body to produce antibodies for a much larger set of targets on the virus, which in practice leads to a more robust immunity. This is supported by data from Isra…

> However, vaccines only target spike protein, while a previous infection will cause your body to produce antibodies for a much larger set of targets on the virus, which in practice leads to a more robust immunity. This is supported by data from Israel and some recent studies No, it does not. The data from Israel only supports the claim that immunity from infection is longer lasting than from the vaccine, which shoul…

>The data from Israel only supports the claim that immunity from infection is longer lasting than from the vaccine, which should not have been a surprise to anyone.

I find that surprising. Why did you expect that? Why should I have expected that?

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#165

Post by jyounker »

unanswered wrote: post #49
Animats wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a good explanation of why.[1] There are several intranasal coronavirus vaccines in test. There's only one approved nasal vaccine now, for anything: FluMist. It's not recommended for people over 50. There have been previous failures. Intranasal vaccines are hard to make work. Think of the current mRNA vaccines as a minimum viable product. The basic formulation was computed days after the virus was sequenced and…

This raises an interesting question: is someone who is waiting for an effective intranasal vaccine to get something more like sterilizing immunity, and foregoing the less-effective vaccine meanwhile, anti-vax?

Yes.

The odds of dying from covid: 1%

The odds of dying from covid after current vaccine: <0.015%

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#166

Post by bobbytit »

jiocrag wrote: post #154
bobbytit wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the Israeli study then.. http://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.spectator.co.uk/arti... It found that double pfizer jabbed people were 13 times more likely to be infected than those who had already recovered.

Not disputing that. Anecdotally in my household: 100% break-through rate (2 Pfizer vaxxed adults and 2 unvaxxed [ineligible] children] all recently caught what we believe to be the delta variant (confirmed via PCR). That said, the vaccine clearly reduced disease severity; all recovered within a few days.

I am glad to hear that you are all well. I am not sure that you can necessarily attribute your luck to the effectiveness of the vaccine, especially if none of you had known risk factors.

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#167

Post by jyounker »

logicalmonster wrote: post #142
strenholme wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the linked study [1] is saying is that unvaccinated people who get COVID-19 are even more likely to get Myocarditis than vaccinated people ; it counters the allegation that people should not get vaccinated because of the risk of Myocarditis. Even if the vaccine increased the risk (it doesn’t), the risk of COVID-19 is orders of magnitude higher than the risk of the Myocarditis heart condition. There have been, fr…

> COVID-19, on the other hand, has an overall 1.66% chance of killing someone (38,043,754 cases, 629,644 deaths). An honest, apples to apples statistical comparison here would compare 18-24 year old death rates to 18-24 year old heart problems risk, not lumping all deaths regardless of age together. > I would rather take a 0.002% non-fatal risk than a 1.66% fatal risk. Statistical problems aside, I’m happy if you tak…

The unvaccinated are volunteering themselves as breeders for the next stronger and nastier version of covid, and they pose an active danger to those who cannot be vaccinated.

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#168

Post by inter_netuser »

IgorPartola wrote: post #134
dnautics wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, it's not by much; mortality for covid-19 is less than a percent of all hospitalizations, iirc.

Right. The point of the vaccines is to not have to find out if you are in the 99% who survive Covid or the 1% who don’t.

and if virus keeps mutating... twice-annual booster shots all over the earth?

I really hope we don't end up with a Marek's disease, but in humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease#Prevention

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#169

Post by randomopining »

Johnny555 wrote: post #147
randomopining wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I've been proposing for a few months. Get the vaccine and then get the delta variant a few weeks later to crush it and then be super immune for future variants that jet off of that one.

The vaccine is highly effective at preventing severe disease requiring hospitalization, but nothing is 100% (after 6 months, Pfizer is 97% effective at preventing severe disease) -- I'm not going to deliberately expose myself to something that could put me in a hospital. And no point, really. If I'm going to force myself to have the disease to build up immunity, why not just wait until I'm accidentally exposed (which…

The whole point of my strategy would be that perhaps Delta is a precursor to a, let's say, Zeta variant that has almost complete evasion to the vaccine.

Let's say in January or something.

So what you're doing is giving your body a high chance to crush the Delta and gain some cross-immunity towards the future evasive variant.

Whereas if you just relied on the vaccine, it might not even work well in January.

Obviously this is just conjecture, but I think a real possibility.

Re: Immunity Generated from Covid-19 Vaccines Differs from an Infection

#170

Post by randomopining »

contravariant wrote: post #122
faeyanpiraat wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have evidence that this is the best course of action?

Well the obvious problems with it is that it's hard to tell you've been infected and you need to quarantine for the entire duration until you are sure you've been infected and have recovered. Apart from that, if the protection from a vaccine is temporary then there's no reason to believe your immune system will learn anything from an infection it can already handle. That part of the immune response takes a while and…

The whole point of my strategy would be that perhaps Delta is a precursor to a, let's say, Zeta variant that has almost complete evasion to the vaccine. Let's say in January or something.

So what you're doing is giving your body a high chance to crush the Delta and gain some cross-immunity towards the future evasive variant.

Whereas if you just relied on the vaccine, it might not even work well in January.

Obviously this is just conjecture, but I think a real possibility.

Post reply on HN