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

Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 371 posts

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#101

Post by raffraffraff »

ProjectBarks wrote: post #85

This feels like an irresponsible title on behalf of the author. People don’t get the vaccine strictly on the strength of the vaccine. It’s considering the risk of getting COVID, understanding the long term side effects, and minimizing risk for those around you. It’s also about avoiding mutations of the virus as the higher availability of the virus only provides more opportunities for it to mutate into something more…

Yeah. Should be "If you survive covid 19, you will have greater immunity to covid that you would get from a vaccine"

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#102

Post by jjuel »

vibrato2 wrote: post #48
jjuel wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you didn't get vaccinated and have yet to get COVID so your strategy is working? Or you already got COVID but it wasn't serious so it is working? Either way it seems like saying "I've been smoking all my life and never got cancer. Not sure why everyone is so worried about smoking."

I’m very confident I’ve been exposed to covid, yet never had any test or conclusive symptoms. I’m also confident that people like me do not experience problems from covid. At least not any more problems than a flu. A 1/3000 risk of myocarditis is not something I will risk. That’s a long term scarring of heart tissue, similar to how my father died in his 30s from teenage medical treatment. The difference in your state…

Okay so a case fatality rate of 1.65% is fine with you, but a 0.003% chance of Myocarditis is not okay? Yes another difference is COVID is easily spread through the air amongst people so yeah it is much worse than a slow growing tumor you are correct.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#103

Post by [deleted] »

jlmorton wrote: post #92
ProjectBarks wrote: post #85

This feels like an irresponsible title on behalf of the author. People don’t get the vaccine strictly on the strength of the vaccine. It’s considering the risk of getting COVID, understanding the long term side effects, and minimizing risk for those around you. It’s also about avoiding mutations of the virus as the higher availability of the virus only provides more opportunities for it to mutate into something more…

What is the harm? "I'm very worried about getting Covid, but I'm also worried about the vaccine, so I'll get Covid to protect me against Covid?" This is an important public health topic to model how the pandemic proceeds as more and more are naturally infected.

[deleted]

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#104

Post by t0mas88 »

vibrato2 wrote: post #48
jjuel wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you didn't get vaccinated and have yet to get COVID so your strategy is working? Or you already got COVID but it wasn't serious so it is working? Either way it seems like saying "I've been smoking all my life and never got cancer. Not sure why everyone is so worried about smoking."

I’m very confident I’ve been exposed to covid, yet never had any test or conclusive symptoms. I’m also confident that people like me do not experience problems from covid. At least not any more problems than a flu. A 1/3000 risk of myocarditis is not something I will risk. That’s a long term scarring of heart tissue, similar to how my father died in his 30s from teenage medical treatment. The difference in your state…

The European total was 145 cases of myocarditis on 177 million vaccinations. Assuming 2 vaccinations per person, that's 145 cases in 88.5 million people or a 0,00016% chance. That's less than 1 in 600.000 not the 3000 you claim.

And even then, a very big majority of the myocarditis cases were mild enough to go away on their own. Only 5 people died from it and all were elderly with other pre-existing conditions.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#105

Post by roenxi »

ProjectBarks wrote: post #85

This feels like an irresponsible title on behalf of the author. People don’t get the vaccine strictly on the strength of the vaccine. It’s considering the risk of getting COVID, understanding the long term side effects, and minimizing risk for those around you. It’s also about avoiding mutations of the virus as the higher availability of the virus only provides more opportunities for it to mutate into something more…

Based on the number of deaths, a very large percentage of people have already had COVID.

Given that there is a non-0% chance of death or harm from taking the vaccine, why should they then get vaccinated? They are already less of a risk to themselves and others than someone who has been vaccinated.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#106

Post by tzs »

Long term it seems pretty straightforward.

It is almost certain COVID will become endemic, and no known form of immunity whether from vaccination or prior infection confers sufficient permanent immunity against infection to stop re-infection but prior immunity (from vaccine or prior infection) does greatly reduce the chances that your infection will give you serious illness.

You assumption therefore should be that over the rest of your life you will get COVID multiple times.

The question then is whether you want your first infection to be with or without prior immunity. If you want that first time to be with prior immunity get vaccinated as that is the only known way to get immunity before your first infection.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#107

Post by londons_explore »

Pxtl wrote: post #98

Good news for survivors, but this is going to make battles about vaccine passports much worse as anti-vax covid survivors demand exemption from the program.

I think most health policy decisionmakers would happily accept a positive test result for covid in place of a vaccination as long as this science is replicated by other parties.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#108

Post by polote »

ProjectBarks wrote: post #85

This feels like an irresponsible title on behalf of the author. People don’t get the vaccine strictly on the strength of the vaccine. It’s considering the risk of getting COVID, understanding the long term side effects, and minimizing risk for those around you. It’s also about avoiding mutations of the virus as the higher availability of the virus only provides more opportunities for it to mutate into something more…

> a much less clickbait title should have been chosen

It is not clickbait, (if true) this is just a fact.

Re: Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

#110

Post by amluto »

peteradio wrote: post #89
peterbonney wrote: post #63

The term ”survivor bias” is usually used metaphorically, but in this case it applies literally. Putting in some caveats about the risks associated with infection is not enough. This is a garbage analysis that should never have been accepted for publication.

I don't see survivor bias here at all. This is simply a study that caters to a rather significant population who justifiably want to know what they stand to gain from this vaccine. What this study has done is identified a sub population who stand to gain such minuscule benefit from vaccination that it would be unethical to include them in a study (most studies DO exclude previously infected individuals, huh wonder wh…

The study appears to be reporting at least a further 50% reduction in risk for previously infected people who get a vaccine.

One might debate whether the probabilities involved are so low as to be irrelevant, but the study absolutely supports the existence of a benefit.

Post reply on HN