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

Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 285 posts

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#231

Post by nawgz »

maxerickson wrote: post #101
nawgz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this is a reoccurring theme throughout history that lead to most of the endemic coronaviruses today. Omicron is truly fantastic; for example look at Ontario’s case count vs ICU count. Omicron has completely decoupled those graphs.

It's not really clear whether that is because it is less severe or if it is because there are lots more breakthrough infections. (but a larger number of mild breakthrough infections is not itself terrible news either as the mildness indicates a population becoming more resilient against the virus)

It’s perfectly clear, across the world vaccinated or unvaccinated hospitalizations and severities are reduced. South Africa on one extreme and New South Wales on the other. Ontario a textbook example of a first world society’s expectation vis a vis vaccination, age curves, and severity.

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#232

Post by nradov »

johnchristopher wrote: post #198
iamdamian wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why we wouldn't be able to go back to normal, and taking a stance that we never will strikes me as somewhat defeatist. I'm more of an optimist. Having a small percentage of the population that's at greater risk of serious implications from infection (respiratory or otherwise) is something we've learned to live with before (see: the flu) without masks, mandates, or dramatically rearranging the way we live…

> I'm not sure why we wouldn't be able to go back to normal, There are no path back to normal unless the virus disappears. We have vaccines that work for a limited time, we'll soon have pills@home. It will still not be `back to normal`. > and taking a stance that we never will strikes me as somewhat defeatist. We'll also never have FTL spaceships or teleportation star trek style. > I'm more of an optimist. Having a s…

The virus will never disappear. We can go back to normal as soon as people decide to accept the risk. In fact that has already happened in several states.

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#233

Post by jbd28 »

abduhl wrote: post #3

So the long Covid we’ve been afraid of for our children this whole time has actually been long term immunity? How ironic that our own push to vaccinate and save our children could put them in a worse position immunity-wise. Like rain on your wedding day.

You couldn’t have lost the plot any more with this one

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#234

Post by jbd28 »

chana_masala wrote: post #202
oezi wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an excellent refutation of using Adverse Events Reports for anything but safety signalling. The author of the linked substack could have uploaded the death reports himself. And he didn't even think about comparing his numbers to expected numbers. So, no: children don't die from the vaccine.

The author has a $1 million dollar offer to debate him and prove him wrong.

Oh wow, never mind it’s settled truth then /s

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#235

Post by jbd28 »

chana_masala wrote: post #212
jacquesm wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's see the escrow first. Seriously though, VAERS is not meant to be used in this way. Let me try to describe how I understand the mechanism, I'm sure there are people on HN that would be more than happy to correct me if anything is out of whack: - VAERS allows for the reporting of suspected side effects - this information is then made available again to ensure transparency - the suspicion of a side effect is not t…

> Within that context the debate is pointless: VAERS is not intended to settle arguments, it is intended to gather possibly useful data. Sounds like you've got this one in the bag, then!

Enjoy the silo you’ve dropped yourself in

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#236

Post by phonypc »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #171
phonypc wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VAERS is not the best information available by any means, but it is indeed a valid source of information. The issue with the paper is that it misuses the information and draws conclusions that aren't actually indicated.

What other dataset are you using to inform yourself about vaccine related harm in the public?

Your question would seem to imply you've used VAERS to inform yourself, but I would contend you've relied on someone else's interpretation of it.

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#237

Post by jlokier »

adam_arthur wrote: post #191
vidarh wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these restrictions were put in place because the effects of Omicron were uncertain when they were decided. If these early results bear out, I'm sure we'll start seeing the easing of some restrictions again very quickly.

The restrictions largely don't have any effect anyway, if you compare different US state policies with health outcomes. Especially something like a travel/flight ban, as if that can stop an exponentially spreading virus.

A travel/flight ban changes the exponent, which changes the shape and peak of the healthcare curve, buys time for gathering data, and in Omicron's case, more time to roll out an mRNA booster dose which significantly improves protection against severe symptoms compared with the 2-dose schedule.

It definitely has an effect, even if the virus is not "stopped".

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#238

Post by nradov »

stubish wrote: post #209
rootusrootus wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what level of risk and mortality are we prepared to accept IMO, the rational answer to this question is 'the same risk and mortality that we have already accepted from influenza.' There is a lot of variability there, of course, but it is way above zero in any case.

I don't think this is quite right. The risk from COVID is in addition to the risk from influenza, and much of the mitigation affects both . Changes like common mask wearing may not have been considered 'worth it' for only lessening mortality and the economic costs of influenza, but the economic benefits alone of reduced productivity due to influenza and COVID combined may mean it is the obvious choice now for governm…

There's more to life than economic benefits. I'm certainly not willing to spend the rest of my life wearing a mask, regardless of what governments say.

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#239

Post by nradov »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #172
pilsetnieks wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now inverse that statement and see where it takes you, and what it tells about you as a human being.

Downvoters: you want your elders (and not just them) to die and countless others to suffer long-term consequences of a disease not yet fully understood just to earn some money right now and keep the endless rat race going as it is; you make me sick.

You present a false choice. No disease will ever be fully understood; there is always more to learn. We can't keep restrictions in place indefinitely while waiting for more information.

Re: Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive immunity after Covid

#240

Post by amanaplanacanal »

nradov wrote: post #232
johnchristopher wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure why we wouldn't be able to go back to normal, There are no path back to normal unless the virus disappears. We have vaccines that work for a limited time, we'll soon have pills@home. It will still not be `back to normal`. > and taking a stance that we never will strikes me as somewhat defeatist. We'll also never have FTL spaceships or teleportation star trek style. > I'm more of an optimist. Having a s…

The virus will never disappear. We can go back to normal as soon as people decide to accept the risk. In fact that has already happened in several states.

I think we'll go back to normal when the risk that hospitals will get overwhelmed wanes.
Post reply on HN