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

New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

hms.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 211 posts

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#181

Post by jjcon »

inopinatus wrote: post #95
jjcon wrote: post #7

Can anyone with more knowledge on this topic than me (I’m no expert) assuage my fears: by giving human populations such artificial resistances (non-live vaccines) we run the risk of selecting for viruses that are even harder for even our own immune systems to detect and destroy. Current Covid strains don’t seem all that bad, basically everyone I know has been infected now. Might we run the risk of making things worse…

> Current Covid strains don’t seem all that bad, basically everyone I know has been infected now The first observation is false, the second, very far from universal.

In EU and US the majority of people have had covid and certainly nearly everyone has had covid or been vaccinated. The new strains are not as deadly as the original or the delta variant. That is factual.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#182

Post by inopinatus »

jjcon wrote: post #181
inopinatus wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Current Covid strains don’t seem all that bad, basically everyone I know has been infected now The first observation is false, the second, very far from universal.

In EU and US the majority of people have had covid and certainly nearly everyone has had covid or been vaccinated. The new strains are not as deadly as the original or the delta variant. That is factual.

"EU and US" is not even remotely approaching "universal": in total that is less that 10% of the world's population. Expand your horizons; this is not a parochial forum. For example, I was born in a country that is neither, and I live in another country that is neither.

Besides which, there are numerous EU member states whose vaccination rate remains below the population immunity level. More broadly, the global chain of infection, and the consequences thereof (preventable suffering and death), has not (yet) been interrupted by a sufficient global reservoir of acquired immunities.

Furthermore, "not as deadly" hardly corresponds to "don’t seem all that bad". Mustard gas is "not as deadly" as VX. Let's not move the goalposts. In the same vein, it would be a mistake to implicitly assume that future COVID variants will be less deadly.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#183

Post by jjcon »

stefs wrote: post #122
jjcon wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are we sure it is a dead end and how sure are we? It sounds as if this would put extraordinary selective pressures on the virus, if we are wrong I’d fear we would just make things worse

if all oxygen in the air was suddenly (by magic) replaced by carbon dioxide it would put extraordinary selective pressure on humans to evolve something other than oxygen-depending lungs. the most likely outcome would be that we'd all die instantly though.

I like the metaphor! I'd suggest two points, if humans evolved as fast as viruses and we couldn't replace all the oxygen on earth at once (and likely not at all in some places just as we can't get vaccine everywhere at once and not in some places at all) I would think it far more likely for human evolution to figure it out. Unlikely still, but maybe not outside the realm of possibility?

In keeping with the metaphor though and as others have pointed out in the thread - non oxygen lungs wouldn't make humans super humans, just different and if anything more likely to be weaker than their oxygen breathing counterparts as they adapt to a new environment? I think that is the running idea I'm getting at least.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#184

Post by jjcon »

HWR_14 wrote: post #175
jjcon wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that because the number of possible signatures is so vast and the vaccines so specific, even if they get slightly broader it isn’t going to make things worse because in the grand scale of things we aren’t really walling too much off?

I'm saying that at most using the vaccine will cause a virus to evolve that it evades the vaccine. It won't get any other supervirus properties, become worse, or otherwise change. The concern with using antibiotics (for instance) is that a bacteria becoming immune to one becomes more resistant to all and it's hard to generate new antibiotics. On the other hand, with the vaccine, you just might need a booster with a d…

That makes a lot of sense, thanks for the explanation!

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#185

Post by jjcon »

inopinatus wrote: post #182
jjcon wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In EU and US the majority of people have had covid and certainly nearly everyone has had covid or been vaccinated. The new strains are not as deadly as the original or the delta variant. That is factual.

"EU and US" is not even remotely approaching "universal": in total that is less that 10% of the world's population. Expand your horizons; this is not a parochial forum. For example, I was born in a country that is neither, and I live in another country that is neither. Besides which, there are numerous EU member states whose vaccination rate remains below the population immunity level. More broadly, the global chain…

Broadly speaking we don't have great data (in scale or quality) outside of the US and EU which is why I spoke to that. Things get pretty speculative even inside those borders.

> "not as deadly" hardly corresponds to "don’t seem all that bad".

That is a simply a judgement call really isn't it? We live with all sorts of terrible things. Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "all that bad"

I'm not trying to make light of something so serious only speaking in relative terms compared to what we've already been through. Also what is wrong with including vaccinated exactly? They have some level of immunity, that is what counts here right?

>you expressed a common fear that vaccination development becomes counter-productive

That is just false. I was asking if by developing such broad vaccines (as opposed to those that we have developed in the past) if we ran the risk of selecting for worse viruses. As best as I can tell the answer is no, but there isn't anything wrong with asking the question right?

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#186

Post by inopinatus »

jjcon wrote: post #185
inopinatus wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"EU and US" is not even remotely approaching "universal": in total that is less that 10% of the world's population. Expand your horizons; this is not a parochial forum. For example, I was born in a country that is neither, and I live in another country that is neither. Besides which, there are numerous EU member states whose vaccination rate remains below the population immunity level. More broadly, the global chain…

Broadly speaking we don't have great data (in scale or quality) outside of the US and EU which is why I spoke to that. Things get pretty speculative even inside those borders. > "not as deadly" hardly corresponds to "don’t seem all that bad". That is a simply a judgement call really isn't it? We live with all sorts of terrible things. Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "a…

> Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "all that bad"

I struggle to comprehend the mindset that allows anyone to think killing a million people "isn't all that bad".

> I was asking if by developing such broad vaccines (as opposed to those that we have developed in the past) if we ran the risk of selecting for worse viruses.

Whilst you were responding I edited that remark from my comment, since it does not lead to a worthwhile discussion. Nonetheless I'll stand by it as an appropriate characterization.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#187

Post by eggy »

krageon wrote: post #115
eggy wrote: post #84

Quoted post unavailable.

You are not an expert and have only anecdotal evidence. Someone might read your post and assume that your advice is healthy to follow, while it flies in the face of actual medical advice. As such, your post is actively harmful to other people. It is also not intellectually interesting, as it is just a rehash of what is essentially facebook COVID reporting. At the very least you should not try to infect others with yo…

Never said I was an expert, and I was the one who labeled my story anecdotal before you did.

What advice did I give? I said, " If you don't have natural immunity, yes, some vaccine is recommended".

My whole family came down with COVID at once. I am not jabbing my young, healthy children with an experimental mRNA virus with no long-term studies available given it has only been in circulation for less than 2 years. Tell me why I should if you think you know better. If their health got them through an initial infection without any complications, why shouldn't I think their health and the fact they now have antibodies, and a deeper B and T-cell memory of the virus, is sufficient?

I am not on FB, so I don't know what you mean "essentially facebook COVID reporting."

Here's just one medical paper citing long-Term persistence of antibodies in people who had SARS in 2003-4. Do your own searches on 2003 SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. You'll find more than enough to say it's legit, and not FB reporting.

Here are some papers about persistence of antibodies, or immunity in the form of B and T-cell immunity in SARS-COV-2 or COVID-19 subjects:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35150319/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258900422...

The CDC, the so-called experts, have been wrong so many times on COVID I have lost count. They ignored natural immunity throughout the entire epidemic. I still test over 15 in an IgG antibody test (over 15 is considered a positive in the test). Last test result was 113 a whole year after infection.

I said I didn't trust that the persistence of the mRNA and spike protein was temporary after vaccination. The CDC had up on its site that the mRNA and spike protein did leave the body shortly after vaccination. How come they deleted that statement from their current page? Check the archives to see it before they deleted it. They didn't note why this important point was quietly removed so we could understand the edit. I can only assume it was proven incorrect, which is astonishing, since there were studies in Japan about biodistribution that should have raised the call for more studies, but instead it was buried or stigmatized as anti-science. Anti-science is deciding not to test if a hypothesis is true or false, and just ignoring it.

SAR-CoV 2003 infected individuals still test positive for antibodies 19 years after. I know it's not the exact same virus as COVID-19, but nonetheless it is a coronavirus and natural immunity is persistent. Also natural immunity is based on being exposed to the whole virus, not a select set of the spike proteins. I'll go with natural immunity on this one; I'm not advising people seek to get COVID, but if you have, your choice to vaccinate should be based on this as a factor along with your age, health, and doctor's advice.

[1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20021386v...

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#188

Post by eggy »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #88
eggy wrote: post #84

Quoted post unavailable.

Covid antibodies, even vaccine induced ones, don't stick around for much more than 3-6 months. Whatever natural immunity you got nearly 3 years ago is long since useless. You're either getting lucky or an asymptomatic case and not knowing it. edit: Since you're unvaccinated, go get a covid antibody test and check for yourself how good (or terrible) your immunity is to the virus. You can take either one, the S type or…

See my response above, however, to your edit remark: a full year later I tested 115 (15 is a positive for IgG test). I referenced studies for both SARS-CoV-1 in 2003 and COVID-19 where antibodies are detected much further out than your 3-6 months. They are still testing positive for antibodies to SARS-CoV-1 (2003), 19 years later.

To your "lucky" point, I can't qualify that. If I have an asymptomatic case, that tells me my natural immunity must be pretty good, given my multi-vaccinated colleagues, at least three of them, have lost work due to second and third infections. They had the vaccination before getting COVID, so I wonder if they have weak immune systems, or the vaccine somehow is not as good as natural immunity. The CDC finally admitted natural immunity was as good or better after a year of ignoring natural immunity, and after they pushed it on healthy children, and Pfizer makes tens of billions of dollars with every booster or new series of vaccines.

I truly believe in the next 5 years it will become more clear that the majority of people who suffered from COVID that were under 55 years old was because of obesity, diabetes, and hypertension, or other immune-compromised patients. The numbers are already in the CDC datasets and other datasets from around the world showing this trend. Everyone has a horror story of a young, healthy person who died, however it is the thin tail of the distribution, and not the norm, and it is a very statistically insignificant number to push a one-size fits all mandate to vaccinate.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#189

Post by eggy »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #172
lbeltrame wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whatever natural immunity you got nearly 3 years ago is long since useless This is factually incorrect. You don't have perhaps protection against infection , nor probably symptomatic disease , but there is working natural immunity, in the form of immune memory and cell based immunity (T lymphocytes). That is far, far more resistant to variants than humoral (antibody based) immunity, mainly because only antibodies n…

Where is the T cell immunity? People are on their fourth and fifth infections now. If there were strong T cell protection we wouldn't see constant reinfection. T cells will save us has been a big coping strategy from people trying to claim the pandemic is over too soon. Hucksters like Monica Ghandi have been saying T cells will save us for years now. When... when will it happen I ask. Over a million dead bodies and p…

Look at the entire continent of Africa. A high seroprevalence of SARS-COV-2 antibodies, and yet these mostly underdeveloped nations have a much lower death rate even if you count excess deaths due to poor reporting than the US with supposedly all the best to fight it. My thought is that statistically Africans are thinner and get outdoors more than their obese, diabetic, and hypertension-suffering peers in the US and Europe sitting on their couches. I tested 113 a full year after my COVID-19 infection on an IgG test when 15 or over is considered a positive antibody test. I am going to get tested again when I return from Saudi back to the US a full two years after my infection. I bet I am still in the 80s or thereabouts. And I have not had a second infection. I am fit, do not suffer from hypertension or diabetes, and I had COVID. These are solid, scientific factors that put me in a lower risk category even if I get COVID again.

Re: New antibody neutralizes all known SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab tests

#190

Post by jjcon »

inopinatus wrote: post #186
jjcon wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broadly speaking we don't have great data (in scale or quality) outside of the US and EU which is why I spoke to that. Things get pretty speculative even inside those borders. > "not as deadly" hardly corresponds to "don’t seem all that bad". That is a simply a judgement call really isn't it? We live with all sorts of terrible things. Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "a…

> Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "all that bad" I struggle to comprehend the mindset that allows anyone to think killing a million people "isn't all that bad". > I was asking if by developing such broad vaccines (as opposed to those that we have developed in the past) if we ran the risk of selecting for worse viruses. Whilst you were responding I edited that remark fr…

> think killing a million people "isn't all that bad".

Please read again, I said cars are not all that bad, if you are going to have discussion please assume good faith (see hn rules please https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

Post reply on HN