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

Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 364 posts

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#231

Post by mustacheemperor »

YawningAngel wrote: post #53
mywittyname wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccination is more comprehensive than natural immunity though. We've already see that the BNT vaccine offers a higher degree of protection against variants than natural immunity, or indeed other vaccines. Reinfection studies from a few months ago demonstrated that natural immunity is roughly 50% effective for people aged 65 or over. And that's the age group most likely to experience negative outcomes from covid-19,…

It's quite irresponsible to try and coerce people who don't need treatment to accept it as well

What you are saying is contrary to the tack already taken towards the eradication of other endemic lethal diseases and pests such as River Blindness. That example has been eradicated through much of the Americas primarily by treating everyone in an affected community with ivermectin, which has the effect of slowing transmission from all of the infected individuals in the community (including those who don't know they are infected) and does not harm uninfected individuals. With attitudes like the one you are quoting, it would never work.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#232

Post by timr »

mrj wrote: post #156
sjwalter wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Canadian who emigrated to the US, the attitude you so proudly display--ostracizing people who aren't convinced of a novel vaccine with zero long-term safety information--makes me so happy I live here.

It's not novel, this technology has been trialed and used for a decade, 3 years in vaccines. We do already have long-term data. You would see side effects for a vaccine within six months, and we have been administering it for much longer than that. The vaccines are safe. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7956899/

> You would see side effects for a vaccine within six months, and we have been administering it for much longer than that.

We have now had two separate rare-but-serious side effects of different Covid vaccines: the CVT issue with J&J, and the myocarditis issue with the mRNA vaccines in children. It's disingenuous to suggest that the vaccines are "safe" merely because they've been widely administered; even the question of what "safe" means is a far more nuanced question than you're presenting. For children, in particular, two-dose vaccination with the mRNA vaccines is probably a poor risk/benefit profile. We didn't know that until we started dosing enough kids to see the rare side effects.

The phase 3 trials were not powered to detect rare side effects, which is part of the reason that they're still classified as emergency use, and not fully approved.

I am an advocate for vaccination, but it's not right to ignore these issues.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#233

Post by rorykoehler »

loceng wrote: post #75
gameswithgo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

vaccines have been effective against it as well

Quite a bit less effective and why the WHO is saying fully vaccinated should still mask up inside. Edit to add: 70% effective vs. 95%+ is a significant reduction.

So you don’t get it and pass it on to the unvaccinated in the window that you are infected and your body is fighting it off.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#234

Post by mrj »

incrudible wrote: post #226
mrj wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if true, this novel molecule is not floating around in a body for an entire year waiting to have some side effect. They've been shooting it into people for a year and a half now. If there was something to worry about, it would have been seen. But there are many parts of this vaccine that is shared with previous ones and the mechanics have been tested thoroughly. The science is the same. There's just no credible…

> Even if true, this novel molecule is not floating around in a body for an entire year waiting to have some side effect. They've been shooting it into people for a year and a half now. If there was something to worry about, it would have been seen. There are lots of things we do see and we should worry about. The problem is that we can't tell right away if it's just noise, if it's a potentially rare side-effect. The…

Right, anything not yet discovered is going to be a pretty rare side effect. We're still learning about what covid does to the body, tell me about the side effects of getting sick.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#235

Post by [deleted] »

sjwalter wrote: post #190
peter422 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How sure are you about the long term effects of COVID?

Oh, not very sure at all. However, I may have already have it, so that cat's out of the bag (and invalidates any reason to get the vaccine anyways). Or I may never get it. Taking the vaccine, which includes three brand new medical technologies and has not completed phase3 trial, guarantees me taking that risk. I am extremely healthy, have a great diet, and as a farmer, I get plenty of time soaking up vitamin D, a pot…

[deleted]

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#236

Post by wait_a_minute »

ryandrake wrote: post #224
wait_a_minute wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not your business to police this and that's not how it works in the United States. It is not anyone's business to demand a confirmed clinical test. Florida and other states have been open for a long time now and their covid numbers are declining same as wherever there are attempts at more mandates. What use is a confirmed clinical test there? We are not a collective. We do not have these types of arbiters who wi…

Every system has some number of malicious actors. You should trust, but you must also verify. If a system designer assumes no bad actors exist, the system will be quickly exploited, which is why voluntary mask mandates and distancing rules didn't work. We have locks on doors, passwords for computers, seat belts in cars, and rules against drunk driving, precisely because of a small number of dishonest and reckless peo…

Wear a mask and get vaccinated if you’re not and stay home if you’re scared.

Florida and other states have not had mandates and they’re doing fine per the data.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#237

Post by Pyramus »

timr wrote: post #183
nokcha wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That's not what this says I admit I'm not medically trained, but the graph [1] seems pretty clear to me, and the authors said: > In contrast, participants with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline before the first vaccine injection rapidly developed uniform, high antibody titers within days after vaccination (median AUC before vaccination, 90 [43 participants]; >at 0 to 4 days, 133 [7 participants]; >at 5 to 8 days, 14…

The graph is quite clear. It shows that seropositive (previously infected) people had a higher pre-existing antibody level before vaccination, and it rapidly increased at days 5-8 post-vaccination -- faster and stronger than in unexposed people. It takes 28+ days and a second dose for the unexposed group to approach the titers seen in the group who already had Covid, and they still don't quite get there. Most notably…

I don't follow your argumentation - why would extremely high antibody titres not almost certainly result in a better immune response?

On the contrary, from all that we know today, wouldn't we expect people with high IgA titres to even develop neutralizing immunity, at least in the weeks after titres peak?

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#238

Post by wait_a_minute »

CameronNemo wrote: post #196
wait_a_minute wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all have a right to use public space. If the users are not interested in the vaccination or don't already have antibodies, that is on them. They will have reaped what they sowed. It's not your business to police that though. And you ignored what I said about Florida and the other states where people have been going maskless for a long time without the numbers changing the trend.

You are free to cite to the statistics you are referencing. But I know in my community, cases did not fall until people started getting vaccinated en masse.

You can easily google “State covid cases” for any of the states that have gotten rid of mandates long ago and see the decline in covid cases. For many states.

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#239

Post by M2Ys4U »

loceng wrote: post #75
gameswithgo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

vaccines have been effective against it as well

Quite a bit less effective and why the WHO is saying fully vaccinated should still mask up inside. Edit to add: 70% effective vs. 95%+ is a significant reduction.

Depends on what you mean by "effective" (i.e. are you talking about infection, hospitalisation or death?), and relative to what (i.e. ancestral wild type vs Alpha vs Delta).

If you're talking Alpha vs Delta and about hospitalisation/death, then the vaccines are actually marginally more effective against Delta than Alpha according to data from Public Health England (although there's significant overlap in the confidence intervals).

Re: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines may produce lasting immunity

#240

Post by willmadden »

michaelmrose wrote: post #174
willmadden wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not use the term "anti-vaxxer". There are countless vaccines with varying safety profiles, unknowns, and underlying risks for the diseases they prevent. People who make informed decisions about specific vaccines based on the risk/reward (and unknowns) are not "anti-vaxxers". It is not an all-or-nothing proposition.

In theory this is true but in reality half of the US population just isn't smart enough to evaluate such a question and those who are hesitant are virtually exclusively drawn from this portion. This is well highlighted by the fact that the societal and individual risks of avoiding vaccination are so insanely high while the risk of vaccination is virtually insignificant. If I offered you a chance to skip rope or play…

>those who are hesitant are virtually exclusively drawn from this portion.

Well, that's complete BS. The list of people expressing concerns about the mRNA / spike protein based injections includes the inventor of the PCR test (Nobel Prize winner), the guy who invented Ivermectin (Nobel Prize winner), the guy credited with inventing mRNA vaccines, the guy who discovered that HIV causes AIDS (another Nobel Prize winner), and countless other famous researchers.

These people are typically pro-vaccine in general, but have reservations about the new spike protein based mRNA vaccines. They are anything but "not smart enough to evaluate such a question".

Here, give this a read: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/693/htm

Post reply on HN