Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant • Hacker News Board

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#671

Post by hcknwscommenter » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 1:34 AM UTC

angelzen wrote: post #627

hcknwscommenter wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long-lasting original antigenic sin (e.g., an immune system trapped for years (or forever) in a sub-optimal state by a vaccination event) is a very unlikely scenario. I don't think we have ever seen something like that for any other virus? So, it's no surprise you haven't found much data. I would also suggest you critically examine whatever data you have found that supposedly backs up this concern of yours.

Long-lasting original antigenic sin is well documented at least for dengue. "Original antigenic sin has the advantage that a response can be rapidly mobilized from memory. However, the downside is that in some cases, such as dengue, the response is dominated by inferior-quality antibody. In influenza, original antigenic sin has been shown to reduce the effectiveness of vaccination (13, 34, 51). In dengue, the effect…

your link only reports on primary and secondary dengue. There is no analysis of how long of a gap there was between primary and secondary, and whether that length of time matters. I don't see any evidence whatsoever in that link of a "long-lasting" original antigenic sin.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#672

Post by swayvil » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 2:04 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #621

swayvil wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Checking out your replies that got flagged and killed. Mob style censorship is alive and well here.

Would you please stop posting flamewar comments to HN? You've been doing it a lot and we ban that sort of account, regardless of what you're flaming for or against. This isn't a site for ideological battle or wake-up-sheeple rants. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sure man. Will do.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#673

Post by rixed » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 2:17 AM UTC

potta_coffee wrote: post #524

bink wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how flu shots work. You might have had an immune response that had you feeling down, but flu shots don't give you the flu.

It's semantics whether or not full-blown flu symptoms are "the flu" or not; I get the flu shot, then I get sick.

Why engage in discussions when semantics does not matter?

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#674

Post by rixed » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 2:31 AM UTC

potta_coffee wrote: post #532

paulryanrogers wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically I think your reaction is from the immune response to the vaccine. Which is unpleasant but not contagious. Now real flu viruses may have not yet given you symptoms since you stopped vaccinating. But it's possible you're becoming a carrier of the virus that spreads it to more vulnerable people. Some of whom may not be able to get vaccinated.

It's my choice not to take shots that make me sick, and no I won't take them again. It's unfortunate that some people have fragile health, but it's not really my problem. No amount of brow-beating will make it my problem. No, I'm not a calloused individual that doesn't care about others. I don't believe that anyone is required to undergo medical procedures in order to benefit me, and I will not undergo medical proced…

Mind you, you sound 100% like someone who do not care about others.

But your decision to not take flu shots sounds totally reasonable given you apparently get a bad adverse reaction every time.

You therefore belong to that group of people whose health is too weak to get vaccinated, I guess.

I hope you won't catch the flu, and will keep getting vaccinated whenever I get the chance since I'm lucky enough that I've never felt any illness from any vaccine (but got flu once and had to stay in bed, half unconscious, for almost a day).

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#675

Post by nojokes » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 2:38 AM UTC

hcurtiss wrote: post #543

bluGill wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The vaccine hasn't stopped spread in rich countries, why would it do so in poor countries? It has greatly slowed the spread. The highest vaccinated countries have almost stopped it. There is every reason to believe that high vaccination across the world would stop covid, and anything less will ensure continued spread (and mutations). People demanding an all or nothing from a vaccine are missing the big picture.

The highest vaccinated countries have almost stopped it? Israel had among the highest vaccination rates in the world prior to its most recent peak, which has now declined. Other countries are going through the same thing. There is only a very rough/weak correlation between vaccination rate and positive cases.

It is depressing how people pretend that it is the same virus every time.

Israel has faced waves of 3 different viruses - original, Alpha and Delta what have required different level of immunization and Israel has managed to vaccinate itself out of 2 of these waves.

Looks quite impressive to me.

I also fail to understand why people pretend that 2 doses should be expected to stop Delta that has higher viral load - it does not make any sense.

It is a probabilistic game - antibodies are not smart - they are like mines - you need to have high enough concentration to stop viral particles to move around. If the viral particles can overload this concentration - they are going to win. There obviously must be some threshold of antibody concentration below what you can't avoid infection - when 2 dose regimen reaches it too quickly, well, game over. 3rd dose regimen is known to boost antibody concentration and keep it high for longer time. There is no surprise here and yet even people in position (like WHO) that should know better have intentionally ignored it.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#676

Post by newsbinator » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 2:42 AM UTC

r00fus wrote: post #454

listless wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has always been my fear. I'm vaccinated (Moderna) and got COVID in September. I recovered quickly - about 3 days. But I'm worried that my body did not get to have a proper immune response and that as such, I'll have to continue get vaccinated forever whereas if I had just gotten COVID without the vaccine maybe I would be set. But I haven't found _much_ data to back up this concern.

> whereas if I had just gotten COVID without the vaccine maybe I would be set You might be "set" with long COVID, sure [1]. It's like wishing to be mugged so you can learn to fight the muggers next time you get mugged instead of practicing mugging defense with say, a martial arts teacher. The act of being mugged could injure you for life or kill you. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/monumental-acknow...

… well a good martial arts teacher would tell you to either run away if possible or give the mugger your wallet, no?

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#677

Post by timr » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 4:05 AM UTC

darkarmani wrote: post #652

timr wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-on... > The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a “Don’t try this at home” label. The newly released data show people wh…

Doesn't that literally have survival bias baked into it? The people that survived COVID-19 are going to be more fit as a population than the population that didn't have the deaths.

Even if they were, why would you assume this would be relevant to re-infection?

The vast majority of people testing positive for the virus are not dying from it.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#678

Post by rsfern » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 4:05 AM UTC

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #617

peter422 wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn’t. Read the study. People being hospitalized with covid-like symptoms is the broader population and those with prior confirmed covid infections and those with prior confirmed vaccines within that population are the sample groups where the covid infections rates are compared. Do you genuinely believe a study with such a massive and obvious methodology problem would get published and cited by the CDC? (and…

I read the study, it's a few pages-long PDF with no description of computational methodology, no indication of the statistical approaches taken, and no justification for the arbitrary decisions made by the people who carried out the study. The criteria for inclusion in the study: > Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19–like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated…

From page 1:

> Previous infection was ascertained based on SARS-CoV-2 testing from rapid antigen tests or molecular assays (e.g., real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) performed before mRNA vaccination and ≥14 days before admission; testing performed after February 2020 was primarily within network partners’ medical facilities.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#679

Post by timr » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 4:07 AM UTC

hcknwscommenter wrote: post #595

timr wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Israeli study highlighted previous infection versus vaccinated Yes, they did this, and showed that natural infection was superior to vaccination alone. > but not (yet) infected. Incorrect. > Note the "previously infected" category did not exclude the vaccinated, but the vaccinated category did exclude the previously infected. No. You only have to read the link to see that your understanding of the study is enti…

Okay. I admit that my characterization was sloppy/incorrect. Thank you for pointing that out. The paper is still not strong evidence though. To whit: "the higher hospitalization rate in the 32,000-person analysis was based on just eight hospitalizations in a vaccinated group and one in a previously infected group. And the 13-fold increased risk of infection in the same analysis was based on just 238 infections in the…

> These numbers are very small for distinguishing between the effectiveness of two different and effective immunization methods (natural and vaccine). By now, we should have more data to support if the effect size is that strong. Do we?

You should check the number of deaths in the original trials used to approve the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. You might be surprised. Even in big trials in immunologically naive populations, only a small number of people became seriously ill -- a total of 10 people became seriously ill across the entire Pfizer trial. No deaths occurred. [1]

Once you've vaccinated your population (or otherwise allowed them to become immune), you're talking about incredibly small effect sizes.

[1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#680

Post by timr » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 4:13 AM UTC

microtherion wrote: post #624

hcknwscommenter wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. I admit that my characterization was sloppy/incorrect. Thank you for pointing that out. The paper is still not strong evidence though. To whit: "the higher hospitalization rate in the 32,000-person analysis was based on just eight hospitalizations in a vaccinated group and one in a previously infected group. And the 13-fold increased risk of infection in the same analysis was based on just 238 infections in the…

Even if the numbers scale up, they'd mean that you'd avoid roughly 1 hospitalization for every 2285 people who got immunity from being infected instead of from being vaccinated. Unfortunately, to obtain that immunity, about 1 in 30 had to be hospitalized, 1 in 250 died, and a significant number suffered serious complications. Nobody in their right mind would choose such a tradeoff.

Nobody here is making this argument. You're setting up a straw man.

The point is: people who have recovered from the illness are immune, and should be treated as such.