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

Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 712 posts

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#701

Post by taneq »

maxehmookau wrote: post #700
taneq wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, interesting! Thanks for the extra info. Wow, if they're insisting on COVID-19-antibody-free blood for donations that's going to cause problems as a greater percentage of the population gains antibodies to it. I guess they'll have to change to a specific test for current infection.

Sorry, I think I was unclear! This is a rule only for those in the trial. If I donate blood today, having had the vaccine, and the blood donation service checks my blood for antibodies and informs me that I had COVID-19 (or so they think!), then I will have been unblinded in the trial which isn't allowed. This isn't the case for the general population. I'm also not allowed to take part in any other antibody tests tha…

Ohhhh right that makes sense.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#702

Post by iamatworknow »

TillE wrote: post #562
iamatworknow wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a native English speaker (American) and have thought it was odd for a few weeks that Reuters in particular likes to use the word "jab" for "vaccination". It's not commonly used that way in the US.

It's extremely weird until you remember the American equivalent is "shot". I think the British media goes for the colloquial version a bit more, but it's hard to say for sure.

Ah...yeah, I didn't even consider "shot" being similarly weird. I guess I'm just used to it.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#703

Post by Retric »

kortilla wrote: post #693
Retric wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t get a significant percentage of the population to obese in a famine. Simply maintaining obesity across over 40% of the population takes a lot of energy, let alone morbid obesity numbers.

Yes you certainly can. Famines are not spread equally. The people that can afford to have food shipped in (i.e. anyone who can afford to order things on Amazon) could comfortably remain fat while the entire lower class in their local area suffered from a famine.

Having food shipped in still requires it to be created somewhere to be shipped out.

It’s very possible for some percentage of the population to starve even during a food surplus, but starving people will bid up the cost of food to the point where you can’t get a 40% of the population to have a surplus in a famine in any society that we know about.

Here is the official definition for the minimum to qualify as a famine:

“At least 20% of households in an area face extreme food shortages with a limited ability to cope The prevalence of acute malnutrition in children exceeds 30% The death rate exceeds two people per 10,000 people per day“

That’s killing off over 7% of the population per year.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#704

Post by BjoernKW »

rusk wrote: post #698
BjoernKW wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There absolutely is evidence of this. It's just not "immunity for life", which is what people commonly seem to think of when they're talking about immunity. When you've had an infection with one of those rather harmless yet still pesky other coronaviruses - otherwise known as the common cold - you're also immune, for a limited period of time, that is.

There are plenty of cases of people being reinfected quite quickly and frequency of exposure also seems to correlate with serious illness ... the science is still very much “out” on this.

The fastest reinfections known so far have occurred after about 6 months and those cases are still mostly anecdotal (also due to a lack of data).

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#705

Post by aaron_m04 »

tempestn wrote: post #699
fastball wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but neither is that an issue of bodily autonomy. Bodily autonomy is about being in control of what happens to your body — it does not mean you have carte blanche to do whatever you want with your body.

So, logically the solution is not to mandate the vaccine, but to restrict what unvaccinated people can do, where necessary to protect others. For example, if not vaccinated, you should continue to wear a mask while indoors in public (as long as local virus cases are above a given threshold), as well as avoiding large gatherings.

Yeah, this is what I was getting at. It's not about bodily autonomy if it affects other bodies too.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#706

Post by rusk »

BjoernKW wrote: post #704
rusk wrote: post #698

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of cases of people being reinfected quite quickly and frequency of exposure also seems to correlate with serious illness ... the science is still very much “out” on this.

The fastest reinfections known so far have occurred after about 6 months and those cases are still mostly anecdotal (also due to a lack of data).

There is no anecdotal data for immunity either.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#707

Post by BjoernKW »

rusk wrote: post #706
BjoernKW wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fastest reinfections known so far have occurred after about 6 months and those cases are still mostly anecdotal (also due to a lack of data).

There is no anecdotal data for immunity either.

“We conclude that neutralizing antibodies are stably produced for at least 5-7 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection,” the team of researchers, lead by Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunobiologist at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, wrote in their report."

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/how-long-does-immunit...

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#708

Post by kortilla »

Retric wrote: post #703
kortilla wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you certainly can. Famines are not spread equally. The people that can afford to have food shipped in (i.e. anyone who can afford to order things on Amazon) could comfortably remain fat while the entire lower class in their local area suffered from a famine.

Having food shipped in still requires it to be created somewhere to be shipped out. It’s very possible for some percentage of the population to starve even during a food surplus, but starving people will bid up the cost of food to the point where you can’t get a 40% of the population to have a surplus in a famine in any society that we know about. Here is the official definition for the minimum to qualify as a famine…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_South_Sudan_famine

56% overweight or obese: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S18714...

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#709

Post by 24gttghh »

hsitz wrote: post #409
24gttghh wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Mechanics It varies by disease. Can anyone really say what the % is/would be for covid-19?

You should be able to see that Covid-19 is in fact a disease listed in the table on the wikipedia page you reference. You should also be able to see that the percentage required for herd immunity effect to begin (the 'herd immunity threshold') is a function of the R0 level for each disease. In addition, to question of "can anyone really say for covid-19", I suppose the answer is 'No, but I would trust that the consen…

It was just a wikipedia table, and the citations actually referred to SARS, not COVID... Hence my skepticism.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#710

Post by rusk »

BjoernKW wrote: post #707
rusk wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no anecdotal data for immunity either.

“We conclude that neutralizing antibodies are stably produced for at least 5-7 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection,” the team of researchers, lead by Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunobiologist at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, wrote in their report." https://www.healthline.com/health-news/how-long-does-immunit...

Interesting. This research is apparently just a few weeks old. I look forward to seeing it corroborated and replicated!

EDIT no mention of it in Nature's covid roundup [0]. They must be censoring the research. I've tried googling the author and he seems to be some form of contrarian.

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00502-w

Post reply on HN