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

Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

cell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 222 posts

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#91

Post by maxerickson »

ramraj07 wrote: post #76
briefcomment wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strawman. Can you instead address this particular bucket: people who have had Covid, and are now wondering if they are as immune as they can hope for, considering all other available interventions.

Actually being infected with Covid (symptomatic) probably does confer the best immunity possible, for sure. You should still get vaccinated after that though, because research suggests that vaccination can significantly help alleviate long COViD symptoms which a large fraction of patients have. Haven’t seen actual numbers on the immunity boost conferred by post-Covid vaccination though (no reason to think it’ll not a…

The stabilized spike used in several of the vaccines appears to offer better resistance to new infection than convalescent immunity.

(The theory is that the vaccine antibodies do a better job of binding to the active site on infectious virus particles than the antibodies induced from infection, which bind to whichever part of the virus, and may bind to the form the active site takes after attaching to a cell, rather than prior)

Also, getting the vaccine as early as it is available is a better way to avoid long Covid than getting the vaccine after you've had a course of infection.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#92

Post by eightysixfour »

briefcomment wrote: post #56
mbgerring wrote: post #47

“Acquiring” natural immunity also has the following side effects at a much higher rate than the vaccine: - Death - Hospitalization - Chronic illness, which can include long-term neurological impairment I feel like it’s important to keep that in mind if you’re either advocating “natural immunity” as a public health strategy, or considering it a personal strategy.

That's a strawman. Can you instead address this particular bucket: people who have had Covid, and are now wondering if they are as immune as they can hope for, considering all other available interventions.

This study shows that those who have had COVID but are unvaccinated have 2.3x the risk of reinfection compared to those who had COVID and are vaccinated. 246 patients, 492 controls.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm...

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#93

Post by _Microft »

anonuser123456 wrote: post #71
mbgerring wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry you got sick, and I’m glad to see this study suggesting you have durable immunity! I worry that since it’s dated July 14 it may not have enough data on the Delta variant to be useful in considering your risk going forward. I hope you remain in good health.

The immunity acquired from infection may be more robust against variants since a broader set of antibodies are produced.

A broader set of antibodies does not necessarily have to be beneficial. They might be targeting parts of the virus that could change without it losing its function. The spike protein seems to be close to indispensable for this virus. Targetting it specifically instead of just 'something', might therefore be the preferable thing.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#94

Post by tchalla »

ramraj07 wrote: post #76
briefcomment wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strawman. Can you instead address this particular bucket: people who have had Covid, and are now wondering if they are as immune as they can hope for, considering all other available interventions.

Actually being infected with Covid (symptomatic) probably does confer the best immunity possible, for sure. You should still get vaccinated after that though, because research suggests that vaccination can significantly help alleviate long COViD symptoms which a large fraction of patients have. Haven’t seen actual numbers on the immunity boost conferred by post-Covid vaccination though (no reason to think it’ll not a…

> Actually being infected with Covid (symptomatic) probably does confer the best immunity possible, for sure.

I don't think so. We have multiple links in this thread that say otherwise.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#95

Post by eightysixfour »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #42

Not to disagree with the effectiveness of immunity gained by getting Covid-19, but also: "The evidence shows that protective antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2 variants ... compared to antibodies acquired from an infection." https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-genera... "Vaccination offers longer, stronger immunity" https://www.jhsph.edu/cov…

To add to the list:

"Kentucky residents who were not vaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated (odds ratio [OR] = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.58–3.47). These findings suggest that among persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, full vaccination provides additional protection against reinfection."

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm...

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#96

Post by [deleted] »

jchw wrote: post #82
briefcomment wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strawman. Can you instead address this particular bucket: people who have had Covid, and are now wondering if they are as immune as they can hope for, considering all other available interventions.

Not being or knowing people applicable to the comment does not make it a straw man. Anyway, available sources so far seem to suggest greater immunity from the vaccine. https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-genera...

[deleted]

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#97

Post by acituan »

tchalla wrote: post #78
anonuser123456 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The immunity acquired from infection may be more robust against variants since a broader set of antibodies are produced.

May be not. > The new evidence shows that protective antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2 variants carrying “single letter” changes in a key portion of their spike protein compared to antibodies acquired from an infection. https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-genera...

You can’t compare a longitudinal study with a cross sectional study. This study doesn’t account for the time dependent decay of vaccines’ immunity. There is more than one dimension to optimize for.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#98

Post by briefcomment »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #42

Not to disagree with the effectiveness of immunity gained by getting Covid-19, but also: "The evidence shows that protective antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2 variants ... compared to antibodies acquired from an infection." https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-genera... "Vaccination offers longer, stronger immunity" https://www.jhsph.edu/cov…

Probably not as clear cut as that. The OP study suggests that vaccines can be improved from learnings from natural immunity.

> "Overcoming the challenges to end the pandemic is accentuated by the recognition that SARS-CoV-2 can undergo rapid antigenic variation that may lower vaccine effectiveness in preventing new cases and progression to severe disease. Our findings show that most COVID-19 patients induce a wide-ranging immune defense against SARS-CoV-2 infection, encompassing antibodies and memory B cells recognizing both the RBD and other regions of the spike, broadly-specific and polyfunctional CD4+ T cells, and polyfunctional CD8+ T cells. The immune response to natural infection is likely to provide some degree of protective immunity even against SARS-CoV-2 variants because the CD4+ and CD8+ T cell epitopes will likely be conserved. Thus, vaccine induction of CD8+ T cells to more conserved antigens such as the nucleocapsid, rather than just to SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens, may add benefit to more rapid containment of infection as SARS-CoV-2 variants overtake the prevailing strains."

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#99

Post by jjtheblunt »

csours wrote: post #18
School-Cotton wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t leave us hanging - what does it mean?

Sorry this is incomplete, but "Natural Immunity" means a person's immune system will mount an effective response to an infectious agent. However, that person may still be infected, and may be contagious to some degree while the body is fighting off the contagion. I'm not a doctor or biologist, but I've been learning over the past year. For instance, people generally think of things like "infected", "sick", and "conta…

A simple example is a person with antibodies being sneezed on with infectious agents. That person could coincidentally sneeze on another person who lacks antibodies, but wouldn't worsen themselves since the contagion in the original sneeze would get met with prepared antibodies killing off the "population" faster than it could replicate.

Re: Longitudinal analysis shows durable immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection

#100

Post by pfisherman »

015a wrote: post #19

Its important to keep studies like this in mind when talking with people who refuse to take the vaccine because they "already had COVID". In a very real sense, if natural antibodies are durable, persistent, and effective; the vaccine is an unnecessary medical procedure. Doctors would not cut off your legs for no reason; that would be unethical. The vaccine is a medical procedure like any other; if the benefit is ques…

I think other comments may have pointed this out already, but there are several problems with this line of reasoning.

When deciding on whether or not to administer a procedure or treatment, one must consider the balance of potential harms and benefits, while accounting for uncertainty.

In this particular case, the potential for harm from the vaccine is quite low (this is borne out by the data), and the benefits are mostly unknown. The potential harms of NOT taking the vaccine are mostly unknown (data is still coming in), and the potential benefit of that course of action is quite low. So it seems like the positive expected value / utility decision here is for them to get the vaccine.

In your comment you use the analogy of a procedure with a much different risk / benefit profile. So that does not really hold up. A much better analogy would be something like routine screening for prostate cancer once you pass a certain age.

Post reply on HN