10 ms·

Not obvious, and probably incorrect. The immunity induced by the vaccines is said to be potentially more effective and/or longer-lasting than the immunity obta

Not obvious, and probably incorrect. The immunity induced by the vaccines is said to be potentially more effective and/or longer-lasting than the immunity obtained from a prior infection. There is also an open question about whether people who are sufficiently immune from prior infection that they won't get serious symptoms are still able to pass the virus to others during a "fighting it off again successfully" phase. Immunity is not a simple yes-no boolean. It's not even a single variable, because there are different parts of the immune system memory.

worker767424 6y ago
Long-term, I agree, vaccines are generally (depends on the vaccine) more effective, but when we're dealing with a vaccine shortage, deprioritizing people who already have antibodies isn't necessarily crazy. I had doubts about prioritizing hospital staff who work with covid patients because they might have already been exposed (I haven't seen any data either way on this), but they also arguably "earned" it by being on the front line, so I'm not complaining too much, either.
tomp 6y ago
> There is also an open question about whether people who are sufficiently immune from prior infection that they won't get serious symptoms are still able to pass the virus to others during a "fighting it off again successfully" phase. Isn't this just as much an open question with vaccines? AFAIK the main vaccine trials were only checking for symptoms (so you could still be asymptomatic & transmitting the virus).
- lsllc 6y ago
  FWIW, US Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) tested positive on Friday for COVID after being exposed to an infected staffer. He had received the 2nd vaccine shot prior to the inauguration: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-positive-covid/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-...
  - worker767424 6y ago
    > FWIW It's worth basically nothing. We already know it's 95% effective; someone has to be the 5%, and there's a publication bias towards reporting on those.

worker767424 6y ago

Long-term, I agree, vaccines are generally (depends on the vaccine) more effective, but when we're dealing with a vaccine shortage, deprioritizing people who already have antibodies isn't necessarily crazy. I had doubts about prioritizing hospital staff who work with covid patients because they might have already been exposed (I haven't seen any data either way on this), but they also arguably "earned" it by being on the front line, so I'm not complaining too much, either.

tomp 6y ago

> There is also an open question about whether people who are sufficiently immune from prior infection that they won't get serious symptoms are still able to pass the virus to others during a "fighting it off again successfully" phase. Isn't this just as much an open question with vaccines? AFAIK the main vaccine trials were only checking for symptoms (so you could still be asymptomatic & transmitting the virus).

lsllc 6y ago
FWIW, US Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) tested positive on Friday for COVID after being exposed to an infected staffer. He had received the 2nd vaccine shot prior to the inauguration: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-positive-covid/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-...
- worker767424 6y ago
  > FWIW It's worth basically nothing. We already know it's 95% effective; someone has to be the 5%, and there's a publication bias towards reporting on those.