8 ms·

So, then I would assume this means people with antibodies from the initial wave of infections are also protected

by o-__-o 5y ago

ghc 5y ago
Interestingly, the mRNA vaccines produce superior immunity compared to getting infected, due mainly to the two dose regimen. For similarly long-lasting natural immunity you'd probably need to get infected with covid twice.
- petertodd 5y ago
  Do you have a source for that?
  - ghc 5y ago
    My wife is an immunologist who works on this at BioNTech. She explained it to me that this is expected and the data matches it. She explained why as well but there's a big gap in my undergrad-level understanding of bio and her phd + years of experience in the field, so it went way over my head I'm afraid.
- jjk166 5y ago
  There's also the benefit that with the mRNA vaccines (and the adenovirus vaccines as well), your body is developing antibodies specifically for the spike protein, which is highly conserved. Your body's immune response to actual covid may, just by chance, focus on a less strongly conserved target.
  - selcuka 5y ago
    I was under the impression that it's the other way around; spike protein is not conserved between variants [1]: https://theconversation.com/new-coronavirus-variant-what-is-the-spike-protein-and-why-are-mutations-on-it-important-152463 https://theconversation.com/new-coronavirus-variant-what-is-...
    - garmaine 5y ago
      If you track each and every mutation as a variant, then here are thousands of them. Changes in the spike protein have the largest effect though, so we track those specifically, and clusters of changes to the spike protein are what get official designation as variants. Because that’s what we care about.
    - tialaramex 5y ago
      That article is explaining that it's particularly worrying that some variants do have changes to the spike protein, not that this is common (it isn't). Mutation causes random changes, the selection process eliminates those that render the mutated version less fit. The focus on the spike is because most random changes to the spike also make it useless, the virus becomes impotent. Such mutations won't thrive of course, and so we hardly see them at all, but they are happening. In contrast, many random changes elsewhere might not prevent the virus from working. They might say, make it less able to survive outside a body, which would give it a disadvantage against variants that don't have that change, but if they also mean the immune system of a previous host doesn't recognise them, that's a big advantage to counteract that. We see lots of these variants because they "work", but since the spike is the same existing vaccines ought to be effective. So this is why it made sense to focus on the spike, even though as this article shows it isn't a magical panacea.
- o-__-o 5y ago
  What about the probability from having had a very bad infection?
b0sk 5y ago
Not necessarily [1]. COVID vaccines particularly give you far higher neutralization titers than a prior infection. [1] A glaring counterexample to your hypothesis is Brazil (Manuas) where prior infections (as high as 60%) didn't stop the P1 variant from ripping through.
- petertodd 5y ago
  > COVID vaccines particularly give you far higher neutralization titers than a prior infection. Do you have a source for that?
  - icedchai 5y ago
    Here's one: https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna-covid-19-vaccines-is-more-robust-than-natural-infection https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna...
    - petertodd 5y ago
      The study itself says that the immune response to the vaccine is not as diverse as a natural infection. That's how the study tried to figure out who had been infected: "Natural exposure induces a dominant Ab response against the nucleocapsid protein (NP), but since NP is not in the vaccine, there is no vaccine induced response against it. In this way vaccinated people who had a prior natural exposure can be classified because they have Abs to NP." Simply looking at one aspect of immunity - detectable antibodies in the blood - is a very incomplete way of looking at the overall level of protection. For example, it's well known that mucosal immunity is important, and injected vaccines have a hard time inducing that kind of immunity: https://theprint.in/opinion/why-a-mucosal-covid-vaccine-has-a-better-shot-at-ending-the-pandemic/589821/ https://theprint.in/opinion/why-a-mucosal-covid-vaccine-has-... It's also concerning that there is evidence that while people who have been vaccinated are much less likely to be infected. If they do get infected, they are more likely to be infected with one of the variants than unvaccinated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA728463 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA728463 The immune response developed to our vaccines is quite specific - they only generate the spike protein - which leads to a much less diverse response than a natural infection. Finally, the study you quoted can't really compare apples to apples anyway, as it's defining prior infection as simply having some level of antibody response, without considering how mild or severe those infections actually were.
senectus1 5y ago
the big diff between a vaccine and a previous infection is that the vaccine doesn't damage your body in the process of training your body to attack it. Covid can wreck havoc on your body and leave it in a weaker state.
- o-__-o 5y ago
  20 million people already had the virus. I’m one of them. Are we the red headed step child that we have forgotten about? Let me change the perspective: when I get the flu because I stupidly did not get the flu shot that year, I don’t rush out and get the flu shot after the fact. I’m wondering why I would do the same with this vaccine when there are lots of evidence that first rounders are not likely to be infected even by variants (assuming low viral load)
  - loveistheanswer 5y ago
    I've been asking this same question and have yet to hear a very convincing answer. The best answer I've heard is: it will give you "extra immunity". Which begs the follow on question, if we're so concerned about topping off our immunity, why shouldn't people get vaccinated and revaccinated every month or two?
refurb 5y ago
No. Antibodies to an infection can be a variety that target different parts of the virus. The vaccine produces antibodies to a specific stretch of the spike protein. So everyone who has the Pfizer vaccine has a similar (but not identical) group of antibodies. Those infected with Covid-19 have a more diverse set of antibodies that may or may not protect as well against varients.
adrr 5y ago
mRNA vaccines produce antibodies targeting just the spike protein( S protein). There are other proteins on the virus like the M protein. Antibodies produced during an infection may target other parts of the virus so you can’t compare the two.
- selcuka 5y ago
  Isn't it the spike protein that is usually different between these variants? In that case antibodies that target a different part should even be more effective.
  - cmckn 5y ago
    The vaccines target specific (and multiple) regions of the spike protein, so a given mutation of the protein is not likely to make a vaccine null and void (hence the current success of the vaccines against variants). A "natural" COVID infection could lead to similar protection, or less; but it's not likely that a natural infection gives you some kind of AAA protection. Being infected can also hurt you, after all. There is literally no downside to receiving the vaccine if you've already had COVID, so I would encourage everyone to get vaccinated regardless :)
    - tialaramex 5y ago
      It's not quite no downside. It may be inconvenient (especially if you live in a country where you can't necessarily get time off work to seek medical treatment) and you're quite likely to have a sore arm. Some people experience fever, headaches, or other annoying symptoms for a day or even longer. I had a powerful craving for a kebab, at like 0400 when all the kebab shops are closed, maybe a coincidence, but maybe not. If you told me I can get a free Coke, but I have to take an hour off work and then my arm will be sore for two days, I think I'll pass on your "free" Coke. Now, of course the excellent chance of becoming immune to a respiratory infection that's killing loads of people is a much better offer than a Coke. So I agree people should take up this offer, get yourself vaccinated - but we shouldn't claim "literally no downside".

So, then I would assume this means people with antibodies from the initial wave of infections are also protected

by o-__-o 5y ago

So, then I would assume this means people with antibodies from the initial wave of infections are also protected

ghc 5y ago

Interestingly, the mRNA vaccines produce superior immunity compared to getting infected, due mainly to the two dose regimen. For similarly long-lasting natural immunity you'd probably need to get infected with covid twice.

petertodd 5y ago
Do you have a source for that?
- ghc 5y ago
  My wife is an immunologist who works on this at BioNTech. She explained it to me that this is expected and the data matches it. She explained why as well but there's a big gap in my undergrad-level understanding of bio and her phd + years of experience in the field, so it went way over my head I'm afraid.
jjk166 5y ago
There's also the benefit that with the mRNA vaccines (and the adenovirus vaccines as well), your body is developing antibodies specifically for the spike protein, which is highly conserved. Your body's immune response to actual covid may, just by chance, focus on a less strongly conserved target.
- selcuka 5y ago
  I was under the impression that it's the other way around; spike protein is not conserved between variants [1]: https://theconversation.com/new-coronavirus-variant-what-is-the-spike-protein-and-why-are-mutations-on-it-important-152463 https://theconversation.com/new-coronavirus-variant-what-is-...
  - garmaine 5y ago
    If you track each and every mutation as a variant, then here are thousands of them. Changes in the spike protein have the largest effect though, so we track those specifically, and clusters of changes to the spike protein are what get official designation as variants. Because that’s what we care about.
  - tialaramex 5y ago
    That article is explaining that it's particularly worrying that some variants do have changes to the spike protein, not that this is common (it isn't). Mutation causes random changes, the selection process eliminates those that render the mutated version less fit. The focus on the spike is because most random changes to the spike also make it useless, the virus becomes impotent. Such mutations won't thrive of course, and so we hardly see them at all, but they are happening. In contrast, many random changes elsewhere might not prevent the virus from working. They might say, make it less able to survive outside a body, which would give it a disadvantage against variants that don't have that change, but if they also mean the immune system of a previous host doesn't recognise them, that's a big advantage to counteract that. We see lots of these variants because they "work", but since the spike is the same existing vaccines ought to be effective. So this is why it made sense to focus on the spike, even though as this article shows it isn't a magical panacea.
o-__-o 5y ago
What about the probability from having had a very bad infection?

b0sk 5y ago

Not necessarily [1]. COVID vaccines particularly give you far higher neutralization titers than a prior infection. [1] A glaring counterexample to your hypothesis is Brazil (Manuas) where prior infections (as high as 60%) didn't stop the P1 variant from ripping through.

petertodd 5y ago
> COVID vaccines particularly give you far higher neutralization titers than a prior infection. Do you have a source for that?
- icedchai 5y ago
  Here's one: https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna-covid-19-vaccines-is-more-robust-than-natural-infection https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna...
  - petertodd 5y ago
    The study itself says that the immune response to the vaccine is not as diverse as a natural infection. That's how the study tried to figure out who had been infected: "Natural exposure induces a dominant Ab response against the nucleocapsid protein (NP), but since NP is not in the vaccine, there is no vaccine induced response against it. In this way vaccinated people who had a prior natural exposure can be classified because they have Abs to NP." Simply looking at one aspect of immunity - detectable antibodies in the blood - is a very incomplete way of looking at the overall level of protection. For example, it's well known that mucosal immunity is important, and injected vaccines have a hard time inducing that kind of immunity: https://theprint.in/opinion/why-a-mucosal-covid-vaccine-has-a-better-shot-at-ending-the-pandemic/589821/ https://theprint.in/opinion/why-a-mucosal-covid-vaccine-has-... It's also concerning that there is evidence that while people who have been vaccinated are much less likely to be infected. If they do get infected, they are more likely to be infected with one of the variants than unvaccinated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA728463 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA728463 The immune response developed to our vaccines is quite specific - they only generate the spike protein - which leads to a much less diverse response than a natural infection. Finally, the study you quoted can't really compare apples to apples anyway, as it's defining prior infection as simply having some level of antibody response, without considering how mild or severe those infections actually were.

senectus1 5y ago

the big diff between a vaccine and a previous infection is that the vaccine doesn't damage your body in the process of training your body to attack it. Covid can wreck havoc on your body and leave it in a weaker state.

o-__-o 5y ago
20 million people already had the virus. I’m one of them. Are we the red headed step child that we have forgotten about? Let me change the perspective: when I get the flu because I stupidly did not get the flu shot that year, I don’t rush out and get the flu shot after the fact. I’m wondering why I would do the same with this vaccine when there are lots of evidence that first rounders are not likely to be infected even by variants (assuming low viral load)
- loveistheanswer 5y ago
  I've been asking this same question and have yet to hear a very convincing answer. The best answer I've heard is: it will give you "extra immunity". Which begs the follow on question, if we're so concerned about topping off our immunity, why shouldn't people get vaccinated and revaccinated every month or two?

refurb 5y ago

No. Antibodies to an infection can be a variety that target different parts of the virus. The vaccine produces antibodies to a specific stretch of the spike protein. So everyone who has the Pfizer vaccine has a similar (but not identical) group of antibodies. Those infected with Covid-19 have a more diverse set of antibodies that may or may not protect as well against varients.

adrr 5y ago

mRNA vaccines produce antibodies targeting just the spike protein( S protein). There are other proteins on the virus like the M protein. Antibodies produced during an infection may target other parts of the virus so you can’t compare the two.

selcuka 5y ago
Isn't it the spike protein that is usually different between these variants? In that case antibodies that target a different part should even be more effective.
- cmckn 5y ago
  The vaccines target specific (and multiple) regions of the spike protein, so a given mutation of the protein is not likely to make a vaccine null and void (hence the current success of the vaccines against variants). A "natural" COVID infection could lead to similar protection, or less; but it's not likely that a natural infection gives you some kind of AAA protection. Being infected can also hurt you, after all. There is literally no downside to receiving the vaccine if you've already had COVID, so I would encourage everyone to get vaccinated regardless :)
  - tialaramex 5y ago
    It's not quite no downside. It may be inconvenient (especially if you live in a country where you can't necessarily get time off work to seek medical treatment) and you're quite likely to have a sore arm. Some people experience fever, headaches, or other annoying symptoms for a day or even longer. I had a powerful craving for a kebab, at like 0400 when all the kebab shops are closed, maybe a coincidence, but maybe not. If you told me I can get a free Coke, but I have to take an hour off work and then my arm will be sore for two days, I think I'll pass on your "free" Coke. Now, of course the excellent chance of becoming immune to a respiratory infection that's killing loads of people is a much better offer than a Coke. So I agree people should take up this offer, get yourself vaccinated - but we shouldn't claim "literally no downside".