24 ms·

Had Covid? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime

264 points by azth 5y ago

mactavish88 5y ago
Does anybody have any ideas as to what this means for people who've had COVID and then get vaccinated with one of the mRNA vaccines? If not, is anyone studying this?
- XorNot 5y ago
  Probably that the vaccine is somewhat irrelevant: though that's up for grabs since what your body targets vs. what the vaccine targets will be subtly different. I'm more interested that this means that quite likely, COVID-19 will be eradicated: with not many advantageous mutation pathways, and if vaccines are conferring immunity forever, it's pretty much going to be burned out of the population one way or the other.
  - jokowueu 5y ago
    >with not many advantageous mutation pathways I was under the impression that any mutations to the spike proteins would make the current vaccines useless and would require changes to the vaccines just like the flu shot . Isn't this the case ?
    - carlmr 5y ago
      It is the case, but with natural immunity slowly building up it will probably become more like a normal cold that you get as soon as a few variants have been seen by the world's immune systems.
    - GeekyBear 5y ago
      >I was under the impression that any mutations to the spike proteins would make the current vaccines useless and would require changes to the vaccines just like the flu shot . Isn't this the case ? No, it is not the case. You don't just make one antibody that targets the entire spike that would be thrown off by a mutation. >Human Antibodies Target Many Parts of Coronavirus Spike Protein https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/05/18/human-antibodies-target-many-parts-of-coronavirus-spike-protein/ https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/05/18/human-antibodies-ta... So far, all the claims that a variant (London variant, South African variant, Indian variant) would be immune to the current vaccine have turned out to be unwarranted.
  - jhugo 5y ago
    By saying it will quite likely be eradicated, you’re assuming herd_immunity_threshold% vaccination is achieved, aren’t you? There are countries that are yet to achieve even 1% and some populations are likely to never achieve the threshold for immunity in that population.
    - marcosdumay 5y ago
      He is saying herd immunity will be achieved before the virus has a chance to mutate and escape it (it's quite unambiguous here). The GP's comment says nothing explicitly about time frame, but sounds pessimistic on that.
  - aledalgrande 5y ago
    It won't be. Look at vaccines in the US, the have flattened out at around 50%. Many countries are <30%. And there are animal reservoirs. This is not like polio.
- ovi256 5y ago
  Probably nothing at all, the mRNA vaccine will just prompt the body to make even more antibodies against the variants from the vaccine. I expect having stronger flu-like side-effects on the first injection instead of the usual second mRNA injection. For this reason, if you had diagnosed COVID, in France you'll be injected a single dose of mRNA vaccine and be considered immune.
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    I had COVID at the end of December. I just got my first Pfizer dose yesterday. Almost no side effects, just a bit of sensitivity around the jab site. And a very slight chill feeling for a few hours.
- exhilaration 5y ago
  I think you might be referring to those social media posts that suggest that the mRNA vaccines undo the immunity afforded by an infection. Those stories are false, here's more information: https://factcheck.afp.com/american-red-cross-accepts-plasma-donations-covid-19-vaccine-recipients https://factcheck.afp.com/american-red-cross-accepts-plasma-...
- 3327 5y ago
  Yes i am studying this and have data on covid + post covid quarterly antibody markets followed by one dose pfizer and monthly markers. In a nutshell - covid patients have sustained antibodies, non covid with vaccine groups have faster decay from Peak concentration.
- GeekyBear 5y ago
  There's some evidence that a second dose of mRNA vaccine isn't necessary if you were infected with Covid. >People who have already had confirmed covid-19 might only need a single dose of a mRNA vaccine, two small studies have indicated. Two weeks after a single dose of vaccine, people who had previously had covid-19 had antibody concentrations that were as high, or up to 10 times higher, than the levels seen in uninfected people who had received two doses of the vaccine. https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n308 https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n308
  - leesalminen 5y ago
    This HN user [0] has an anecdote to challenge this evidence. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27315459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27315459
    - GeekyBear 5y ago
      How does that challenge this evidence?
  - cableshaft 5y ago
    This is important when vaccine supplies are limited (in some places in the world that's the case), but not if they aren't. "Since then, one study after another has reinforced the single-vaccine-for-survivors idea, though some skeptics have pointed out that it is logistically simpler to just give everyone two doses than to figure out who needs only one...Cheng at Cedars-Sinai said she would still default to the CDC guidance calling for two vaccines, even for people who have had COVID-19. The data does suggest, however, that one dose could be enough" https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/04/18/world/coronavirus-vaccine-doses/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/04/18/world/coronavir...
    - moses-palmer 5y ago
      I think supply is not the only thing to consider. I suffered a SARS-CoV-2 infection around Easter, and received my first vaccine dose a week ago. The days after that I felt much worse that when I had the actual infection, albeit for a shorter time, so I personally would appreciate an official recommendation to not have to take the second dose.
- GuB-42 5y ago
  At the end of the article. > Ellebedy’s team has observed early signs that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine should trigger the production of the same cells. But the persistence of antibody production, whether elicited by vaccination or infection, does not ensure long-lasting immunity to COVID-19. The ability of some emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants to blunt the protective effects of antibodies means that additional immunizations may be needed to restore levels, says Ellebedy. “My presumption is we will need a booster.” The idea seems to be that an infection is like a single dose of the vaccine, so you still need another shot for the best immunity.
tomp 5y ago
> The study provides evidence that immunity triggered by SARS-CoV-2 infection will be extraordinarily long-lasting. Does it? I think this pop-science article overly simplifies antibodies and immunity... I'm no doctor myself, but as was explained to me by my doctor friends (who however are not specialists in this subtopic either), there's many different layers to the immune system. It's entirely possible to have antibodies and/or antibody-producing capacity in your body, yet not be "immune" - if by "immune" we mean that you cannot get the illness, both in the sense that you don't get ill, and in the sense that you don't become asymptomatic carrier (i.e. the virus starts replicating in your body, but not enough to make you feel "ill" effects) (both of which are kind-of important if you want to stop a pandemic). Long-term immune system "memory cells" (B-cells) might still need time to be activate and start producing antibodies, so you can get infected, ill & a spreader, but not seriously ill because your immune system re-awakens and starts producing antibodies and you recover much quicker than you otherwise would. (This whole mechanism is the reason why you need booster shots of some vaccines.) This is, of course, based mainly on experience from non-coronavirus like viruses. This one might be different.
- fortran77 5y ago
  I don't think _Nature_ is considered "Pop Science".
  - postalrat 5y ago
    When they say thing you don't agree with it most certainly is.
  - JAM1971 5y ago
    > I don't think _Nature_ is considered "Pop Science". Did you read the article? It isn't exactly "in depth". It isn't what I'd expect from a magazine of Nature's prominence.
- galangalalgol 5y ago
  Don't we also have many instances of people who have recovered and been reinfected months later? Some nurse friends said they had many coworkers who had been infected twice months apart with multiple negative tests between.
afavour 5y ago
I’m personally sceptical of putting too much faith in this, we’ve already seen a number of variants. Over my lifetime? Who knows what mutations we’ll see.
- Closi 5y ago
  Hopefully the mutations will slow over time - the mutations at the moment may be the 'easy' ones.
  - Sharlin 5y ago
    The various non-novel corona- and rhinoviruses that cause common cold don't seem to have had any problems playing catch with the human immune system for who knows how many thousand years. SARS-CoV-2 is probably more likely than not to just become a new member of the family of "domestic" human pathogens that we learn to live with.
    - threatripper 5y ago
      "learning to live with it" includes filtering out those who can't learn fast enough.
- roywiggins 5y ago
  The vaccine manufacturers are already gearing up for booster shots, so we won't have to trust it in the long term- new strains can be met with new vaccines.
  - HighlandSpring 5y ago
    In that case won't it become a self-fulfilling prophecy?
    - mywittyname 5y ago
      No. It was suspected from the beginning that booster shots would be necessary. There are just so many variants and the infection has spread to so many people that it was unrealistic to expect a single round would eliminate the virus. There's a very real risk of covid vaccines being necessary every year.
myth_drannon 5y ago
What happened in Manaus/Brazil(high re-infection rate even after the city reached herd immunity) shows that's not that simple and they clearly state it "though viral variants could dampen some of the protection they offer"
- baybal2 5y ago
  Very much it. Getting influenza antibodies once only protects you for that season, until a new strain emerges few months down the line.
  - drno123 5y ago
    But influenza virus mutates much more quickly than Sars-cov-2.
    - swiley 5y ago
      "mutates" is probably the wrong word. My understanding is that it combines different genes. That's why the names for different flue viruses always contain numbers: to indicate which forms of the different proteins the genes are expressing.
  - toolz 5y ago
    influenza mutates much faster than the covid family [1] - looking at the other coronavirus family there is plenty of reason to have expectations that this will become an endemic mild seasonal cold. The most similar coronaviruses provide life long immunity (please don't mistake immunity as being unable to experience symptoms, just means bad clinical outcomes will likely plummet due to immune system recognition) [2] [1] https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/06/10/sars-cov-2-dna-suggests-single-vaccine-will-be-effective/ https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/06/10/sars-cov-2-dna-suggests-singl... [2]https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1....
- shoto_io 5y ago
  Listening to the Prof. Drosten Podcast (German only), he highly doubts that they actually had reached herd immunity before their second deadly wave. He rather assumes something like 40% and then the mutated variant raged on (not badly affecting but infecting the 40% partially, and thus driving the infections).
_Microft 5y ago
Also see the discussion from three days ago at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27267852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27267852
anonymousDan 5y ago
As someone who had COVID 6 months ago and is currently awaiting the result of a PCR test I hope this is true!
- curiousgal 5y ago
  PCR test? Shouldn't you have gone for a serology test?
  - TotempaaltJ 5y ago
    I think OP is saying they're testing to see if they have COVID now. Hoping not to be reinfected.
- dustinmoris 5y ago
  Neither the vaccine nor a previous infection will prevent you from catching the virus again, but it will prevent you from falling ill which is all that really matters.
  - anoncake 5y ago
    You'll obviously get some virus in your body, but a lot less because most of it (hopefully) gets destroyed before it can reproduce.
    - trompetenaccoun 5y ago
      It will still be picked up by a PCR test depending on the number of replication cycles. Which is why mass testing everyone, including healthy people, is such a dumb idea.
      - hef19898 5y ago
        Only if the number of cycles wasn't pre defined. Which it is, nobody is running cycles until a PCR test turns positive.
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
I know two people who had covid and who right now have a second covid infection by the british mutation. One of them also had their first vaccination.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  I don't really believe stories on the internet. There's a lot of context missing. Like the fact that 3% of the population are hypochondriacs.
  - amarant 5y ago
    It's still anecdotal, but my cousin's wife who is a nurse also had covid twice, both of them confirmed infections(as in, she tested positive), the second one was after she'd received her first shot(not sure which vaccine, but one of the 2-dose ones) I have no clue if they were different variants or what caused her to not be immune, or how unlucky she were(this might be exceedingly rare) but for me it's been a good anecdote to tell people who think they don't need the vaccine because they already had covid. Get vaccinated!
    - nickthemagicman 5y ago
      Counterpoint. My cousins wife's friends bosses therapists personal trainer got Covid twice and it made them more physically strong and able to do advanced math and play piano masterfully never having touched a piano before! Getting Covid a second time made their life way better.
    - skeeter2020 5y ago
      >> anecdotes aren't anthema to logic. THey're all that is required to disprove universally stated truths. So if some vax-denier says "healthly people can't get covid twice" your anecdote is good enough. The real problem is that despite all their talk of science and facts they're not going to be convinced. That's just window dressing for their wrong beliefs. The value of vaccines is for society as a whole but the majority of us who get vaccinated do so for very selfish reasons: we don't want to get sick, we perceive the risk worth it, etc. The vast majority of anti-vaxers are still driven by the same base needs, we just haven't found the motivator that triggers action. Something as simple as vacinne passports would probably do it.
andy_ppp 5y ago
Does anyone know if PCR tests will find out if you've had the virus, after you had the vaccine?
- OldManAndTheCpp 5y ago
  I got a rapid test after getting the first vaccine -- I was told that there were more than one type of antibodies, the vaccine only provides one, so they can test for the others to see if you had the virus proper.
- ilogik 5y ago
  PCR tests only detect live virus, not antibodies. there are several antibody tests for covid. As far as I'm aware, the vaccines only trigger the anti-spike protein antibodies, so if you test positive for other types of covid-19 antibodies, you've probably had it.
  - rimliu 5y ago
    PCR test detect genetic material of the virus. It may be live virus it may be just fragments, impossible to tell.
- olivierlacan 5y ago
  PCR tests don't detect antibodies, they detect active virus. Antibody tests may be what you're thinking of. See: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/coronavirus-disease-2019-testing-basics https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/coronavirus-d... I don't know the answer to your question, but it would make sense unless the antibody test(s) look for a specific type of antibody to COVID-19 that is produced naturally when infected and not just any antibodies that might be produced when vaccinated.
  - toolz 5y ago
    incorrect, PCR tests detect any virus matter - active or otherwise. This is a very important distinction since we've seem to lost our minds collectively and label PCR tests with a cycle threshold of >40 as a true positive.
heyflyguy 5y ago
I am being shunned by my family because of my lack of interest in the vaccine. I've had COVID and recovered. I also don't get a flu shot each year. I really like not putting things into my body, especially when year after year I may or may not "catch" these things but if I do, I always recover. I act responsibly and do not go out when I am sick. However, none of these facts or articles such as this will ever effectively challenge the "get the vaccine or you are a bad citizen and will kill everyone" emotional arguments that are out there. I have continuously been near or around folks that have come down with Covid and have yet to encounter a second infection or positive test since my initial infection. I look forward to when greater fact-based realities start to take hold again.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  I look forward to when greater fact-based realities start to take hold again. I think you are in for a long wait.
- nednar 5y ago
  Who said after recovery you need vaccine? Probably you just need to share official documentation from your government and official health body with your family. Afaik, recovered and vaccinated are treated the same currently.
  - mfer 5y ago
    I asked about this. The response I got was that many people who got COVID had a mild case where the immune system did not kick in very strongly. That these are more likely to get a 2nd infection. The vaccine for them will give them coverage from a second infection. They want everyone to get the vaccine so that people aren't missed who had a mild case. Right or wrong, this is the reasoning being shared where I live.
    - sigstoat 5y ago
      > They want everyone to get the vaccine so that people aren't missed who had a mild case. i feel like "mild case" (also) subtly refers to all of the folks who said "oh, yeah, i had a cold in december 2019, that was probably covid. i've had it. no big deal."
nednar 5y ago
If recovered people have longer term protection than vaccinated people (which is one possible interpretation of the headline's statement), would it make sense to first vaccinate someone and then expose them to the real virus, thereby generating the benefits with a much much lower risk or maybe even zero risk?
- gurleen_s 5y ago
  I don’t know anything about how effective that might be, but I imagine the logistics of transporting a live, deadly virus would be a nightmare.
  - nednar 5y ago
    In many locations you have hospitals close by with covid stations. So you could bring the people to the virus.
    - insaneirish 5y ago
      And that would work how, exactly?
      - sebmellen 5y ago
        Walk the people through the respiratory ICU ward without PPE? Not endorsing it, just brainstorming...
      - nednar 5y ago
        For me, this would be a point where I would fully rely on the experts for deciding how to implement that step and check if the plan is feasible. I don't recommend executing such ideas without syncing with authorities and experts. That shouldn't stop us from brain storming, though, and allow experts to decide, if it's an interesting idea or stupid.
    - gls2ro 5y ago
      Wouldnt this just create the environment for a more resistant virus in a shorter period of time? I did not calculated the chances yet but here is what my probability intuition is saying Having 50% of population go through virus in one year creates a less fit environment for a more resistant mutation than having 50% of population being exposed to virus in 2-3 months. Like more encounters over a shorter period of time is a good environment to allow survival of resistant mutations.
seren 5y ago
From my understanding if you had an mRNA vaccine, your body was only exposed to an artificial spike protein, so effectively you have spike specific antibodies. On the other hand, if you had a real infection by the virus, you likely have antibodies for the spike protein and other part of the virus like the shell. So from my layman understanding, the immunity should be more resistant to a mutation of the spike protein. That being said I also know someone who got Covid 2 times, once in march 2020 and once in april 2021. (Confirmed by PCR the 2 times). The second time was much milder, but still she had to stop working for a week (versus one month the first time). It is still possible it was a defective test the second time, and something else than Covid.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jimbob21 5y ago
  If she was out for a month and then again for a week, it sounds like a compromised immune system more than anything else, assuming she isn't elderly.
- koolba 5y ago
  What if you have the vaccine, and then get exposed to the actual virus? Would it be the best of all worlds as the existing antibodies would prevent a full on infection but your body would also learn more generalized attacks against the virus? Or would it not be enough exposure to warrant the latter?
  - randomopining 5y ago
    That’s what I think and is why I actually wanted to get the virus 2+ weeks after vaccination.
    - jeremyjh 5y ago
      You want to get the virus so that in the future you don't...get the virus?
ppljudge 5y ago
And every new study like this confirms we didn’t know enough about it to propose solutions like “herd immunity”
- ultralite 5y ago
  Isn't this the sort of study and conclusion that would give weight to "herd immunity"? To you, is there any study/conclusion that would allow us to propose solutions like "herd immunity"?
  - barrkel 5y ago
    By that, I presume you mean sit back and do nothing, and let 'immunity' arise from infections. That doesn't work with Covid because the mortality rate is too high and the infection rate leads to healthcare being overwhelmed. If there was evidence that the mortality rate was low (but we have evidence of the opposite) or that the infection rate didn't spike upwards and start clogging up the beds that hospitals have which are able to deal with Covid (but we have evidence of the opposite), then that might be a conclusion that would permit proposing it. But we have direct evidence of the opposite.
    - swader999 5y ago
      It will work fine for younger populations though.
      - barrkel 5y ago
        Young populations are not hermetically sealed away from older populations. And even then, some of the young deaths have been horrific - e.g. the blood-drenched walls from the 13 year old who died, see https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13519684/shock-photos-blood-boy-13-hospital-wall-died-covid/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13519684/shock-photos-blood-bo...
- 8note 5y ago
  Herd immunity seems like a default assumption? At worst, we will always end up with the herd immunity solution. Others need to prove themselves to be more effective
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
loveistheanswer 5y ago
It almost seems like a lot of people don't want the data to indicate that natural immunity is strong and long lasting, even though the data shows that reinfection is extemely rare. Similar to how so many people have been unwilling to even consider a lab leak was a possibility, until just now it seems, because that idea was heresy to the orthodox dogma that ordained Scientists are Saviors. Humans have equated sickness with Sin for thousands of years, and catching covid has been no exception.
- cdolan 5y ago
  I appreciate the fact you said this and find it ironic you are being downvoted for this heresy!
- ultralite 5y ago
  Natural immunity was used as a justification for some societal responses, particularly by some on one side of the political spectrum. Thus, some of those on the opposite side will interpret strong natural immunity to COVID-19 as a political loss.
  - DarknessFalls 5y ago
    Remember that across the globe, there are many complex political affiliations. As it turns out, the governments that tend to be more authoritarian, such as India, the U.K., or the U.S. during the last cycle, denied the efficacy of wearing masks or getting vaccinated. Boris Johnson went as far as to suggest he get Covid on stage with the cameras rolling, to show the dangers were exaggerated. Now he's well on his way to early retirement, thanks to the damage it's done.
    - hesarenu 5y ago
      Hmm trying to change history? India govt is right winged but don't think they denied efficiency of masks or vaccination.
    - Xplune13 5y ago
      Don't know about the U.K or the U.S. but saying Indian Govt. denied the efficacy of wearing masks is false. The Indian Govt. had some questionable reaction to the pandemic but they never denied efficacy of wearing masks and vaccinations. On the contrary they actually encouraged people to wear masks and get vaccinated as fast as possible (when there were plenty of vaccines that is).
ck2 5y ago
If you had covid you also probably have a 1 in 10 chance of having long-covid for a year or more where your life quality is hell. Lifetime antibodies are not very helpful if you have longterm or permanent damage from covid.
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  I don't want to trivialize what people are suffering through, but 1 in 10 is not a remotely accurate count.
patrakov 5y ago
The big question is whether this can be read as "Vaccinated with Sinovac or CoviVac (i.e. a vaccine based on the whole but inactivated virus, as opposed to mRNA or a vector)? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime".
joelbondurant 5y ago
This will upset the diaper face brigade.

264 points by azth 5y ago

Does anybody have any ideas as to what this means for people who've had COVID and then get vaccinated with one of the mRNA vaccines? If not, is anyone studying this?

XorNot 5y ago
Probably that the vaccine is somewhat irrelevant: though that's up for grabs since what your body targets vs. what the vaccine targets will be subtly different. I'm more interested that this means that quite likely, COVID-19 will be eradicated: with not many advantageous mutation pathways, and if vaccines are conferring immunity forever, it's pretty much going to be burned out of the population one way or the other.
- jokowueu 5y ago
  >with not many advantageous mutation pathways I was under the impression that any mutations to the spike proteins would make the current vaccines useless and would require changes to the vaccines just like the flu shot . Isn't this the case ?
  - carlmr 5y ago
    It is the case, but with natural immunity slowly building up it will probably become more like a normal cold that you get as soon as a few variants have been seen by the world's immune systems.
  - GeekyBear 5y ago
    >I was under the impression that any mutations to the spike proteins would make the current vaccines useless and would require changes to the vaccines just like the flu shot . Isn't this the case ? No, it is not the case. You don't just make one antibody that targets the entire spike that would be thrown off by a mutation. >Human Antibodies Target Many Parts of Coronavirus Spike Protein https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/05/18/human-antibodies-target-many-parts-of-coronavirus-spike-protein/ https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/05/18/human-antibodies-ta... So far, all the claims that a variant (London variant, South African variant, Indian variant) would be immune to the current vaccine have turned out to be unwarranted.
- jhugo 5y ago
  By saying it will quite likely be eradicated, you’re assuming herd_immunity_threshold% vaccination is achieved, aren’t you? There are countries that are yet to achieve even 1% and some populations are likely to never achieve the threshold for immunity in that population.
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    He is saying herd immunity will be achieved before the virus has a chance to mutate and escape it (it's quite unambiguous here). The GP's comment says nothing explicitly about time frame, but sounds pessimistic on that.
- aledalgrande 5y ago
  It won't be. Look at vaccines in the US, the have flattened out at around 50%. Many countries are <30%. And there are animal reservoirs. This is not like polio.
ovi256 5y ago
Probably nothing at all, the mRNA vaccine will just prompt the body to make even more antibodies against the variants from the vaccine. I expect having stronger flu-like side-effects on the first injection instead of the usual second mRNA injection. For this reason, if you had diagnosed COVID, in France you'll be injected a single dose of mRNA vaccine and be considered immune.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  I had COVID at the end of December. I just got my first Pfizer dose yesterday. Almost no side effects, just a bit of sensitivity around the jab site. And a very slight chill feeling for a few hours.
exhilaration 5y ago
I think you might be referring to those social media posts that suggest that the mRNA vaccines undo the immunity afforded by an infection. Those stories are false, here's more information: https://factcheck.afp.com/american-red-cross-accepts-plasma-donations-covid-19-vaccine-recipients https://factcheck.afp.com/american-red-cross-accepts-plasma-...
3327 5y ago
Yes i am studying this and have data on covid + post covid quarterly antibody markets followed by one dose pfizer and monthly markers. In a nutshell - covid patients have sustained antibodies, non covid with vaccine groups have faster decay from Peak concentration.
GeekyBear 5y ago
There's some evidence that a second dose of mRNA vaccine isn't necessary if you were infected with Covid. >People who have already had confirmed covid-19 might only need a single dose of a mRNA vaccine, two small studies have indicated. Two weeks after a single dose of vaccine, people who had previously had covid-19 had antibody concentrations that were as high, or up to 10 times higher, than the levels seen in uninfected people who had received two doses of the vaccine. https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n308 https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n308
- leesalminen 5y ago
  This HN user [0] has an anecdote to challenge this evidence. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27315459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27315459
  - GeekyBear 5y ago
    How does that challenge this evidence?
- cableshaft 5y ago
  This is important when vaccine supplies are limited (in some places in the world that's the case), but not if they aren't. "Since then, one study after another has reinforced the single-vaccine-for-survivors idea, though some skeptics have pointed out that it is logistically simpler to just give everyone two doses than to figure out who needs only one...Cheng at Cedars-Sinai said she would still default to the CDC guidance calling for two vaccines, even for people who have had COVID-19. The data does suggest, however, that one dose could be enough" https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/04/18/world/coronavirus-vaccine-doses/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/04/18/world/coronavir...
  - moses-palmer 5y ago
    I think supply is not the only thing to consider. I suffered a SARS-CoV-2 infection around Easter, and received my first vaccine dose a week ago. The days after that I felt much worse that when I had the actual infection, albeit for a shorter time, so I personally would appreciate an official recommendation to not have to take the second dose.
GuB-42 5y ago
At the end of the article. > Ellebedy’s team has observed early signs that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine should trigger the production of the same cells. But the persistence of antibody production, whether elicited by vaccination or infection, does not ensure long-lasting immunity to COVID-19. The ability of some emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants to blunt the protective effects of antibodies means that additional immunizations may be needed to restore levels, says Ellebedy. “My presumption is we will need a booster.” The idea seems to be that an infection is like a single dose of the vaccine, so you still need another shot for the best immunity.

tomp 5y ago

> The study provides evidence that immunity triggered by SARS-CoV-2 infection will be extraordinarily long-lasting. Does it? I think this pop-science article overly simplifies antibodies and immunity... I'm no doctor myself, but as was explained to me by my doctor friends (who however are not specialists in this subtopic either), there's many different layers to the immune system. It's entirely possible to have antibodies and/or antibody-producing capacity in your body, yet not be "immune" - if by "immune" we mean that you cannot get the illness, both in the sense that you don't get ill, and in the sense that you don't become asymptomatic carrier (i.e. the virus starts replicating in your body, but not enough to make you feel "ill" effects) (both of which are kind-of important if you want to stop a pandemic). Long-term immune system "memory cells" (B-cells) might still need time to be activate and start producing antibodies, so you can get infected, ill & a spreader, but not seriously ill because your immune system re-awakens and starts producing antibodies and you recover much quicker than you otherwise would. (This whole mechanism is the reason why you need booster shots of some vaccines.) This is, of course, based mainly on experience from non-coronavirus like viruses. This one might be different.

fortran77 5y ago
I don't think _Nature_ is considered "Pop Science".
- postalrat 5y ago
  When they say thing you don't agree with it most certainly is.
- JAM1971 5y ago
  > I don't think _Nature_ is considered "Pop Science". Did you read the article? It isn't exactly "in depth". It isn't what I'd expect from a magazine of Nature's prominence.
galangalalgol 5y ago
Don't we also have many instances of people who have recovered and been reinfected months later? Some nurse friends said they had many coworkers who had been infected twice months apart with multiple negative tests between.

afavour 5y ago

I’m personally sceptical of putting too much faith in this, we’ve already seen a number of variants. Over my lifetime? Who knows what mutations we’ll see.

Closi 5y ago
Hopefully the mutations will slow over time - the mutations at the moment may be the 'easy' ones.
- Sharlin 5y ago
  The various non-novel corona- and rhinoviruses that cause common cold don't seem to have had any problems playing catch with the human immune system for who knows how many thousand years. SARS-CoV-2 is probably more likely than not to just become a new member of the family of "domestic" human pathogens that we learn to live with.
  - threatripper 5y ago
    "learning to live with it" includes filtering out those who can't learn fast enough.
roywiggins 5y ago
The vaccine manufacturers are already gearing up for booster shots, so we won't have to trust it in the long term- new strains can be met with new vaccines.
- HighlandSpring 5y ago
  In that case won't it become a self-fulfilling prophecy?
  - mywittyname 5y ago
    No. It was suspected from the beginning that booster shots would be necessary. There are just so many variants and the infection has spread to so many people that it was unrealistic to expect a single round would eliminate the virus. There's a very real risk of covid vaccines being necessary every year.

myth_drannon 5y ago

What happened in Manaus/Brazil(high re-infection rate even after the city reached herd immunity) shows that's not that simple and they clearly state it "though viral variants could dampen some of the protection they offer"

baybal2 5y ago
Very much it. Getting influenza antibodies once only protects you for that season, until a new strain emerges few months down the line.
- drno123 5y ago
  But influenza virus mutates much more quickly than Sars-cov-2.
  - swiley 5y ago
    "mutates" is probably the wrong word. My understanding is that it combines different genes. That's why the names for different flue viruses always contain numbers: to indicate which forms of the different proteins the genes are expressing.
- toolz 5y ago
  influenza mutates much faster than the covid family [1] - looking at the other coronavirus family there is plenty of reason to have expectations that this will become an endemic mild seasonal cold. The most similar coronaviruses provide life long immunity (please don't mistake immunity as being unable to experience symptoms, just means bad clinical outcomes will likely plummet due to immune system recognition) [2] [1] https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/06/10/sars-cov-2-dna-suggests-single-vaccine-will-be-effective/ https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/06/10/sars-cov-2-dna-suggests-singl... [2]https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1....
shoto_io 5y ago
Listening to the Prof. Drosten Podcast (German only), he highly doubts that they actually had reached herd immunity before their second deadly wave. He rather assumes something like 40% and then the mutated variant raged on (not badly affecting but infecting the 40% partially, and thus driving the infections).

_Microft 5y ago

Also see the discussion from three days ago at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27267852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27267852

anonymousDan 5y ago

As someone who had COVID 6 months ago and is currently awaiting the result of a PCR test I hope this is true!

curiousgal 5y ago
PCR test? Shouldn't you have gone for a serology test?
- TotempaaltJ 5y ago
  I think OP is saying they're testing to see if they have COVID now. Hoping not to be reinfected.
dustinmoris 5y ago
Neither the vaccine nor a previous infection will prevent you from catching the virus again, but it will prevent you from falling ill which is all that really matters.
- anoncake 5y ago
  You'll obviously get some virus in your body, but a lot less because most of it (hopefully) gets destroyed before it can reproduce.
  - trompetenaccoun 5y ago
    It will still be picked up by a PCR test depending on the number of replication cycles. Which is why mass testing everyone, including healthy people, is such a dumb idea.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      Only if the number of cycles wasn't pre defined. Which it is, nobody is running cycles until a PCR test turns positive.

MrBuddyCasino 5y ago

I know two people who had covid and who right now have a second covid infection by the british mutation. One of them also had their first vaccination.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
I don't really believe stories on the internet. There's a lot of context missing. Like the fact that 3% of the population are hypochondriacs.
- amarant 5y ago
  It's still anecdotal, but my cousin's wife who is a nurse also had covid twice, both of them confirmed infections(as in, she tested positive), the second one was after she'd received her first shot(not sure which vaccine, but one of the 2-dose ones) I have no clue if they were different variants or what caused her to not be immune, or how unlucky she were(this might be exceedingly rare) but for me it's been a good anecdote to tell people who think they don't need the vaccine because they already had covid. Get vaccinated!
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    Counterpoint. My cousins wife's friends bosses therapists personal trainer got Covid twice and it made them more physically strong and able to do advanced math and play piano masterfully never having touched a piano before! Getting Covid a second time made their life way better.
  - skeeter2020 5y ago
    >> anecdotes aren't anthema to logic. THey're all that is required to disprove universally stated truths. So if some vax-denier says "healthly people can't get covid twice" your anecdote is good enough. The real problem is that despite all their talk of science and facts they're not going to be convinced. That's just window dressing for their wrong beliefs. The value of vaccines is for society as a whole but the majority of us who get vaccinated do so for very selfish reasons: we don't want to get sick, we perceive the risk worth it, etc. The vast majority of anti-vaxers are still driven by the same base needs, we just haven't found the motivator that triggers action. Something as simple as vacinne passports would probably do it.

andy_ppp 5y ago

Does anyone know if PCR tests will find out if you've had the virus, after you had the vaccine?

OldManAndTheCpp 5y ago
I got a rapid test after getting the first vaccine -- I was told that there were more than one type of antibodies, the vaccine only provides one, so they can test for the others to see if you had the virus proper.
ilogik 5y ago
PCR tests only detect live virus, not antibodies. there are several antibody tests for covid. As far as I'm aware, the vaccines only trigger the anti-spike protein antibodies, so if you test positive for other types of covid-19 antibodies, you've probably had it.
- rimliu 5y ago
  PCR test detect genetic material of the virus. It may be live virus it may be just fragments, impossible to tell.
olivierlacan 5y ago
PCR tests don't detect antibodies, they detect active virus. Antibody tests may be what you're thinking of. See: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/coronavirus-disease-2019-testing-basics https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/coronavirus-d... I don't know the answer to your question, but it would make sense unless the antibody test(s) look for a specific type of antibody to COVID-19 that is produced naturally when infected and not just any antibodies that might be produced when vaccinated.
- toolz 5y ago
  incorrect, PCR tests detect any virus matter - active or otherwise. This is a very important distinction since we've seem to lost our minds collectively and label PCR tests with a cycle threshold of >40 as a true positive.

heyflyguy 5y ago

I am being shunned by my family because of my lack of interest in the vaccine. I've had COVID and recovered. I also don't get a flu shot each year. I really like not putting things into my body, especially when year after year I may or may not "catch" these things but if I do, I always recover. I act responsibly and do not go out when I am sick. However, none of these facts or articles such as this will ever effectively challenge the "get the vaccine or you are a bad citizen and will kill everyone" emotional arguments that are out there. I have continuously been near or around folks that have come down with Covid and have yet to encounter a second infection or positive test since my initial infection. I look forward to when greater fact-based realities start to take hold again.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
I look forward to when greater fact-based realities start to take hold again. I think you are in for a long wait.
nednar 5y ago
Who said after recovery you need vaccine? Probably you just need to share official documentation from your government and official health body with your family. Afaik, recovered and vaccinated are treated the same currently.
- mfer 5y ago
  I asked about this. The response I got was that many people who got COVID had a mild case where the immune system did not kick in very strongly. That these are more likely to get a 2nd infection. The vaccine for them will give them coverage from a second infection. They want everyone to get the vaccine so that people aren't missed who had a mild case. Right or wrong, this is the reasoning being shared where I live.
  - sigstoat 5y ago
    > They want everyone to get the vaccine so that people aren't missed who had a mild case. i feel like "mild case" (also) subtly refers to all of the folks who said "oh, yeah, i had a cold in december 2019, that was probably covid. i've had it. no big deal."

nednar 5y ago

If recovered people have longer term protection than vaccinated people (which is one possible interpretation of the headline's statement), would it make sense to first vaccinate someone and then expose them to the real virus, thereby generating the benefits with a much much lower risk or maybe even zero risk?

gurleen_s 5y ago
I don’t know anything about how effective that might be, but I imagine the logistics of transporting a live, deadly virus would be a nightmare.
- nednar 5y ago
  In many locations you have hospitals close by with covid stations. So you could bring the people to the virus.
  - insaneirish 5y ago
    And that would work how, exactly?
    - sebmellen 5y ago
      Walk the people through the respiratory ICU ward without PPE? Not endorsing it, just brainstorming...
    - nednar 5y ago
      For me, this would be a point where I would fully rely on the experts for deciding how to implement that step and check if the plan is feasible. I don't recommend executing such ideas without syncing with authorities and experts. That shouldn't stop us from brain storming, though, and allow experts to decide, if it's an interesting idea or stupid.
  - gls2ro 5y ago
    Wouldnt this just create the environment for a more resistant virus in a shorter period of time? I did not calculated the chances yet but here is what my probability intuition is saying Having 50% of population go through virus in one year creates a less fit environment for a more resistant mutation than having 50% of population being exposed to virus in 2-3 months. Like more encounters over a shorter period of time is a good environment to allow survival of resistant mutations.

seren 5y ago

From my understanding if you had an mRNA vaccine, your body was only exposed to an artificial spike protein, so effectively you have spike specific antibodies. On the other hand, if you had a real infection by the virus, you likely have antibodies for the spike protein and other part of the virus like the shell. So from my layman understanding, the immunity should be more resistant to a mutation of the spike protein. That being said I also know someone who got Covid 2 times, once in march 2020 and once in april 2021. (Confirmed by PCR the 2 times). The second time was much milder, but still she had to stop working for a week (versus one month the first time). It is still possible it was a defective test the second time, and something else than Covid.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jimbob21 5y ago
If she was out for a month and then again for a week, it sounds like a compromised immune system more than anything else, assuming she isn't elderly.
koolba 5y ago
What if you have the vaccine, and then get exposed to the actual virus? Would it be the best of all worlds as the existing antibodies would prevent a full on infection but your body would also learn more generalized attacks against the virus? Or would it not be enough exposure to warrant the latter?
- randomopining 5y ago
  That’s what I think and is why I actually wanted to get the virus 2+ weeks after vaccination.
  - jeremyjh 5y ago
    You want to get the virus so that in the future you don't...get the virus?

ppljudge 5y ago

And every new study like this confirms we didn’t know enough about it to propose solutions like “herd immunity”

ultralite 5y ago
Isn't this the sort of study and conclusion that would give weight to "herd immunity"? To you, is there any study/conclusion that would allow us to propose solutions like "herd immunity"?
- barrkel 5y ago
  By that, I presume you mean sit back and do nothing, and let 'immunity' arise from infections. That doesn't work with Covid because the mortality rate is too high and the infection rate leads to healthcare being overwhelmed. If there was evidence that the mortality rate was low (but we have evidence of the opposite) or that the infection rate didn't spike upwards and start clogging up the beds that hospitals have which are able to deal with Covid (but we have evidence of the opposite), then that might be a conclusion that would permit proposing it. But we have direct evidence of the opposite.
  - swader999 5y ago
    It will work fine for younger populations though.
    - barrkel 5y ago
      Young populations are not hermetically sealed away from older populations. And even then, some of the young deaths have been horrific - e.g. the blood-drenched walls from the 13 year old who died, see https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13519684/shock-photos-blood-boy-13-hospital-wall-died-covid/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13519684/shock-photos-blood-bo...
8note 5y ago
Herd immunity seems like a default assumption? At worst, we will always end up with the herd immunity solution. Others need to prove themselves to be more effective

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

loveistheanswer 5y ago

It almost seems like a lot of people don't want the data to indicate that natural immunity is strong and long lasting, even though the data shows that reinfection is extemely rare. Similar to how so many people have been unwilling to even consider a lab leak was a possibility, until just now it seems, because that idea was heresy to the orthodox dogma that ordained Scientists are Saviors. Humans have equated sickness with Sin for thousands of years, and catching covid has been no exception.

cdolan 5y ago
I appreciate the fact you said this and find it ironic you are being downvoted for this heresy!
ultralite 5y ago
Natural immunity was used as a justification for some societal responses, particularly by some on one side of the political spectrum. Thus, some of those on the opposite side will interpret strong natural immunity to COVID-19 as a political loss.
- DarknessFalls 5y ago
  Remember that across the globe, there are many complex political affiliations. As it turns out, the governments that tend to be more authoritarian, such as India, the U.K., or the U.S. during the last cycle, denied the efficacy of wearing masks or getting vaccinated. Boris Johnson went as far as to suggest he get Covid on stage with the cameras rolling, to show the dangers were exaggerated. Now he's well on his way to early retirement, thanks to the damage it's done.
  - hesarenu 5y ago
    Hmm trying to change history? India govt is right winged but don't think they denied efficiency of masks or vaccination.
  - Xplune13 5y ago
    Don't know about the U.K or the U.S. but saying Indian Govt. denied the efficacy of wearing masks is false. The Indian Govt. had some questionable reaction to the pandemic but they never denied efficacy of wearing masks and vaccinations. On the contrary they actually encouraged people to wear masks and get vaccinated as fast as possible (when there were plenty of vaccines that is).

ck2 5y ago

If you had covid you also probably have a 1 in 10 chance of having long-covid for a year or more where your life quality is hell. Lifetime antibodies are not very helpful if you have longterm or permanent damage from covid.

bpodgursky 5y ago
I don't want to trivialize what people are suffering through, but 1 in 10 is not a remotely accurate count.

patrakov 5y ago

The big question is whether this can be read as "Vaccinated with Sinovac or CoviVac (i.e. a vaccine based on the whole but inactivated virus, as opposed to mRNA or a vector)? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime".

joelbondurant 5y ago

This will upset the diaper face brigade.