7 ms·

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity

30 points by huntermeyer 5y ago

a0-prw 5y ago
"Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."
- zamalek 5y ago
  > previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional Exactly. In addition, the vaccine is vastly less life-threatening than acquiring natural immunity. In addition, the vaccine is more effective against the original variant and is very successful in that regard. The same will hold true when Pfizer/Moderna "print" updated vaccines.
  - LurkingPenguin 5y ago
    > In addition, the vaccine is vastly less life-threatening than acquiring natural immunity. Nobody reasonable is disputing this, but I find it interesting that this seems to be such a common response to the findings that natural immunity is strong and durable. It's as if some people are threatened by the fact that natural immunity is so good. I don't think any of the researchers looking into natural immunity are doing so to create a narrative that people should prefer to be infected than get vaccinated. Obviously, that would be dumb. They're doing so because substantial numbers of people have already been infected and for a variety of health and policy reasons, we need to know what that means. One of the good implications about the strength and durability of natural immunity is that in parts of the world where vaccines continue to be in short supply but significant percentages of people have already been infected the situation might be less dire than feared. > In addition, the vaccine is more effective against the original variant... More effective than what? Given that Delta is the variant responsible for over 90% of cases in the US (and likely a similar percentage in other parts of the world that continue to have high rates of infection), efficacy against the original strain of the virus is a less and less meaningful metric.
    - Imnimo 5y ago
      I think the reason for this sort of response is that people are worried (and reasonably so, in my opinion), that people will say, "I'm pretty sure I had covid back in February of 2020 so I don't need the vaccine!"
      - angelzen 5y ago
        First news item in a quick google search: "Cheap covid-19 antibody test shows if you have immunity in 5 minutes". Perhaps stop treating people like children that need to be lied to by omission 'for the common good'? https://www.newscientist.com/article/2290120-cheap-covid-19-antibody-test-shows-if-you-have-immunity-in-5-minutes https://www.newscientist.com/article/2290120-cheap-covid-19-...
        Imnimo 5y ago
        I don't think the original commenter here is lying by omission, they're adding additional context - that even if you have natural immunity, you still benefit from getting vaccinated.
        moistly 5y ago
        Antibodies are not produced forever and do not hang around for more than a few months. If you think you had covid last year you’re S.O.L. on the antibody testing front, because those antibodies are loooong gone.
        guytpearson1 5y ago
        Your comment is not true.
        moistly 5y ago
        It absolutely is true. Antibody production declines at an exponential rate(1). You don’t lose your immune response quickly, because T-cells and the like “remember” the virus—but your body doesn’t waste energy producing antibodies forever when there is no active need to have them around. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2025179 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2025179 Late edit: if you think you’ve lived through a sars-cov-2 infection, get it in writing within a few months.
  - valarauko 5y ago
    > The same will hold true when Pfizer/Moderna "print" updated vaccines To this point - why haven't they? In the spring/summer there was a lot of talk regarding the ability to quickly switch to a new variant recipe, yet that doesn't seem to have happened. The plan for the boosters still uses the original Wuhan strain.
    - angelzen 5y ago
      How long should be the clinical trials for updated vaccines? Historically, 'on average, vaccine development can take 10-15 years'. We've rushed the current crop of vaccines 10x. It was an emergency, fingers crossed everything works out fine in the end. Is this the new normal? Are we going to throw long-term safety concerns out the window as a matter of normal procedure? Reminder, there is no reboot button. Perhaps 'move fast and break things' is not the right motto to use in vaccine development. https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/how-covid-19-leading-innovation-clinical-trials https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/how-covid-19-leading-innov...
      - moistly 5y ago
        The vaccines are not rushed. They have been in development for ages. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-myth-versus-fact https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...
        angelzen 5y ago
        The delivery technology has been in development for ages. The payload was tested for about 1 year. IIRC the formulation was done early 2020 in 2 days. Re your link, it asserts 'MYTH: If I’ve already had COVID-19, I don’t need a vaccine.'. I have serious doubts that is the case, see the OA. The flu vaccines have been on a yearly basis update schedule. As an organics kind of guy that never sit well with me, but I knew little about vaccines and the flu damage seemed low enough to not matter. It's just an inactivated virus, I'm going to get it either way. These days I wonder how safe the iterated flu shot really is.
      - 5y ago
m0llusk 5y ago
Much of this discussion, including to a significant degree this study, rate immunity using a linear metric based on detection of infections. A more nuanced view of the situation shows that vaccine immunizations cause a very strong immune reaction to the particular viral components in the vaccine while natural immunity tends to cause immune reactions that are not as strong but cover more if not all of the exposed virus components. Having weaker but more general immunity would potentially explain why natural immunity was better able to handle a new variant. This does not eliminate the possibility that a new booster deliberately designed to counter all current variants may be even more effective. In particular that is true for the Delta. The Delta variant is so virulent that it currently dominates by a wide margin over all other variants and there is not necessarily going to be a more virulent variant. This means that the current problem is quite likely not to be ready for more variants, but to focus on handling the Delta variant. That in turns means that vaccines and vaccine boosters may be called for as the best possible option even though natural immunity may be helpful. Natural immunity also comes with far greater risks which is another reason to focus on vaccines and boosters.
lern_too_spel 5y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28307224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28307224
johnchristopher 5y ago
How long before this study is peer reviewed ?

30 points by huntermeyer 5y ago

"Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."

zamalek 5y ago
> previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional Exactly. In addition, the vaccine is vastly less life-threatening than acquiring natural immunity. In addition, the vaccine is more effective against the original variant and is very successful in that regard. The same will hold true when Pfizer/Moderna "print" updated vaccines.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  > In addition, the vaccine is vastly less life-threatening than acquiring natural immunity. Nobody reasonable is disputing this, but I find it interesting that this seems to be such a common response to the findings that natural immunity is strong and durable. It's as if some people are threatened by the fact that natural immunity is so good. I don't think any of the researchers looking into natural immunity are doing so to create a narrative that people should prefer to be infected than get vaccinated. Obviously, that would be dumb. They're doing so because substantial numbers of people have already been infected and for a variety of health and policy reasons, we need to know what that means. One of the good implications about the strength and durability of natural immunity is that in parts of the world where vaccines continue to be in short supply but significant percentages of people have already been infected the situation might be less dire than feared. > In addition, the vaccine is more effective against the original variant... More effective than what? Given that Delta is the variant responsible for over 90% of cases in the US (and likely a similar percentage in other parts of the world that continue to have high rates of infection), efficacy against the original strain of the virus is a less and less meaningful metric.
  - Imnimo 5y ago
    I think the reason for this sort of response is that people are worried (and reasonably so, in my opinion), that people will say, "I'm pretty sure I had covid back in February of 2020 so I don't need the vaccine!"
    - angelzen 5y ago
      First news item in a quick google search: "Cheap covid-19 antibody test shows if you have immunity in 5 minutes". Perhaps stop treating people like children that need to be lied to by omission 'for the common good'? https://www.newscientist.com/article/2290120-cheap-covid-19-antibody-test-shows-if-you-have-immunity-in-5-minutes https://www.newscientist.com/article/2290120-cheap-covid-19-...
      - Imnimo 5y ago
        I don't think the original commenter here is lying by omission, they're adding additional context - that even if you have natural immunity, you still benefit from getting vaccinated.
      - moistly 5y ago
        Antibodies are not produced forever and do not hang around for more than a few months. If you think you had covid last year you’re S.O.L. on the antibody testing front, because those antibodies are loooong gone.
        guytpearson1 5y ago
        Your comment is not true.
        moistly 5y ago
        It absolutely is true. Antibody production declines at an exponential rate(1). You don’t lose your immune response quickly, because T-cells and the like “remember” the virus—but your body doesn’t waste energy producing antibodies forever when there is no active need to have them around. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2025179 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2025179 Late edit: if you think you’ve lived through a sars-cov-2 infection, get it in writing within a few months.
- valarauko 5y ago
  > The same will hold true when Pfizer/Moderna "print" updated vaccines To this point - why haven't they? In the spring/summer there was a lot of talk regarding the ability to quickly switch to a new variant recipe, yet that doesn't seem to have happened. The plan for the boosters still uses the original Wuhan strain.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    How long should be the clinical trials for updated vaccines? Historically, 'on average, vaccine development can take 10-15 years'. We've rushed the current crop of vaccines 10x. It was an emergency, fingers crossed everything works out fine in the end. Is this the new normal? Are we going to throw long-term safety concerns out the window as a matter of normal procedure? Reminder, there is no reboot button. Perhaps 'move fast and break things' is not the right motto to use in vaccine development. https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/how-covid-19-leading-innovation-clinical-trials https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/how-covid-19-leading-innov...
    - moistly 5y ago
      The vaccines are not rushed. They have been in development for ages. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-myth-versus-fact https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...
      - angelzen 5y ago
        The delivery technology has been in development for ages. The payload was tested for about 1 year. IIRC the formulation was done early 2020 in 2 days. Re your link, it asserts 'MYTH: If I’ve already had COVID-19, I don’t need a vaccine.'. I have serious doubts that is the case, see the OA. The flu vaccines have been on a yearly basis update schedule. As an organics kind of guy that never sit well with me, but I knew little about vaccines and the flu damage seemed low enough to not matter. It's just an inactivated virus, I'm going to get it either way. These days I wonder how safe the iterated flu shot really is.
    - 5y ago

m0llusk 5y ago

Much of this discussion, including to a significant degree this study, rate immunity using a linear metric based on detection of infections. A more nuanced view of the situation shows that vaccine immunizations cause a very strong immune reaction to the particular viral components in the vaccine while natural immunity tends to cause immune reactions that are not as strong but cover more if not all of the exposed virus components. Having weaker but more general immunity would potentially explain why natural immunity was better able to handle a new variant. This does not eliminate the possibility that a new booster deliberately designed to counter all current variants may be even more effective. In particular that is true for the Delta. The Delta variant is so virulent that it currently dominates by a wide margin over all other variants and there is not necessarily going to be a more virulent variant. This means that the current problem is quite likely not to be ready for more variants, but to focus on handling the Delta variant. That in turns means that vaccines and vaccine boosters may be called for as the best possible option even though natural immunity may be helpful. Natural immunity also comes with far greater risks which is another reason to focus on vaccines and boosters.

lern_too_spel 5y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28307224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28307224

johnchristopher 5y ago

How long before this study is peer reviewed ?