4 ms·

Since initial infectious doses and peak viral loads seem to vary wildly in people who've been infected, I would speculate that it's much easier to quantify vacc

Since initial infectious doses and peak viral loads seem to vary wildly in people who've been infected, I would speculate that it's much easier to quantify vaccine-induced immunity in a public health context relative to so-called "natural immunity", since those initial variables can be tightly controlled. This is a practical matter for making consistent and effective public health policy, as well as a scientific matter (viz. establishing the relative effectiveness of various forms of immunity for diverse and uncertain infection scenarios). Experts in public health and/or infectious diseases, epidemiology, etc. may feel free to correct me if I'm substantially incorrect. However, for people who see the world through a lens that paints all public health policy with the brush of partisan politics, the distinction may be difficult to grasp.

OrvalWintermute 5y ago
> Since initial infectious doses and peak viral loads seem to vary wildly in people who've been infected, I would speculate that it's much easier to quantify vaccine-induced immunity in a public health context relative to so-called "natural immunity", since those initial variables can be tightly controlled. I think you are missing the largest discriminator. The US Vaccines[1], and the related vaccines, are highly limited resistance specific to a spike protein only, perhaps with boosters, to a number of spikes seen. Total = 1, perhaps 2 if it includes a delta variant spike booster also. Natural immunity confers with it resistance to a number of different covid-19 viral proteins, not just the spike. We know Covid-19 has 29 proteins Now, we know that researchers saw these antibodies, as they were the ones that said, "all these antibodies could be the target of future vaccines", and the idea is there. However, we don't know the exactly count of antibodies to all these viral proteins, we just know of their existence from research. [2] But, to compare the strength of natural immunity to a vaccine is to fail at elementary math. However, I am not saying that people at a high risk from age, comorbidities, or both, should not take the vaccine. That is their own decision. On the other hand, the vast majority of the research indicates that natural immunity actually provides superior immunity from a breadth perspective, since a legacy vaccine protection is comparatively challenged against a mutated spike. [1] This is not true for all vaccines, merely "spike" vaccines. So, it wouldn't apply to an attenuated viral vaccine. However, attenuated vaccines do not prompt as strong an immune response. [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32555388/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32555388/
- caconym_ 5y ago
  I'm not sure where you imagine I made any statement directly comparing the efficacy of vaccines to natural immunity. The substance of my comment is limited to the problem of quantifying the efficacy of natural immunity in the real world, from the perspective of public health policy.
  - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
    > quantify vaccine-induced immunity This is a non-sequitur. These vaccines are leaky & non-sterilizing; these are not remotely comparable to the vaccines we have had throughout most of our normal lives that grant something like 99.99999% protection with minimal side effects. I'm saying that as someone as who has had a number of vaccines during my life - I am not an antivaxx. However, these vaccines are not comparable.
    - caconym_ 5y ago
      You are, apparently, not even making a token effort to understand my comments. If you want to talk about how much better natural immunity is than vaccines, there are plenty of subthreads in these comments where your contributions--while possibly controversial--would not be completely irrelevant. But this is not one of those subthreads. I have not expressed an opinion on that matter and I have no intention of doing so in this particular context.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >had a number of vaccines during my life - I am not an antivaxx "Antivaxx" in today's context has nothing to do with whether you've ever accepted a vaccine in your life, and everything to do with whether you reject COVID vaccines. In fact, that's as much the meaning as anything: that people who were previously OK with vaccines (including the regimen of sometimes experimental vaccines required by the military) are somehow now vociferously opposed to COVID vaccines. And, on that measure, even a cursory glance at your recent comment history reveals that you are unequivocally antivaxx.

OrvalWintermute 5y ago

> Since initial infectious doses and peak viral loads seem to vary wildly in people who've been infected, I would speculate that it's much easier to quantify vaccine-induced immunity in a public health context relative to so-called "natural immunity", since those initial variables can be tightly controlled. I think you are missing the largest discriminator. The US Vaccines[1], and the related vaccines, are highly limited resistance specific to a spike protein only, perhaps with boosters, to a number of spikes seen. Total = 1, perhaps 2 if it includes a delta variant spike booster also. Natural immunity confers with it resistance to a number of different covid-19 viral proteins, not just the spike. We know Covid-19 has 29 proteins Now, we know that researchers saw these antibodies, as they were the ones that said, "all these antibodies could be the target of future vaccines", and the idea is there. However, we don't know the exactly count of antibodies to all these viral proteins, we just know of their existence from research. [2] But, to compare the strength of natural immunity to a vaccine is to fail at elementary math. However, I am not saying that people at a high risk from age, comorbidities, or both, should not take the vaccine. That is their own decision. On the other hand, the vast majority of the research indicates that natural immunity actually provides superior immunity from a breadth perspective, since a legacy vaccine protection is comparatively challenged against a mutated spike. [1] This is not true for all vaccines, merely "spike" vaccines. So, it wouldn't apply to an attenuated viral vaccine. However, attenuated vaccines do not prompt as strong an immune response. [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32555388/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32555388/

caconym_ 5y ago
I'm not sure where you imagine I made any statement directly comparing the efficacy of vaccines to natural immunity. The substance of my comment is limited to the problem of quantifying the efficacy of natural immunity in the real world, from the perspective of public health policy.
- OrvalWintermute 5y ago
  > quantify vaccine-induced immunity This is a non-sequitur. These vaccines are leaky & non-sterilizing; these are not remotely comparable to the vaccines we have had throughout most of our normal lives that grant something like 99.99999% protection with minimal side effects. I'm saying that as someone as who has had a number of vaccines during my life - I am not an antivaxx. However, these vaccines are not comparable.
  - caconym_ 5y ago
    You are, apparently, not even making a token effort to understand my comments. If you want to talk about how much better natural immunity is than vaccines, there are plenty of subthreads in these comments where your contributions--while possibly controversial--would not be completely irrelevant. But this is not one of those subthreads. I have not expressed an opinion on that matter and I have no intention of doing so in this particular context.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >had a number of vaccines during my life - I am not an antivaxx "Antivaxx" in today's context has nothing to do with whether you've ever accepted a vaccine in your life, and everything to do with whether you reject COVID vaccines. In fact, that's as much the meaning as anything: that people who were previously OK with vaccines (including the regimen of sometimes experimental vaccines required by the military) are somehow now vociferously opposed to COVID vaccines. And, on that measure, even a cursory glance at your recent comment history reveals that you are unequivocally antivaxx.