[HN Gopher] Is one vaccine dose enough if you've had Covid? What...
___________________________________________________________________
Is one vaccine dose enough if you've had Covid? What the science
says
Author : dsr12
Score : 29 points
Date : 2021-06-27 17:31 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| macinjosh wrote:
| Natural immunity is way better than any vaccine. You don't need a
| vaccine if you already have antibodies.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| > France, Germany and Italy, among other countries, now advise
| only one dose of vaccine for people with a healthy immune system
| and a confirmed previous diagnosis. Many scientists who have
| studied immune responses to vaccination say such policies are a
| sensible way to make the most of limited supplies in countries
| that are racing to inoculate their populations.
|
| At least for France, their Infectious Disease professionals go
| further. They're of the opinion that a second dose in someone
| that's been infected (within a certain range of time) is
| subjecting them to unnecessary treatment, wasted time and side
| effects for no/limited benefit.
|
| It's not to make the most of limited supplies.
|
| Auto-translation (with some readability tweaks):
|
| > If the second dose of vaccine has already been administered to
| people with a history of infection with SARS-Cov-2, the data
| available to date do not show any difference in the safety
| profile apart from the occurrence of more common systemic
| reactions.
|
| https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/p_3237271/en/strategie-de-vacc...
|
| But questioning the value of a vaccine under any circumstances is
| ban-worthy in a lot of places.
| kriskrunch wrote:
| The study used 26 participants? Did I read that right?
|
| What is the preferred sample size to back these sorts of claims?
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Not sure why they'd focus on a study out this week, there have
| been several others, e.g. the first 5 references in this Letter
| published a month ago:
| https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-39...
| 123pie123 wrote:
| Why doesn't getting Covid and then allowing your body to produce
| your own immunity not protect you from getting it again?
|
| As I understand the variants are not like the flu or the cold
| (yet!)
| crazygringo wrote:
| It probably does.
|
| We just haven't had enough time to prove it yet, or to
| investigate the differences between variants.
| raarts wrote:
| According to this (preprint) paper(n=52000), recovering from
| covid-19 protects just as well (or even slightly better) than
| getting vaccinated.
|
| Also note that vaccines focus on the Spike protein only, and
| you're immunesystem takes the entire virus into account,
| which might offer better protection against variants.
|
| https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v.
| ..
| thedrbrian wrote:
| PHE are doing one too:-
|
| https://www.gov.uk/government/news/past-
| covid-19-infection-p...
|
| >>PHE scientists working on the study have concluded
| naturally acquired immunity as a result of past infections
| provide 83% protection against reinfection, compared to
| people who have not had the disease before. This appears to
| last at least for 5 months from first becoming sick.
| uryga wrote:
| iirc for some reason the amount of antibodies you have falls
| sharply after 1-3 months and you're vulnerable again.
| anecdotally, a friend of a friend (EMT) had covid like 4 times
| before vaccines were available.
| furgooswft13 wrote:
| Can someone explain why this would not be the case for
| vaccines?
|
| If antibodies fall off quickly from an actual infection, why
| would this not also happen for the antibodies produced
| because of taking the vaccine?
| strogonoff wrote:
| Antibody count falls at first, but relevant antibody-
| producing cells were found[0] to remain in the bone marrow. I
| suppose it is not the only determining factor in
| susceptibility to symptomatic infection, though.
|
| I'd be curious if currently available vaccines stimulate such
| preexisting antibody-producing bone marrow cells of past
| COVID patients (which sounds more optimal on the face of it),
| or they trigger yet another variety of antibodies to be
| produced in addition to the "native" one.
|
| [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442-9#ref-
| CR1 "Had COVID? You'll probably make antibodies for a
| lifetime"
| mfkdkslsn wrote:
| Bullshit. SARS 1 produces immunity against COVID and every
| other coronavirus has natural immunity. Your friend had some
| colds, the flu, maybe COVID once, and potentially false
| positive tests.
|
| Antibodies do drop but they're not the only part of the
| immune system. T cells have memory and will remember the
| antigen
| 123pie123 wrote:
| this video is good simple(ish) explaination - note it says
| bacteria, but the vid is for most things that are invasive
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQGOcOUBi6s&list=PLsboZGJ1J
| M...
|
| It's from the Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell channel
| djrogers wrote:
| > Research shows that a previous coronavirus infection plus one
| dose of vaccine provides powerful protection -- but concerns
| linger
|
| This is one thing that's been incredibly frustrating throughout
| this whole pandemic. Studies and research will show B, with no
| sign of A, however inertia/politics/fear/ignorance will continue
| to push A to the point of harm.
|
| An example - a local store was insisting on wiping down the
| entire checkout conveyor with alcohol between every single
| customer until very recently, when we've know for a long time
| that you won't get COVID from that.
| avian wrote:
| > a local store was insisting on wiping down the entire
| checkout conveyor with alcohol between every single customer
| until very recently, when we've know for a long time that you
| won't get COVID from that.
|
| As someone from a country where running orders are still to
| disinfect often-touched surfaces (switches, door handles,
| office desks, etc.) I was surprised by this.
|
| I went to check what CDC from US recommends. It turns out it's
| pretty much the same:
|
| > Clean high touch surfaces daily. This includes tables,
| doorknobs, light switches, countertops, handles, desks, phones,
| keyboards, toilets, faucets, and sinks.
|
| (from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-
| getting-si...)
|
| So maybe wiping down the belt between _every_ customer is a bit
| excessive, but it seems my sources don 't agree with the "you
| don't get COVID from that" part.
| unpolloloco wrote:
| https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00251-4
|
| Cleaning for an airborne illness is just theater. Upgrading
| air handlers, increasing airflow, and spacing people further
| apart matter. Cleaning stuff randomly just makes people feel
| better (but can make good business sense because of this!)
| clairity wrote:
| yes, cleaning surfaces regularly (but not excessively) is
| good for a variety of reasons, but not for covid. the
| airflow concern is also overblown though. you really just
| need modest distancing indoors (or masks, absent modest
| distancing). no need for fancy airflow handling. covid
| isn't a robust virus that, as it's tiny water-bubble craft
| rapidly evaporates, quickly falls apart outside the body
| (similar to why surfaces aren't a concern).
| konschubert wrote:
| Security theatre.
|
| It's about feeling safe, not about being safe.
| the_laka wrote:
| I wish there was an easier way to figure out if you had COVID.
|
| As someone who's only got one dose so far, I would gladly skip
| the second one if I knew for certain I had COVID before, so
| someone else could get my second dose.
| dataflow wrote:
| [never mind]
| taxicabjesus wrote:
| The US is in desperate need of people who are willing to take
| all the vaccines the government has purchased for us. What's
| the shelf life on the mRNA products? Looks like Moderna's
| lasts for six months in the freezer. Pfizer for 30 days on
| dry ice, another 30 days in a regular freezer?
|
| Lots of doses are going to get tossed. Most the people who
| are going to get the shot have gotten it already.
| sologoub wrote:
| The article is not advocating doing anything unsafe or
| otherwise endangering others. The scientific question is
| quite valid - do we have to use our limited vaccine supply to
| ensure all get two doses or can we save a dose on those who
| already had COVID and give it to someone who needs it?
|
| First paragraph of the article: "Many people who've been
| infected with the coronavirus might be able to safely skip
| the second jab of any two-dose vaccine regimen, a growing
| number of studies suggest. These results could help to
| stretch scarce vaccine supplies and are already influencing
| vaccination policies in some countries."
|
| US might have enough for everyone, and wouldn't it be also
| great if we didn't need as many doses and could share with
| hard hit places like India? I see this as a net positive if
| true.
| nikstar wrote:
| A test for antibodies against N protein will tell you if you
| had COVID or not.
| johtso wrote:
| T-cell tests are available in some places now.
|
| https://www.tspotcovid.com/
| crazygringo wrote:
| Did you not get an antibody test at some point prior to the
| vaccine? That would have given you an answer with 99% certainty
| if you used a good one.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Antibody tests were only widely available in July-August, so
| people who got COVID in Feb or March often didn't have high
| enough antibody counts by that point to flag positive on the
| tests.
| crazygringo wrote:
| That's not true.
|
| The half-life of antibody levels has been estimated at 73
| days. The antibody tests are quite sensitive, time has not
| been enough of a factor yet to produce false negatives. In
| a year or two it might be.
|
| The only time concern is that you need to wait 2-3 weeks
| until _after_ you recover from COVID to ensure you test
| positive.
| briefcomment wrote:
| I think they are relatively expensive, ~$200. Probably worth
| it though.
|
| We would need some form of official recognition of antibody
| tests though. Pretty sure most places that require
| vaccination don't accept antibody test results.
| alkonaut wrote:
| Antibody tests at the supermarket clinic here is $40.
| Unsure if that's a crappy test or if any subsidy is
| provided. $40 vs $200 does seem like the usual EU vs US
| markup too I guess
| briefcomment wrote:
| Ah, not bad
| colospoin wrote:
| I believe the Red Cross tests for the antibody when you
| give blood, as well.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Antibody tests have been widely made available for free
| across the developed world.
|
| In NYC, for example, they've been available for free at a
| ton of different sites. It may always be as convenient or
| quick, but it's free.
| bootlooped wrote:
| Don't some antibody tests do this? I think antibody tests that
| detect antibodies to the nucleocapsid should be unaffected by
| the vaccines, which only spur resistance to the spike protein.
|
| See the section called "Binding Antibody Tests" here:
|
| https://creakyjoints.org/living-with-arthritis/coronavirus/c...
| DiogenesKynikos wrote:
| This is true of some - but not all - of the vaccines. The
| whole inactivated virus vaccines contain more than the spike,
| but the mRNA and vector vaccines only contain the spike.
| sigstoat wrote:
| seems like there's some consensus on two "exposures" worth of
| immunity being valuable.
|
| any data on second shots for folks who took the J&J?
| Scoundreller wrote:
| The cynical part of me thinks that J&J is only 1 shot because
| your body develops strong immunity to it adenovirus-26 vector,
| so a 2nd shot would get immediately killed off before its spike
| protein payload could take any action. Until your immunity to
| it wanes anyway.
| Throwawayaerlei wrote:
| This is suspected to be a problem with the Oxford vaccine
| which also uses one virus vector for both doses.
|
| Like Sputnik V, J&J's Janssen unit's Ebola vaccine uses two
| different virus vectors. And Janssen is doing an ENSEMBLE 2
| Phase III clinical trial with two doses eight weeks apart
| that lol768 mentions. But their primary objective stated from
| the very beginning was to create the most effective single
| dose vaccine possible, and vaccinated a billion people in
| 2021.
|
| They appear to have achieved the former, although Sputnik
| Lite with the same Ad26 based vector could be a competitor,
| the latter goal is failing due to inherent issues with using
| cell culturing to make something, a strained supply chain for
| that which is also required to make Oxford's Sputnik V, and
| Novavax's vaccine (bug cell grown protein plus adjuvant), and
| being forced to use the dangerously incompetent Emergent
| BioSolutions as a subcontractor.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Was J&J the most effective vaccine after 1 dose? Sure they
| don't have much competition if you only compare against
| 'approved' schedules, but mRNA vaccines seem better after 1
| dose than J&J is. But yeah, there's just not a lot of trial
| data out there for 1dose mRNA or Oxford vaccine since
| they're (officially) pretty quick to get you to 2 doses.
|
| Emergent BioSolutions was contamination between the J&J
| side of production with the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine side
| of production...
| lol768 wrote:
| I don't think they've published any data relating to ENSEMBLE 2
| yet.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-27 23:03 UTC)