"Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
Spock
Posts: 3473
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm

"Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#1 Post by Spock » Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:25 am

This deserves it own thread.

"Science," -which along with "Nature" is one of the 2 big journals just published a report on an Israeli study in which natural immunity blew vaccinated immunity out of the water.

>>>" It’s the largest real-world observational study so far to compare natural and vaccine-induced immunity to SARS-CoV-2, according to its leaders."<<<

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08 ... on-parties

>>>"The new analysis relies on the database of Maccabi Healthcare Services, which enrolls about 2.5 million Israelis. The study, led by Tal Patalon and Sivan Gazit at KSM, the system’s research and innovation arm, found in two analyses that people who were vaccinated in January and February were, in June, July, and the first half of August, six to 13 times more likely to get infected than unvaccinated people who were previously infected with the coronavirus. In one analysis, comparing more than 32,000 people in the health system, the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher."<<<<

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24247
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#2 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Aug 27, 2021 11:16 am

And those previously infected who died are 100% less likely to be reinfected.

Your selective editing missed this:
The researchers also found that people who had SARS-CoV-2 previously and then received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine were more highly protected against reinfection than those who once had the virus and were still unvaccinated. The new work could inform discussion of whether previously infected people need to receive both doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or the similar mRNA vaccine from Moderna. Vaccine mandates don’t necessarily exempt those who had a SARS-CoV-2 infection already and the current U.S. recommendation is that they be fully vaccinated, which means two mRNA doses or one of the J&J adenovirus-based vaccine. Yet one mRNA dose might be enough, some scientists argue. And other countries including Germany, France, Italy, and Israel administer just one vaccine dose to previously infected people.
Also, you failed to note the study considered only the Delta variant. We don't know if those stats hold true for the previous ones or Lamda.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#3 Post by silverscreenselect » Fri Aug 27, 2021 1:32 pm

One of the problems with the study, which has not been peer reviewed, is that participants were not required to undergo any sort of testing regimen. So it's impossible to tell how many people in either group who experienced no or mild symptoms may actually have been infected at some time.

And of course this ignores the question of how much more effective giving the vaccine to a person who has already had the disease is versus just relying on "natural immunity."
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24247
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#4 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Aug 27, 2021 3:18 pm

silverscreenselect wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 1:32 pm
One of the problems with the study, which has not been peer reviewed, is that participants were not required to undergo any sort of testing regimen. So it's impossible to tell how many people in either group who experienced no or mild symptoms may actually have been infected at some time.

And of course this ignores the question of how much more effective giving the vaccine to a person who has already had the disease is versus just relying on "natural immunity."
Well, they didn't give a metric but did say it was better.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#5 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:26 pm

"Natural Immunity" has its drawbacks as well:

Even survivors of milder covid-19 face heightened risk of kidney damage, study finds
A new study provides grim insight into “long covid,” finding that even survivors of less-serious covid-19 cases had a heightened risk of kidney damage. The dangers increase with the severity of infection but extend even to those who were not hospitalized, according to the paper published Wednesday in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. Risks included “end stage kidney disease,” in which the organs can no longer filter blood without transplant or regular dialysis. The researchers wrote that given the massive scale of coronavirus infections in the United States and worldwide, “the numbers of people with long COVID in need of post COVID care will likely be staggering and will present substantial strain on already overwhelmed health systems.”

“This is really huge. It will really literally shape our lives for probably the next decade or more,” one of the authors, Ziyad Al-Aly, told Bloomberg News. Al-Aly, the chief of research at VA St. Louis Health Care System, is among many scientists scrambling to learn more about the lingering effects of a disease that is known for ravaging the lungs but can also wreak havoc on other organs. Al-Aly said that even survivors who were not hospitalized and had no kidney problems in their first 30 days faced a 23 percent higher risk of acute kidney injury. “These people literally thought they have no problem,” he said. “Everything is good, 30 days went by. They recovered.”
This has been one of my big worries, that COVID could have severe long-term health effects, even on those who have "fully recovered." If there's a higher risk of kidney disease (and we're only about one year out from most COVID cases), then there may be a higher risk of other organ diseases, especially lung diseases, as well.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11940
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#6 Post by Beebs52 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:35 pm

silverscreenselect wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:26 pm
"Natural Immunity" has its drawbacks as well:

Even survivors of milder covid-19 face heightened risk of kidney damage, study finds
A new study provides grim insight into “long covid,” finding that even survivors of less-serious covid-19 cases had a heightened risk of kidney damage. The dangers increase with the severity of infection but extend even to those who were not hospitalized, according to the paper published Wednesday in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. Risks included “end stage kidney disease,” in which the organs can no longer filter blood without transplant or regular dialysis. The researchers wrote that given the massive scale of coronavirus infections in the United States and worldwide, “the numbers of people with long COVID in need of post COVID care will likely be staggering and will present substantial strain on already overwhelmed health systems.”

“This is really huge. It will really literally shape our lives for probably the next decade or more,” one of the authors, Ziyad Al-Aly, told Bloomberg News. Al-Aly, the chief of research at VA St. Louis Health Care System, is among many scientists scrambling to learn more about the lingering effects of a disease that is known for ravaging the lungs but can also wreak havoc on other organs. Al-Aly said that even survivors who were not hospitalized and had no kidney problems in their first 30 days faced a 23 percent higher risk of acute kidney injury. “These people literally thought they have no problem,” he said. “Everything is good, 30 days went by. They recovered.”
This has been one of my big worries, that COVID could have severe long-term health effects, even on those who have "fully recovered." If there's a higher risk of kidney disease (and we're only about one year out from most COVID cases), then there may be a higher risk of other organ diseases, especially lung diseases, as well.
There is a risk from manymanymany diseases for manymanymany side effects and oh so many bad things. Unless you're assigning blame for specifics from this virus and who let the dogs out this means nothing. There will always be a virus.
Well, then

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#7 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:02 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:35 pm
There is a risk from manymanymany diseases for manymanymany side effects and oh so many bad things.
If you had been around in the 1960s, you would have been a great spokesperson for the tobacco industry.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11940
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#8 Post by Beebs52 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:31 pm

silverscreenselect wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:02 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:35 pm
There is a risk from manymanymany diseases for manymanymany side effects and oh so many bad things.
If you had been around in the 1960s, you would have been a great spokesperson for the tobacco industry.
That is just stupid and you know it. I WAS around then as I'm sure you were. Bet you ran behind the ddt trucks. Bet your parents smoked. Guess you never ate too much sugar. Your sanctimonious bullshit doesn't carry that far. You are sorta sad.
Well, then

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11940
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#9 Post by Beebs52 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:50 pm

One could discuss causes of prostate and breast cancer too. Care to?
Well, then

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#10 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Sep 01, 2021 5:53 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:31 pm
silverscreenselect wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:02 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:35 pm
There is a risk from manymanymany diseases for manymanymany side effects and oh so many bad things.
If you had been around in the 1960s, you would have been a great spokesperson for the tobacco industry.
That is just stupid and you know it. I WAS around then as I'm sure you were. Bet you ran behind the ddt trucks. Bet your parents smoked. Guess you never ate too much sugar. Your sanctimonious bullshit doesn't carry that far. You are sorta sad.
I didn't phrase my comment the best way. What I meant was that your arguments now are exactly what the tobacco industry said for years. "Lots of things could cause cancer so you can't blame us and just keep smoking."

Lots of things can cause kidney disease. But if the COVID virus leads to a greater incidence of severe kidney disease (plus possibly lots of other long-term problems), then that's one more reason to do one's best to avoid getting it in the first place rather than pin one's hopes on some type of natural immunity.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
mrkelley23
Posts: 5992
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: Somewhere between Bureaucracy and Despair

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#11 Post by mrkelley23 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 6:17 pm

Getting away from the our side vs your side thing for a minute...

If this study had been available in March, when I had the opportunity to get my first shot, I very well might have put it off for a few months. After all, it was a serious possibility that the strength of the vaccine might fade with time (and there are indications now that it does) so waiting until summer might have been fine and wouldn't have cost me the two days off work I spent recovering from each shot (because I would have been off school.)

As it was, I made the considered decision to maximize my coverage when it became available. I don't regret it. And, as has been pointed out in this thread, the authors of this study pointed out that having had COvid PLUS at least 1 shot offers much greater protection than just one or the other.

The problem is, we have some people who have decided they know better than anyone based on their gut feelings. It can't be based on the science, because there isn't enough data yet. So it's based on a hunch. And those people might very well turn out to be right. But it won't be because they knew anything at the time they made the decision.

BTW, if you haven't read my post in the non-political thread yet, the first true data about masking is beginning to come in. It will be years before we have a true picture about natural immunity vs. vaccinated vs. both. This article, as good as the study was, is about observational data, is not randomized or controlled, and is not peer-reviewed. Still better than any other study out there, but nowhere near consensus-level yet.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Richard Feynman

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#12 Post by silverscreenselect » Sat Sep 25, 2021 10:51 pm

Kansas City area official who died from COVID was unvaccinated, ‘felt he was immune’
COVID-19 took the life of 48-year-old Ryan Vescovi, a popular and beloved pizza shop owner, school board member and familiar smile in Pleasant Hill.
“He was not vaccinated, but felt he was immune because he already had COVID,” his stepmother, Kathy Feist-Vescovi, told The Star this week. Vescovi’s death Sept. 17 spurred much discussion online about natural immunity and whether people who have had the virus need the vaccine. His illness convinced his stepmom that she needed the shots.

“A family member being hospitalized with COVID is a harsh reminder to get vaccinated,” she wrote on Facebook a few days before he died. “I finally got my second shot today, 8 weeks after the first. It’s never too late. Make the time. Because the role you play in your family’s life is far too important to risk a chance.”

A study in August showed that hundreds of unvaccinated Kentucky residents who had been infected with the coronavirus through June were more than twice as likely to be reinfected as those who were fully vaccinated after they got infected. The findings suggested that the vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent more infection. After the study came out, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, urged people who have had COVID to get vaccinated. “This study shows you are twice as likely to get infected again if you are unvaccinated,” she said in a statement. “Getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others around you, especially as the more contagious delta variant spreads around the country.”

Researchers for another study published in July in Nature magazine say their findings and others demonstrate that vaccinating patients who have had COVID-19 substantially boosted their immune response and gave them stronger resistance against newer variants, including delta. People who have recovered from COVID-19 should get vaccinated “because they become bulletproof when they do so,” researcher Dr. Michel Nussenzweig told the medical journal JAMA Network Open.

Getting vaccinated “is the single greatest thing you can do to lower your risk of a serious outcome,” said epidemiologist Ryan Demmer at the University of Minnesota. “There’s evidence that they help reduce your risk of infection. They don’t prevent it altogether, but we definitely know, because the trials were designed to study this, that they substantially reduce your risk of being hospitalized or dying.” Physicians are frustrated by why some people would choose to take a chance on getting infected rather than getting vaccinated. Many vaccine-resistant people have said they’ll just get natural immunity from the virus, Stites has said. But having COVID-19 is not just a few days in bed for many survivors who have dealt for months with other serious medical problems the virus caused — including serious damage to the heart and lungs — and the medical bills that come with them.
Unlike some anti-vaxxers, Vescovi seems to have been a genuinely nice guy who just got some bad advice.

BTW, Mrs. SSS and I are scheduled for our booster shots on Monday. The clinic we use (where we got our first shots) is not administering booster shots because they don't have the subzero storage capabilities currently (I'm not sure how they had them in January but not now). So, I went online to the CVS website today, and they had virtually every slot for Monday open.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Ritterskoop
Posts: 5510
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: "Science" Mag on Vaccine VS Natural Immunity

#13 Post by Ritterskoop » Sun Sep 26, 2021 9:32 pm

I think a larger portion of unvaccinated folks than most of us realize are folks who are not against it; it's just not convenient for them (some are concerned they will have to provide a SSN, some don't understand it will be free, some don't have transportation, some work a lot, etc.).

The number I saw today was 10% (of everyone), so the estimate was that of the 30-40% of Americans who are not vaccinated, a fourth to a third of them are not Anti-Vax. I'm sorry I don't remember which publication it was, but I tend to go with Politico and Vox from the Apple News feed (I did love the free trial for the gatekeeper stuff, and will use it, once my hometown paper stops publishing and I can put the money there), so it may have been one of them. I like BBC and Reuters, too, but this article was specifically about Americans.

The point was that the folks who are going door to door and offering education and shots are making a lot of progress, especially in communities who may be more at risk in the first place (older, lower-income, like that).
If you fail to pilot your own ship, don't be surprised at what inappropriate port you find yourself docked. - Tom Robbins
--------
At the moment of commitment, the universe conspires to assist you. - attributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.

Post Reply