Hacker News Reader

Comment by etherael | Hacker News Reader

Why? They said they already had it which means they'd now have natural immunity. What would be the point of getting a vaccine for something you're already immune to? Am I missing something here?

View on HN

> What would be the point of getting a vaccine for something you're already immune to?

The immunity can wane and the virus can mutate[0]. Same reason you would get a shingles vaccine or a yearly flu shot.

[0] Admittedly, this isn't relevant to COVID-19 yet as the vaccine hasn't been updated AFAIK, but it's probably useful to keep in mind going forward when evaluating your own personal situation/risk, and when trying to understand public policy decisions.

That is misinformation. While there can be benefits to vaccination after infection, recovery from infection does produce durable cellular immunity in the vast majority of patients. Antibody levels always wane over time, but there's more to immunity than antibodies.

https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/

I encourage everyone eligible to protect themselves by getting vaccinated but the reasons to get a COVID-19 vaccine have really nothing to do with the reasons to get a shingles vaccine. Shingles is caused by the varicella herpesvirus which remains dormant in the body even after the acute infection has cleared. That virus works in a completely different way than SARS-CoV-2.

Given that I don't know anything about how antibodies and T-cells and all that jazz work and I don't plan on listening to a 2:40hr podcast to learn what some dude on the internet thinks about it, all I can say is that there appears to be research demonstrating that the COVID-19 vaccine has real benefit to people who already contracted the actual virus[0], which make's my government's advice that folks in that situation still get vaccinated[1] seem pretty reasonable.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm...

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html

Dr. Attia is very much within the medical mainstream. The CDC resources you linked are, frankly, for persuading ignorant people, and not really appropriate to a site devoted to satisfying intellectual curiosity. I'm also uncertain what exactly you're trying to convey by admitting total ignorance and blind faith in a US government agency. Is that supposed to convince curious people you have something interesting to say?

> I'm also uncertain what exactly you're trying to convey by admitting total ignorance and blind faith in a US government agency.

I believe it's important to consider the recommendations of experts as well as the evidence they claim warrants those recommendations. That's why I linked directly to both the recommendation itself (that's the second link, titled "FAQ"), as well as the evidence which (in my estimation) credibly backs it up (that's the first link, titled "Reduced Risk of Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 After COVID-19 Vaccination — Kentucky, May–June 2021").

The podcast linked above is not "some dude on the internet". It is a panel discussion by several physicians including Dr. Monica Gandhi, one of the country's leading experts on infectious diseases. Definitely worth the time to listen if you want to understand what's really happening with the pandemic.

Nothing in my comment contradicted CDC guidelines.

I think I misread your post originally, and appreciate the correction. My apologies.

>The immunity can wane and the virus can mutate. Same reason you would get a shingles vaccine or a yearly flu shot.

aren't the current mrna vaccines based on the old 2019 variant of covid?

If you read exactly one additional sentence from my post you will see an acknowledgement of that very fact, as well as my justification for bringing up that line of reasoning in the first place. :)

I can understand if it mutates to the point of circumventing the original immunity and there's a new vaccine variant to address that specific mutation but as you yourself point out, that doesn't apply here, so I don't get it?

I read a study the other day that showed that the third best thing for Covid protection is vaccination.

The second best is having had it already.

And the best was both.

Even if you've already had it, getting the vaccine as well drastically reduces your chances of being serious ill with Covid.

And it's free, so why not get that extra protection?

We aren't sure how long natural immunity lasts for.

Immunity is not a binary condition. It's not as if immunity, whether produced by vaccination or recovery from infection, lasts a certain period and then stops. While I would encourage everyone eligible to protect themselves by getting vaccinated, all the scientific evidence we have from similar viruses indicates that recovery from infection produces a significant level of cellular immunity lasting as long as the patient's immune system remains basically healthy. Concerns about waning immunity were mainly based on antibody levels, but of course those aren't very important.

https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/

It may be short term, but it's probably as long or longer than the immunity from the vaccine.

That's an argument for scheduling repeat vaccinations... but it needs to be looked at in the context of a lifetime. A recurring shot every year or few years may be feasible. Every three months is not.

well the amazing vaccine at best works for 4 months, if that. considering i've recently had covid with minimal issue, i'll take my chances with natural immunity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com