back

by raphlinus·5y ago·view on hn ↗
It is one datapoint among many, but I found it interesting because it is based on careful biological experimentation and directly compares immune response from vaccination and prior infection. Another relevant quote: "Importantly, the vaccine-elicited antibodies targeted a broader range of places on the RBD than those elicited by natural infection." This is not an intuitively obvious result.

But, since it was asked, here are more studies that support the broader point:

* https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna... describes a study directly addressing the question, and with impressive results.

* https://medicine.wustl.edu/news/covid-19-vaccine-generates-i... didn't directly compare against prior infection, but this is discussed briefly and there is strong support in favor of protection from vaccines.

* https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/marty-makary/92434 is a discussion with a virologist (not peer reviewed science).

1 comments
It seems odd to present these tangential measurements when what I think most people are interested in is personal outcomes. How can one relate relative increases in seropositivity to patient outcomes? Why don't we see studies which conclusively nail this down? I'm well aware of this study https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7032e1-H.pdf, I'm unmoved by it, see this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28106987 . Are you aware of more substantial studies to date? Thank you for the links and the discussion. I personally have yet to get the vaccine but do consider myself persuadable.