BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Another study suggesting why it would be better to avoid getting Covid-19 (through vaccination, mask use, and social distancing) than relying upon “most survive this disease”.
COVCOG 2: Cognitive and Memory Deficits in Long COVID: A Second Publication from the COVID and Cognition Study.
MedRxiv preprint 27Oct2021
Quote:The accumulating neural and cognitive findings in Long COVID patient groups present a concerning picture when considering long-term cognitive health. In particular, loss of gray matter within the temporal lobe in COVID-19 (Douaud et al. 2021), along with the evidence for reduced memory performance presented here, supports the suggestion that those who have suffered COVID-19 infection may be at increased risk for later neurodegeneration and dementia (de Erausquin et al. 2021).
|
Moderator
Tennessee
Moderator
Joined: 01/19/2004
View Profile
|
Reminder: personal experiences with Covid and vaccinations go here: Personal Covid and Vaccination experiences Thank you.
|
MEXICOWANDERER
las peñas, michoacan, mexico
Senior Member
Joined: 06/01/2007
View Profile
 Offline
|
Discussions about highly technical rest results go where?
|
Moderator
Tennessee
Moderator
Joined: 01/19/2004
View Profile
|
If they are personal results they belong in the personal thread. This thread is for presenting research data from legitimate sources and the implications thereof. Individual Covid experiences are strictly that and have no relevance or bearing on how other individuals may react under the same circumstances.
* This post was
edited 10/29/21 09:06pm by Moderator *
|
MEXICOWANDERER
las peñas, michoacan, mexico
Senior Member
Joined: 06/01/2007
View Profile
Offline
|
So be it
|
|
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Here is another retrospective study on which provides better protection: natural immunity induced by a previous infection or mRNA vaccination. Several studies have been reported; there hasn’t been consistent results across these studies on which provides better protection.
Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19–Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity — Nine States, January–September 2021
CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 29Oct2021
Quote:Laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified among 324 (5.1%) of 6,328 fully vaccinated persons and among 89 of 1,020 (8.7%) unvaccinated, previously infected persons. A higher proportion of previously infected than vaccinated patients were aged 18–49 years (31% versus 9%), Black (10% versus 7%), and Hispanic (19% versus 12%).
Quote:In this U.S.-based epidemiologic analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19–like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90–179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, including during a period of Delta variant predominance. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.
If vaccine effectiveness is decreasing because of waning antibodies and/or changes in the circulating variants, why wouldn’t this also occur with natural immunity (waning antibodies and changes in the variants)?
* This post was
edited 10/30/21 08:27am by BCSnob *
|
pianotuna
Regina, SK, Canada
Senior Member
Joined: 12/18/2004
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob,
That is what the article I posted suggested--that natural immunity is less lasting than vaccination produced immunity.
Regards, Don
My ride is a 28 foot Class C, 256 watts solar, soon to have SiO2 batteries, 3000 watt Magnum hybrid inverter, Sola Basic Autoformer, Microair Easy Start.
|
dturm
Lake County, IN
Moderator
Joined: 01/29/2001
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:If vaccine effectiveness is decreasing because of waning antibodies and/or changes in the circulating variants, why wouldn’t this also occur with natural immunity (waning antibodies and changes in the variants)?
It does in real life. The big problem with evaluating natural immunity (post disease) is the variability in immune response from one person to the next. A similar variability happens with vaccine, but there is much less variability because there is a known dose of antigen and the vaccine has a booster where the natural immunity does not. This is why it is recommended that people who have had COVID get a vaccination.
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
I’m not questioning if vaccine effectiveness is decreasing; I’m questioning the source of the decrease: decreasing antibodies titers and/or changes in circulating variants that the vaccines are less effective against.
Why vaccine effectiveness is diminishing is critical for developing a long term plan against the virus. If it is just the antibody titers are waning then boosting with the vaccines developed against the wuhan variant is appropriate. If the VE is diminishing because the vaccines are less effective against the new variants then boosting with vaccines against the new variants makes more sense and boosting with the current vaccines is a loosing battle, long term.
* This post was
edited 10/30/21 08:50pm by BCSnob *
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Here is a randomized control trial of boosting those who received 2 doses of Sinovac/CoronaVac with either CoronaVac or Pfizer.
A RCT of a third dose CoronaVac or BNT162b2 vaccine in adults with two doses of CoronaVac
MedRxiv Preprint 2Nov2021
Quote:At one month after the third dose of vaccine, BNT162b2 vaccines elicited significantly higher surrogate virus neutralizing test (sVNT), spike receptor binding, spike N terminal domain binding, spike S2 domain binding levels than CoronaVac. More participants from the BNT162b2 group reported injection site pain and swelling as well as fatigue and muscle pain than those who received CoronaVac as the third dose. The mean results of the sVNT against the wild type, beta, gamma and delta variants in the BNT162b2 boosted group was 96.83%, 92.29%, 92.51% and 95.33% respectively which were significantly higher than the CoronaVac boosted group (Wild type: 57.75%; Beta: 38.79 %; Gamma: 32.22%; Delta: 48.87%)
Boosting with Pfizer provided better protection, as measured by a surrogate virus neutralizing test, than boosting with CoronaVac.
|
|
|
