Izzy
Senior Insider
Re: A few observations from embedded reporter
The Pfizer mRNA vaccine affording greater protection than natural immunity was among the many findings in a large UK study, that had a primary goal of assessing Delta’s impact on vaccine effectiveness. The Oxford/AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine, which has been less effective than the mRNA vaccines, provided similar protection to natural immunity.
This UK study has some advantages over the preprint study from Israel that you are referencing but still has limitations that are noted in the article.
The study from Israel is being viewed as far from definitive. The main limitations that the peer reviewers have likely asked the authors to more fully address relate to properties of “test-seeking” behavior, the number of outcomes (infections, hospitalization, etc.) and the large odd ratios on which the conclusions are based. How long it takes the authors to reply to reviewers’ questions and concerns is often a rate-limiting step in article publication. The UK paper was, btw, posted as preprint in late August and published in mid-October.
“Real world” observational studies of natural immunity such as these present many more challenges and provide conclusions with lower confidence than Phase 3 vaccine efficacy studies, which can not address natural immunity. One looks for a preponderance of evidence and the strengths and weaknesses of each study.
Laboratory studies looking at infection vs. vaccine neutralizing antibody response (multiple have favored vaccines) are much more scientifically robust but only assess a limited part of the immune response and do not necessarily translate into clinical results.
The issue of vaccine vs. natural immunity does not have a clear scientific consensus. There are some expectations that the CDC will have more information and more to say in the next month. The topic of hybrid immunity may start filling more of those 24/7 slots that Eve mentioned.
In the meantime, perhaps it is best to leave debate and opinion about this topic to other forums.
BTW, nice "spike" (protein) pun, intentional or otherwise!
Hi Andy.. this paper of significant importance has lingered in review for almost 2 months. Either spike it with a clear flaw, or 'follow the science' as they say.) In the mean time, can you point me to the research you found that shows vaccinated people are better protected from a first infection than Covid survivors are from a reinfection? I looked and couldn't find any.
The Pfizer mRNA vaccine affording greater protection than natural immunity was among the many findings in a large UK study, that had a primary goal of assessing Delta’s impact on vaccine effectiveness. The Oxford/AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine, which has been less effective than the mRNA vaccines, provided similar protection to natural immunity.
This UK study has some advantages over the preprint study from Israel that you are referencing but still has limitations that are noted in the article.
The study from Israel is being viewed as far from definitive. The main limitations that the peer reviewers have likely asked the authors to more fully address relate to properties of “test-seeking” behavior, the number of outcomes (infections, hospitalization, etc.) and the large odd ratios on which the conclusions are based. How long it takes the authors to reply to reviewers’ questions and concerns is often a rate-limiting step in article publication. The UK paper was, btw, posted as preprint in late August and published in mid-October.
“Real world” observational studies of natural immunity such as these present many more challenges and provide conclusions with lower confidence than Phase 3 vaccine efficacy studies, which can not address natural immunity. One looks for a preponderance of evidence and the strengths and weaknesses of each study.
Laboratory studies looking at infection vs. vaccine neutralizing antibody response (multiple have favored vaccines) are much more scientifically robust but only assess a limited part of the immune response and do not necessarily translate into clinical results.
The issue of vaccine vs. natural immunity does not have a clear scientific consensus. There are some expectations that the CDC will have more information and more to say in the next month. The topic of hybrid immunity may start filling more of those 24/7 slots that Eve mentioned.
In the meantime, perhaps it is best to leave debate and opinion about this topic to other forums.
BTW, nice "spike" (protein) pun, intentional or otherwise!