Coronavirus: COVID-19

[BaronVerde]

My English may fail me but if you mean this paragraph

Scientists haven’t identified any relationship between the initial inflammatory reaction and the long-term response that leads to protection. There’s no scientific proof that someone with more obvious side effects from the vaccine is then better protected from COVID-19. And there’s no reason that having an exaggerated innate response would make your adaptive response any better.

I understand it says that the initial reaction of a vaccinated person to the vaccine says nothing about the long term reaction of that same person to the vaccine.

That statement does not include what would have happened to persons with different reactions to the vaccine if they contacted the real virus without ever having been vaccinated at all. Which is how I understand the initial question, and which is somewhat pointless as such a comparison can not be documented.

Ort have I misunderstood ?

[Tamina]

Yeah, I also don't see what exactly CBJ is referring to

I doubt that such a question can be answered with some certainty. The jab is a well defined dose, but catching a virus in the wild can be a massive burst from somehwre. or just a few casually encountered organisms. It can be after a drunken night when the immune system is having a hangover, of fresh and fit in the morning. I would assume that there are too many variables.

But am ready for correction.

True but in this thought process we can just assume that multiple people get theoretically exposed to the same amount of virus. I rather think it is impossible to answer because you would need to get the same person in contact with the virus for the first time ever, two times in a row, and that is logically impossible.

On the one hand, since a vaccine contains fluids to trigger a more extreme immune response, some people might just be more allergic to those fluids then others. On the other hand, people with a more sensitive immune system might also have a statistically higher immune response probability to the real virus. Then again, women are very sensitive to illnesses but that also means a more successfull, faster and painless immune response overall, while men's immune system is naturally surpressed causing delayed but higher pain and fatality rates. So men might never ever feel the vaccine, while many more women will have mild sideeffects yet with a lower fatality rate.

There are so many variables to consider. I wonder if someone has an anwer to the question besides CBJ answer we don't understand

[Mightysword]

That statement does not include what would have happened to persons with different reactions to the vaccine if they contacted the real virus without ever having been vaccinated at all. Which is how I understand the initial question, and which is somewhat pointless as such a comparison can not be documented.

Ort have I misunderstood ?

I think you understood my original question correctly, and the article CBJ linked didn't really answer it, not directly anyway. But base on the explanation included in the article, I think a reasonable answer to my question can be reasonably deducted from it (I think).

My question was about the correlation between reaction to the vaccine and our body's innate ability to fight Covid without vaccine. The article is an answer if the question was something like "is our reaction to the vaccine an indication of how well it works in building up our immune system".

[euclid]

Missus and me getting the 1st shot of AZ tomorrow (well today ) noon. Mixed feelings but they won't give the pfizer, hence no choice.

Cheers Euclid

[pjknibbs]

I had the second AZ yesterday evening. Not feeling any side-effects at all this time--had a sore arm for 2-3 days after the first, but nothing much else.

[greypanther]

I had the second dose of AZ on Saturday, no side effects this time, except for a sore arm, where she wiggled the needle, die to talking too much!

[jlehtone]

The paper where thy ask if you have fever, had COVID symptoms in last 2 weeks, had COVID before, had severe ilness (inmunosupression, cancer, blood clogging etc). It's done either by the paper or by questioning shortly before vacination.
I thought it's a standard procedure world wide?

Online time reservation form had a drop-down selection box, list of illnesses or other risk factors. "None of those" was one of them.

Person administering the vaccine did ask two questions:
1. Have you ever had severe reaction to any vaccine?
2. Do you have infection/etc now?

Pfizer. This morning. No observable reactions yet.

[euclid]

All good for the 1st 12 hrs but then I've developed flu-like symptoms very fast. Had a bad night and still feel a little beside myself.

Cheers Euclid

[Tamina]

The number of people here with side effects is astonishing. None of my vaccinated family members got any symtpoms (50-90 years old), in fact they felt indifferent before and after but maybe they are just injecting salt water in Germany

[chew-ie]

Both at my workplaces and for my family so far Astra Zeneca caused up to 2 days of illness while BioNTech only caused swellings where the vaccine was administered. (I'm from Germany as well)

[Mailo]

The number of people here with side effects is astonishing. None of my vaccinated family members got any symtpoms (50-90 years old), in fact they felt indifferent before and after but maybe they are just injecting salt water in Germany

I'm from Germany as well, and out of the ~20 people I know who were vaccinated, not a single one was without side effects. Your family was really lucky. Most of the ones still working were one day off sick, only a few had to take two days.
Still better than catching COVID though, a neighbour (<40y) had a light case, but now has (probably) permanent scarring on her lung tissue leading to breathing difficulties, and the friend of a colleague turned deaf, probably also permanently.

[Falcrack]

The number of people here with side effects is astonishing. None of my vaccinated family members got any symtpoms (50-90 years old), in fact they felt indifferent before and after but maybe they are just injecting salt water in Germany

I think the age of the vaccinated individual has something to do with the degree of the side effects. Younger people with more intact immune systems tends to lead to the stronger side effects. It is well known that the immune system of older individuals gives a less robust response to new vaccines than younger individuals. Age really takes a toll on the immune system. There are far fewer "naive" T cells, which are critical for establishing responses to a previously unseen antigen, available in older individuals due to reduced thymic output with age.

[clakclak]

I am fully vaccinated (Astra shot 1; Moderna shot 2) and had side effects both times.

[Ketraar]

I am fully vaccinated (Astra shot 1; Moderna shot 2) and had side effects both times.

First person I hear having different brands of vaccines between shots.

MFG

Ketraar

[pjknibbs]

Same here. Does that even work properly? The whole point of the second dose is to reinforce the effects of the first one, so AZ and Moderna would have to have extremely similar modes of operation for there to be a chance of that happening.

[red assassin]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01359-3
Yes, it works, and potentially better than two doses of the same vaccine. The aim is to get your immune system to respond to Covid, so there are some fairly obvious advantages to a mixed vaccine dose - less chance of generating an immune response to the adenovirus used as a delivery vector by some vaccines, more likelihood that you build an immune response that's robust to mutations by training your immune system on slightly different triggers, etc. All of these vaccines ultimately work by delivering the SARS-CoV2 spike protein in some form, so it's unsurprising that this works.

[Tamina]

So there are more side effects but no actual evidence that is is more effective to mix them long term?

[red assassin]

These studies are too small to measure efficacy, much less compare it against other vaccination strategies; they're mostly about ensuring that it's safe and the immune response generated looks as expected. Which it is and it does, which is good, as quite a few people are getting mixed vaccinations for various reasons, and it's likely that a third booster dose may be needed at some point which may also be a different vaccine. Comparing effectiveness of a mixed strategy against individual vaccines will require very large numbers of people.

[BaronVerde]

Mixing vaccines has become common practice. There are no safety concerns, apart from somewhat more frequently mild symptoms like feverishness.

Single-dose vaccines are also going to hit the market soon(tm).

[Ketraar]

what he said

Thanks for the explanation, my surprise came from the fact that, when the AZ one was not available in high quantities, and we moved to use other ones (mostly Pfizer at the time), a stock was kept to ensure people who had taken the AZ as first shot could take the second from the same version. Even though not explicitly stated it gave the impression that mixing versions would not be a good thing.

Single-dose vaccines are also going to hit the market soon(tm).

Single dose J&J one is already available here for several weeks, though still not as wide spread as others.

MFG

Ketraar