The drop to 44% protection vs sympt dz 5mo after RNA dose2 suggests a rapid drop of circulating antibodies. The immune system does not sustain the high amounts of nAbs needed to block symptomatic infection. Makes sense it would only produce those high levels after the RNA punch.
This paper found the half-decay time of anti-SARSCoV2 antibody levels to be 2-3 months after infection.
There isn't a linear correlation between nAb levels and % symptomatic breakthrough of course. So here we lose 50% of the protection (~88 to 44% breakthrough rate) in 5 months, which corresponds to ~75% reduction in antibody levels.
This is just about your ability to have high enough circulating nAb levels for mucosal immunity: stopping enough virus from entering cells that you don't even have symptoms. So even if your nAb levels have decayed and you get symptoms, the vaccines already gave you a head start
...in that your trained B and T cells are already there and can ramp up activity upon breakthrough to produce more nAbs again and kill infected cells, preventing progression to severe disease.
It also goes without saying that this doesn't mean your long term ability to recognize and fight SARSCoV2 is being lost with 50% probability in 5 months either. You have memory B and T cells that survive for years and can proliferate in response to re-encounters.
So when you hear talk about immunity waning and then the next day talk about how you have lifelong protection, they are not contradictory. Your immune system is designed to react to ongoing challenges with antibody production.
Your circulating levels of Abs wane because you can't possibly keep nAb levels high for every antigen you've ever encountered. But you still have lifelong protection in B and T cells watchfully waiting.
This does mean that to protect against symptomatic disease which is also transmissible disease, we would need boosters every 6 months. If nearly everyone worldwide were immunized synchronously then we could reach herd immunity, i.e. the virus stops propagating.
However it seems unlikely we can immunize everyone synchronously. So then if there are always some people with low antibody levels (whose last vaccination or last infection was >6 months ago) the virus can continue to propagate through the population as a mild cold.
Let's rewind the tape: '“Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people don’t carry the virus, don’t get sick and that it’s not just in clinical trials, but it’s also in real world data,” said Walensky.'
GBS often happens following infections and, because it is ameliorated by immunsuppressive treatments, appears to be due to antibodies elicited by the infection cross-reacting to some components on peripheral nerves.
J&J (and AZ) COVID-19 vaccines causing GBS may be unsurprising as these are (very limited) virus infections. These vax consist of a replication-defective adenovirus that infects cells to express SARSCoV2 spike (and most likely some leaky adenovirus proteins too)
Was a busy day so just now getting to this article about the J&J vaccine potentially performing worse than RNA vaccines against Delta, and how a booster shot might e a good idea.
A thread on why J&J recipients may be experiencing a feeling of déja-vu...
I had predicted that, as nAbs raised against original SARSCoV2 by RNA vaccines suffered a similar loss in potency against Delta as against Beta, J&J would have similar efficacy against Delta as against Beta (relative risk ~40% vs nonvaxxed for symptoms, ~18% for severe disease)
(40% relative risk is the same as 60% relative risk reduction which is the "efficacy" number for J&J vs symptomatic disease from Beta. It's 67% vs all strains and 72% vs original strain in the US. Numbers may be off by a few % — working from memory here)
"I am a little surprised how quickly Delta has become widespread,” said Ashish Jha, dean of Brown's School of Public Health. “We’re one week into July and it is everywhere. It suggests that it is far, far more contagious than the Alpha variant."
We knew 10 days ago Delta was 50% of sequences in the US, so that realization is both late and not surprising. The below came to me via @ScottGottliebMD on 6/28, and if Jha wasn't following Gottlieb or Delta progress by then, he should have been
Claims of decoupling between cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the UK have been premature.
No doubt we'll see lower death rates, but we'll also see (1) plenty of acute and likely long-term morbidity, and (2) breakthrough deaths in sick/elderly.
UK researchers weigh in...
Our sources will be two UK newspapers from opposite ends of the political spectrum: The conservative Daily Mail and the liberal Guardian. First up, the Daily Mail quotes the government for 100k daily cases and ICL epidemiologist Ferguson for a CFR of 0.1%.
100k looks plausible to me. With 50% not vaccinated, 20% of whom might be prev infected (based on total deaths so far), that makes 40% nonimmune. Half of those (20% of UK) might get Delta before herd immunity sets in. That's a similar number to all infections so far.
Health officials' oversimplistic message that vaccines were perfect and treatment of breakthroughs as taboo has, predictably, led to defensiveness/apologeticness upon local breakthroughs that undermines confidence in both officials and vaccines. sacbee.com/news/politics-…
Take this explanation by the CA senate secretary after a local outbreak: "Even fully vaccinated individuals can be infected with COVID-19. However, public health experts indicate that fully vaccinated individuals are less likely to suffer...
... the most serious symptoms of COVID-19, and for this reason, the Senate continues to encourage all staff to protect themselves by receiving the vaccine.”
Does one sense a little awkwardness here? Isn't the way the outbreak is discussed sound like an apology for vaccines?
Must always consider mechanism and data quality in COVID19 curve. Factors Topol misses: (1) UK cases started rising early June, and deaths lag by 1mo (2) cases in the other countries cited may be underreported, increasing the death/case ratio (Russia curves esp make no sense)
Another thing to consider is if Topol included precisely those countries that have the highest death/case ratios to make a contrast with UK, then he would have filtered in exactly those countries that are underreporting their cases.
Kind of frustrating that Topol would continue to make the same mistakes in data interpretation (no mechanism, no awareness of data quality, no awareness of selection bias)