Hacker News Reader

Comment by boatsie | Hacker News Reader

What if you have had COVID and recovered, now test negative with antibodies. Should you still have to wear a mask?

If we are following the science, you should be fine to not wear a mask due to immunity, right?

Should these people also be allowed to live a normal life, gathering with others indoors, etc? I’ve never heard people giving the previously infected a pass to return to normal. I think everyone thinks it’s only fair to make them continue to suffer too, despite having immunity and ignoring the actual reason for social distancing and mask wearing.

View on HN

No. How would you prove it? As soon as there existed some document allowing one to "get back to normal" in some way, I guarantee you there will be a black market for those documents, to the point where they become useless. Oh, wait, it's already happening [1].

1: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2020/11/11/covid-...

Is that more useless than the person just choosing not to mask in the first place?

Yes people may break the laws or not follow the rules, that doesn’t mean there is no value. There’s surely a black market for passports, ids, etc, does that mean those documents are useless?

Masks are primarily to protect others, so the concern is not the mask-wearer catching it, but rather the mask-wearer spreading it.

There are two concerns related to post-immunity spread: First, the accuracy of tests, and second, the ability to spread despite immunity.

I believe that some studies have shown you may still be able to transmit the disease if exposed, even though you yourself are immune.

I don't have sources handy, but that is a starting point for your own research.

The first concern regarding test inaccuracy, sure, that’s the same as saying false negatives should also still quartantine because, hey, the test could be wrong. But we don’t require that.

As to your second point, would you also be saying we should still mask and social distance after vaccination, because just in case?

Not an epidemiologist, but from my laymen's understanding: No, because vaccines will be available to the whole/most vulnerable population, so if you spread you have a fairly high degree of confidence others are immune with zero harm having been done to them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com