Kidney damage as a result of Coronavirus infection | Hacker News Reader

Kidney damage as a result of Coronavirus infection

radboudumc.nl

12 pointsgeox11 comments

That's why I don't get why people get so happy about Omicron - we know very little of the lasting damage from a "mild" infection! It's funny that people who are afraid of long-term effects from vaccines are not at all concerned by the long-term effects of an infection!

What is the mechanism behind a mild, acute infection (as opposed to severe acute, or chronic) causing negative long-term effects? To phrase it differently: what is the mechanism behind "Long Covid"?

It would depend on which "long-term effects" you examine, they range from simple inflammation to brain damage[1]. Could be the virus causing damage or your own immune response.

[1] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...

Sadly it does not seem to mention what MRI abnormalities there are, but I am very curious. Does it affect the white matter, for example? If so, which sites? Does it cause lesions? Demyelination, or what?

>It's funny that people who are afraid of long-term effects from vaccines are not at all concerned by the long-term effects of an infection!

I'm afraid of both. And since the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting infected by omicron (actually, it seems it makes it worse, according to recent data), I reckon it's better to not get vaccinated and face one unknown source of long-term effects, instead of get vaccinated and face two unknown sources of long-term effects. How funny is that?

  > it makes it worse, according to recent data

have a link?

Denmark, Pfizer effectiveness against omicron of minus 75% (Table) https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v...

Strong negative vaccine effectiveness persists after controlling for age. Data are however uncontrolled for restrictions/behaviour, which might vary strongly in Europe. (unvaccinated people are excluded from full civil and social rights at the moment)

The situation is unclear. As someone who is not at acute risk of Covid (age < 24, BMI < 24), there is absolutely no reason to be rushing to get these vaccines before the long-term effectiveness ad safety trials are over.

Nowhere in those papers does it mention having had a vaccination makes Omikron worse.

The vaccines are just less effective. Big difference, please don’t spread false information.

It shows having had 2 doses of the vaccine increases your chances to get infected with Omicron compared to having none. Considerably.

I'm just talking about the data here, you can play word games or make the excuses on your own.

maybe i am not reading it correctly, but from the abstract it says:

   Our study provides evidence of protection against infection with the Omicron variant after completion of a primary vaccination series with the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines; in particular, we found a VE against the Omicron variant of 55.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 23.5 to 73.7%) and 36.7% (95% CI: -69.9 to 76.4%) for the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, respectively, in the first month after primary vaccination. However, the VE is significantly lower than that against Delta infection and declines rapidly over just a few months. The VE is re-established upon revaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine (54.6%, 95% CI: 30.4 to 70.4%).

and the other study:

   This national investigation is one of the first to show that Omicron is less likely to result in COVID-19 hospitalisation than Delta. It finds the rate of possible reinfection for Omicron is 10 times that of Delta. It also finds that third/booster vaccine doses offer considerable additional protection against symptomatic disease when compared to ≥25 weeks post second vaccine dose with these benefits being seen with all available vaccines.

-----

i cant seem to find any evidence in those two papers about the vaccines making someone more susceptible... maybe i missed something?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com