Categories
Health

Pfizer and Moderna Vaccines Prone to Produce Lasting Immunity, Research Finds

The vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna trigger a sustained immune response in the body that can protect against the coronavirus for years, scientists reported on Monday.

The results add to the growing evidence that most people immunized with the mRNA vaccines may not need a booster dose as long as the virus and its variants do not progress much beyond their current forms – which is not guaranteed. People who have recovered from Covid-19 before they were vaccinated may not need a booster vaccination, even if the virus goes through a significant transformation.

“It’s a good sign of how persistent our immunity to this vaccine is,” said Ali Ellebedy, an immunologist at Washington University in St. Louis who led the study, which was published in the journal Nature.

The study did not take into account the coronavirus vaccine manufactured by Johnson & Johnson, but Dr. Ellebedy said he believed the immune response was less permanent than that of mRNA vaccines.

Dr. Ellebedy and colleagues reported last month that in people who survived Covid-19, immune cells that recognize the virus remain dormant in the bone marrow for at least eight months after infection. A study by another team showed that so-called memory B cells continue to mature and strengthen for at least a year after infection.

Based on these results, the researchers suggested that immunity in people infected with the coronavirus and later vaccinated could last for years, possibly a lifetime. However, it was unclear whether vaccination alone could have a similar long-lasting effect.

Dr. Ellebedy addressed this question by examining the source of memory cells: the lymph nodes, where immune cells train to recognize and fight the virus.

After an infection or vaccination, a specialized structure forms in the lymph nodes, the germinal center. This structure is sort of an elite school for B cells – a boot camp in which they become increasingly sophisticated and learn to recognize a multitude of viral genetic sequences.

The greater the range and the longer these cells have to practice, the more likely they are to thwart any virus variants that may appear.

“Everyone is always focused on developing the virus – this shows that the B cells are doing the same,” said Marion Pepper, an immunologist at the University of Washington in Seattle. “And it will protect against the continued development of the virus, which is really encouraging.”

After an infection with the coronavirus, the germinal center forms in the lungs. But after the vaccination, the cells are formed in the lymph nodes in the armpits that researchers can reach.

Updated

July 2, 2021, 5:06 p.m. ET

Dr. Ellebedy and colleagues recruited 41 people – including eight with a history of infection with the virus – who were immunized with two doses of the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine. The team collected lymph node samples from 14 of these people three, four, five, seven and 15 weeks after the first dose.

This meticulous work makes this a “heroic study,” said Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale. “This kind of careful time history analysis in humans is very difficult.”

Dr. Ellebedy found that 15 weeks after the first dose of the vaccine, the germinal center was still highly active in all 14 participants and that the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not decreased.

“The fact that the reactions lasted almost four months after the vaccination – that’s a very, very good sign,” said Dr. Ellebedy. Sprouting centers typically peak one to two weeks after vaccination and then decrease.

“Usually there isn’t much left after four to six weeks,” said Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunologist at the University of Arizona. But germinal centers that are stimulated by the mRNA vaccines “still go in, months, and most people don’t go back much”.

Dr. Bhattacharya noted that most of what scientists know about the persistence of germinal centers is based on animal studies. The new study shows for the first time what happens to people after vaccination.

The results suggest that the vast majority of those vaccinated will be protected in the long term – at least against the existing coronavirus variants. But older adults, people with weak immune systems, and those taking drugs that suppress immunity may need boosters; People who survived Covid-19 and were later vaccinated may not need it at all.

It is difficult to predict exactly how long protection against mRNA vaccines will last. In the absence of variants that bypass immunity, immunity could theoretically last a lifetime, experts said. But the virus is clearly evolving.

“Anything that would actually require a refresher would be variant-based, not immunity waning,” said Dr. Bhattacharya. “I just don’t see it.”

People who have been infected with the coronavirus and then immunized see a sharp spike in their antibody levels, likely because their memory B cells – which produce antibodies – had many months to develop before vaccination.

The good news: a booster vaccine is likely to have the same effect on people who have been vaccinated as a previous infection, said Dr. Ellebedy. “If you give them another chance to get involved, they’ll have a massive response,” he said, referring to memory B cells.

In terms of boosting the immune system, vaccination is “probably better” than recovering from the actual infection, he said. Other studies have shown that the repertoire of memory B cells produced after vaccination is more diverse than that produced by infection, suggesting that the vaccines protect against variants better than natural immunity alone.

Dr. Ellebedy said the results also suggest that these signs of sustained immune response could be caused by mRNA vaccines alone, as opposed to those made by more traditional means like Johnson & Johnson’s.

But that’s an unfair comparison because the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is given as a single dose, said Dr. Iwasaki: “If the J&J had a booster, they might get the same kind of reaction.”

Categories
Politics

The Supreme Court docket’s Latest Justices Produce Some Sudden Outcomes

Justice Alito was aghast. “Today’s decision is the third installment in our epic Affordable Care Act trilogy, and it follows the same pattern as installments one and two,” he wrote, joined by Justice Gorsuch. “In all three episodes, with the Affordable Care Act facing a serious threat, the court has pulled off an improbable rescue.”

Richard J. Lazarus, a law professor at Harvard, said the decisions “suggest that several key justices are willing to temper their views to join the chief’s longstanding battle to have the court decide cases more narrowly and with a more unified voice.”

But he added a note of caution. “What remains to be seen,” he said, “is whether, notwithstanding the chief’s best efforts, his battle to promote a nonpartisan image for the court is ultimately a losing one.”

So far this term, the court’s three Democratic appointees have voted with the majority 73 percent of the time in divided cases, slightly ahead of the 72 percent rate of the six Republican appointees. In the term that ended last year, the gap was 14 percentage points in favor of Republican appointees.

The change may be explained by strategic voting. The court’s Democratic appointees have not hesitated to join unanimous decisions with conservative outcomes, as labeled by the Supreme Court Database at Washington University. The percentage of liberal decisions in unanimous cases so far this term is just 30, the lowest since at least 1953.

But the story changes in divided cases, where 64 percent of decisions have been labeled liberal, the highest since 1968.

“Going into this term,” Professor Epstein said, “the expectation was a bunch of divided decisions with the three Democratic appointees getting the short end of the stick. So far that prediction is way off the mark. In divided cases, the Trump appointees have moved the court to the left. If anyone got the short end of the stick, it’s this year’s most conservative justice, Alito.”

Categories
World News

Explosion at Produce Market Kills at Least 12 in China

A gas explosion at a produce market killed at least 12 people and injured 138 others, 37 of them severely, in central China on Sunday, the local authorities said.

The cause of the blast, which took place at around 6:40 a.m. in the city of Shiyan, in Hubei Province, was still under investigation, according to the local government.

Photographs published by official media showed bricks and debris strewn in the street and extensive damage to nearby buildings. Rescue workers in helmets and orange suits worked to free people trapped in the rubble.

Local news reports said that when the explosion took place, people had been buying and selling produce and eating breakfast at the market, which is in a residential area in the city’s Zhangwan District. City officials said 913 households and merchants had been evacuated from the scene.

The governor of Hubei, Wang Zhonglin, rushed to Shiyan to direct rescue efforts, the authorities said. The provincial Communist Party secretary, Ying Yong, called for gas pipelines, chemical factories, power plants and older residential neighborhoods across Hubei to be inspected for safety risks.

China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, said there were “profound” lessons to be learned from the incident, according a readout that was published Sunday evening by the Xinhua state news agency.

Taking stock of “hidden dangers” and being on the lookout for major emergencies would help create a “favorable atmosphere,” Mr. Xi said, ahead of the July 1 centenary of the Chinese Communist Party’s founding. The government is using the anniversary to hammer home the message that only by following the party can China fortify its status in the world.

In recent years, deadly blasts in industrial zones have led the Chinese authorities to become stricter about enforcing safety rules. In 2015, explosions at a chemical storage facility in Tianjin, a northern port city, killed more than 170 people.