[disgruntledphd2]

I think (from my parents and in-laws) that immunosuppression is normally associated with current cancer treatment.

So, for example, it looks like this protocol would exclude people getting chemotherapy.

Happy to be proven wrong on this by someone with more information.

[w45673456354]

And autoimmune conditions, robbing a list from wikipedia: celiac disease, diabetes mellitus type 1, Graves' disease, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus.

I don't know how many people with conditions take immunosuppression medication. I take it for arthritis and alopecia and have come across many people on similar meds for diabetes or other things. But that could be a form of confirmation bias

[Skunkleton]

Don't forget organ transplants.

[TearsInTheRain]

Does this mean the vaccine wont be given to people with psoriasis?

[eropple]

It means it hasn't been, and thus needs more study in that regard.

My inexpert understanding is that mRNA vaccines such as this one are unlikely to have an impact on many autoimmune cases. In many, perhaps most, others, it appears from my reading to be likely that the generated interferons are not adding anything to the likelihood of developing an autoimmune condition that wouldn't eventually already happen. (It might be the nudge over the cliff, but so might have the next common cold you catch.) But it should be tested to understand, regardless.

[rjsw]

There was a suggestion that people with autoimmune conditions were more likely to get "long COVID".

[raducu]

What is "long covid"?

People experiencing long term symptoms? I can believe that, my tinnitus after covid-19 is still there, even if I don't notice it as much.

Actual viral infection? I really doubt that, thoug perhaps it could hide like the herpes virus.

[noneeeed]

The first. Long lingering after effects. For some they are fairly minor, but for many they seem to be quite tough, with significant problems doing any kind of physical activity.

At the moment it's all quite nebulous, with a lot of anecdote and not enough data. But there are some studies starting up that might start to untangle what's going on.

[chimeracoder]

> I think (from my parents and in-laws) that immunosuppression is normally associated with current cancer treatment.

There are other reasons a person would be considered immunosuppressed, and plenty of non-chemotherapy drugs that have immunosuppressive effects. But yes, cancer is one of them.

It would make no sense to include immunosuppressed people in the initial trials for a vaccine, the purpose of which is to determine whether a vaccine can induce an immune response.

[disgruntledphd2]

Yeah, agreed.

My selfish concern is then whether or not the vaccine will work for them.

[chimeracoder]

> My selfish concern is then whether or not the vaccine will work for them.

We won't have hard data on that specific question for a very long time, but it's something your/their doctor would be better equipped to make an educated guess about, given the specifics of their situation ("immunosuppressed" can mean a range of things). In some cases, a vaccine might do nothing. In some, it might be actively dangerous. In some, it might have a weaker but still nonzero protective effect. But I wouldn't trust anything you read on HN that tries tell you anything more specific than that.

[tsimionescu]

Unfortunately, vaccines can't really help immunocompromised people, as their immune system is simply unable to fight off any infection, regardless of whether it recognizes the infection or not (of course, this may be a matter of degrees). That is why, for example, people with advanced AIDS can die from essentially any pathogen.

[chimeracoder]

Your answer isn't exactly wrong, but it's painting with a broad brush. "immunocompromised" is a broad term (even more so than "immunosuppressed"), so there definitely are people who are immunocompromised who could potentially benefit from a vaccine (again, we don't have hard data on that yet for any of the vaccine candidates and won't for a while).

[iso1210]

They do help indirectly - by innoculating the 90% who can take a vaccine, the 10% who can't (for example babies when it comes to measles vaccines) are unlikely to actually catch the disease.

[tsimionescu]

Oh, for sure, I wasn't trying to say vaccines shouldn't be used! They are extremely important to a healthy population overall, and it is all the more important for people with healthy immune systems to get them to help protect those that can't benefit directly.

[lokar]

Transplant recipients (which must be on suppressants for life) can and do take vaccines and they work. They generally can't take live virus vaccines, but that's about it AFAIK.

[shabda]

Also, Anybody who has received an organ transplant is immunosuppressed. They take immunosuppressive drugs so that the transplanted organ is not rejected.

[raducu]

It would be so nice if those people could have access to a coctail of synthetic antibodies that gave some protection to covid-19, the flu and others. Or perhaps a generic antibody that protects against most viruses(unlikely, given such an atibody does not exist in nature).

[duskwuff]

Antibodies don't themselves help fight infections; their role is simply to identify dangerous pathogens to white blood cells. In immunosuppressed patients, those cells often aren't present (or aren't responding properly), so adding antibodies wouldn't help.

[projektfu]

Antibodies also initiate the complement cascade and can thus kill cells directly.

[JulianMorrison]

Also transplant recipients take suppressants so their immune system doesn't reject the graft.