Kelly Baclija
Mr. Ippolito
AP Bio
February 26, 2021
Mandavilli, Apoorva. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/health/covid-vaccine-single-dose.html.
In “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest”, Apoorva Mandavilli discusses exactly what is stated in the title. Nearly 30 million people in the United States have been infected with Covid-19 so far which begs the question as to if they should still be vaccinated; two new studies suggest that they in fact should. The research proposes that just one dose of the vaccine is enough to turbocharge their antibodies and destroy the virus (and some more infectious variants). The explanation behind this discovery is that a person’s immune response to a natural infection is highly variable. Most people make copious amounts of antibodies that persist for many months. But some people who had mild or no symptoms of Covid-19 produce few antibodies, which quickly fall to undetectable levels. The vaccines “even the playing field”, as Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto, states, so that anyone who has recovered from the virus produced enough antibodies to protect against it. The latest study analyzed blood samples from people who have had Covid-19 and the findings suggested that their immune systems would have trouble fending off B.1.351, the virus variant first identified in South Africa. However, one shot of either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine amplified the amount of antibodies in their blood by a thousandfold. In fact, the antibodies seemed to perform better than those in people who had not had Covid and had received two doses of a vaccine.
This article is particularly relevant to our society because it is likely a significant concern for those who have contracted Covid-19 to know whether or not to receive the vaccine as they have developed antibodies against it already. Furthermore, studies like the ones analyzed in this article allow people to gain a better understanding, as more and more Americans are getting vaccinated, of the vaccine against Covid-19 and its properties which would ultimately boost the knowledge we as a society have to combat this current pandemic and eventually result in us leading a normal life once again.
This article was relatively well-written and provided the reader with plenty of information as to how the vaccine works for those who have previously contracted the virus and features some quotes from experts in the field, which increases the author’s credibility. However, there was not much material pertaining to the variants of Covid-19, which were mentioned frequently throughout the article and thus it would have been beneficial to include this for the audience’s understanding. Furthermore, the author could have included some more information on the studies and how they were conducted which would also broaden the reader’s grasp. Despite this, overall, this article allowed me to learn more about the Covid vaccine and its effectiveness for those who have already contracted the virus.
Holden D’Avico
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio
12/26/20
Mandavilli, Apoorva. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/health/covid-vaccine-single-dose.html.
Baclija, Kelly. "People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest", 26 Feb. 2021, https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2021/02/people-who-have-had-covid-should-get.html
Kelly’s review of “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest,” by Apoorva Mandavilli is concise and very relevant. The first aspect that was well presented is in the first paragraph where Kelly summarizes the original article and only includes the most important information. Kelly mentions that getting one dose of the vaccine boosted antibody counts in individuals who contracted the virus, even more so than individuals who haven’t contracted the virus but received two doses. This information is very important and is highlighted in the first paragraph of the review. The second aspect that was well presented is in the second paragraph where Kelly describes the importance of this information and all information about Covid-19. This allows the reader to understand how little we know about the virus and how much any new information helps in fighting the virus. The final aspect that was well presented is in the third paragraph where Kelly suggests that the author should include more information about the variants. I agree that this would help the reader understand how effective the vaccine is against the variants and would also help many other questions and concerns about the variants.
My first suggestion is to describe the effect or importance of the vaccine amplifying “the amount of antibodies in their blood by a thousandfold” (Baclija). As a reader (if the original article actually provided this information), I would like to know the real effect of having one thousand times the number of antibodies. My second suggestion is to elaborate more on the second critique in the third paragraph where Kelly mentions that the author should have included more information about the studies. Kelly says that this would broaden the reader’s grasp but I would like to know how (more in detail).
The one fact that I was most surprised by is that people who were asymptomatic produced very little amounts of antibodies which means that they are not immune to the virus after they catch it. This suggests that asymptomatic people can catch the virus multiple times in a short period of time which surprised me.
Angelinna Faisca
ReplyDeleteMandavilli, Apoorva. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/health/covid-vaccine-single-dose.html.
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com
In Kelly’s review of this article, she explains pretty well why one vaccine dose should do the trick. She first starts by explaining how a person creates antibodies. Kelly also explains that a person who had Covid and recovered from it, produced more antibodies than people who had it and had mild or few symptoms, meaning that their bodies did not produce many antibodies. She also put in a fact that was very interesting. Kelly states that people who had covid and recovered, were tested and doctors found that they had enough antibodies in their body, however these antibodies alone would not help against the new strand in Africa, however, with a shot of either vaccine, along with the antibodies, doctors say that with those antibodies, they are better equipped to fight against the new strand, rather than people who only had two vaccine doses.
Kelly does a nice job of explaining the impact difference between a person with antibodies and a person who does not have antibodies. I would also have included the details of what the difference of antibodies does and what a thousandfold difference can make. I also think she could have described her article more, as it seems vague and ineffective.
This impacts our world of course because of how we’re living. Usually we think people with the two doses are fine, but this doesn’t seem to be the case. However it does make sense for the people who have antibodies, to be better at fighting covid off, especially with the two doses of the vaccine.
Erin Foley
ReplyDeleteAP Bio C Block Even
Current Event 14
Feb. 25th, 2020
Kelly’s review was extremely effective in drawing the reader in, providing relevant information and explaining the article’s significance to society. She begins by posing the question of whether the 30 million COVID survivors should be vaccinated, which very successfully peaked my interest in the article/review. She offers very relevant information as she describes the concept of antibodies, including how they develop in response to the natural infection as well as the vaccine. She uses verified sources and indicates their reliability, for instance “Jennifer Commerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto”. This reliability strengthens her argument that vaccines offer further protection to those who have already been infected. Finally, her explanation of the article’s significance to society was very effective. She explains that “their [those who have been infected] immune systems would have trouble fending off B.1.351, the virus variant first identified in South Africa”, making this topic very relevant as confusion surrounding new variants emerges.
Though very well-written, Kelly could’ve improved her review with a few additions. Firstly, she explains that “just one dose of the vaccine is enough to turbocharge… antibodies and destroy the virus”, meaning that those who have already been infected by COVID only need one dose of the vaccine, but doesn’t go in-depth on the economic/societal implications of this finding. It would have been interesting for her to describe how slow vaccines are being rolled out in the US (relatively), and how/if this might change if required doses are reduced for many Americans. Moreover, Kelly could improve her review by giving a more in-depth description of the emergence of new variants and how this pertains to the article’s findings. I noted this information as a highlight of her article, because I do find it very relevant and she did include some details about a South Africa variant, but I think she could expand on it even more. One of the main reasons why Americans who have already been infected with COVID need to be vaccinated is to protect themselves against new variants, which are on the rise and could pose as a major issue in the future. Thus, this angle could’ve been interesting to take and impactful in informing her audience about the importance of vaccination.
Kelly’s review left me with a new understanding of how vaccinations and immune responses work. I chose to read her review because my parents are undergoing vaccination currently, one of whom already had COVID, so I was eager to learn more. After reading it, I know that my dad, who was already infected, is pretty safe against COVID-19 and variants, because he has had one dose. I’m also more aware now of the importance of vaccination, as it will help us control the rise of variants. Overall, Kelly’s review was engaging and informative, and connects to how the biological systems within our bodies can keep us safe from infection.
Annabelle Krause
ReplyDeleteCurrent Event 14
AP Bio
2/26/2020
Mandavilli, Apoorva. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/health/covid-vaccine-single-dose.html.
Baclija, Kelly. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest,” 26 Feb. 2021, https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2021/02/people-who-have-had-covid-should-get.html
Overall, Kelly wrote a very strong review of the article, “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” Primarily, Kelly did a good job of supplying context and explaining why this article was relevant to our lives, giving the reader enough information to understand why they should care without overdoing it. She discussed how many people had been affected, like when she wrote that “Nearly 30 million people in the United States have been infected with Covid-19” to emphasize how relevant COVID-19 is to our lives and how relevant the research presented in the article she read is. She also did a really good job of being succinct; her review was not overly verbose. She gave the reader enough information to decide whether they wished to further investigate the topic. She gave the reader a general overview of the topic and the science behind it, but she did not overcomplicate the matter with intense scientific diagrams and explanations. Lastly, she used the names of experts to build credibility for her own review and for the research that she was presenting and learning about. She used a quote from “Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto” and then paraphrased her findings. This made it easier for me as a reader to understand that this is serious research and that the findings are scientific fact from a credible source.
Although her review was strong overall, there are a few things that Kelly could have done to make it better. Primarily, it would have been helpful if Kelly had defined her terms. She discussed concepts, such as antibodies, that are integral to one’s understanding of the topic, without explaining them or defining them. She assumed that her reader would understand, at least superficially, what antibodies and other concepts were, which is an unfair assumption to make. It also would have been quite interesting for readers who do have a superficial understanding of the topics to learn more about the science behind it. Also, it would have been helpful if Kelly had used more quotes to further boost her credibility. She used only one quote throughout her article, and I believe the use of the quote added greatly to my trust in the strength of the study. More quotes would have greatly benefited her in this regard and would have taken some of the pressure off of Kelly in explaining complicated scientific topics like COVID-19 variants.
I chose this article because it is very relevant, and I am interested in the science behind ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Obviously, COVID-19 is really relevant to all of our lives, so learning about the different studies that are ongoing about COVID-19 and the different questions that must be answered, such as the immune response of someone who has had COVID-19 to the vaccine, are both interesting and relevant to my life. I think this review really made clear to me that there’s a lot of research still to be done to fully understand the COVID-19 virus, and it really added to my understanding of how the vaccine will be given and the different problems with it beyond supply. Overall, I really enjoyed Kelly’s discussion of the article, and I found it highly informative.
Hugh Duffy
ReplyDeleteAP Bio C Block Even
Current Event 14
Feb. 25th, 2020
I thought Kelly’s review of “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” was extremely informative and interesting. It was well written, and I felt like I didn’t need to dive deep into the subject matter to fully understand crystal clear- simply based on her review. Under normal circumstances, when someone gets infected with a virus, the immune system will remember the viral footprint, and immediately terminate it upon a future attempted infection. I think it was interesting how Kelly included the idea that taking a dose of the vaccine after fighting the virus yourself, was like taking both doses of the normal vaccine. It “evens out the playing field”.
One point I would like to see Kelly improve further on is her research. While her review was still great, I think a level of outside research would’ve made it that much better. It would be nice to know exactly what causes the vaccine to still be required despite having contracted the illness in the past. Additionally, why is the vaccine only half-needed? These questions were only briefly answered in Kelly’s review.
I was initially intrigued by the title of Kelly’s review. Previously I had been under the impression that everyone needed both doses of the vaccine, so seeing this apparent change in plans was surprising and interesting. This type of research is imperative to our recovery, as only having to use one dose on covid-19 survivors makes the process of herd immunity much more plausible.
Nate Kim
ReplyDeleteAP Bio, Mr. Ippolito
2/26/21
Current Event 14
Mandavilli, Apoorva. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/health/covid-vaccine-single-dose.html.
Baclija, Kelly. “People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest,” 26 Feb. 2021, https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2021/02/people-who-have-had-covid-should-get.html
Kelly’s deep dive into "People Who Have Had Covid Should Get Single Vaccine Dose, Studies Suggest" is a brilliant display of analytical genius that is able to properly inform her audience on the topic of the COVID-19 vaccine and its use in society. Kelly does a great job of weaving in her own personal commentary in the intro paragraph where she gives a summary of the article. As a result, there is great flow between ideas and the summary becomes more cohesive as a result. I loved the way Kelly gave clear reasons as to why she chose this article. It really gives us great insight into her thoughts and creates a connection with the audience that makes her seem more trustworthy and reliable. Lastly, I liked her connections and extrapolation of ideas. Kelly does not just regurgitate the ideas from the article. She adds to them with original and unique thoughts of her own.
Although I really enjoyed reading Kelly’s analysis, I believe that there are places that could be improved. Either Kelly’s article is a bit vague and nonspecific, or Kelly needs to be more specific in her summarization. Her summarization leaves many questions to be answered. First, she states that a person’s antibody count is variable. Later, she mentions that the vaccine increases the person’s antibody count by a thousand fold. If someone is on the super low end of antibody count, will the thousand fold increase be enough? Also, how do the different vaccines affect antibody count and which vaccines increase antibody count the most? Does antibody count directly correlate to being better equipped to fight the virus? I feel that if Kelly went into a little bit more detail, this analysis would have been a thousand fold more strong.
Overall, Kelly put together an informative and relevant review of an important article. For many people, going to get the second dose for the vaccine is mandatory. This new news is something to think about as the rest of us have the option to get the vaccine. To improve for next time, Kelly could have added some statistics in the second paragraph to add some emphasis on the antibody count increases that she mentioned.