Covid Immunity to COVID-19

Dagne

Elite member
Messages
599
Reaction score
135
Points
0
Location
Vilnius
Ethnic group
Lithuanian
Can anyone explain more about immunity?
It is so confusing with regard to COVID-19... especially with today's (April 17) warning from WHO that there is No evidence that antibody tests can show coronavirus immunity

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/17/who...no-evidence-antibody-tests-show-immunity.html


Again, is the WHO questioning rapid blood testing or they doubt that people who recovered from COVID-19 will develop immunity to it?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't trust anything the WHO says about anything. They've been wrong about absolutely everything so far, whether through sheer incompetence or Chinese influence I don't know and it doesn't really matter, imo. Wrong is wrong.

Personally, I think they worded that caution incorrectly.

There is uncertainty about the value of the immunity testing because in East Asia, for example, some people who tested as having antibodies are now becoming ill. It's not the majority, but they exist.

So, are they really becoming reinfected, or does the test produce false positives for a small percentage of people. How long it might last is another question. Some immunity lasts a year, some ten years, some a lifetime. It would be great if it lasts at least two years, until, hopefully we would have a vaccine, although the shortest time for a vaccine so far is five years.

See here starting at 1:30.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKaEFpzDq_I

From what Dr. Fauci and Dr. Berks are saying here, they're not sure what the presence of the antibodies is showing, because there are reports from East Asia of "reactivation" or "re-infection".

The question is whether they are indeed getting "re-infected", or "re-activated", or is the test faulty and giving out false positives for antibodies in the first place? So, they didn't have antibodies in the first place, or the antibodies were to another coronavirus.
 
"Past exposure to coronavirus may protect people from getting COVID-19 again" is this all what they can say?
Do we know of viral infections where a person could contract the same illness again during the same season?
Could it be that coronavirus' strains may be so different that people may contract another strain immediately?

Well, we'll have to wait for some more research, I am sure it is on its way, as more than 300,000 people have been registered as cured from COVID-19 by now.
 
There is so little known on this subject uptill now.
Even the experts don't know, so I'm not in a position to comment myself.
 
We are nowhere near herd immunity in any country. No wonder the original projections were off, although the health systems still almost collapsed; the vast majority of people have probably not even been exposed. The hope has been there were big percentages of the population who got it without symptoms or mild symptoms, and are now immune. Guess not.

Serology testing from Wuhan indicates only 2-3% have antibody among 8,600 hospital workers and visitors, with much more testing in the works https://wsj.com/articles/wuhan-starts-testing-to-determine-level-of-immunity-from-coronavirus-11587039175?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2

Interesting to see so many responders who don't believe it. Well, information from Denmark, the Netherlands, and other countries, have not surpassed 4% seropositive level to dateTY @TroelsKrarup
@redevries
@carstensenpol
Any other country data, large cohort welcome to add


 
We are nowhere near herd immunity in any country. No wonder the original projections were off, although the health systems still almost collapsed; the vast majority of people have probably not even been exposed. The hope has been there were big percentages of the population who got it without symptoms or mild symptoms, and are now immune. Guess not.

Serology testing from Wuhan indicates only 2-3% have antibody among 8,600 hospital workers and visitors, with much more testing in the works https://wsj.com/articles/wuhan-starts-testing-to-determine-level-of-immunity-from-coronavirus-11587039175?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2

Interesting to see so many responders who don't believe it. Well, information from Denmark, the Netherlands, and other countries, have not surpassed 4% seropositive level to dateTY @TroelsKrarup
@redevries
@carstensenpol
Any other country data, large cohort welcome to add



Yet, on the same day Mass General says a random test of people in Chelsea shows that one third have antibodies. In that hard hit area of Germany and in Lombardia it was only 15%.

Different tests with different reliability?

That's it. Nobody knows what the hell is going on.
 
Yet, on the same day Mass General says a random test of people in Chelsea shows that one third have antibodies. In that hard hit area of Germany and in Lombardia it was only 15%.

Different tests with different reliability?

That's it. Nobody knows what the hell is going on.

That is unfortunately pretty much the gist of things right now, everyone is racing to figure out what is going on. Different tests may have different reliability, some tests might not work, some sample sizes might be skewed by human error (this did happen recently) and the list goes on.
 
That is unfortunately pretty much the gist of things right now, everyone is racing to figure out what is going on. Different tests may have different reliability, some tests might not work, some sample sizes might be skewed by human error (this did happen recently) and the list goes on.

It's a mess. The group from Stanford which did two studies in California used volunteers who saw a facebook tweet about it. Clearly, people who came into contact with Covid patients or thought they had the symptoms would want to. That throws it all off, aside from the question of the reliability of the tests.

The only way to know is to perhaps use the old time consuming test, which is the most accurate, and test where there's been a high incidence, but do it completely randomly and blind. My God, have research companies who do randomized sampling all the time do it, and then permission from the selected people to test. It won't be perfect, but it's better than using people who suspect they were exposed and/or who had symptoms.

How can policy makers plan, or be blamed for how they do plan, when the information is still not accurate?
 
I've seen some Virologists saying, after contracting an illness like Covid-19 our body should provide us at least a whole year of immunity, mainly those virologists spoked after China made those " re-infection " claims.

What's a certainity is that nobody, even from the medical field, knows anything about Covid-19. Like this ridiculous idea that the Incubation time could take from 2 to 30 days. Mainly those assumptions are wrong, and they just gived us this huge gap time because they dismissed other potential way of transmissions, like an aerosol-type transmission, roughly you can have it only by randomly speaking with someone who has it.

How this illness modus operandi tend to escape most specialists in different concerned fields, can only create more paranoia on its functioning. This non-living organism has almost created a biblical plague.
 
It's a mess. The group from Stanford which did two studies in California used volunteers who saw a facebook tweet about it. Clearly, people who came into contact with Covid patients or thought they had the symptoms would want to. That throws it all off, aside from the question of the reliability of the tests.

The only way to know is to perhaps use the old time consuming test, which is the most accurate, and test where there's been a high incidence, but do it completely randomly and blind. My God, have research companies who do randomized sampling all the time do it, and then permission from the selected people to test. It won't be perfect, but it's better than using people who suspect they were exposed and/or who had symptoms.

How can policy makers plan, or be blamed for how they do plan, when the information is still not accurate?

It's a mess because, lets be frank, China has failed to really divulge information and the data that was needed from the start. That's probably one of the major factors for this mess.

I've seen some Virologists saying, after contracting an illness like Covid-19 our body should provide us at least a whole year of immunity, mainly those virologists spoked after China made those " re-infection " claims.

What's a certainity is that nobody, even from the medical field, knows anything about Covid-19. Like this ridiculous idea that the Incubation time could take from 2 to 30 days. Mainly those assumptions are wrong, and they just gived us this huge gap time because they dismissed other potential way of transmissions, like an aerosol-type transmission, roughly you can have it only by randomly speaking with someone who has it.

How this illness modus operandi tend to escape most specialists in different concerned fields, can only create more paranoia on its functioning. This non-living organism has almost created a biblical plague.


Yeah, we really don't know what the deal is with immunity. Some insinuate that we should be okay after contracting it, while others state we don't know enough yet. Problem being is immunity lasting a year is not necessarily a thing with coronaviruses. IIRC some coronaviruses that are responsible for the common flu (keep in mind they are the minority, most of those are rhinoviruses) only result in a few weeks worth of immunity before you are susceptible.

I'm hoping with enough testing both for infections and antibodies we can really come to understand the true extent of this virus and what really goes along with it. It's been a whirlwind in the media with one article saying a positive thing with a following article contradicting it. Or the pre-prints that are coming out like rapid fire, some with great promise for treatment and others showing negative results for those promises.

2020 has been a strange year to say the least...
 
Having identifiable neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) in your blood means you've built up immunity. The pre-print paper (Wu et al. 2020) found that patients produced differing levels of antibodies. The study found that 6% of the 130 recovered COVID-19 patients studied didn't develop any detectable antibodies, and 30% developed very low amounts, who are likely to be reinfected with the coronavirus. The researchers also found that older patients developed more antibodies than younger ones. Counting on developing herd immunity as a nation may be risky, if roughly 30% of recovered COVID-19 patients don't have immunity at all.

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus threatens global public health. Currently, neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) versus this virus are expected to correlate with recovery and protection of this disease. However, the characteristics of these antibodies have not been well studied in association with the clinical manifestations in patients.

Methods Plasma collected from 175 COVID-19 recovered patients with mild symptoms were screened using a safe and sensitive pseudotyped-lentiviral-vector-based neutralization assay. Spike-binding antibody in plasma were determined by ELISA using RBD, S1, and S2 proteins of SARS-CoV-2. The levels and the time course of SARS-CoV-2-specific NAbs and the spike-binding antibodies were monitored at the same time. Findings SARS-CoV-2 NAbs were unable to cross-reactive with SARS-CoV virus. SARS-CoV-2-specific NAbs were detected in patients from day 10-15 after the onset of the disease and remained thereafter. The titers of NAb among these patients correlated with the spike-binding antibodies targeting S1, RBD, and S2 regions. The titers of NAbs were variable in different patients. Elderly and middle-age patients had significantly higher plasma NAb titers (P<0.0001) and spike-binding antibodies (P=0.0003) than young patients. Notably, among these patients, there were ten patients whose NAb titers were under the detectable level of our assay (ID50: < 40); while in contrast, two patients, showed very high titers of NAb, with ID50 :15989 and 21567 respectively. The NAb titers were positive correlated with plasma CRP levels but negative correlated with the lymphocyte counts of patients at the time of admission, indicating an association between humoral response and cellular immune response.

Interpretation The variations of SARS-CoV-2 specific NAbs in recovered COVID-19 patients may raise the concern about the role of NAbs on disease progression. The correlation of NAb titers with age, lymphocyte counts, and blood CRP levels suggested that the interplay between virus and host immune response in coronavirus infections should be further explored for the development of effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 virus. Furthermore, titration of NAb is helpful prior to the use of convalescent plasma for prevention or treatment.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047365v2
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 5660 times.

Back
Top