True, but it's predicated on the effect of individual acquired immunity functioning en masse. Individual acquired immunity is not an established fact with this virus, at least not on a universal level, as with the more "traditional" contagions. Not a wise thing to base policy on.....yet.
Coronavirus Thread
- Thread starter Zipper730
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Status
This is not what the scientists are saying. Antibodies confer immunity. This is true for any virus. It is why we have survived as a species on this planet, on which we have co-evolved with other life forms which are pathogenic.
What the current science is saying is that they do not yet know how effective or for how long this immunity will last. This is being interpreted in a scare mongering and sensationalist press as "infection does not confer immunity", something which would make this particular coronavirus absolutely unique among all other viruses, and other pathogens which the human species has encountered since it's immune system started to evolve.
The first story came from S. Korea, when the press jumped on some apparent cases of re-infection or re-activation of the virus in some individuals. This was subsequently found to be due to errors in testing, as was also the case in similarly reported cases in the UK. Errors in testing have been prevalent; a test regarded as being very close to 100% accurate was only released last week.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
Minnesota report, May 16
cases 14,969**, recovered 10,271, hospitalized 2,039, deaths 700, tested 143,281*/**
fatality rate 4.7%
mortality rate 122.8 per million
test rate 25.1 per thousand*
*Test kits and reagents are becoming more available, and Minnesota's ability to test has just passed 5,000 people/day. Testing of the general population is beginning in small numbers.
**The measures used by Minnesota have reduced the rate of spread significantly, however our rate of spread (reflected by the 'curve') now appears to be increasing again. In theory this is at least partly (largely?) due to the increased rate of testing.
cases 14,969**, recovered 10,271, hospitalized 2,039, deaths 700, tested 143,281*/**
fatality rate 4.7%
mortality rate 122.8 per million
test rate 25.1 per thousand*
*Test kits and reagents are becoming more available, and Minnesota's ability to test has just passed 5,000 people/day. Testing of the general population is beginning in small numbers.
**The measures used by Minnesota have reduced the rate of spread significantly, however our rate of spread (reflected by the 'curve') now appears to be increasing again. In theory this is at least partly (largely?) due to the increased rate of testing.
at6
1st Sergeant
at6
1st Sergeant
The problem with trying to figure out whether or immunity will protect those who've had it is that there has never been a virus like this one.
That's pretty much the case with any "new" virus; we have to learn its quirks and details before we know how to intelligently confront it. Some follow somewhat predictable patterns and fortunately are countered by well coordinated and supplied research, medical, and public policy initiatives. Others are more enigmatic and take longer to figure out, especially if they encounter undersupplied, poorly managed, ideologically contentious efforts to combat them.
Which of these scenarios do we see around us?
Cheers,
Wes
Glider
Captain
There was some good news in the last week. On Friday the number of new cases in London was 24. How long it will stay at that level is a different question, but its a glimmer of light
Yes there has. It is one of a large family of viruses. Of the hundreds known, there are at least seven that are known to infect and cause disease in humans.
As I said before, the problem is that this one is new and unfamiliar. Developments in efforts to counter the virus and the disease it causes are therefore on going.
For example, specialists at Royal Brompton Hospital's severe respiratory failure service established the clearest link yet between Covid-19 and blood clotting in the small vessels of the lungs by using hi-tech dual energy CT scans to take images of lung function in their most serious patients. All of those tested suffered a lack of blood flow, suggesting such clotting. This partly explains why some patients are dying of lung failure through lack of oxygen in the blood. Prof Openshaw, a specialist in experimental medicine at Imperial and honorary physician at St Mary's hospital, said: "This intravascular clotting is a really nasty twist that we haven't seen before with many other viruses". Scientists are usually careful with their words (unlike the press and politicians) and he said "many other viruses"; but it is not unique, just unusual and newly discovered. Incidentally, this also offers hope that blood thinning drugs might help seriously ill patients. It will probably work better than shoving a light up your arse and drinking disinfectant.
Glider
Captain
Don't tell Trump that.
More of the scare tactic non-sense. It is only scare tactics to people who want it to be that. The media sensationalizes every thing, but knock it off with the control conspiracy nonsense. Sorry, Stona, I think you are looking too much into this my friend.
They have stating that immunity is likely, but unknown. Current studies show it to be very short lived as well. 4 to 5 months only, and whether it is enough for herd immunity, or two fight off a second bout.
What doctors and virologists are saying is that they simply do not know with this virus. Their data knowledge is changing every day.
" Ultimately, researchers are still uncertain about what level of long-term immune memory is sufficient to protect against future coronavirus infection, and how long it takes for the immune system to drop below that level. It's not even clear whether someone with immunity could spread the coronavirus to others while fighting off a second infection, Vabret and Samstein said. If the immune response were strong enough to crush the virus quickly, the person probably wouldn't transmit it further, they said. "
After recovering from COVID-19, are you immune? | Live Science
Last edited:
Italy report, 17th May 5 pm cest
cases 225,435, +675, deaths 31,908, +145, recovered 125,176, +2,366, active cases 68,351, -1,836, tests 3,004,960, +60,101
fatality rate 14.2%
mortality rate 529 per million
test rate 49.8 per thousand
positive rate 7.5%
test rate today 996 per million
positive rate today 1.1%
new case rate today 11 per million
From now i will report weekly on Sunday, unless unexpected
cases 225,435, +675, deaths 31,908, +145, recovered 125,176, +2,366, active cases 68,351, -1,836, tests 3,004,960, +60,101
fatality rate 14.2%
mortality rate 529 per million
test rate 49.8 per thousand
positive rate 7.5%
test rate today 996 per million
positive rate today 1.1%
new case rate today 11 per million
From now i will report weekly on Sunday, unless unexpected
at6
1st Sergeant
Insertion of the light was difficult but so very warm later. The disinfectant tasted like a bit bleach with a slight hint of Hand sanitizer.
We don't know if herd immunity will work yet as we don't know if one infection provides you with immunity for future infections. This is similar to the common flu. There have been documented cases of re-infection weeks after index infection. It's also thought to be a fast involving virus which doesn't help the herd immunity.
TheMadPenguin
Senior Airman
N.B. they (John Hopkins) continue to list China as having gone "flat-line" in new cases back in Feb... so they aren't validity-checking the data.Even if Herd Immunity works with Covid-19, lets put it into perspective. It's John Hopkins, but then again maybe they are part of the conspiracy too...
Early Herd Immunity against COVID-19: A Dangerous Misconception
Care to explain?
I know you are a medical expert, but can you please not contribute to the scare tactics with this nonsense.
just kidding...
TheMadPenguin
Senior Airman
COVID-19 Map
Click on each Country name on the left side. On the lower right, there's a graph of the numbers reported in that country over the last few months. Note that most graphs form a curve which rises rather steeply.
A few have a negative second derivative (cases climbing but rate slowing).
Only China appears to have a zero (or about zero) first derivative.
Perhaps I'm alone and foolish in being flat-out incredulous of China's claim of no (or near no) new cases since early March. I rather doubt that. Make your own conclusions, and make them known if you will.
You are looking for something nefarious on the part of John Hopkins when there is nothing there.
They can only post what China reports. That's not the fault of John Hopkins. They are only reporting the numbers given to them. China's claimed numbers have been very low for weeks. It does not matter what your source is. Yesterday, China reported 6 total new cases, and 1 new death. Everyone knows that China's numbers are not accurate or truthful. Everyone is reporting the same numbers as John Hopkins because that is what is being reported.
But what is John Hopkins supposed to do, and how is John Hopkins at fault for China's reported numbers? Should they call China up and smack their hand for it?
TheMadPenguin
Senior Airman
No, not JHU: China.
This is what I would expect JHU to note...
That would be a good start. Specifically, I'm not asserting JHU has any part in any conspiracy.
Sure it is. You implied that JHU is not "validity-checking" their data. They can't though. The only data they have is what China reports. They can't compare the data because only China has it. China does not care what JHU or anyone else thinks. Nor can any University or anyone else hold China accountable for it.
- Status
