The Herd, Vaccine and Natural Immunity Thread....
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Nobody takes self-responsibility anymore in the extreme liberal delusion. If you are at high risk, you have to protect yourself by wearing a mask when out in public and there are huge numbers of people. So, if you go to the grocery store, mall or hospital, wear a mask while, there. Take it off when you reach your car. Take a hot bath is the oft chance Corona Virus droplets managed to cling to any part of your exposed skin. That hot water and soap is enough to flush and kill any viruses outside your body. As long as you do not inhale it or bring it inside your body, you will be fine. Open your windows to enable the fresh air and wind to flush out the germs and viruses that might have been trapped in your room. Extreme liberal cry babies are just that. Grow up little snowflakes.
COVID-19 Antibodies May Disappear In As Little As Two Months, According To New Study
https://www.inquisitr.com/6128544/covid-19-antibodies-disappear-two-months/
Antibodies to COVID-19 may disappear in some patients in as little as 2 months, according to a new study. As ABC News reported, the findings may dash hopes that so-called “immunity passports” could allow individuals to travel freely.
Antibodies are proteins produced by the body’s immune system as protection against pathogens such as viruses or bacteria. When a person is sickened by a virus — or administered an inactive or weakened pathogen via a vaccine — the body produces antibodies, which can then fight off the pathogen should it re-infect the patient later.
However, a team of researchers from Chongqing Medical University in China has found that — in the case of COVID-19, the respiratory illness caused by the novel coronavirus — it appears that in some patients, those antibodies can fade away in as little as two months. In effect, that means that a patient who gets sick with COVID-19 and then recovers can get sick from it again, rather than being immune from it for the rest of their life.
In the study, researchers compared the immune responses of 37 people who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 but had no symptoms, to 37 patients who had the disease and were showing symptoms. Among the patients who weren’t sick, 40 percent had no antibodies in their system just 2 months after they were diagnosed. By comparison, among the sickened patients, just 13 percent had lost their antibodies in the same time frame.
The study’s findings seem to back up what the medical community has suspected for some time: that being exposed to the coronavirus once, and even coming down with COVID-19, doesn’t necessarily mean that the patient can’t get it again.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious-disease specialist, said previously that data seems to indicate that antibodies to the coronavirus family of viruses can fade in as little as 3-6 months.
“When you look at the history of the common coronaviruses that cause the common cold, the reports in the literature are that the durability of immunity that’s protective ranges from 3 to 6 months to almost always less than a year.”
The study’s findings also seem to deal another blow to the concept of so-called “immunity passports” — which is to say, a sort of theoretical documentation that a person has developed immunity to COVID-19 and thus can travel freely or return to work.
https://www.inquisitr.com/6128544/covid-19-antibodies-disappear-two-months/
Antibodies to COVID-19 may disappear in some patients in as little as 2 months, according to a new study. As ABC News reported, the findings may dash hopes that so-called “immunity passports” could allow individuals to travel freely.
Antibodies are proteins produced by the body’s immune system as protection against pathogens such as viruses or bacteria. When a person is sickened by a virus — or administered an inactive or weakened pathogen via a vaccine — the body produces antibodies, which can then fight off the pathogen should it re-infect the patient later.
However, a team of researchers from Chongqing Medical University in China has found that — in the case of COVID-19, the respiratory illness caused by the novel coronavirus — it appears that in some patients, those antibodies can fade away in as little as two months. In effect, that means that a patient who gets sick with COVID-19 and then recovers can get sick from it again, rather than being immune from it for the rest of their life.
In the study, researchers compared the immune responses of 37 people who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 but had no symptoms, to 37 patients who had the disease and were showing symptoms. Among the patients who weren’t sick, 40 percent had no antibodies in their system just 2 months after they were diagnosed. By comparison, among the sickened patients, just 13 percent had lost their antibodies in the same time frame.
The study’s findings seem to back up what the medical community has suspected for some time: that being exposed to the coronavirus once, and even coming down with COVID-19, doesn’t necessarily mean that the patient can’t get it again.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious-disease specialist, said previously that data seems to indicate that antibodies to the coronavirus family of viruses can fade in as little as 3-6 months.
“When you look at the history of the common coronaviruses that cause the common cold, the reports in the literature are that the durability of immunity that’s protective ranges from 3 to 6 months to almost always less than a year.”
The study’s findings also seem to deal another blow to the concept of so-called “immunity passports” — which is to say, a sort of theoretical documentation that a person has developed immunity to COVID-19 and thus can travel freely or return to work.
So Its like magic. Morons who don't understand the complexity of the subject attack me. And then a day later new science comes out and support my argument.
This is exactly what I have been telling GWB on every thread....If you read the paper some of us have been scary accurate...
they even say in the paper ... that the more restrictive your lockdown the worse your potential second wave. (you dumb fuckers...that should have been obvious.)
Herd Immunity Threshold for COVID-19 Could Be Just 43 Percent
The percentage of people in a population who need to be immune to the coronavirus to protect others, or the threshold of herd immunity, may be lower than previously thought, according to a study.
Herd immunity could potentially be achieved if 43 percent of a population is immune to the coronavirus, the authors of a paper published in the journal Science said. This is "substantially less" than the level of 60 percent given by vaccinating the population, the mathematicians from the University of Nottingham and University of Stockholm wrote.
However, the team said their estimate should be viewed as an "illustration" of how differences in a population affect herd immunity, "rather than an exact value or even a best estimate."...
The study comes as questions remain about whether those who have caught the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 are immune to reinfection—and if so, for how long.
https://www.newsweek.com/herd-immunity-threshold-covid-19-could-just-43-percent-1512978
here is the paper...
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/06/22/science.abc6810
...
"Only the curve corresponding to greatest preventive measures shows a severe second wave when restrictions are lifted. In most cases no (strong) second wave of outbreak occurs once preventive measures are lifted. Note also that the yellow curve, in which the overall fraction infected is well below the classical herd immunity level hC = 60%, is in fact protected by herd immunity since no second wave appears. See the supplement for depictions of when restrictions are lifted continuously between June 1 and August 31 (see figs. S1 and S2), and how the effective reproduction number evolves as a function of the time when restrictions are lifted (see fig. S3).
Our simple model shows how the disease-induced herd immunity level may be substantially lower than the classical herd immunity level derived from mathematical models assuming homogeneous immunization. Our application to COVID-19 indicates a reduction of herd immunity from 60% under homogeneous immunization down to 43% (assuming R0 = 2.5) in a structured population, but this should be interpreted as an illustration, rather than an exact value or even a best estimate. To try to quantify more precisely the size of this effect remains to be done.
...
(Now here is the disclaimer in the paper like I made on the first page of this thread... we don't know how long the immunity will last yet...)
In our model we assume that infection with and subsequent clearance of the virus leads to immunity against further infection for an extended period of time. If there is relatively quick loss of immunity or if we want to consider a time scale where the impact of demographic processes, such as births and people changing age-group becomes substantial, then we need further models.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/06/22/science.abc6810
This is exactly what I have been telling GWB on every thread....If you read the paper some of us have been scary accurate...
they even say in the paper ... that the more restrictive your lockdown the worse your potential second wave. (you dumb fuckers...that should have been obvious.)
Herd Immunity Threshold for COVID-19 Could Be Just 43 Percent
The percentage of people in a population who need to be immune to the coronavirus to protect others, or the threshold of herd immunity, may be lower than previously thought, according to a study.
Herd immunity could potentially be achieved if 43 percent of a population is immune to the coronavirus, the authors of a paper published in the journal Science said. This is "substantially less" than the level of 60 percent given by vaccinating the population, the mathematicians from the University of Nottingham and University of Stockholm wrote.
However, the team said their estimate should be viewed as an "illustration" of how differences in a population affect herd immunity, "rather than an exact value or even a best estimate."...
The study comes as questions remain about whether those who have caught the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 are immune to reinfection—and if so, for how long.
https://www.newsweek.com/herd-immunity-threshold-covid-19-could-just-43-percent-1512978
here is the paper...
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/06/22/science.abc6810
...
"Only the curve corresponding to greatest preventive measures shows a severe second wave when restrictions are lifted. In most cases no (strong) second wave of outbreak occurs once preventive measures are lifted. Note also that the yellow curve, in which the overall fraction infected is well below the classical herd immunity level hC = 60%, is in fact protected by herd immunity since no second wave appears. See the supplement for depictions of when restrictions are lifted continuously between June 1 and August 31 (see figs. S1 and S2), and how the effective reproduction number evolves as a function of the time when restrictions are lifted (see fig. S3).
Our simple model shows how the disease-induced herd immunity level may be substantially lower than the classical herd immunity level derived from mathematical models assuming homogeneous immunization. Our application to COVID-19 indicates a reduction of herd immunity from 60% under homogeneous immunization down to 43% (assuming R0 = 2.5) in a structured population, but this should be interpreted as an illustration, rather than an exact value or even a best estimate. To try to quantify more precisely the size of this effect remains to be done.
...
(Now here is the disclaimer in the paper like I made on the first page of this thread... we don't know how long the immunity will last yet...)
In our model we assume that infection with and subsequent clearance of the virus leads to immunity against further infection for an extended period of time. If there is relatively quick loss of immunity or if we want to consider a time scale where the impact of demographic processes, such as births and people changing age-group becomes substantial, then we need further models.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/06/22/science.abc6810
Last edited:
Now... I want to be clear. I brought this up on the first page of this thread....
Whether and for how long we build immunity is unknown. It seems from limited studies and data so far that the harder people were hit with the virus the better their antibodies... at the moment.
Regardless of what the GWB moron will argue... we do not have enough data at the moment to determine how long immunity lasts for everyone...We need more data. We don't even know if some people may have a natural immunity acquired from other viruses...
So don't listen to GWBs crap. Challenge him to prove it.
Whether and for how long we build immunity is unknown. It seems from limited studies and data so far that the harder people were hit with the virus the better their antibodies... at the moment.
Regardless of what the GWB moron will argue... we do not have enough data at the moment to determine how long immunity lasts for everyone...We need more data. We don't even know if some people may have a natural immunity acquired from other viruses...
So don't listen to GWBs crap. Challenge him to prove it.
Cambian rapidamente
Los datos están cambiando rápidamente y es posible que algunos casos aún no se hayan informado.
Solo incluye a aquellos que han sido seleccionados.
El número de casos solo incluye a aquellos que dieron positivo. Las reglas y la disponibilidad de evidencia varía según el país. Es posible que los datos no estén disponibles para algunas áreas porque aún no se han publicado o no son recientes.
Los datos están cambiando rápidamente y es posible que algunos casos aún no se hayan informado.
Solo incluye a aquellos que han sido seleccionados.
El número de casos solo incluye a aquellos que dieron positivo. Las reglas y la disponibilidad de evidencia varía según el país. Es posible que los datos no estén disponibles para algunas áreas porque aún no se han publicado o no son recientes.
So let's make this clear --- research from Stockholm University funded by the government of Sweden is claiming that the herd immunity level needed for COVID-19 is only 43 percent of the population.
The government of Sweden has found that despite months of attempting eugenics on their own population to increase immunity the national level is at a mere 4% level (at best) and the immunity level in dense urban areas has not been able to hit double digits. So what to do now - let's fund a study to move the goalposts and claim the required herd immunity level is only 43% instead of 60 to 70%.
Anyone who can do basic math is laughing their rear off at this assertion. For a disease where the R0 level is above 1,0 the minimum herd immunity level is at least 50%. As noted by other scientists mocking the Stockholm study - even the simplest model demonstrates this. While also mentioning that the herd immunity level is most likely above 70% for COVID-19.
Some more info on funding - from the Study -- "Acknowledgments: Funding: TB and PT acknowledge financial support from the Swedish Research Council, grant 2015-05015 (TB) and 2016-04566 (PT)"
Further information and context - https://www.studyfinds.org/herd-immunity-covid-19-not-so-far-off-after-all-new-model-shows/