South African Covid-19 News and Discussions 3

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
20,138
Unfortunately your opinion and scientific fact suggests otherwise. The studies suggest the immune response is not consistent in terms of an innate or adaptive immune response in the event of re-exposure.
The studies suggest that not only do people have long term defences, but that many people's immune systems already had defences in place capable of recognising this virus. They're even able to distinguish between people whose immune system had pre-existing defences and those that only developed them after being exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Inconsistencies are to be expected, and even for vaccines. So that does not argue against long term immune system memory.
 

garp

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
8,846
The studies suggest that not only do people have long term defences, but that many people's immune systems already had defences in place capable of recognising this virus. They're even able to distinguish between people whose immune system had pre-existing defences and those that only developed them after being exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Inconsistencies are to be expected, and even for vaccines. So that does not argue against long term immune system memory.
Apparently there was a recent study on survivors of the original SARS-CoV-1 (SARS). Not a single one has contracted SARS-CoV-2, and for some it’s almost 20 years later.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,511
Allegedly. But the way they're sold to the public and mandated by law indicates prevention as the driving factor. Plus any reduction in risk is going to be dependent on the mask worn. Nothing stops anyone from using cloth that doesn't block anything or an N95 that is leaking around the edges.
They tried a scientific approach to risk in terms of masks for general usage for the population from the outset. This didn't fly because how joe-public reasons with risk demanding certainty. Nothing is absolute in terms of protection as the requirements to ensure an absolute protection outcome far exceed what the public wish to endure. There is a reason why medical workers undergo vast training on infection control. The law mandate has nothing to do with anything but an attempt at reducing the chance of infection which is why it is described as one of the tools by our illustrious president.

The studies suggest that not only do people have long term defences, but that many people's immune systems already had defences in place capable of recognising this virus. They're even able to distinguish between people whose immune system had pre-existing defences and those that only developed them after being exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Inconsistencies are to be expected, and even for vaccines. So that does not argue against long term immune system memory.
Once again, the data suggests a diminishing response. We have no data supporting long term immunity as yet.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,511
Apparently there was a recent study on survivors of the original SARS-CoV-1 (SARS). Not a single one has contracted SARS-CoV-2, and for some it’s almost 20 years later.
There are plenty of studies looking at pre-existing immunological responses to COVID-19 and are quite fascinating. The immune system is the sum of its experience after all.
 

R13...

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
36,068
Enter the Chief Justice his very self.


“If there be any vaccine that is of the devil, meant to infuse triple-six in the lives of people, meant to corrupt their DNA, any such vaccine, Lord God almighty, may it be destroyed by fire, in the name of Jesus.”
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,405

Ha ha ha!

And here people are thinking their little cloth **** will help.
The masks did meet the specs. Therefore not suitable for use by medical people, who are potentially exposed to high viral loads.
It is NOT the same as limiting low exposure to potentially low viral loads and anyway, the purpose of your mask is to protect me from your bugs.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,405
Herd immunity requires our immune systems to continue producing antibodies as an immune response. Evidence to date so far suggests that this is not the case medium to long term.
The conventional immunity wisdom is sure taking a knock these days!
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,405
Unfortunately your opinion and scientific fact suggests otherwise. The studies suggest the immune response is not consistent in terms of an innate or adaptive immune response in the event of re-exposure.
Read the next post! The immunity system, just like everything else needs to be exercised regularly, to keep it sharp and ready for action!
The immunologists, just like the epiwhatisnames are being forced to review their preconceived BS on a daily basis.
 

Paulsie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Messages
1,705
We can only look at what is currently known unless you believe that long term is less than a year.
Yes, we cannot know the effectiveness of a synthetic vaccine as it hasn't been tested for long, but I think we can fairly safely extrapolate on our knowledge of our own immune system (ie natural immunity)
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,405

Lupus

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
31,605
Unfortunately your opinion and scientific fact suggests otherwise. The studies suggest the immune response is not consistent in terms of an innate or adaptive immune response in the event of re-exposure.
So that would make a vaccine pointless, unless you keep going for boosters like flu vaccines.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,511
Read the next post! The immunity system, just like everything else needs to be exercised regularly, to keep it sharp and ready for action!
The immunologists, just like the epiwhatisnames are being forced to review their preconceived BS on a daily basis.
There are innate and adaptive immune system responses however for it to be "exercised" you'd require constant exposure over time which is not necessarily the case with Covid 19 and furthermore is not supported by medical workers who are being reinfected despite this constant exposure. However, it still does not negate the fact that, although studies show T-cell memory remaining in some patients, it's not consistent with all and we have only been able to measure it in the short-term.
Yes, we cannot know the effectiveness of a synthetic vaccine as it hasn't been tested for long, but I think we can fairly safely extrapolate on our knowledge of our own immune system (ie natural immunity)
I would argue against "fairly safely extrapolate" otherwise we might as well extrapolate that because all vaccines are arguably safe what's the worst that could happen? It's also not supported by even the manufacturers who state that the likelihood is that multiple booster shots will be required. We simply don't know as yet.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,511
So that would make a vaccine pointless, unless you keep going for boosters like flu vaccines.
Even the manufacturers of said vaccines have alluded to this however the mechanism for the various vaccines are different. The efficacy and delivery (mRNA vs Recombinant Adenovirus) will be determined in time.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,405
And now, already a warning that people with a certain ailment cannot be given the Pfizer vaccine? And that the vaccine interferes with the detection of HIV?
Here we come,
"Ek is n dapper muis".
I wonder how many exceptions will have to surface baforecthe vaccine becomes useless as a preventative measure in a normal population?
 
Top