Feels like a good time to mention that research going around (dunno how much truth, can’t evaluate) suggesting perhaps other coronavirus exposures do provide some sort of partial immunity to this one
-
-
Runs into the problem of Lombardi; maybe some % of people there *didn't* have COVID19 and had the protective infection first (which shows up on serum tests as COVID antibodies). All that means is that COVID is that much more deadly to those who do catch it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @soncharm and
They can check old blood donations from 2019 to make sure they aren't getting false positive readings from pre-existing antibodies.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Steve_Sailer @soncharm and
Granting their assumption that some prior corona virus causes the body to produce the same antibodies as for COVID19 it still isn't good news; just means that the IFR goes from 1% to some higher number by lowering the denominator (I) while keeping the numerator constant (F).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @euneaux @Steve_Sailer and
SIR is extremely well established; it's worked for previous epidemics and has a sound mathematical and logical basis. Assuming that SIR will apply to this one is like assuming that the fog-shrouded road continues rather than terminating in a drop off a cliff.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @euneaux and
So, what is S? What are the factors that affect S? How do they apply to COVID-19?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @luigi_warren @euneaux and
It's a novel zoonotic; the assumption is that everyone alive is susceptible. If it turns out that some people aren't susceptible then the disease is more infectious and more deadly than previously thought because it spread to a partly immune population and killed a % of cases.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @euneaux and
On the first paragraph, what is the justification for that assumption? What does "it's a novel zoonotic" have to do with it? It is a coronavirus, correct? Coronaviruses are common, correct? Neutralizing antibodies and cytotoxic T-cells raised by coronaviruses are common, correct?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The assumption is that people are not immune to novel infectious agents. The spread of COVID19 is not consistent with any other assumption; certainly not with the assumption that having had a coronavirus cold will make you immune.
-
-
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @euneaux and
Actually, your body has plenty of generic defenses against viruses that don't even involve adaptive immunity. Your body is constantly being assaulted by viral & non-viral pathogens & most of the time it blows them off. If those defenses didn't work, you wouldn't have them.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.