Coronavirus protective immunity is short-lasting https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.11.20086439v2.full.pdf … https://twitter.com/apoorva_nyc/status/1273624551952392196 …pic.twitter.com/e1nGPJccwp
-
I completely agree.
The worst interpretations of these papers conclude that "immunity doesn't exist in most people" (because, lack of neuts). If that was the case, we'd see report after report about reinfections by now - and we don't. So it works, but how long is an open Q (and it's more than neuts)
-
-
Another limitation of these nAb studies is a lack of consistency in time of sampling. I think Florian showed that if you wait, a lot of people with low or no nAbs will end up seroconverting. The point about a lack of re-infections is huge and seems to be widely ignored.
-
I don’t think the lack of reinfection is ignored. I think it’s an absolutely massive relief. There’s clearly some protection from reinfection. The questions are how long protection lasts, if it’s duration corellates with severity of primary infection and if T cells are helping.
- Nog 3 antwoorden
Nieuw gesprek -
-
-
Another somewhat annoying conclusion from Ab studies is that the waning detection of a protein in the blood is taken as a correlate for short-lived immunity. All it really means is that Ab levels have declined. Period. It says nothing about long-term cellular immune *memory*
-
yes these studies don't show anything about T cells, but a focus on nAb's is partly because the vast majority of data shows that Ab's do confer protection against coronaviruses, including SARS (SARS1), in the context infection and vaccination - and memory T cell info is sparse
- Nog 11 antwoorden
Nieuw gesprek -
Het laden lijkt wat langer te duren.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.