Can You Get Covid-19 Again? It's Very Unlikely, Experts Say 55
An anonymous reader shares a report: The anecdotes are alarming. A woman in Los Angeles seemed to recover from Covid-19, but weeks later took a turn for the worse and tested positive again. A New Jersey doctor claimed several patients healed from one bout only to become reinfected with the coronavirus. And another doctor said a second round of illness was a reality for some people, and was much more severe. These recent accounts tap into people's deepest anxieties that they are destined to succumb to Covid-19 over and over, feeling progressively sicker, and will never emerge from this nightmarish pandemic. And these stories fuel fears that we won't be able to reach herd immunity -- the ultimate destination where the virus can no longer find enough victims to pose a deadly threat.
But the anecdotes are just that -- stories without evidence of reinfections, according to nearly a dozen experts who study viruses. "I haven't heard of a case where it's been truly unambiguously demonstrated," said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Other experts were even more reassuring. While little is definitively known about the coronavirus, just seven months into the pandemic, the new virus is behaving like most others, they said, lending credence to the belief that herd immunity can be achieved with a vaccine. It may be possible for the coronavirus to strike the same person twice, but it's highly unlikely that it would do so in such a short window or to make people sicker the second time, they said. What's more likely is that some people have a drawn-out course of infection, with the virus taking a slow toll weeks to months after their initial exposure. People infected with the coronavirus typically produce immune molecules called antibodies. Several teams have recently reported that the levels of these antibodies decline in two to three months, causing some consternation. But a drop in antibodies is perfectly normal after an acute infection subsides, said Dr. Michael Mina, an immunologist at Harvard University.
But the anecdotes are just that -- stories without evidence of reinfections, according to nearly a dozen experts who study viruses. "I haven't heard of a case where it's been truly unambiguously demonstrated," said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Other experts were even more reassuring. While little is definitively known about the coronavirus, just seven months into the pandemic, the new virus is behaving like most others, they said, lending credence to the belief that herd immunity can be achieved with a vaccine. It may be possible for the coronavirus to strike the same person twice, but it's highly unlikely that it would do so in such a short window or to make people sicker the second time, they said. What's more likely is that some people have a drawn-out course of infection, with the virus taking a slow toll weeks to months after their initial exposure. People infected with the coronavirus typically produce immune molecules called antibodies. Several teams have recently reported that the levels of these antibodies decline in two to three months, causing some consternation. But a drop in antibodies is perfectly normal after an acute infection subsides, said Dr. Michael Mina, an immunologist at Harvard University.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. We are now, what, ~9 months into the pandemic and as far as I can see there is very little, if any, clinical evidence of repeated infections from CV-19 that is statistically significant given the rate of false negatives/positives from testing. It does not rule it out completely but it would appear not to be a major problem.
Re: (Score:2)
One does not get infected with COVID-19. COVID-19 is the syndrome (not a disease) developed in "the defective" in response to an infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. COVID-19 is not a direct effect of the virus. What is described as COVID-19 is exactly what one would call "the flu" or "a cold" -- a generalized immune response.
Just like you don't get infected with Chickenpox. You get infected with a varicella virus which then causes the syndrome generally known as "ChickenPox" (which is a combined general
Re: Ms. Mash's headlines are str8 out of Cosmopoli (Score:1)
I subscribe to the Rumsfeld theory (Score:3)
It's the unkown unknowns that'll getcha.
Based on the macaque test (Score:3)
Its possible you could be an asymptomatic carrier but a T-cell response should kick in and keep you from actually getting the worst end of it. I am sure there could be outliers. Those with poor immune response that might have escaped the first infection by narrow margins. But the T-cell response seems promising. We may never see sterilization immunity, but reducing it to an annoyance is not the end of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
No understanding of statistics (Score:5, Interesting)
In this case, there were some indications (and papers published) presenting evidence of re-infection. The papers were good papers and the science in them was solid, so they were worth publishing, but they also indicated that the probability of re-infection was low, that there are other, much more likely explanations for the events they were recording.
Newspapers and bloggers didn't realize (or didn't care) that it was a low possibility scenario, they saw the sensational headline and went with it. Over and over.
The world is a very confusing place to people who don't understand statistics.
Any studies about T cells yet? B cells? (Score:2)
It's my understanding that it's normal for the antibodies themselves to wane fairly quickly for any virus; B cells "remember" how to make more and T cells also provide longer-term protection.
I haven't seen any studies yet on either of these two types of longer-term protection wirh COVID. Anyone seen anything?
Re:Any studies about T cells yet? B cells? (Score:5, Informative)
People who had SARS in 2002-2003 still have T cells that are cross-reactive to SARS-CoV-2 to this day (17 years later). SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are cross-reactive back to SARS as well, and it is expected that they may last as long. John Campbell explains [youtube.com], via Nature: SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected controls [nature.com].
The mutation rate of SARS-CoV-2 is very low compared to that of rhinoviruses, which cause the common cold, and influenza viruses. One major mutation has been observed: at position 614, RNA that used to encode aspartate now encodes glycine. It's not on the part of the spike that binds to the ACE2 receptor. Video for that one [youtube.com], with references in the description.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no reason for China to develop such a crappy virus. It is highly ineffective at doing anything useful -- particularly in China's population.
What is more likely is that it was developed by "Western" countries such as the U.K., Canada, and the United States specifically for the purpose of culling the population over the age of 65 in order to "save" money on Healthcare/Medicare, Old Age Security and Pensions; and, that its "escape" from the laboratory in Wuhan where it was developed by China and a co
Re: Any studies about T cells yet? B cells? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Not directly related, but there was a study that came out of the UK not too long ago (3-4 weeks?) about blood testing finding nearly double the rate for t-cells for Coronavirus than antibodies-- suggesting that actually coronavirus has affected far more people (and probably earlier) than we realize. A friend of mine was seriously ill in late November with what he thought was the flu-- but the symptoms match to a T (cell?) those of covid-19.
So yes, T-Cell production after exposure is definitely a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
So yes, T-Cell production after exposure is definitely a thing.
Yes, in fact, if you don't have T-cells helping out against the infection then you will be unlikely to win the game. Why? An individual antibody will simply tag one virus particle for destruction, and it's done. It can't do anything else for you. A T-cell on the other hand will detect an infected human cell, kill it, and move on to the next. Not only does it kill that infected cell but it takes out hundreds or even thousands of unassembled viruses along with it. So, there is literally an order of magnitude
Re: (Score:2)
Some are hoping not (Score:1)
Between a Republican dying from covid-19 [cbsnews.com] and hospitals in Texas having death panels [cbsnews.com] because of the virus, we couldn't take any more winning.
Yes you can, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes you can, but, how much it affects you and how long it lasts depends on two factors: how much infection you get the 2nd time and how strong you immune system is. when you get a new infection, your immune system has to fight it off. it can do that faster this 2nd time, before the infection has time to spread around your body. but it can still affect you, perhaps without symptoms.
the big question to ask is: can you spread it to others from this new 2nd infection? yes, you can, but less so as it will be quickly "dying" (viruses are not technically alive) off. how long? that also depends. but in most people it can still be there for a long time, diminishing as time passes. i'd worry about the first 24 hours.
this also will apply to vaccinated people. so, everyone still needs to wear a mask until we "get rid of it" which could be months after we have 80% immunity in the population.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, there is a growing body of evidence that antibody levels drop dramatically ~3 months after infection [theguardian.com], opening the door to reinfection. As a Cambridge University virologist quoted in the article puts it, this "puts another nail in the coffin of the dangerous concept of herd immunity". It also has implications for the effectiveness of any potential vaccine.
Re: (Score:2)
This is misinformation and totally false. PCR tests, which are how all "cases" are tested are tested against blood from 2019 and they return 0% reactivity in all tests. They are not reacting against "A" coronavirus. They are reacting against THE corona virus.
Antibody tests (which aren't used for more than population surveys) do sometimes cross react but even then their false positive rates are very very low.
Re: (Score:1)
(And just hope no one notices the bodies piling up.)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong, the test for infection is pretty specific for COVID-19. You may be thinking of antibody tests.
It's anecdotes all the way down (Score:5, Interesting)
"But the anecdotes are just that -- stories without evidence of reinfections, according to nearly a dozen experts who study viruses. "I haven't heard of a case where it's been truly unambiguously demonstrated," said Marc Lipsitch"
So anecdotes are being refuted by anecdotes.
Actually I personally find that mainstream reporting is absolutely rubbish. I find myself shouting at the TV screen (only slightly incoherently) when Laura from the BBC and that bloke from Sky et al try to question our (UK) politicians.
In the UK, there is a spot in the daily briefing (or there was) when us proles could ask a question before the professional reporters got stuck in. The questions from the public were generally short and to the point and got a sensible answer back from a scientist or govt minister.
Then the pros dive in. They waffle for ages and are lazy. The classic start is: "Do you believe ..." or "Do you accept that ..." Those gambits are guaranteed to make any politician fall back on stock answers. So that's a waste of a question. Now that is fine except that I expect my professional journos to keep my politicians to account. They persist in making the same mistake, day after day after day.
It really gets on my tits: Mainstream journalists are so lazy and seemingly incapable of original thought.
Re: It's anecdotes all the way down (Score:2)
Well, you and I also only have anecdotes of the existence of each other, and of any studies. We didn't exactly replicate the results of the guy who supposedly jumped off the skyscraper and died either. ;)
Hell, by some definitions, we don't have more than anecdotal evidence for our feet touching ground after getting out of bed this morning. ;)
Gotta repeat it another few million times, to get six sigma. And fly in scientits to peer review you and your morning boner.
THIS morning, of course. Not tomorrow mornin
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you should be following people like Lipschitz, Florian Krammer, Christian Drosten on Twitter and get it straight from the horse's mouth...
Sample:
https://twitter.com/florian_kr... [twitter.com]
any virus can reinfect some people (Score:2)
The real question is whether the virus can reinfect those with normal healthy immune systems. A member of my family has had chickenpox (not shingles) three times now. They have also had melanoma multiple times with different DNA signatures in each (thus multiple developments rather than recurrences). Obviously, their immune system has a flaw.
I think that one of the best indicators of coronavirus reinfection rates was the US carrier incident. Testing was extensive in this laboratory-like case. There were cas
Re: any virus can reinfect some people (Score:2)
The "flaw" with regard to viruses is, that viruses mutate. Including the "handles" (proteins) our immune cells learned to identify them by.
And the reason it works that way, is because to generic detections are in essence allergies. Or even self-drestruction.
Same reason anti-virus software, or blacklists in general, are not a solution.
What's better, is to separate things by what is harmful and what not.
If a "pathogen" only brings advantages or is harmless... which is not that uncommon by the way... it need n
Re: any virus can reinfect some people (Score:2)
s/to generic/too generic/
Gotta "grammar nazi" myself! :)
Re: any virus can reinfect some people (Score:2)
@Ok, fucknit, I can't handleOm.fuckin toxhsfreen keyboards anymore!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nature does not care about infections or defects that kill adults after they have reached breeding age and successfully spawned the next generation.
Natural Selection only prunes out the propagation of mutations which interfere with species propagation. That is, if a system mutation (or trait) prevents one from reaching breeding age and breeding offspring, then that particular trait will rapidly be culled -- those possessing the mutation/trait will not survive to breed and will not pass on that mutation/tra
You can get the Flu twice, any other virus too. (Score:1)
- 2nd: You can get the Flu (Influenza Viruses) many times in your life, and any virus that can have mutations (like Covid19) can generate symptoms of a new infection. This is the reality for any virus, since they mutate, like birds flies.
- 3rd: All the respiratory disease have a tendency to mutate and be able to
Body overtime (Score:2)
I've seen this with flu before in a few people I know. People saying that had bad flu, a month later "they say" they caught it again. It was more likely they were still recovering from the first bought and caught a cold. Without the normal fully operational immune system they a bad cold made them feel like absolute crud. I've found on average that recovery from flu takes me about 3 weeks after the symptoms go, you catch food poisoning or a bad head cold and your immune system is still shot. Symptoms go but
Re: The same experts? (Score:2)
There is no evidence for the existence of your brain. <--- You are here.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, quite the zinger! Well done!
Uuum, typical false dichotomy fallacy again. (Score:2)
Just because I jave neber truly unambiguously shown a black swan, doesn't mean they don't exist.
It does not mean they do exist, at least for that hypothtical me, either.
The point is: It means I do not know! Which is distinct from *either* of the above two choices.
So not having seen a case of reinfection is *not* an argument for that not being the case. Because ... I know this might come as a surprise to you, dear doctors, .. you are /not/ Gods.
It is an argument for /looking into it/.
To find out.
So let's se
According to nearly a dozen experts? (Score:1)
WOW Slashdot is now Fake News (Score:1)
Yes you can get reinfected as MORE THAN A THOUSAND CASES are already FACT CHECKED and ACKNOWLEDGE by doctors.
In fact, the 2nd (or 3rd or 4th, just give time to lose the immunity to get reinfected) will hit you harder as your body hasn't had enough time to recover from last battle.
Nice to see Slashdot is not another Fake News source.
Re: (Score:2)
That would depend on how you define "hit you harder". Generally speaking the symptoms associated with immune response (feeling sick, fever, sore throat, cough, lung congestion, etc, general systemic symptoms) will be greater because of elevated immune system response. (ie, your immune system will engage in a "more pitched battle"). However, it is likely that the "direct effects" of the infection (various cellular damage) will be much less.
What is commonly called "immunity" means that your immune system r
Already known (Score:2)