New Studies Find Evidence Of 'Superhuman' Immunity To COVID-19 In Some Individuals (npr.org) 149
Some scientists have called it "superhuman immunity" or "bulletproof." But immunologist Shane Crotty prefers "hybrid immunity." "Overall, hybrid immunity to SARS-CoV-2 appears to be impressively potent," Crotty wrote in commentary in Science back in June. From a report: No matter what you call it, this type of immunity offers much-needed good news in what seems like an endless array of bad news regarding COVID-19. Over the past several months, a series of studies has found that some people mount an extraordinarily powerful immune response against SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes the disease COVID-19. Their bodies produce very high levels of antibodies, but they also make antibodies with great flexibility -- likely capable of fighting off the coronavirus variants circulating in the world but also likely effective against variants that may emerge in the future.
"One could reasonably predict that these people will be quite well protected against most -- and perhaps all of -- the SARS-CoV-2 variants that we are likely to see in the foreseeable future," says Paul Bieniasz, a virologist at Rockefeller University who helped lead several of the studies. In a study published online last month, Bieniasz and his colleagues found antibodies in these individuals that can strongly neutralize the six variants of concern tested, including delta and beta, as well as several other viruses related to SARS-CoV-2, including one in bats, two in pangolins and the one that caused the first coronavirus pandemic, SARS-CoV-1. "This is being a bit more speculative, but I would also suspect that they would have some degree of protection against the SARS-like viruses that have yet to infect humans," Bieniasz says.
"One could reasonably predict that these people will be quite well protected against most -- and perhaps all of -- the SARS-CoV-2 variants that we are likely to see in the foreseeable future," says Paul Bieniasz, a virologist at Rockefeller University who helped lead several of the studies. In a study published online last month, Bieniasz and his colleagues found antibodies in these individuals that can strongly neutralize the six variants of concern tested, including delta and beta, as well as several other viruses related to SARS-CoV-2, including one in bats, two in pangolins and the one that caused the first coronavirus pandemic, SARS-CoV-1. "This is being a bit more speculative, but I would also suspect that they would have some degree of protection against the SARS-like viruses that have yet to infect humans," Bieniasz says.
Yep, like my son. (Score:1, Interesting)
Despite repeated and prolonged exposure, he's never had so much as a sniffle.
Re:Yep, like my son. (Score:5, Funny)
Does he chew on fish tank cleaner? Or stick his finger in horse b-holes?
I have some theories.
Re:Yep, like my son. (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet infection rates are rising. And mostly amongst the unvaccinated. Wishful thinking is nice, but the data shows otherwise. Unless by "most" you mean "most of those vaccinated and very few of those who aren't, so roughly 50% of people, but only in this one country in the world."
CDC numbers show (Score:1)
It would premature to think we have herd immunity. Case rates show that we haven't.
On the other hand, the latest CDC numbers show that about 20% of Americans have TESTED positive for COVID. If 25% of infections result in symptoms that lead to a positive test, that would suggest 80% have been infected.
If 50% of infections lead to positive tests, that would be 40% exposed.
We don't know exactly how many people have been infected but the data indicates somewhere between 40%-80%.
CDC "total reported cases" (infec
Re:CDC numbers show (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. we don't have herd immunity and likely never will. But estimating 80% have already been infected does not hold up with the math you have. That 20% number from CDC is already extrapolated to the entire population, you don't need to extrapolate a second time.
Re:CDC numbers show (Score:5, Insightful)
The COVID tests do not look for symptoms, they look for infections. There are a lot of people getting tested who are not showing any symptoms. For example, I haven't had any symptoms, but I flew from the US to Europe and had to be tested twice - once going and once returning. Had to show two negative tests. People are getting tested weekly in some schools schools.
Right now they're showing about 40 million Americans have been infected. That's less than 20% of all of us. Now while I'm sure there are people who caught covid and never showed symptoms (or had mild ones) and were never tested, and there are also people who tested positive but never got sick, I don't see how it could possibly add up to 80% of the population.
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, people get tested without suspecting they are sick.
Still, not everyone who gets infected gets tested. So the number of infections will be higher than the number of positive tests.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, I agree, but it's a stretch to say that the reported 15% or so of the population who have confirmed infections is really closer to 80%.
Maximum possible doesn't mean most likely (Score:2)
> but it's a stretch to say that the reported 15% or so of the population who have confirmed infections is really closer to 80%.
What I said was that 80% is the upper bound - meaning there's no way it's over 80%. We know that because we still have a significant number of new cases, I said. Stating what the maximum the maximum number possible is, saying "it's not more than 80%", is very much NOT the same thing as saying "it's 80%".
I'm going to posit that you are almost certainly not more than 115 years ol
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on when they were infected. We don't know exactly how long the antibodies last, but it could be as little as 7-8 months or as long as 1-1.5 years. If you were infected in early 2020 during the first big wave, and have not gotten vaccinated, you may not have durable antibodies left. It gets very complicated very fast.
Until they come up with something better, we s
Re: (Score:2)
I absolutely agree we should get vaccinated.
Some people would argue that their employer (or the government?) shouldn't FORCE them to get vaccinated. That's a different question from whether getting vaccinated is a good idea. The science is clear that getting vaccinated is a good bet. Aside from the real sciency science, the experience of hundreds of millions of people backs that up.
What I was pondering about is *how far* we might be from herd immunity, or at least herd immunity among segments of the populat
Re: (Score:2)
Because of the possibility of re-infection, especially from variants, and with widespread infections giving time for mutation, it's doubtful that we will get to herd immunity at our current vaccination rates. With people reluctant to get vaccinated, and young children not yet eligible, the best we
Re: (Score:2)
The rate of non-vaccinated under emergency medical care does not suggest how many have had it, but it shows rather strongly that a) by far not enough people have immunity and b) vaccination provides excellent, if not quite perfect protection against needing treatment.
Re:Yep, like my son. (Score:5, Informative)
but only in this one country in the world.
Yes, AC was wrong about most of the world, but it will be true eventually.
However, last month in England, 94% of people were estimated to be antibody-positive to Covid, but only 70% had been vaccinated (1st dose).
So most unvaccinated people there have already caught it. The cost of that immunity was 133,000 reported deaths, many more unreported in the first wave, as well as ongoing health effects for countless more. Not something you want to emulate.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplep... [ons.gov.uk]
Plus infected vaccinated (Score:2)
The level of protection you get from being infected is nowhere near as long (8-12 weeks) as being vaccinated (protection is still fully effective after 12 weeks)
Re: (Score:2)
citation ????
Citation (Score:2)
https://www.cdc.gov/media/rele... [cdc.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.cdc.gov/media/rele... [cdc.gov]
Unfortunately, like so many articles in my local paper, the headline is wrong, written by an idiot sub-editor who did not read the article properly. ... sounds a bit like slashdot on occasion)
(Hmmm
The study only looked at people who were previously infected. It does not support your claim, but does show that people who have already been infected should still be vaccinated.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And yet infection rates are rising. And mostly amongst the unvaccinated. Wishful thinking is nice, but the data shows otherwise. Unless by "most" you mean "most of those vaccinated and very few of those who aren't, so roughly 50% of people, but only in this one country in the world."
Indeed. The degree some people are lying to themselves is astonishing. Most of the non-vaccinated have _not_ had it and this is still highly risky to them both because the risk of death (small but relevant) and the risk of other side-effects (pretty high, actually).
Well, with "authority" figures (or rather political clowns) claiming complete bullshit like that the COVID vaccine can turn you into a crocodile, it is not surprising some people with weaker minds were confused initially. But by now the facts of
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention, your immune system doesn't treat all infections the same, and it can forget them which will reduce or even wipe out it's effectiveness over that pathogen over time.
After all, this isn't some simple video game, it's the human immune system, which though rather amazing, is exceedingly complex and full of flaws.
It seems the vaccine also protects bet
Re: (Score:2)
The human immune system has encountered viruses before, viruses evolve far faster than humans, so if the immune system didn't have some capacity to generalize as well as remember, it wouldn't be much use. Count me among those who say the virus won't succeed in evolving resistance to the vaccines, certainly not to the antibodies of
Re:Yep, like my son. (Score:4, Informative)
There's a huge variety of viruses. Some are DNA based and don't mutate very often and some are RNA based, which have no checksums and mutates more often. It is easy to vaccinate against most DNA viruses like smallpox which also never reinfected but still regularly caused pandemics and some are hard to vaccinate for like the flu which mutates regularly and returns most every year in new variants and reinfects as as needing a new vaccine. And those flu vaccines run about 50% effective due to the mutations.
Covid is an RNA virus, it mutates regularly and some of those mutations allow avoiding the immune system.
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
Rubella, mumps and measles viruses are also RNA viruses. There's no a priori reason to think covid viruses should be better at evading our immune defences than they are. And especially, you'd have to be extremely pessimistic to think they would get as good at it as influenza viruses.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all viruses are equal. The flu virus, for example, does evolve to evade the immunity of previously vaccinated persons almost every year.
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
Flu viruses are extremely modular. They evade our immune system by switching out some of their parts with variant parts humans haven't seen in a while. They manage to keep these switch-out parts around with help from their huge reservoir in swine and waterfowl, which they jump between regularly.
Covid has no such tricks. It's very, very rare that its relatives jumps species and becomes viable in humans. Humans interact immensely more with waterfowl and swine than we do with bats and pangolins.
Re: (Score:2)
Shut up, ignorant asshole. If that was true, the hospitals would be empty.
Re: (Score:3)
So a notorious peddler of lies reports that a notorious liar says someone is telling lies. Hmm. Whom to believe?
Re: (Score:2)
From the link you provided:
Nowhere in the report are the words gain-of-function used to describe the project.
The only mention of it is the NIH's addition that 'no funds are provided and no funds can be used to support gain-of-function research'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Please buy the shots + booster 1 + booster 2... (Score:4, Informative)
Everyone's either going to get delta or the vaccine.
Interesting charts to perhaps provide some possibilities:
India covid cases chart [google.com] vs India covid deaths chart [google.com]
UK covid cases chart [google.com] vs UK covid deaths chart [google.com]
Israel covid cases chart [google.com] vs Israel covid deaths chart [google.com]
New daily cases chart by country from JHU (takes a while to load) [jhu.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I heard stories about Ivermecting being abused, which is true, and I heard stories about rural hospitals in danger of being overwhelmed by covid caseswhich is also true, but I never heard any stories aobut rural hospitals being overwhelmed by Ivermectin overdose cases.
However, I have heard stories made up by people about how the liberal media is making up stories. Almost like it's a Russian misinformation engine poking at the open wound that is America and watching it flinch. When they've got us
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I heard stories about Ivermecting being abused, which is true, and I heard stories about rural hospitals in danger of being overwhelmed by covid caseswhich is also true, but I never heard any stories aobut rural hospitals being overwhelmed by Ivermectin overdose cases.
There was a story recently about poison control getting quite a bit more calls because of Ivermectin abuse. It was still a smaller number (2000 or so per month in the US?) hence the degree of stupidity needed to actually take this stuff in the horse-variant is a lot higher than the already pretty high level of stupidity needed to believe this stuff really helps.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I heard stories about Ivermecting being abused, which is true, and I heard stories about rural hospitals in danger of being overwhelmed by covid caseswhich is also true, but I never heard any stories aobut rural hospitals being overwhelmed by Ivermectin overdose cases.
There was a story recently about poison control getting quite a bit more calls because of Ivermectin abuse. It was still a smaller number (2000 or so per month in the US?)
It was approximately 150 people per month in the US.
That story was retracted (Score:3)
You're probably thinking of two different stories and mixing then together.
The Sunday story on Slashdot said nationwide, poison control centers have received 500 calls in the last few months. So something three people per state per month.
Rolling Stone put out a story that went viral about a hospital that was inundated, based on what they were told by someone who claimed to be a doctor working there. That viral story was retracted when the hospital said they've treated ZERO people for this, and the doctor ha
Re: (Score:1)
Indeed. There are plenty of liars on both sides, but people actually stupid enough to poison themselves with horse dewormers are pretty rare.
Re: (Score:2)
They're common enough that our local feed store announced that they quit selling Ivermectin as soon as they saw an increased demand due to people giving it to themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
what's his blood type? I've read A is the most susceptible and I think O or B is supposed to be the least
COVID bonds to the ACE2 protein and I've read somewhere that blood type has some effect on it
Re: (Score:3)
All this really proves is that he didn't have symptomatic Covid. Most likely with everyone else around him having caught the virus he also caught it but just never developed symptoms. It could be that he is has "superhuman immunity" but without testing all we can conclude is that he never developed a symptomatic response.
But don't let me stop you from calling him a superhuman if you want. 8^)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep unless he was having regular PCR tests that he didn't show symptoms tells us nothing. Roughly 1/3 of people don't show symptoms. Actual research in this area shows that once COVID-19 is in a household everyone is going to get it. Of course that research was undertaken before the vaccine, so what the situation is now I have no idea.
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
Not true. Covid hit my home twice. Once in January when my wife (RN at a nursing home) brought it home. With masking and social distancing as best as possible she only spread it to our breast feeding 5 month old. And not our two year old and myself
In August the 5 month old is now a year old and the 2 year old brought it home from daycare because the daycare workers were unvaccinated. The toddler was even sharing a room with his 70 year old grandmother who was visiting. The grandmother mother and mysel
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like your entire family is irresponsible.
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
What happens to him isn't important. What's important is that we harvest from him what we can right now. This body represents hundreds of millions... maybe billions of dollars worth of biotechnology. There are people out there, governments, corporations... who would kill for this chance. Will he survive the procedure? No, of course not. We need everything. Tissue, bone marrow, blood. The procedure's gonna basically strip him down to nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
What happens to him isn't important. What's important is that we harvest from him what we can right now.
Will he survive the procedure?
No, of course not. We need everything. Tissue, bone marrow, blood.
I believe the phase you are looking for here is "precious bodily fluids."
Well, sir, if the scientist is a really good man, I mean really sharp, why he can barrel that electron microscope along so low - well you just have to see it some time. A real small beam, like one nanometer thermionic emission gun, zig-zagging in, its jet exhaust frying chickens in the barnyard --- Hell, yes! He has one hell of a chance!
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
Re: Yep, like my son. (Score:2)
BDLPSWDKS (Score:2)
Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:5, Insightful)
Has been sacked.
The people responsible for the sacking, with the publication of this story, have also been sacked.
I'm an aerospace engineer, not a biologist, nor do I play one on TV, but I'll just float the obvious here:
This pandemic is the first one of the "modern" era that has drawn the undivided attention of nearly every medical scientist in the world. Why exactly is that that we seem to think any discovery about the workings of the human immune system, which evolved over hundreds of millions of years, with respect to *this* virus are unique to this virus?
Re: (Score:1)
I think the issue is not so much that people thought the immune response would be unique, but rather the response would be "unknown" or "undefined" since the virus itself was an unknown and undefined quantity when this all broke out. IOW, we are still learning.
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
Which is a form of pre-scientific thinking.
It began early on when at the same time reports were coming in of people recovering from infection--due to the action of their immune systems--speculation was rampant over whether reinfection was likely or whether vaccination was even possible.
I'll say again: amid ample evidence of the effectiveness of the human immune system against sars cov 2, there were "questions" about the effectiveness of the human immune system against sars cov 2.
And btw we know what it look
Re: (Score:3)
And btw we know what it looks like when the human immune system is ineffective against a virus: AIDS.
AIDS is due to a virus (or group of viruses) that specifically attack components of the human immune system. SARS-Cov-2 doesn't do that. Although SARS-Cov-2 is unique enough* to slip by the immune system, once that system is 'taught' by an mRNA vaccine, it seems to be pretty effective.
*Possibly due to its source in a lab and it being significantly different from anything our immune systems have seen to date. rather than a plain old flu, which is usually a minor mutation from last year and something we are
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
I'll say again: amid ample evidence of the effectiveness of the human immune system against sars cov 2, there were "questions" about the effectiveness of the human immune system against sars cov 2
Ample evidence of what, that the immune system does immune systemy-stuff, so all our questions are answered? Maybe you should stick to sheet metal, just saying.
Re: (Score:3)
It was somewhat unknown. We did learn very very early that it was closely related to SARS. And we already had vaccines for SARS. That's one of the reasons we got a vaccine so fast. (the other reason being that the mRNA technology was already here and had been tested and was no longer merely experimental)
But other things are not clear, the same with any new virus where we have had zero years to study and investigate. Such as what are long term effects, how fast does it mutate, how effective are immune re
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:1)
The choice to assume the worst plausible scenario (vaccines impossible, reinfection frequent, death rate many orders of magnitude higher than flu, only vaccine-induced immunity) over a more likely scenario (immunity works like any other virus, death rate at worst one order more than flu) was driven by panic.
And the panic hasn't stopped.
The media want their clicks, and the CDC wants its favorite butt cheek covered.
Rationality and nuance are too much to ask for when panic dresses itself up as Science. Or God.
Re: (Score:2)
Best case scenario, it's still a terrible disease, still a very high death rate, with a very high transmission rate, and for quite some time at the start hospital wards were filling up beyond normal capacities, and recently the hospitalizations are indeed on the rise again with some locations not having room for new patients. It's not something to feel complacent about. So yet, it is not quite the level of panic, but all the fools who claimed it was a non-event are still fools. There's a middle ground wh
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:1)
Okay so here's the thing: clogged up hospitals are the only only only justification for any kind of public health restrictions on economic activity. This got lost sometime around when masks became totems and a virus with a low-ish ifr for most people became the all-consuming focus and justification for every piece or nonsense imaginable.
Close down universities? Elementary schools? Daycares? Why not!
Clamp down on the food supply? Sure!
Cancel elections and to fuck with any semblance of voter authentication wh
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
This got lost sometime around when masks became totems and a virus with a low-ish ifr for most people became the all-consuming focus and justification for every piece or nonsense imaginable.
Close down universities? Elementary schools? Daycares? Why not!
Clamp down on the food supply? Sure!
Cancel elections and to fuck with any semblance of voter authentication when they were eventually held? Go for it!
"low-ish"
https://www.reddit.com/r/Herma... [reddit.com]
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
I see it's Opposite Extremism Dumb Therefore My Extremism Smart time.
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
The choice to assume the worst plausible scenario (vaccines impossible, reinfection frequent, death rate many orders of magnitude higher than flu, only vaccine-induced immunity) over a more likely scenario (immunity works like any other virus, death rate at worst one order more than flu) was driven by panic.
Straw man sad
Re: (Score:2)
Who said that? What they did say was that a vaccine would take a long time to develop and produce - which was a reasonable prediction, but happily one that turned out wrong.
I don't think many said that either. I know I did say that this virus doesn't have any unusual clever way of evading the immune system (like HIV's subversion of the immune system, or flu viruses' extreme modularity), so reinfection didn't to me sound more plausible or common than reinfection with
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
Re: scary death rate.
Okay I'll admit this is a legitimately subtle point so I'll try to explain myself without trolling too hard.
Sars and mers were legit scary but also conspicuously slow in their spread. Ditto for ebola. And it's a general rule that things like incubation period, lethality, and contagiousness kind of tug against each other.
For instance, a long incubation period implies slow replication or a fairly benign virus where lots of replicated virus doesn't cause that much trouble for the infected
Re: (Score:2)
Ok. Now explain away heart disease and cancer as not a big deal either.
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
Seeing as those are not infectious diseases, and are generally well-studied without any mass hysteria and panic attached to them, they can't really be "explained away" by appealing to Science 101 principles that got thrown out the window in said panic.
Re: (Score:2)
Since they're not infectious diseases, they're much harder to prevent than COVID-19. If there were a vaccine to significantly reduce the odds of either cancer or heart disease, it would be crazy not to take it. There actually is a clear example of that, actually. The HPV vaccine. HPV can cause cervical cancer. It's basically crazy for parents not to get it for their kids.
Regarding Science 101 principles that get thrown out of the window in the panic, I'm a little unclear what you mean. There is panic and m
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
You're yelling back at Tucker Carlson, not responding to me.
Yes covid is killing people. Therefore it's a damn good idea for people pushing public health advice to a) recommend stuff that actually works and b) not piss away credibility by enforcing stuff that doesn't work or whose costs outweigh the benefit with religious fervor.
That's it. That's the overriding principle.
Pushing vaccines? Good and sound and probably effective.
Scaring the shit out of people about bare faces to the point where the more fragil
Re: (Score:2)
You're yelling back at Tucker Carlson, not responding to me.
Re-reading the thread, it still seems like I was responding to you.
Yes covid is killing people. Therefore it's a damn good idea for people pushing public health advice to a) recommend stuff that actually works and b) not piss away credibility by enforcing stuff that doesn't work or whose costs outweigh the benefit with religious fervor.
That's it. That's the overriding principle.
Which things are they recommending that doesn't actually work? Masking? That works. The problem is that they don't go hard enough on it and they also don't teach people to wear them properly. You see so many people with huge gaps around their nose and the sides along with people using masks with vents, etc., let alone the ones that don't wear them. Eye covering should be promoted as well. Social distancing? Once again, works, but people shou
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
Repeat after me: widespread vaccine-derived (and infection-derived) immunity change everything.
It no longer matters that vaccinated people are catching and spearing covid among eachother. It doesn't contribute to the public health emergency because they aren't en masse incapacitated and aren't filling up hospitals.
The benefit of preventing spread among immune people pales in comparison to the benefits of preventing spread among unimmunized people. But the cost stays high.
As for small children in daycares...
Re: (Score:2)
Repeat after me: widespread vaccine-derived (and infection-derived) immunity change everything.
It no longer matters that vaccinated people are catching and spearing covid among eachother. It doesn't contribute to the public health emergency because they aren't en masse incapacitated and aren't filling up hospitals.
I'm not going to repeat after you. I think that might be a cultural difference there. Maybe in your subculture, that's how it works, people say things and then others just repeat after them by rote. I'm going to make my own informed decisions, thank you. I do appreciate though, that you do seem to be trying to reason your way through this. I think you're ignoring at least one important detail though. Spread of the virus is spread of the virus. Even if the vaccinated are better protected or asymptomatic, the
It's the bleach! (Score:2)
quite obviously, these folks figured out early on how much bleach to drink.
Then, they engaged in a conspiracy to falsely label it as a stupid idea, figuring that when the rest of us died, they could
[URLPP}
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
with respect to *this* virus are unique to this virus?
Viruses aren't all the same. Duh.
https://www.thelancet.com/jour... [thelancet.com]
Obvious natural immunity straw man is obvious.
Re: Hashtag NaturalImmumity (Score:2)
Your link describes high level characteristics of the various viruses. It makes no claims about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the human immune system in any way that would let you call my post a strawman.
This reminds me of drivers and mobile phones. (Score:5, Interesting)
The result of this study is that an obscenely high percentage of people seemed to believe they were part of this 2%. And they all considered themselves excellent and more importantly safe drivers (I shared an office with one, he was my manager, I didn't contradict him).
I figured it was more likely I was one of them. I'm a piss poor driver and I can't really see that using my phone would make me any more or less of a hazard to the other people on the road.
I can already imagine that there will be a huge percentage of people who figure that since they haven't gotten covid (or didn't realize they did) they must be part of this miniscule percentage.
Might be reproduciblie (Score:2)
Indeed (Score:3)
So now if you're naturally immune to COVID you're (Score:1)
Wuhan Military Games (Score:2)
we should capture some of these people (Score:2)
lame article (Score:2)
Note that this is about biological entities, not chemicals. For example, arsenic will kill all humans (at least as of this day).
This happened with HIV too (Score:2)
This happened with HIV too [wikipedia.org]. If you read the separate article on delta-32 mutation, it's more common in Nordic countries and I remember reading about this "Scandinavian resistance" back when HIV was in the news more. Unfortunately they don't all have it, so I wouldn't be surprised if some people were like, "I don't have to worry, I'm Swedish" and ended up getting it. When I consider how much harder it is to get HIV (or how much easier it is to prevent, depending on how you look at things) I don't have a
Re: (Score:2)
i recall the story about HIV immunity, from a BBC radio programme. In that case, the immune individuals had some genetic variant that made them totally immune without any prior exposure to HIV. There was some speculation that the genetic variation may have come about as a result of exposure to and recovery from plague, in ancestors hundreds of years ago.
I am not an immunologist, but I presume there is genetic variation between people, that affects their ability to resist Covid-19, regardless of prior exposu
Most people have good immune defense against COVID (Score:2)
It's a couple of percent who do not because of age, comorbidities or rare bad luck which are a concern. Not saying 140 million deaths out of 7 billion world population is a great prospect. But it's more like leprosy than black plague or HIV.
Listen to the authors of the paper ... (Score:2)
A podcast that I follow, by virologists and immunologists, had two of the authors (a husband and wife team) recently to discuss their finding.
TWiV #796: The vary hungry spike with Paul and Theodora [microbe.tv]
An interesting part: "we don't do T-cells". That is, they only study antibodies. Shows you how complex the immune system is, and how specialized research in it has become.
One part I don't understand and would like to, but cannot find enough information on it: antibody affinity maturation. I assume that continued e
Re: (Score:3)
If you actually read TFA, you'd know this sort of immunity was found to be primarily present in people who have had COVID and then later been immunized.
Sorry - read the article, and ... (Score:3)
It's quite interesting how they never once address the very real possibility of someone first getting the alpha variant of COVID and then, without ever getting vaccinated, catching the delta variant and getting over both of them. Why wouldn't that have the same potential to create this "super immunity"? It makes no sense to me that a body's immune system, tricked into attacking protein spike structures thanks to mRNA vaccines instructing your cells to create them, would be a "lesser quality" of immunity t
Re:Sorry - read the article, and ... (Score:4, Informative)
It makes no sense to me that a body's immune system, tricked into attacking protein spike structures thanks to mRNA vaccines instructing your cells to create them, would be a "lesser quality" of immunity than what it made in response to actually encountering the virus itself?
If you've never been infected with something your body has to figure out how to attack it. That takes time, time you may not have depending on what you've been infected with.
On the other hand, if the body already has a template to work with if it should get infected, it knows what to do without wasting time.
Sure, there were many people who didn't die after contracting smallpox, but look at all the damage done to their bodies. Meanwhile, those who received the vaccine (once it became available), went merrily on their way because their body knew what to do straight off. In a similar fashion, people who think their body will fight off covid (and some do) completely ignore all the damage being done to their organs and other pieces while their body tries to figure out what to do. Thus, loss of taste and smell, liver damage, heart damage, lung damage, brain fog, to name just some of the wonderful after effects of contracting covid [mayoclinic.org].
Re: (Score:3)
If you've never been infected with something your body has to figure out how to attack it. That takes time, time you may not have depending on what you've been infected with.
That's not at all what King_TJ asked. He asked if a person gets COVID alpha and gets over it, then contracts COVID delta and gets over that, why wouldn't they also have "super immunity" from then on, or at least a immune response as good or better than the immune response from only the mRNA vaccine? In other words, couldn't a person have this same "super immunity" "naturally" and not involving the vaccine (from having actually contracted the COVID strains)?
Re: (Score:3)
It makes no sense to me that a body's immune system, tricked into attacking protein spike structures thanks to mRNA vaccines instructing your cells to create them, would be a "lesser quality" of immunity than what it made in response to actually encountering the virus itself?
Unless you know something about immunology, then it makes sense. Of course, even if it doesn't make sense yet, it's still true. The world doesn't conform to what makes sense to individuals. The world works the way it works. And it's nice to understand things. But you don't have to understand the laws of thermodynamics. You will still follow them.
https://directorsblog.nih.gov/... [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
They only tested 14 people under specific circumstances, and so they're not addressing anything one way or another about people who have contracted and recovered from two different variants.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop spreading the misinformation, Ivan!
Re: (Score:3)
With a large enough population and enough genetic variation there should be some naturally immunity to any virus/bacteria.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was heavily down-modded and yelled at for claiming some peoplehad natural immunity to Covid...
There's always people immune to something. There's people immune to HIV. Still doesn't mean there isn't an HIV pandemics, so for practical epidemiological purposes, these people are a mere curiosity (at least until you learn to somehow create treatments based on the research on how these people do it).
Re: Vindication (Score:3)
And youâ(TM)ve been downmodded again because the article is about vaccinated individuals.
Re: (Score:2)