Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[Gregs24]

I'm too busy today to go through all of this. I stopped at your first 'understanding' here.

The section you quoted contradicts what your understanding is!

"...natural immunity against other coronaviruses in humans tends to be short-lived."

You really are off your nut.

Time to send him to Coventry

Sponsored

 

[sk47]

The Good Part About ‘Waning’ Immunity (msn.com)

“Antibodies are supposed to peter out; that’s why they always do. Still, even as our antibodies are dwindling in absolute quantity, these scrappy molecules are enhancing their quality, continuing to replace themselves with new versions that keep improving their ability to bring the virus to heel. Months after vaccination, the average antibody found in the blood simply has higher defensive oomph. “That’s why I hate the word waning,” Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto, told me. “Antibody levels are declining, but something good is happening too: The immune response is evolving.””

“The focus on antibody counts alone actually does a disservice to our understanding of immunity, experts told me. Like a block of wood being hewn into a sharper blade, vaccinated immune systems can hone their skills over time. Part of waning certainly does mean fewer. But it can also mean better.”

“This process is haphazard and imprecise, though: When B cells are born, “they don’t have any particular pathogen in mind,” Gabriel Victora, an immunologist at Rockefeller University, told me. Instead of gripping firmly onto the virus’s surface, many antibodies might just “bounce on and off,” giving the pathogen ample time to wrest itself free, Bhattacharya said. It’s the best defense the body can slap together on short notice, having never met the bug before. Early antibodies are sort of the immune system’s best guesses at defense—the immunological equivalent of throwing spaghetti against a wall to see what sticks—which usually means we need a lot of them to truly pen the pathogen in place. They’re also fragile. Most antibodies don’t hang around for more than a few weeks before they degrade.”

“Such flimsy fighters aren’t terribly good investments for the long term. So while the subpar antibodies are duking it out on the front lines, the immune system will shuttle a contingent of young B cells into a boot camp, called a germinal center, where they can study up on the coronavirus. What happens inside these training camps is a battle royal in miniature: The cells crowd together and desperately vie for access to the resources they need to survive. Their weapons are their antibodies, which they wave frantically about, trying to latch on to chunks of dead coronavirus, while a panel of other immune cells judges them from afar. Only the most battle-ready among them—the ones whose antibodies grip most tightly onto the coronavirus—move on to the next round, and the losers perish in defeat. As Gommerman put it, “If they suck, they die.””

“At the end of this process, our bodies are left with some truly primo antibodies, well poised to take up the mantle of protection as the first waves of mediocre defenders start to fall away. This is what is happening in the immune system of those who got vaccinated months ago: An initial burst of antibody activity, followed by a gentle tapering off, as the body goes back to baseline. “Immune responses can’t just stay in your blood forever,” Langel told me. If they didn’t abate, we’d have no room or resources for the body to mount a different defense, against another threat—and our blood would be nothing more than a useless antibody sludge.”

“Whereas the first B cells that rally after vaccination might live just a few days, the cohort that trounced their peers in training can post up in the bone marrow or the blood for months or years. Some will continue to squeeze out antibodies for the long term, while others drift about in quietude, ready to resume their defensive duties when they’re called upon again. “What is seen as a ‘loss’ in antibodies is actually the slow waning of the less-good, short-lived response,” Victora told me. And when antibodies are needed—say, when the actual virus infects us—veteran B cells will produce them again, in gargantuan quantities. Antibodies themselves don’t always linger. But the capacity to create them usually does.”

“But he and others have also found that there’s little difference in how much neutralization the body is capable of—a strong hint that superior antibodies have since stepped up to the plate. Again, antibody levels always drop. That doesn’t mean that immune protection (which, by the way, is about more than just antibodies) disappears.”

“The slow trudge toward self-improvement might also be one reason to not rush into nabbing a booster shot. Boosting reminds the immune system of a threat it’s seen before. But offering up that refresher too often or too soon could be pointless, even slightly counterproductive, if active germinal centers are still doing their thing. Waiting a bit longer might help ensure that the best possible B cells are reawakened into action, to manufacture antibodies anew. Immunity, then, is much less about what’s around now, and more about what’s around when it’s needed; it’s no big deal if those defenses aren’t always visible, as long as they kick back into gear when they’re called to the fore.”

“All this means that a slowdown in antibody production could, in a way, be seen as comforting. It’s a sign of an immune system that’s allocating its resources wisely, rather than working itself into a constant panic. Bhattacharya, for one, hasn’t been at all fazed by what’s happening to his antibodies, which, nearly eight months out, still look pretty freaking good, despite the numerical drops—because they still seem to be walloping the virus when he tests them in his lab. Langel says that’s standard. When she sees antibodies “waning,” she shrugs. “I say, ‘Look,’” she told me, “‘that’s the immune system, doing what it does.’””



Hello my comments; I did not find much to comment about. The article is clear enough. I did underline some comments. This matches my understanding of immunity and is well written and with some detail.

 

[sk47]

Time to send him to Coventry

Hello; Interesting. I disagree with some who post on this thread but do not wish them to be silenced. I guess if you can manage to silence voices who do not see things exactly you way, that would stop the comments you do not care to or unable to refute. There is a term for this action.

 

[GT Pony]

Covid will most likely become a lasting "super flu" because of it's ability to continually mutate, and will probably require a yearly vaccination to give added immunity system protection, much like the "common flu". It probably won't ever be "wiped out" in anytime soon because there will always be plenty of hosts for it to do it's thing.

 

[RPDBlueMoon]

COVID-19 reinfection is likely among unvaccinated individuals, Yale study finds - Yale Daily News

“Jeffrey Townsend, the study’s lead author and Yale professor of biostatistics, explained that it can take several years to collect enough data to determine the rate of reinfection of an infectious disease. This creates a problem for researchers, as COVID-19 has only been actively circulating for about a year and a half. “

Hello my comments; This part seems fairly clear. Not had enough time yet to actually know from the data.

“With an understanding of how these viruses evolve and how they are related to each other, the team was able to model the likelihood of reinfection for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.”

“Townsend noted that this result was not unexpected, given that natural immunity against other coronaviruses in humans tends to be short-lived. But one cause for concern is that COVID-19 has more dangerous outcomes during and after infection compared to common colds.”

Hello my comments; It is my understanding the common cold virus is in the family of corona virus so a comparison makes sense. The deal with common cold virus is there are so many different strains around. Over a hundred is what I recall. My understanding is each of the different strains can give us a cold is one reason we have so many colds over time.

My understanding has been we do get long term immunity to any particular strain of common cold we recover from. The next common cold we get will either be one of the other strains or an old strain which has mutated enough.

This is likely to be the case with the covid19. I have shots designed around the early strain of covid19 and many of the naturally recovered were infected by that early strain. Call it alpha for the purpose here. We now have had mutated strains different from that alpha going around. Mutated enough to have a distinct enough identity so these mutated strains have their own names. So I, with the shots and those who recovered from alpha will not get sick from the alpha strain again but will not be so well protected from new strains as they mutate over time. The reports are that the delta strain is not “drifted” so much that the shots or natural immunity no longer work at all. That the shots and natural immunity from alpha still help when we get infected with delta.

As new and more changed strains of the covid19 virus mutate, then at some point a few will be beyond the immune system help we have from the alpha shots and/or infections. As the strains move thru the population I can see a situation similar to the common cold with a number of covid19 strains in circulation. Such is my take so far.

“Our results are based on average times of waning immunity across multiple infected individuals,” Hassler told the News.”

Hello my comments; Here is a point where more information would be helpful. By waning immunity is this restricted to the waning number of “circulating antibodies” only as a measure of immunity? If such is the case, I find this misleading. Discussed this in a recent post.

“Townsend said he was excited about the study’s use of a data-driven model based on an understanding of evolutionary principles. Although evolutionary biology is typically thought of as a historical discipline, according to Townsend, the team was able to use these theoretical principles to model the reinfection of a relatively new virus.”

“This is an instance where we have no idea about the answer to something and the only way that we can obtain that answer is through evolutionary biology,” he said. “And we managed to obtain it, and I’m very confident in the result.”

Hello my comments; Ok I get it. In place of actual numbers and data they made models to come up with the gist of the article.

I honestly have no idea what your point is in wasting your time dissecting these articles. You aren't even assessing the actual paper. At my college we would have weekly discussions about a research topic and we would dissect the paper no matter how dense to extract information from it. You aren't even doing that.

You are just responding to secondary sources from the paper. The paper dives heavily into viral evolution, and current methodology which is dense and you aren't even trying to make sense of it.

If you actually read the paper (the article even conveniently provides a link for you), it literally says at the top page:
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, reinfection is likely to become increasingly common. Maintaining public health measures that curb transmission—including among individuals who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2—coupled with persistent efforts to accelerate vaccination worldwide is critical to the prevention of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

This is the part you are looking for
In particular, our estimate argues strongly against the claim that a long-standing resolution of the epidemic could arise due to herd immunity from natural infection or that mitigation of the long-term risks of morbidity and mortality can be achieved without vaccination.

Continue preaching on about natural immunity

 

[CJJon]

Hello; Too bad you cannot take time to explain what you find wrong. That particular part of the article does not match what I have understood about the common cold and I explained why there appears to be a difference.

You have zero credibility here anymore. Congrats on becoming the undisputed head kook of this thread. Well deserved, I might add.

 

[Burkey]

You have zero credibility here anymore. Congrats on becoming the undisputed head kook of this thread. Well deserved, I might add.

Considering the quality of the completion, this is hardly a hollow victory. Quite the achievement in fact.
Honourable mention for Shogun.

 

[sk47]

CDC COVID Data Tracker
Hello; Still a downward trend in cases since a peak back in August 2021. The largest peak of cases for all ages was back in Jan 2021 around a third greater than the more recent August peak.

 

[GT Pony]

JAMA Intern Med. Published online October 11, 2021.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2785141

Key Points
Question How is COVID-19 immunity within families associated with the risk for infection in family members without immunity?

Findings In this cohort study of 1,789,728 individuals from 814,806 families in Sweden, family members without immunity had a 45% to 97% lower risk of contracting COVID-19 as the number of immune family members increased.

Meaning These results suggest that COVID-19 vaccines play a key role in reducing the transmission of the virus within families, which likely has implications for herd immunity and pandemic control.

 

[saleen367]

Not sure what the point of this whole thread is quite honestly. It does make me chuckle how much effort some of you put into your argument, when the fact of the matter is humans have existed without the miracle vax for what, thousands of years?

There's a really good local news interview on YT about the Amish community in PA ... some of you should check it out. I'm heading back to the fun side of the board.

 

[GT Pony]

Not sure what the point of this whole thread is quite honestly. It does make me chuckle how much effort some of you put into your argument, when the fact of the matter is humans have existed without the miracle vax for what, thousands of years?

LoL, what's the definition of "humans have existed without the miracle vax" ... that there's still some humans on Earth? How many more people might have died over the years without science, modern medicine and vaccines of all types?

 

[Burkey]

Not sure what the point of this whole thread is quite honestly. It does make me chuckle how much effort some of you put into your argument, when the fact of the matter is humans have existed without the miracle vax for what, thousands of years?

There's a really good local news interview on YT about the Amish community in PA ... some of you should check it out. I'm heading back to the fun side of the board.

You’re absolutely right. Our species has existed for a couple of hundred thousand years.
The problem is, pre-science, we just weren’t very good at it.

EDIT: Respect to the Amish people for their continued commitment toward combatting climate change.

 

[sk47]

Not sure what the point of this whole thread is quite honestly. It does make me chuckle how much effort some of you put into your argument, when the fact of the matter is humans have existed without the miracle vax for what, thousands of years?

There's a really good local news interview on YT about the Amish community in PA ... some of you should check it out. I'm heading back to the fun side of the board.

Hello Jeff. Another Jeff here. I get it.

 

[GT Pony]

Just because it worked for a small group of people (the Amish) in a small localized area doesn't mean it would work for the entire world without an vaccine and other measures used to control it. It wouldn't if you kept up with this pandemic.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196496/coronavirus-pandemic-could-have-caused-40/

But hey ... if 40 million people died the human race would still exist, right.

 

[GT Pony]

Hello Jeff. Another Jeff here. I get it.

You actually don't get much.

Sponsored