Which kind of sucks for hopes of extended immunity after infection.
“Mild” is defined as not requiring a respirator
Link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-21/covid-antibodies-fade-rapidly-raising-risk-of-lost-protection
I thought I heard an expert say that the presence of antibodies means one is immune, but the absence of antibodies does not dispel immunity if one had the virus and recovered.
immunity. Another reason that this letter to the editor should never be put in the MSM headlines like this.
That's generally how coronavirus vaccines work - you get antibodies for awhile, but you need to re-up again when the season comes around again.
With this one, hopefully we can put a good-sized dent in the infection rate due to the fact that vaccines will be coming out in waves concurrently with social-distancing and masks policies still in effect. The 2 combined should make a considerable difference for us.
Also worth noting: Even if your antibodies have faded, once this coronavirus is no longer "novel" to your immune system (i.e., once you've had it before), the impact of a subsequent infection will be a lot milder for your body.
Could it be that we’ll just have to live with a periodic, perhaps fatal new type of weird cold?
C’mon, science nerds. Do better.
Like once a year instead of once per 10 years. At least initially.
Another negative story from a joke of a study within a day of good vaccine news......yet again.
A “study” (which is actually just a letter) of 34 patients - with that low of a power to the study, you can literally infer nothing (since just a very few individual findings can sway the final result).
This kind of shit would never had made into a publication in normal times, and certainly not a FYI letter rather than even a published study so that the specifics are not even made available but the political impact can be equal to a real study. It simply stirs the fear and hysteria, and it has become clear that the NEJM is not immune (ironic given the silly vignette “study” being discussed).
Every Tom, Dick, and Harry who wants to get their name out there is putting up their ridiculous crap rather than waiting for the full powered studies from the big boys. But to the ignorant public, it is taken as gospel if it follows their preferred political narrative.
Maybe this phenomenon is true, and maybe it’s not. But you cannot infer the answer to this in any way from this junk.
Maybe you should cancel your subscription to the NEJM to express your outrage.
(no message)
Have you been thrown out of a supermarket yet?
I think you are getting easily triggered these days.
news.
ATL, feel free to tell me about this letter and why it is significant enough to make headlines.
Do you understand that there are literally thousands of case studies and mini research projects on COVID worldwide, and that there a probably hundreds that have great and optimistic findings regarding the disease, but it is too early to publish or the “n” is too small to infer anything (like this one). None of those were chosen to put forth because they were not ready or were not worthy - at least not yet....but this?
Yet they choose to publish this crap....and do it in the cowardly form of a letter so that they don’t have to explain later why they published a ridiculous study yet still get the same media impact out of it.
And they do it within a day of good vaccine news (I have made note of this MSM practice before).
Oh no, nothing,political here.
I agree the n is too small to draw society-wide conclusions, but everyone with a positive antibody test that thinks it is a golden ticket, probably still needs to be careful. That's what I got out of it.
I also don't see how this negates the good news on vaccines. If anything this study demonstrates how important they will be.
(no message)