Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#66,201
#66,201
Mick said:
If a person doesn't have the antibodies they are not immune. Hard concept I know.
Click to expand...

If exposed and immune antibody response occurs, once antibodies disappear (in the case of Covid) is the host susceptible to reinfection from the same pathogen?
 
#66,204
#66,204
McDad said:
If exposed and immune antibody response occurs, once antibodies disappear (in the case of Covid) is the host susceptible to reinfection from the same pathogen?
Click to expand...
I think it's the whole concept of immunity giving you problems.
Immunity - the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection or toxin by the action of specific antibodies or sensitized white blood cells.
Natural Herd Immunity to COVID-19 Might Be Impossible | Freethink
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#66,205
#66,205
Mick said:
I think it's the whole concept of immunity giving you problems.
Immunity - the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection or toxin by the action of specific antibodies or sensitized white blood cells.
Natural Herd Immunity to COVID-19 Might Be Impossible | Freethink
Click to expand...
If you believe herd immunity is impossible, there's no need to test because it isnt quantifiable.

If either antibodies or sensitized WBCs provide immunity, then your thought of testing for antibodies will not give good data.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13, davethevol and allvol123
#66,207
#66,207
McDad said:
If that is true, wouldn't it also be true that herd immunity is impossible to achieve?

It also means herd immunity is not quantifiable in any way because it doesnt exist.
Click to expand...
My “personal” theory which is based on nothing more than deep thoughts after a doob is this...., even if the antibodies last only a short period.... the body will be more effective at fighting it a second and third time around...... rendering it as helpless as the common cold. I’ll post the link when they publish me in The New England Journal of Medicine
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, mr.checkerboards, Rocky_Top_Vol13 and 4 others
#66,209
#66,209
McDad said:
If that is true, wouldn't it also be true that herd immunity is impossible to achieve?

It also means herd immunity is not quantifiable in any way because it doesnt exist.
Click to expand...
McDad said:
If you believe herd immunity is impossible, there's no need to test because it isnt quantifiable.

If either antibodies or sensitized WBCs provide immunity, then your thought of testing for antibodies will not give good data.
Click to expand...
Now, do you understand why I questioned Doc's statement that Sweden has achieved "herd immunity" and the mortality rate is a useless indicator of such? If zero percent of the population has the antibodies you don't have herd immunity, if 100 percent has the antibodies you have herd immunity. Even though the actual threshold is unknown, X % of people have to have the antibodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#66,210
#66,210
Mick said:
Now, do you understand why I questioned Doc's statement that Sweden has achieved "herd immunity" and the mortality rate is a useless indicator of such? If zero percent of the population has the antibodies you don't have herd immunity, if 100 percent has the antibodies you have herd immunity. Even though the actual threshold is unknown, X % of people have to have the antibodies.[/QUOTE

Sweden on COVID-19: 'the strategy is right' even as its mortality rate exceeds the U.S.
Click to expand...
 
#66,211
#66,211
Mick said:
I think it's the whole concept of immunity giving you problems.
Immunity - the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection or toxin by the action of specific antibodies or sensitized white blood cells.
Natural Herd Immunity to COVID-19 Might Be Impossible | Freethink
Click to expand...

So this Herd Immunity concept redux... basically the dumbasses who refuse to wear masks, and wash their hands after taking a poo, because "Freedumb"... This is their last hope at saving some face and not being forever remembered as reckless morons.

Well, just my objective perspective, anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick and Purple Tiger
#66,215
#66,215
Mick said:
Now, do you understand why I questioned Doc's statement that Sweden has achieved "herd immunity" and the mortality rate is a useless indicator of such? If zero percent of the population has the antibodies you don't have herd immunity, if 100 percent has the antibodies you have herd immunity. Even though the actual threshold is unknown, X % of people have to have the antibodies.
Click to expand...
I understood your question to kiddiedoc's assertion since yesterday. There are obvious issues when using fatalities to gauge herd immunity. Whether or not herd immunity can be inferred from that set of data, is still to be determined.
When I asked how you would quantify when herd immunity is reached, it wasn't as a defense of his claim. I was genuinely interested in what ways we could test for herd immunity. Your answers were really unclear and got worse the more you replied. In retrospect, I think you were 'defending' your position rather than engaging in dialogue. I can assure you a 'defense' wasn't necessary. I wasn't throwing rocks from the sidelines as much as I was attempting to understand both sets of opposed views.

We seem to be in a quandary, now. Both kiddiedoc's graph and your proposal for testing would not give good data. Which means both approaches could only provide an inference. I hope the inference using NYC data is encouraging for all.
 
#66,216
#66,216
Stew Cook said:
So this Herd Immunity concept redux... basically the dumbasses who refuse to wear masks, and wash their hands after taking a poo, because "Freedumb"... This is their last hope at saving some face and not being forever remembered as reckless morons.

Well, just my objective perspective, anyway.
Click to expand...
Disagree.

I still think it comes down to what is/was the best approach for the circumstances. Unfortunately, I don't think we are any closer to an answer after 6 months than we were in Feb.
 
#66,220
#66,220
McDad said:
@TennTradition
Do you have any insight on whether herd immunity can be tested via antibody tests or other tests?

One may be able to infer appropriate levels of herd immunity have been achieved by simply looking at infections versus fatalities. But that inference wouldnt take into account the virus making it's way through a younger, less vulnerable demographic.

Mick offered antibody testing but stated antibodies don't last long. If true, how could testing for antibodies which are no longer present in someone who had been infected (and immune) give viable data. Mick can't explain.
Click to expand...

Just measuring antibodies, even if perfectly done, can’t tell you if you are at herd immunity without knowing fundamental characteristics of the virus. How infectious is someone? How long are they infectious?

This becomes trickier when a portion of the population might already have natural cross-immunity and perhaps antibodies fade but T cells remain trained in such a way that re-infection isn’t a risk.

The fundamental requirement for herd immunity for a isolated population is that the population have a low enough susceptible population (never have been infected and are not naturally immune/vaccinated), that

s * c * t * d < 1

s is the susceptible fraction
c is contacts per day for average person
t is transmission probability per contact
d is the average number of days a person is infectious and contacting others

True herd immunity occurs when the s is reached such that normal behavior (normal c, contact pattern) will not result in an epidemic if the virus is in circulation among the population. But you can appear to reach herd immunity at higher s values if c is still artificially low. Included in this would be quarantines, masks, increased hand washing, temperature screening, etc.

The true R0 of this virus was uncertain because our testing wasn’t in place as it started its natural progression through the population. That’s one reason herd immunity predictions vary. That is further complicated by the fact that some people might have a natural immunity.

I say all that to say you have to know what your target is to even make antibody testing for herd immunity useful. I’m not sure we really know what that is.

As for the question about the antibody lifetime and how you could test for it. First, is someone who loses their antibodies still immune? In most cases I think the answer is yes. So what is providing immunity? T cell response?

It’s possible that antibody tests will overpredict the susceptible population of a lot of people lose their antibodies. But that’s probably the limit of what I can say at this point without venturing into too much conjecture.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kiddiedoc, BennesseeVols, Mick and 2 others
#66,221
#66,221
McDad said:
Disagree.

I still think it comes down to what is/was the best approach for the circumstances. Unfortunately, I don't think we are any closer to an answer after 6 months than we were in Feb.
Click to expand...

Not saying the concept is bogus, just that assuming it's a sound approach to an end is dubious.

We have NYC and Spain to draw data from. If the data suggests it's a viable concept, that's one thing, but hoping it works out that way doesn't do much, but allow for an indifference to proven measures to slow the spread.

I'm all for allowing volunteers for a large scale proof of concept, but it seems like we might as well just quarantine Florida and watch. In the meantime we have the ability to be responsible, otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#66,222
#66,222
hog88 said:
I can't understand why some here try to debunk any good news about the pandemic. It's almost like they are rooting for the bug.
Click to expand...
It's all about keeping Trump from getting re elected. I guarantee you if O'Biden wins in November some libs will come out and say the damages/deaths from the virus was all worth it
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and oz615
#66,223
#66,223
McDad said:
I understood your question to kiddiedoc's assertion since yesterday. There are obvious issues when using fatalities to gauge herd immunity. Whether or not herd immunity can be inferred from that set of data, is still to be determined.
When I asked how you would quantify when herd immunity is reached, it wasn't as a defense of his claim. I was genuinely interested in what ways we could test for herd immunity. Your answers were really unclear and got worse the more you replied. In retrospect, I think you were 'defending' your position rather than engaging in dialogue. I can assure you a 'defense' wasn't necessary. I wasn't throwing rocks from the sidelines as much as I was attempting to understand both sets of opposed views.

We seem to be in a quandary, now. Both kiddiedoc's graph and your proposal for testing would not give good data. Which means both approaches could only provide an inference. I hope the inference using NYC data is encouraging for all.
Click to expand...
That’s what I find funny.... if it is something someone agrees with then they have no problem with what is inferred..... if they don’t agree with it then it becomes a huge issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#66,224
#66,224
Stew Cook said:
Not saying the concept is bogus, just that assuming it's a sound approach to an end is dubious.

We have NYC and Spain to draw data from. If the data suggests it's a viable concept, that's one thing, but hoping it works out that way doesn't do much, but allow for an indifference to proven measures to slow the spread.

I'm all for allowing volunteers for a large scale proof of concept, but it seems like we might as well just quarantine Florida and watch. In the meantime we have the ability to be responsible, otherwise.
Click to expand...
Isnt that what Sweden did? I know it doesnt have the density we do.

But it seems like some type of proof of concept.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top