Coronavirus in Massachusetts (Boston, Burlington: largest, avoid, about)

[charolastra00]

Originally Posted by redplum33

What's really the point? As far as I know, there's no guarantee that you're immune. And even if you are immune, nobody knows for how long.

While both of these points are true, the antibodies in others' plasma has been effective in helping very sick patients. It seems likely that even if you are *not* immune, your system is likely to be able to better fight back infection for as long as you have antibodies for most people.

[brightdoglover]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

While both of these points are true, the antibodies in others' plasma has been effective in helping very sick patients. It seems likely that even if you are *not* immune, your system is likely to be able to better fight back infection for as long as you have antibodies for most people.

Also, widespread antibody testing gives some understanding to the data of the spread and prevalence of the virus. It's not all about one of us, after all. I personally wouldn't change anything I do based on the result, no matter what it is. Still not gonna go to a crowded bar or restaurant or into a store without a mask.

[Arya Stark]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

While both of these points are true, the antibodies in others' plasma has been effective in helping very sick patients. It seems likely that even if you are *not* immune, your system is likely to be able to better fight back infection for as long as you have antibodies for most people.

They already have a portal for you to contribute.

https://www.fda.gov/emergency-prepar...ovid-19-plasma

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

While both of these points are true, the antibodies in others' plasma has been effective in helping very sick patients. It seems likely that even if you are *not* immune, your system is likely to be able to better fight back infection for as long as you have antibodies for most people.

Originally Posted by brightdoglover

Also, widespread antibody testing gives some understanding to the data of the spread and prevalence of the virus. It's not all about one of us, after all. I personally wouldn't change anything I do based on the result, no matter what it is. Still not gonna go to a crowded bar or restaurant or into a store without a mask.

Call me crazy, but I have concerns about getting the virus from the healthcare worker when getting any kind of test done.

[brightdoglover]

Originally Posted by redplum33

Call me crazy, but I have concerns about getting the virus from the healthcare worker when getting any kind of test done.

A fair consideration. That's why the testers are full of appropriate PPE and why we should all be wearing masks. It's the person-to-person breath/talking droplets that are the most infective. This isn't blood borne, it's respiratory and that's bad too. Note that they also wear gloves and all.

One reason there hasn't been widespread testing, besides the lack of testing supplies, is that some smaller areas lacked sufficient PPE to do the testing.

[RBThescot]

Originally Posted by redplum33

What's really the point? As far as I know, there's no guarantee that you're immune. And even if you are immune, nobody knows for how long.

This is an article from the UK Guardian about that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...nity-passports

[porterhouse]

The WHO is already backpedaling from the quotes in that article and deleted their tweets from earlier today.

[Arya Stark]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

While both of these points are true, the antibodies in others' plasma has been effective in helping very sick patients. It seems likely that even if you are *not* immune, your system is likely to be able to better fight back infection for as long as you have antibodies for most people.

Agree with this. I don't understand why the known laws of viruses have stopped for this one. The argument for the flu shot is that it will give you some immunity even if the strain is wrong.

But here.. oh no... this *may* do nothing.

IF it didn't give you "some immunity" wouldn't we see ever spiking numbers? Yet the numbers are flat. Seems to me that is evidence that some immunity is given.

In any event, I am getting tested because I keep having strange symptoms that my doctors keep smugly saying is a virus. But won't test me for.

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

I am one of the smartest people alive.

Indeed.

[charolastra00]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Agree with this. I don't understand why the known laws of viruses have stopped for this one. The argument for the flu shot is that it will give you some immunity even if the strain is wrong.

But here.. oh no... this *may* do nothing.

IF it didn't give you "some immunity" wouldn't we see ever spiking numbers? Yet the numbers are flat. Seems to me that is evidence that some immunity is given.

In any event, I am getting tested because I keep having strange symptoms that my doctors keep smugly saying is a virus. But won't test me for.

We're seeing flattening numbers because of the shelter in place. Nothing to do with immunity.



WHO was speaking in strict science-speak which doesn't translate well to the masses. By saying there's "no evidence" that antibodies prove immunity, they mean just that - they haven't yet completed testing that proves immunity. People have only been recovered for a few months at this point. They aren't saying it goes one way or the other, just that we lack evidence. They later went on to say that in all likelihood, exposure/antibodies does provide protection.



South Korea has done some research into this as well that is much more encouraging about the impact of antibodies. This article also notes that previous concerns about reinfection/relapsing may have been tied to dead or weak amounts of coronavirus still in the system. The new research suggests that if a patient is re-diagnosed with COVID-19 after recovering, it's unlikely he or she will be able to infect other: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/south-...ry?id=70312111