Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Old BMJ article from 2021 Data indicate that neutralising antibodies last for several months in patients with covid-19 but gently fall in number over time. One study, published in the journal Immunity, of 5882 people who had recovered from covid-19 infection, found that antibodies were still present in their blood five to seven months after illness. This was true for mild and severe cases, though people with severe disease ended up with more antibodies overall. All of the vaccines approved so far produce strong antibody responses. The study group for the Moderna vaccine reported in April that participants in an ongoing clinical trial had high levels of antibodies six months after their second dose. A study in the Lancet found that the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine induced high antibodies with “minimal waning” for three months after a single dose. Natural immunity appears slightly better than from the vaccines but there was some debate it may be more specific to the strain and give less broad based coverage. It'll be interesting to see what they think currently.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Nicholas91
Natural Selection surely? Darwin would be proud.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It'll be interesting to see what they think currently. The Lancet, March 2022 Foremost, the scientific evidence must be considered. Specific to SARS-CoV-2, some results suggest that vaccine-induced immunity is more effective,3 other results suggest that natural immunity is more effective,4 and some findings estimate both options as roughly equal.5 All evidence appears to support that prior immunity helps reduce frequency of severe outcomes and prevents future infections. The scientific evidence thus supports an advantage for some level of protection beyond unvaccinated and uninfected, but further study is needed.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
The Lancet, March 2022 Foremost, the scientific evidence must be considered. Specific to SARS-CoV-2, some results suggest that vaccine-induced immunity is more effective,3 other results suggest that natural immunity is more effective,4 and some findings estimate both options as roughly equal.5 All evidence appears to support that prior immunity helps reduce frequency of severe outcomes and prevents future infections. The scientific evidence thus supports an advantage for some level of protection beyond unvaccinated and uninfected, but further study is needed. Not that piece is really saying much.....but the Lancet published the letter that denied any chance of Covid being from the Wuhan lab. Personally I'm more trusting of the BMJ. Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Jul 2022 6.59pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
US inflation rises to 9.1 percent......the real rate is probably much higher.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2022 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.