Scientists conclude people cannot get coronavirus twice

When police, law makers, judges, government departments break and ignore the law they have sworn to uphold, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival.

These days so many governments around the planet seem to be having a lot of trouble following their own rules, and seem to believe in selective enforcement, this section is here to try to help people find ways (preferably non-violent ways) to survive the tyranny.

Note: Anyone can read this forum, only registered users may post or reply to messages.
Post Reply
snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Scientists conclude people cannot get coronavirus twice

Post by snafu » Sat May 02, 2020 6:13 am

I am a simple person so please correct me if I am incorrect about how, in general, the human immune system along with vaccines work.

If one catches an illness for instance chicken pox or mumps, the body produces antibodies for the illnesses there by after one recovers preventing one from contracting the illness again.

A vaccine works by injecting a person with an antigen unique to the illness one wishes to prevent. Injecting these unique antigens then causes the body to produce antibodies so ones body can overcome the illness should one become infected with whatever illness one has taken the vaccine to prevent.

So basically both events are producing the antibodies to overcome a particular illness, it is just with the vaccine one hopes not to get sick in the process.

However, according to WHO in the article below:

The WHO warned there was, "no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection".

I have a couple of simple but serious question which I would really like to receive a serious precise answer (not a "because we said so answer").

If a person which has recovered from CV-19 does not develop antibodies for CV-19, how were they able to recover? (especially since according to WHO and CDC it is estimated that between 25%-50% of those infected are able to fight off the illness with only minor symptoms and in many cases no medical assistance.)

Second, if these antibodies produced by a person,, as a result of having CV-19, will not prevent one from contracting the infection, how will any vaccine be effective from preventing current or future CV-19 infections? As the vaccine's primary function is to cause the body to produce the antibodies needed to allow one's body to fight off the illness.

Why are we wasting the time and money on vaccine development, especially for something that, if what WHO says is true, will not be effective or since most people's immune system seems to be able to easily combat the illness why mandate that everyone take what is at best questionably effective poorly safety tested vaccine?

Copied from:

http://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/world/sci ... r-BB13tMAe


Scientists conclude people cannot get coronavirus twice

May/1/2020

Sky News

A number of reported cases of coronavirus patients relapsing after overcoming the disease were actually due to testing failures, South Korean scientists say.

Researchers at the South Korean centre for disease control and prevention (CDC) now say it is impossible for the COVID-19 virus to reactivate in human bodies.

There have been more than 10,000 confirmed coronavirus cases in South Korea, with 245 deaths - a 2.3% fatality rate, which is lower than the 3.4% average as stated by the World Health Organisation.

A total of 277 patients in the country were believed to have fallen ill for a second time, as had patients in China and Japan.

This prompted concerns that the virus could be mutating so quickly that people were not necessarily immune to catching it again.

However, genetic analyses of the virus have not found any substantial changes which would effectively disguise it from the immune system.

Partially as a result of these reports, the World Health Organisation warned governments against using so-called "immunity passports" to allow people to return to work simply because they have antibodies for the virus.

Immunity passports are a proposed way of allowing countries to begin to lift their coronavirus lockdowns in a targeted manner and resume economic activity.

They would be issued to people who have already overcome a COVID-19 infection and test positive for antibodies to the virus, based on the assumption they are therefore immune.

In an update to its guidance, the WHO warned there was "no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection".

But it was not expected that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test used to check the blood for antigens - actual particles of the virus itself - could also have issues.

South Korea's CDC has found that the test results for the suspected relapsed patients were false positives, and warned the test it used was not able to distinguish between live traces of the virus and the harmless dead samples which remain after patients have recovered.

The WHO has also warned that immunity certification depended upon the rapidly developed tests being checked for accuracy and reliability before being used.

"People who assume that they are immune to a second infection because they have received a positive test result may ignore public health advice," the WHO warned.

"The use of such certificates may therefore increase the risks of continued transmission," its guidance added at the time, although this guidance is currently being kept under review.

The CDC added that unlike other viruses, such as HIV and chickenpox - which can break into the nucleus of human cells and stay latent for years before reactivating - the coronavirus stays outside of the host cell's nucleus.

"This means it does not cause chronic infection or recurrence," explained Dr Oh Myoung-don, the head of the CDC committee, meaning it is unlikely for patients to relapse in this fashion.

In the future it could be possible that the coronavirus mutates and infects people who have previously overcome it, similarly to the flu.

Post Reply