Posted on 04/14/2020 9:07:30 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A new study from Chinese scientists on 130 recovered COVID-19 patients is raising questions about the extent to which people develop immunity to the virus.
The paper — a pre-print that has not been peer-reviewed yet — found that patients produced differing levels of antibodies . Having identifiable coronavirus antibodies in your bloodstream means you've probably built up immunity. But roughly 6% of the patients studied didn't develop any detectable antibodies at all.
"What this will mean to herd immunity will require more data from other parts of the world," Huang Jinghe, the leader of the research team behind the report, said, according to the South China Morning Post.
Interestingly, the levels of antibodies patients produced seemed to correlate with their ages: Middle-aged and elderly recovered patients had higher levels of antibodies. Nine of the 10 of the patients who did not develop detectable levels of coronavirus antibodies were 40 years old or younger.
Finding out more about how antibodies to the virus work will have major implications for both vaccine development and the potential for herd immunity.
The study, from researchers from Fudan University in Shanghai, took blood samples from 175 coronavirus patients who had recovered at Shanghai hospitals and who'd had "mild" symptoms. (Patients with "severe" symptoms were excluded because many had received blood transfusions to treat their illnesses.)
The participants ranged in age from 16 to 68, and the scientists grouped them into three categories: elderly (60-85), middle-aged (40-59), and young (15-39).
They found that the patients developed antibodies around 10 to 15 days after the disease's onset and remained stable afterwards.
The researchers measured the levels of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) in each patient's blood, and found that recovered elderly patients developed significantly higher levels of antibodies than younger patients did.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
In the 10 patients in the study who did not develop detectable antibodies, "other immune responses, including T cells or cytokines, may contribute to the recovery," the researchers wrote.
T cells are a type of white blood cells that aid in immune response, and cytokines are a type of molecule that cells release to fight infections. However, when too many cytokines are released, they cause inflammation — which has reportedly contributed to fatal outcomes in some COVID-19 patients.
Even in patients who do develop coronavirus antibodies, scientists still aren't sure how long they'll last; the virus has not been around long enough to study long-term effects.
Generally, once your body has antibodies to fight off a particular disease, you can't get it again, though some types of antibodies weaken over time. Plus, with viruses that mutate — such as the common cold or seasonal flu — antibodies people build up against one strain aren't effective against others
And 94% did develop anti-bodies?
If you can believe Dr. Faci, remember what he said before...
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has said it’s unlikely that people would get the coronavirus more than once — at least within a short time period.
“If we get infected in February and March and recover, next September, October, that person who’s infected — I believe — is going to be protected,” Fauci said on Wednesday during a livestreamed conversation with Howard Bauchner, editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Over 375,000 people worldwide have recovered from the coronavirus (likely more, given that many mild and asymptomatic cases are not reported in official counts). Given that a third of the world is under some kind of lockdown, those who have recovered could potentially emerge and return to work first.
There are many tests out there, and some are more accurate than others.
How do they know there was or was not a FALSE POSITIVE test result? (they have no clue)
RE: And 94% did develop anti-bodies?
Yes, that’s the implication.
Another way of writing the article title optimistically would be to say:
“94% of recovered patients in one study did develop antibodies”
RE: How do they know there was or was not a FALSE POSITIVE test result?
This is a test to look for the existence of antibodies, not whether or not a person is positive/negative for Covid-19.
I would assume the test would do the following:
1) Establish first that the person is Covid-19 NEGATIVE
2) Determine the level of antibodies they have.
What you seem to be suspicious about is the accuracy of step #1 above. If step #1 turned out to be wrong, then of course step #2 will turn out negative for antibodies.
How many people get the flu and don’t develop antibodies?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Or the Chinese-made tests have a 6% error rate.
More likely the original diagnostic test was a false positive.
But why would the lames do something like that?
“And 94% did develop anti-bodies?”
Go catch.
“found that recovered elderly patients developed significantly higher levels of antibodies than younger patients did. “
I guess older patients system had to fight harder so they would have higher levels of antibodies.
So plasma from older patients would be better for treatement. Not sure if I have the plasma theory correct. ????
Maybe we are learning about the human immune system.
Also, could it be a compromised immune system either naturally or by drugs?
Chinese? Bidness Insider? Nope!
I would believe absolutely nothing that the Chinese told me.
“China study” is all I had to read to skip this story.
Young healthy people fight it off so easily and quickly their bodies don’t have time to develop antibodies.
I’m pretty sure there was another milder bug that went through. In my household we all caught something that caused shortness of breath, coughing, messy GI tract symptoms, and mild fever (if any fever). This didn’t include high fever, losing sense of smell, coughing up blood, encephalitis, or heart attacks, it just caused the flu. I’m convinced there is more than one bug going around.
Chinese study?
Snort.
I’ll get exercised if we can replicate it over here.
Friend of mine is a prof of immunology
1) Her initial reaction to this report was surprise at the peak levels being so low. The patients had antibody measures during progression of disease. The peak levels were low, to her understanding of what proper disease response should be.
2)The fact the levels were low or zero after recovery (recovery is defined as 2 negative tests over 24 hrs apart) was less remarkable to her than the low levels at peak, and she was surprised they ever survived the virus with levels that low.
3) Antibodies are not there forever. They die and metabolize all the time. They are produced by memory B cells, and it is those cells that retain memory of antigens antibodies are supposed to defend against. The fact those cells were not replenishing the total is the ominous part of the report.
4) She thought the quality of the paper was fine. There were enough samples to dismiss testing error and the terminology said the authors were sophisticated and understood the subject matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.