Posted on 09/08/2021 11:26:14 PM PDT by blueplum
This retrospective cohort study of 1 health system included 150 325 patients tested for COVID-19 infection via polymerase chain reaction from 12 March 2020 to 30 August 2020. Testing performed up to 24 February 2021 in these patients was included. The main outcome was reinfection, defined as infection ≥90 days after initial testing. Secondary outcomes were symptomatic infection and protection of prior infection against reinfection.
Results Of 150 325 patients, 8845 (5.9%) tested positive and 141 480 (94.1%) tested negative before 30 August. A total of 1278 (14.4%) positive patients were retested after 90 days, and 62 had possible reinfection. Of those, 31 (50%) were symptomatic. Of those with initial negative testing, 5449 (3.9%) were subsequently positive and 3191 of those (58.5%) were symptomatic. Protection offered from prior infection was 81.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.6–85.8) and against symptomatic infection was 84.5% (95% CI, 77.9–89.1). This protection increased over time.
(Excerpt) Read more at academic.oup.com ...
Research done last year found 80% had pre-existing immune responses. T-cell response research
Wife & I had it last year. We work from home.
Son got it this year (at school), stayed home.
Daughter, being exposed, stayed home too.
Ergo lots of exposure.
No re-infection.
This is not true for anyone I know that has had it. They all have the expectation that they don't need to worry about it for a while. They generally know how their immune system works and know reinfection with anything is unlikely after you've had it.
How do you know that? Sincere question.
Yup.
“It BS. There is a much better Israel study released mmaybe 3 weeks ago, shows 19 out of 16,000 no reinfection after prior confirmed infection, 13x higher than vaxed.”
It does sound rigged, to get politicians to force people to take the vaccine. I also wonder how they define an infection. Is it just a positive test (I sure as hell hope not) or is it a positive test with the normal covid symptoms? HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I have serious doubts about this study. Did they test for antibodies after having “covid” the 1st time?
Saw this, which is based on data from Public Health England https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/05/latest-phe-report-reveals-the-vaccinated-account-for-70-percent-of-covid-19-deaths-since-february/
“But what does this mean in terms of the risk of death if infected with the Delta Covid-19 variant? Well it means the risk of death increases significantly in those who have been fully vaccinated.
536 deaths have occurred among 219,716 confirmed cases in the unvaccinated population since February. This is a case fatality rate of 0.2%.
Whereas 1,091 deaths have occurred among 113,823 cases among the fully vaccinated population. This is a case fatality rate of 1%.
This means the Covid-19 injections seem to be increasing the risk of death due to Covid-19 by 400% rather than reducing the risk of death by 95% as claimed by the vaccine manufacturers, Public Health bodies, and the Government, and now they want to give this experimental, deadly treatment to your children
PRCP was never intended to be diagnostic. Especially dialed up over 25 cycles.
On the other hand, antigen test are designed exactly for the purpose of determining if one has the specific antigens.
but then look at Nov 20, 2020 252,564 deaths according to nbc, and 11 million cases. (although I recall one of the protestors signs about that time reading 233k)
That’s not a lot of cases compared to 350million population - 3%. At a RO of 2.6 for wild covid, I just can’t see where 3% managed to come in contact with, to pass immunity to, 80% of the gen pop in less than 6 months. We’re not even seeing that with Delta at RO of 5+. The probability math doesn’t work for me. Neither does the current death rate - almost 700K or 450K more. If 80% were immune, wouldn’t the death rate have tanked well before vaccine?
Whereas, the 20% is similar to that seen in other nations and other ethnicities.
reactive t cells; how does this sentence translate into 81% immunity?? Doesn’t it say that there are elements to wild wuhan coronavirus similar to elements in the genome of the common cold?
“ Cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 peptides revealed pre-existing T cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals and validated similarity with common cold coronaviruses,”
Here’s a paper you might find interesting, that may be worth considering when looking at immune response:
Type I interferon autoantibodies are associated with systemic immune alterations in patients with COVID-19
“ autoantibodies to type I IFNs in critical COVID-19 cases were present at the time of their presentation and precede the development of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. This, along with the presence of healthy autoantibody-positive individuals in the community, suggests that anti-type I IFN autoantibodies pre-date infection and that there exists an at-risk group for severe to critical disease in the general population”
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.abh2624
check out the paper I linked in post 29 - might interest you. Genetics always plays a big part.
What this study says is, there were only 20% natural infected, but, that 20% had about 80=85% immunity from reinfection. It doesn’t matter if the % natural infected is a variable, that immunity from reinfection is THE important number.
So you should like the study very much. This study, along with a nice healthy antibody test, should be enough to mount a logical argument for exemption other than religious. as the immunity is in line with what is obtained from vaccines. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth, right?
I think the labs that run the antibody tests for folks should have a means to issue a ‘vaccine-equivalent’ card just as official as a vaccination card, if you have the right level of antibodies. Yeah?
I would like to think that there would be an exemption, but I suspect they would prefer destroying this data set that has had covid. Especially if vaccine enhanced infection is occurring.
There is no logic.
Having prior immunity doesn’t mean you won’t get sick. A lot of that 80% will absolutely get sick. Some of them could even die. But overall both their symptoms and risks are dramatically lower.
You see the same thing with any vaccine as well.
One aspect of vaccinations is risk management. Risk of hospitalization, death, or life altering consequences. Everyone thinks it’s so I, personally, won’t get sick and that is how they stupidly marketed these vaccines. That may be your reason for getting it and hopefully it works out that way.
That’s not even how your immune system works or flu and every other virus would have died out a long time ago.
What the 80% ultimately means is there is far less risk to be managed than the fear porn marketers are telling you.
The chances are high that Anyone Around the person that was immunized and got covid anyway will be paranoid mask-wearing fear mongers because “OMG , he still got it, and could have spread it to me and the rest of the world, so stay in the other room.”
And because fear porn says, “and you don’t have any immunity, you can get it again and again”
For. Real.
I wouldn’t make too many assumptions about the behavior of post-illness people.
I recently spent 25 days in the hospital for the ‘rona, most of it on high-flow O2. I’m still recovering, so I’m more limited with my mobility, but within that restriction, my behavior hasn’t changed. I was careful before I got sick. I took the same precautions I take during flu season.
First, at least for some time, I know the chance of reinfection for me approaches zero. Because of this, even though I’m currently unvaxxed, the doctors don’t recommend a vax for months for me.
But even after that, I’ll go back to my same behavior.
If I go somewhere where masking is required, I mask, as I did before. If it’s not absolutely required, I don’t bother. If someone offers me their hand to shake, I reciprocate. If I’m up to it, I go out to eat.
Worse yet, I’m immunosuppressed. Which is why I’m generally careful. But being long-term immunosuppressed, I’ve had to come to terms with the fact that what may make you sick for a week could kill me. And I had to make the decision to live my life in spite of that fact. So, I take some basic precautions, but I don’t engage in unnescessary theater like optional masking.
The bottom line is, the ‘rona is endemic. It has become like the common cold in terms of the likelihood of catching it. I’m grateful I lived through my initial bout with only minor damage. I suspect, as time goes on, when I get it again, it’ll usually be milder, as long as I maintain my health as best as I can. And, as my health falters near the end of my life, I wouldn’t be surprised if some sort of respiratory infection delivered the coup de grace. My mother died of cancer. But the immediate cause of death was ARDS.
“There is almost zero chance of getting it twice”
BRING ON THE HERD!
The ONLY way to be sure.
If you die, you die. The rest of us will be immune. The virus will also be DEAD!
Costs NOTHING! Economy can roar back. Life can return to normal, the OLD normal.
We have a SIL in the medical profession and he said that people were getting the covid tests over and over again. So if you are having millions of people getting two, three or four tests and everyone had a false-positive on these tests....the numbers the past year and a half are all off by a mile.
That’s interesting perspective. You nor I can know if you’re typical. I would suspect the more severe the first illness, the more careful people will be from then on.
A similar effect with “cases”. Vaxed people think they are somewhat bulletproof against the virus. If they get fever and cough, they decide it is normal flu. Only if they get extremely ill will they go to the doc, and it is from the doc they will get tested. So the surge in cases we see now must be far, far worse than last year. Last year people were getting drive thru testing with no symptoms at all. The numbers are hugely corrupted by this.
This is all really not the point. The point is testing like this is vastly inferior to intentional infection and observing results. That will never be approved and so we won’t ever have great confidence in testing.
I’m told my illness was pretty severe. My pulmonologist at my last appointment used the word “critical [shudder].” I was admitted and immediately put on 100% high-flow O2. The ICU doctor informed me solemnly that the next step was the ventilator. And he made sure to inform me that the fatality rate of those who went on the ventilator was roughly 50%.
So, does my illness count as severe?
“Vaxed people think they are somewhat bulletproof against the virus.”
I’m sure many do, but with the media reports on “breakthrough cases,” that feeling might be reduced in many.
On the other hand, when leaving the hospital, and at my dctors’ appointments since then I have been specifically told NOT to vax for several months BECAUSE I’M LIKELY HIGHLY IMMUNE right now. These are doctors slavishly following the regime protocols (I live in a deep blue state where an MD who tries to treat outside of CDC/FDA guidelines is likely to lose his license). So, if anyone will feel “bulletproof,” it’s more likely to be those of us who’ve just recovered.
“Only if they get extremely ill will they go to the doc, and it is from the doc they will get tested.”
No. Not at all. Many employers are requiring regular, routine testing, especially here, deep in blue state land. Many places I go check my temperature at the door. Every tradesman that comes to my home asks if I have the dreaded ‘rona.
“That will never be approved and so we won’t ever have great confidence in testing.”
Correct. So, we make do with the research results we CAN ethically obtain.
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.