FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Not sure I can post a link from the Japan Times so . . .
Not sure I can post a link from the Japan Times so . . .
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
in particular.
'The paper’s central findings are that, out of 1,797 tested people who’d recovered from COVID, 91.1 percent produced detectable levels of antibodies. Moreover, these levels hadn’t declined four months after the diagnosis. The immune response was higher among older individuals — who are at greater risk of developing a more dangerous form of the coronavirus — and among those who presented the worst symptoms.' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules."
Well said.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules."
So how will they go about that and really - answer just once with clarity - Why would they do that?
Ps. It's already on media outlets all around the World. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said. "
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish."
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?"
Thats not what it says. Its says most people have an immune response that lasts at least 6 months. Immune response is not necessarily the same. Its only a small study on one population. It is potentially good news especially for vaccine development , well it was when it was first published nearly 3 weeks ago. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?
Thats not what it says. Its says most people have an immune response that lasts at least 6 months. Immune response is not necessarily the same. Its only a small study on one population. It is potentially good news especially for vaccine development , well it was when it was first published nearly 3 weeks ago."
So you're saying antibodies produced by a vaccine stop you catching it again but antibodies produced by actually catching the disease somehow don't?
What's more, up till now there was a suggestion that the antibodies decrease but this study suggests they don't so the immunity could last for ever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There are two documented cases of patients having a second Covid infection. Clearly a small number, but it shows immunity from a previous infection (or a vaccine when it is available) does not guarantee against reinfection. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?"
That's a very selfish view to hold in that it makes it ok. What about transmission. Isn't this all about reducing transmitting to others especially those more vulnerable, or have I got this all wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?"
No! Immunity generally means that if you catch it again the antibodies will cover the pathogens which'll be destroyed before taking hold in your body. You can also be a cause of cross contamination, picking it up on one surface transferring it to another. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?"
No. I don't agree. I've had flu more than once in my life and no doubt have antibodies that will reflect that. And yet. I can catch it again.
What 'might' be good news about this news is that an immune response might be better prepared to fight a new infection.
But you didn't say that anyway - you said the Government will squash this information - Please explain how and why they would do that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Even if you have antibodies, it doesn't equate to you not contracting it again and therefore passing it on to another, it just means you may not be as severely effected by it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?
Thats not what it says. Its says most people have an immune response that lasts at least 6 months. Immune response is not necessarily the same. Its only a small study on one population. It is potentially good news especially for vaccine development , well it was when it was first published nearly 3 weeks ago.
So you're saying antibodies produced by a vaccine stop you catching it again but antibodies produced by actually catching the disease somehow don't?
What's more, up till now there was a suggestion that the antibodies decrease but this study suggests they don't so the immunity could last for ever."
No i am saying getting antibodies from a vaccine is a lot safer and more reliable than getting them from catching covid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?
Thats not what it says. Its says most people have an immune response that lasts at least 6 months. Immune response is not necessarily the same. Its only a small study on one population. It is potentially good news especially for vaccine development , well it was when it was first published nearly 3 weeks ago.
So you're saying antibodies produced by a vaccine stop you catching it again but antibodies produced by actually catching the disease somehow don't?
What's more, up till now there was a suggestion that the antibodies decrease but this study suggests they don't so the immunity could last for ever.
No i am saying getting antibodies from a vaccine is a lot safer and more reliable than getting them from catching covid."
It may debatable as to whether the vaccine will be safer for young people than the disease itself. However returning to the original point, whether you have the antibodies from the disease or the vaccine, you don't need to follow the rules anymore. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"
It may debatable as to whether the vaccine will be safer for young people than the disease itself. However returning to the original point, whether you have the antibodies from the disease or the vaccine, you don't need to follow the rules anymore."
Explain why? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid."
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled."
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled.
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ"
Lol - the poster you are questioning literally says “some of which we have no idea about, and probably won’t for many years”.... I would also be interested to see the source of this “could be” situation we should be so terrified about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled.
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ
Lol - the poster you are questioning literally says “some of which we have no idea about, and probably won’t for many years”.... I would also be interested to see the source of this “could be” situation we should be so terrified about."
Just google long covid should be enough reputable links and info on it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules.
Well said.
It's not well said at all - it's absolute rubbish.
Do you not agree that if, once you've caught it, you cannot catch it again?
Thats not what it says. Its says most people have an immune response that lasts at least 6 months. Immune response is not necessarily the same. Its only a small study on one population. It is potentially good news especially for vaccine development , well it was when it was first published nearly 3 weeks ago.
So you're saying antibodies produced by a vaccine stop you catching it again but antibodies produced by actually catching the disease somehow don't?
What's more, up till now there was a suggestion that the antibodies decrease but this study suggests they don't so the immunity could last for ever."
**"....So you're saying antibodies produced by a vaccine stop you catching it again but antibodies produced by actually catching the disease somehow don't?...."**
-------------------------
That is true in some cases.
The thing with antibodies is not just developing them, but *how much* of it is developed.
There is a slight difference between vaccine immunity and natural immunity.
With vaccines, antibodies can be created 'synthetically'; so they can be mass produce. A single shot will give the patient enough levels of antibodies to ward off re-infection.
With natural immunity, in some cases, if a patient has mild or no symptoms, they do not develop enough antibodies to a level which can prevent re-infection. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"The government will be squashing this news, the last thing they want is for the people who have had it realising they don't need to follow any of the rules."
You are twisting things more than any politition
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled.
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ
Lol - the poster you are questioning literally says “some of which we have no idea about, and probably won’t for many years”.... I would also be interested to see the source of this “could be” situation we should be so terrified about.
Just google long covid should be enough reputable links and info on it."
I just googled those words, and had a scan through the first few articles it threw up. It seems to me that it’s all self reported symptoms rather than proven. Therefore I’m inclined to dismiss it as evidence thus far. It’s late and I’m going to bed shortly- please feel free to share more conclusive evidence if you have it. Based on the google search you suggested, I’m not that impressed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled.
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ
Lol - the poster you are questioning literally says “some of which we have no idea about, and probably won’t for many years”.... I would also be interested to see the source of this “could be” situation we should be so terrified about.
Just google long covid should be enough reputable links and info on it.
I just googled those words, and had a scan through the first few articles it threw up. It seems to me that it’s all self reported symptoms rather than proven. Therefore I’m inclined to dismiss it as evidence thus far. It’s late and I’m going to bed shortly- please feel free to share more conclusive evidence if you have it. Based on the google search you suggested, I’m not that impressed. "
On the first page on google were british medical journal, the independent, nature,sky news, the guardian, the bbc and an official government article on long covid. There is also the daily mail too. I don't what other sources you would suggest as more reliable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid."
Covid-19 is far more infectious and has worse health outcomes than typically flu has, so your assertion is based on a false premise. Currently our main alternative to the disruption from covid-19 would be vaccination as many would be unhappy with the current measures continuing in the very long term |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
I see what you are saying but what about the heart lung kidney brain damage done by the virus some of which we have no idea of and probably won't for many years, these are mainly effecting young people. No vaccine is going to be as dangerous or have as many side effects as the virus. The other thing from this study is the worse the bout of the virus the stronger the immune response so a mild bout probably won't protect you as a bout that leaves you disabled.
Do you have a source for the data showing heart lung kidney brain damage done by covid19 is effecting mainly the young please?
KJ
Lol - the poster you are questioning literally says “some of which we have no idea about, and probably won’t for many years”.... I would also be interested to see the source of this “could be” situation we should be so terrified about.
Just google long covid should be enough reputable links and info on it.
I just googled those words, and had a scan through the first few articles it threw up. It seems to me that it’s all self reported symptoms rather than proven. Therefore I’m inclined to dismiss it as evidence thus far. It’s late and I’m going to bed shortly- please feel free to share more conclusive evidence if you have it. Based on the google search you suggested, I’m not that impressed.
On the first page on google were british medical journal, the independent, nature,sky news, the guardian, the bbc and an official government article on long covid. There is also the daily mail too. I don't what other sources you would suggest as more reliable."
I didn’t say there weren’t any articles. I said that the results reported in the articles I read were “self reported rather than proven”. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So far we have trialed the disease on 30 million people and the figures show how little the young have to fear from catching it. The vaccine is being trialed on far fewer. I am generally pro vaccination but we don't vaccinate everyone against the flu, we don't need to vaccinate everyone against covid.
Covid-19 is far more infectious and has worse health outcomes than typically flu has, so your assertion is based on a false premise. Currently our main alternative to the disruption from covid-19 would be vaccination as many would be unhappy with the current measures continuing in the very long term "
I'm not saying a vaccine is unnecessary, for the more vulnerable it is the right answer. For the young healthy, it might be safer to wait and see how the vaccinated get on. After all, if the are several vaccines developed around the world, which one do you choose to have? Would you have the Russian one? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
At this point they don’t fully understand the virus and it’s not been around long enough to know enough about the antibodies.
My partners colleague had Covid in January and still tests positive for antibodies now.
It’s worth remembering, those medical professionals who caught Swine Flu during the 2009 pandemic didn’t need to wear PPE afterwards, they had immunity.
Whilst the common cold is also a coronavirus, we don’t get long-term immunity from having it. Maybe that’s because it’s not a particularly strong virus now.
Hopefully with Covid being a strong virus, our immune response will be long-lasting and allow us to get on with life again.
We’ll know more in time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago
hiding from cock pics. |
If the vaccine is likely to to make the effects and symptoms of catching the actual virus less intense, in a similar way to the flu vaccine (as far as I'm aware) then what would be the point of vaccinating the whole population? With flu we only vaccinate the vunerable, I know of course covid is different, but as it won't stop people catching it and spreading it once vaccinated, what would be the point of vaccinating everybody?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If the vaccine is likely to to make the effects and symptoms of catching the actual virus less intense, in a similar way to the flu vaccine (as far as I'm aware) then what would be the point of vaccinating the whole population? With flu we only vaccinate the vunerable, I know of course covid is different, but as it won't stop people catching it and spreading it once vaccinated, what would be the point of vaccinating everybody?
"
When we vaccinate for flu the main idea is to protect the person who is being vaccinated although it does slightly protect society. Flu has many different strains. When deciding on a particular years vaccine they have to try and guess what strains of flu are going to hit. If they get it right you don't catch flu. The covid vaccines purpose would be different. It would be more like the measles vaccine. Yes it would provide some protect for the vaccinated but the main idea would be enough people get a vaccine to provide herd immunity. If enough people are vaccinated even the people who don't or can't have the vaccine are protected. What % are needed to protect from covid no one knows. For polio its around 80% for measles its around 90%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
