3 ms·
Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. So yes, it’s pretty safe to say there won’t be a second w
by gizmo 6y ago
Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. So yes, it’s pretty safe to say there won’t be a second wave of any significance. This was known since Februari and I don’t understand why you would think this disease will be seasonal when it isn’t anything like the seasonal viruses we know that mutate and don’t trigger good immune responses.
(It is seasonal in the sense that the R0 is higher in the winter when people are cooped together, but once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless)
- mynegation 6y ago> Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. Citation, please. Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. > there won’t be a second wave of any significance There will or will not be but certainly not for the reasons you mention. Unlike flu and older coronaviruses, SARS-Cov-2 R_t seems to be driven exclusively by containment measures, not by seasonality, at least not at the present. > once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless We are nowhere near the "sufficient exposure" and it is already the most impactful pandemic in the last 100 years.
- lbeltrame 6y ago> Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. It was T-cell immunity, not humoral immunity like with antibodies. Absence of antibodies != absence of immunity. And here's the citation: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z