4 ms·
For the lazy (cited 556 times as of now): https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30610-3.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30610-3.pdf
by krona 6y ago
For the lazy (cited 556 times as of now): https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30610-3.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30610-3.pdf
- wbl 6y agoThat paper looks at 40 people and has no idea what the clinical correlates of the non-spike responses are because no one has any idea. You cannot take that paper and say that a substantial factor of people are protected due to preexisting responses.
- lbeltrame 6y agoThere's at least another paper detailing this phenomenon[1] so for sure it warrants further investigation. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x