7 ms·

First phrasing makes more sense than the second one to me -- what would it even mean for somebody to be "90% immune" to a disease?

permo-w 6y ago
only your feet get ill
carlmr 6y ago
I would assume something like with the influenza vaccine, where you have immunity to i think around 70% of currently available virus mutations, if the vaccine works.
- usrusr 6y ago
  That's a percentage on a different axis. Influenza is a diverse family of related viruses and strains vary much more than those of SARS-COV-2. No surprise given the very different time since taking foot in humans, and in addition to that (I think, working on weak knowledge here) that influenza is even part of a group of viruses that is prone to create mashup versions of itself when two strains meet in the same host. Think Dangermouse, Grey Album.
  - carlmr 6y ago
    I'm explaining a concept, nothing specific to the flu or covid. I'm just saying how you can have a single person that's 90% immune to something vs. Having 90% of people immune against one strain of a virus.
jyoshi 6y ago
Perhaps its something like "90% percent of the individuals' immune system are successful in quick eliminating covid without any symptoms or adverse reactions". I admit I know very little on how immunity to diseases work, but I imagine that with viruses there is a chance it'll progress to a full blown infection even if you are vaccinated in some cases.
bjarneh 6y ago
> what would it even mean for somebody to be "90% immune" to a disease? Hasn't this virus already mutated to a bunch of different strands? Could it mean you're immune to 90% of the known variations of the virus?
- jefftk 6y ago
  The variations are enough to have differences in infectiousness and to allow us to trace the spread a bit, but as far as we know immunity to any of them is immunity to all of them.
  - kbd 6y ago
    > as far as we know immunity to any of them is immunity to all of them. What are you basing that on, when there are known cases of people getting coronavirus and then still contracting the other strain of it?
    - mulmen 6y ago
      Do you know the reinfection was a different strain? Or did the immunity to the first strain weaken?
      - bipson 6y ago
        Maybe there is a slight semantic misunderstanding here, but in fact a "re-infection" is defined as such: A patient must present a infection and the particular virus must be sequenced, and then present with an infection later on where the virus is again sequenced and identified as sufficiently different from the first sample. Otherwise it cannot be deemed a re-infection. If these small differences in the genomic sequence are already a different strand, I don't know, not an expert. But all 5 (?) cases known so far had a different sequence identified the second time.
      - kbd 6y ago
        https://www.ajmc.com/view/first-case-of-covid-19-reinfection-detected-in-the-us https://www.ajmc.com/view/first-case-of-covid-19-reinfection... > The genomes of the patient’s virus samples from April and June displayed significant genetic differences between them, suggesting that the patient was infected twice by 2 distinct COVID-19 infections. I’d read of known second infections that are from different strains, but scientists also question lasting immunity from COVID-19 infection because other coronaviruses are seasonal.
ubercow13 6y ago
Immunity isn't binary
ajuc 6y ago
In terms of D&D you have +8 to constitution saving throw vs this infection (assuming DC is 10) :)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
OJFord 6y ago
No, it's probabilistic, about the 'amount of protection' from or 'decrease in likelihood' of contracting it, which is why generally people are happy / would have been happy even for a much lower percentage - protecting ~everyone a bit is higher impact than protecting a few people a lot. It's the same as 'herd immunity', where each member is '90% immune' and as a result the herd is 'more immune' than if only 10% of its members were 100% immune.
sambeau 6y ago
It means reduced severity so that people still get ill but you get 90% less people than you would expect hospitalised.

permo-w 6y ago

only your feet get ill

carlmr 6y ago

I would assume something like with the influenza vaccine, where you have immunity to i think around 70% of currently available virus mutations, if the vaccine works.

usrusr 6y ago
That's a percentage on a different axis. Influenza is a diverse family of related viruses and strains vary much more than those of SARS-COV-2. No surprise given the very different time since taking foot in humans, and in addition to that (I think, working on weak knowledge here) that influenza is even part of a group of viruses that is prone to create mashup versions of itself when two strains meet in the same host. Think Dangermouse, Grey Album.
- carlmr 6y ago
  I'm explaining a concept, nothing specific to the flu or covid. I'm just saying how you can have a single person that's 90% immune to something vs. Having 90% of people immune against one strain of a virus.

jyoshi 6y ago

Perhaps its something like "90% percent of the individuals' immune system are successful in quick eliminating covid without any symptoms or adverse reactions". I admit I know very little on how immunity to diseases work, but I imagine that with viruses there is a chance it'll progress to a full blown infection even if you are vaccinated in some cases.

bjarneh 6y ago

> what would it even mean for somebody to be "90% immune" to a disease? Hasn't this virus already mutated to a bunch of different strands? Could it mean you're immune to 90% of the known variations of the virus?

jefftk 6y ago
The variations are enough to have differences in infectiousness and to allow us to trace the spread a bit, but as far as we know immunity to any of them is immunity to all of them.
- kbd 6y ago
  > as far as we know immunity to any of them is immunity to all of them. What are you basing that on, when there are known cases of people getting coronavirus and then still contracting the other strain of it?
  - mulmen 6y ago
    Do you know the reinfection was a different strain? Or did the immunity to the first strain weaken?
    - bipson 6y ago
      Maybe there is a slight semantic misunderstanding here, but in fact a "re-infection" is defined as such: A patient must present a infection and the particular virus must be sequenced, and then present with an infection later on where the virus is again sequenced and identified as sufficiently different from the first sample. Otherwise it cannot be deemed a re-infection. If these small differences in the genomic sequence are already a different strand, I don't know, not an expert. But all 5 (?) cases known so far had a different sequence identified the second time.
    - kbd 6y ago
      https://www.ajmc.com/view/first-case-of-covid-19-reinfection-detected-in-the-us https://www.ajmc.com/view/first-case-of-covid-19-reinfection... > The genomes of the patient’s virus samples from April and June displayed significant genetic differences between them, suggesting that the patient was infected twice by 2 distinct COVID-19 infections. I’d read of known second infections that are from different strains, but scientists also question lasting immunity from COVID-19 infection because other coronaviruses are seasonal.

ubercow13 6y ago

Immunity isn't binary

ajuc 6y ago

In terms of D&D you have +8 to constitution saving throw vs this infection (assuming DC is 10) :)

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

OJFord 6y ago

No, it's probabilistic, about the 'amount of protection' from or 'decrease in likelihood' of contracting it, which is why generally people are happy / would have been happy even for a much lower percentage - protecting ~everyone a bit is higher impact than protecting a few people a lot. It's the same as 'herd immunity', where each member is '90% immune' and as a result the herd is 'more immune' than if only 10% of its members were 100% immune.

sambeau 6y ago

It means reduced severity so that people still get ill but you get 90% less people than you would expect hospitalised.