3 ms·
The current headline (“strongly resistant to past immunity”) is editorialized and not what the research here shows. It’s resistant to donor antibodies, which is
by wk_end 6y ago
The current headline (“strongly resistant to past immunity”) is editorialized and not what the research here shows. It’s resistant to donor antibodies, which is definitely unfortunate and concerning, but there’s more to immunity than just antibodies, and even more to antibodies than just the ones donated. Preliminary research [1] shows that vaccines are still effective, at least, and likely that implies natural immunity is still effective too.
[1] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.426911v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.426911v1
- gewa 6y agoI agree, the headline is definetly not what the research shows. See my other comment on non-neutralizing antibodies. Please change the title to the original one.
- mikem170 6y agoYep. It's an irresponsible headline, like so many others, renewing panic even amongst the crowd here. I hope your comment and others like it are not lost amongst all the others so quick to call for a doubling-down of imposed quarantines and lock downs without regard for collateral damage, based on their partial knowledge of the immune system and lack of perspective.
- hansdieter1337 6y agoThe paper you cited actually states that existing vaccines are less effective: “However, neutralization by 14 of the 17 most potent mAbs tested was reduced or abolished by either K417N, or E484K, or N501Y mutations.”