3 ms·

There's no sterilising immunity. That's a gross oversimplification of the incredibly complex thing that the immune system is. Immune response isn't linear. Lik

by fer 5y ago

There's no sterilising immunity. That's a gross oversimplification of the incredibly complex thing that the immune system is. Immune response isn't linear. Likewise, viral reproduction isn't linear. They're not even constant within the same tissue. So whatever happens will depend on the virus, on the viral load, where it appears, and previous type and kind of immunity, and the speed of that immune response. Fun fact: the overwhelming majority of HIV exposures don't result in infection, but one would be stupid to claim that most people have "sterilising immunity" to HIV. It simply can't target most cells and dies off in the mucous membranes.

walterbell 5y ago
Let's look at the latest UK data, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041447/Weekly_Flu_and_COVID-19_report_w50.pdf#page18 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... > To the end of week 43 in 2021 (to 31 October 2021) 72,264 possible reinfections have been identified, of which 441 have been confirmed by identification of genetically distinct specimens. That is from a total of 7.9 million positive cases, i.e. reinfection rate is ~0.01% to 1%. That means at least 99% of Covid-recovered people in the UK were not reinfected. Some textbooks from recent decades may call that "sterilizing immunity". Note that some words have been redefined by government agencies since 2020, including the term "vaccine" (definition updated by the CDC as recently as Sept. 2021). At this point, usage of some evolving and contested terms should be accompanied by a version number, date and changeset hash. Regardless of terminology, the UK numbers show a 1% chance of reinfection upon exposure. If someone takes precautions to reduce their exposure to infected people (e.g. people with symptoms / positive test, or a crowded indoor space with poor ventilation), then the risk of reinfection will be a small number X 1%.
- fer 5y ago
  I think you're not looking at the numbers the way I do. 1. The closest to reality is probably the 70k figure, since the requirements for probable and confirmed are held to unusually high standards (sequencing of one or both samples). 2. The numbers have to be adjusted by date to make sense of them. That's a cumulative analysis of data since the beginning of the pandemic, meaning first infections are overrepresented because you have to have a first to have a second, and because most first infections require uninfected people and there are way more of those. 3. Page 20 shows reinfection rate was climbing along with first infections before widespread vaccination, and also that reinfection rate is receding as first infections climb lately. Statistically it's expected to grow as the previously infected population grows. This, if anything, displays that vaccination in previously infected individuals is effective at preventing reinfection.
  - walterbell 5y ago
    Based on the latest report, what is your estimate for the % of UK people who have been reinfected?

by fer 5y ago

walterbell 5y ago

Let's look at the latest UK data, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041447/Weekly_Flu_and_COVID-19_report_w50.pdf#page18 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... > To the end of week 43 in 2021 (to 31 October 2021) 72,264 possible reinfections have been identified, of which 441 have been confirmed by identification of genetically distinct specimens. That is from a total of 7.9 million positive cases, i.e. reinfection rate is ~0.01% to 1%. That means at least 99% of Covid-recovered people in the UK were not reinfected. Some textbooks from recent decades may call that "sterilizing immunity". Note that some words have been redefined by government agencies since 2020, including the term "vaccine" (definition updated by the CDC as recently as Sept. 2021). At this point, usage of some evolving and contested terms should be accompanied by a version number, date and changeset hash. Regardless of terminology, the UK numbers show a 1% chance of reinfection upon exposure. If someone takes precautions to reduce their exposure to infected people (e.g. people with symptoms / positive test, or a crowded indoor space with poor ventilation), then the risk of reinfection will be a small number X 1%.

fer 5y ago
I think you're not looking at the numbers the way I do. 1. The closest to reality is probably the 70k figure, since the requirements for probable and confirmed are held to unusually high standards (sequencing of one or both samples). 2. The numbers have to be adjusted by date to make sense of them. That's a cumulative analysis of data since the beginning of the pandemic, meaning first infections are overrepresented because you have to have a first to have a second, and because most first infections require uninfected people and there are way more of those. 3. Page 20 shows reinfection rate was climbing along with first infections before widespread vaccination, and also that reinfection rate is receding as first infections climb lately. Statistically it's expected to grow as the previously infected population grows. This, if anything, displays that vaccination in previously infected individuals is effective at preventing reinfection.
- walterbell 5y ago
  Based on the latest report, what is your estimate for the % of UK people who have been reinfected?