Re: Coronavirus
 

There is no chance of antibodies preventing infection and that applies to any Vaccine. Antibodies play no part in preventing infection of the person vaccinated.

I am sure jonbxx can explain it better than me but here goes.

The immune system is very complicated but has a very good memory, there is no such thing as an antibody per se, antibodies are a combination of T cell, B cells (and others) which fight an infection.

So, if a vaccinated person never gets infected then the immune system plays no part.

However, if a vaccinated person gets infected then the combination of T cells etc are already active and know what to do to fight it. This leads to reduced severity, hospitalisation and death because the immune system doesn't have to remember what worked as the solution is still active. This reduces the reaction time before the bodies defenses go into action, they are already there. This is the reason for the booster shots, they keep the solution the immune system worked out active.

So, if you've digested that then let's take it a little further.

I get infected bya non-vaccinated person so the viral load passed on to me is high.

My immune system is prepared to fight back immediately (it doesn't need to refer back to memory) because I'm fully vaccinated and boosted.

Now even though I'm "protected" my immune system gets overloaded due to the viral load and I start feeling ill or "out of sorts" until my immune system brings in the reinforcements it needs. However I may not realise I have contracted covid due to the symptoms.

Then I go and meet up with Seph for whatever, my viral load should be less than the unvaccinated person who passed (perhaps asyptomatic) to me albeit unknowingly.

Now Seph has caught it form me but the viral load is less so his immune system can deal with it easily and wipes it out quickly in his system and no viral load to transmit because my viral load was much less and Seph's immune system wasn't overwhelmed.

This applies to every single vaccine ever produced. There is not one that prevents infection.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hello!

You are right in that the immune system is horribly complicated and there are still new discoveries being made on the regulation of the immune system...

There are two broad parts of the immune system - the innate and acquired. The innate immune system is you first defence against infection. Once infected, all kinds of signals are produced saying 'something is not right here' and then all hell breaks loose. There will be inflammation and activation of cells which 'eat' microbes and kill virus infected cells. Infected cells will display virus proteins on their surface to mark themselves as infected. The current COVID vaccines produce viral proteins inside cells which are displayed on the cell surface.

Alongside the immediate fight, the acquired immune system will be activated during this process. T cells which recognise the viral proteins will be generated (T cells are the watchmen of the immune system and some have direct cell killing functions) B cells which make antibodies will also be stimulated to find B cells which make good antibodies against the infection (there a mini evolution which happens here)

If you are not vaccinated or previously infected, the innate system kicks in quick (think how quickly you got the typical vaccine side effects, that's your innate immune system kicking off) The acquired immune system takes a little longer to kick in as there is this evolution of finding the best T cells and antibodies. This can take a week to 10 days to really get going. The acquired system is super specific and has the advantage with viral infections of antibodies stopping virus entering cells

After your infection dies down, you will be left with a few antibodies if your blood but will also have T cells and B cells that will recognise the virus and viral infections and will kick in very quickly on a subsequent infection. Bearing in mind that virus needs to go in to cells to reproduce, the only way you can prevent infection is to recognise and stop the virus from getting in to cells. Antibodies which bind parts of the SARS-COV-2 spike protein are very good for this. These neutralising antibodies are like gold dust as they not only help mop up free virus but also stop infection. This was why there was a big panic about variants escaping the vaccines a while back

Re: Coronavirus
 

The next wave is coming folks. Enjoy.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-b2098253.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

Let's have a lock down , dig out those masks,:erm:

Re: Coronavirus
 

:wavey:

Who cares?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pagel is a mathematician I think and doesn't really know a lot about actual medicine.


We all know how well the mathematical modelling in the pandemic has coped so far. Most of the predictions have been far off in the overestimate scale because they have not been adapting for the immunity already in the population and think that infections will just go up and up. An actual medic like JVT explained how it wasn't in the Christmas lectures.



Also, despite the naming similarity indysage is nothing to do with sage really. They've usually just been a group lobbying for more restrictions, more upheaval, more closures and more economic stagnation as a result of wanting to play Knut and stop a virus in its tracks which you can't really do (though you can slow its course down if you need to, it will invariably not significantly alter the outcome). We have communists, professors who did research into turning whole islands into prison communities, etc etc... I actually think Pagel is reasonable in her views, but it is clear she is thinking about things mainly from the perspective of mathematical modelling not actual epidemiology. (She did talk about mitigations indoors, but without using masks - which we all know about - instead other things like improving ventilation, air purifiers etc which will filter the air and try and reduce the amount of viruses etc.)


Endemic viruses fluctuate anyway. We are still in the transitionary period where the virus is moving from a dangerous pandemic agent which can kill easily to one where most of the population has some immunity either from previous infection or from vaccination. Whilst there is significant evidence that the omicron lineage is able to blunt this and break through infections, these are usually milder (even if still unpleasant) and there's plenty of suggestion the virus itself is milder (though no guarantee that there won't be mutations which change this) on this lineage. We are also at the stage where there is no mandatory isolation, no mandatory testing, and no access to free testing unless you are in certain groups, or have stockpiles of LFTs (which will eventually expire) from when they were freely available.



If there is an uptick in cases and other metrics now, it will be because they are fully open, some people will be going out with covid and not knowing it, or caring, or can't afford to isolate. With all respect to CEVs it should now be allowed to ride naturally. People should be suggested to stay home if they could be infectious, as much as they can possibly help it, in general. Employers should support this and allow WFH in those cases if possible and full sick pay if they cannot. But we have to resist calls for any more restrictions whether this is masks, closing businesses, distancing... It doesn't work anyway and even immunity in its present form is likely to wane either due to new variants escaping it or natural waning.


What we do need is vaccines for Omicron lineage as this is still the best way of protecting a load of the population who shouldn't be expected to live the living dead at home. It isn't a pleasant lifestyle and we should protect them as much as possible. When Omicron broke last year the vaccine makers were all saying it was possible. What happened with this, did they stop bothering because everyone found it was milder or is it still happening and just isn't getting the attention?

---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:41 ----------

My view is, in the wake of Partygate (and that KS/AR don't appear to be much better) if this lot decided to impose restrictions, they would be ignored as much as possible.



Sure, they can legally close businesses (or could, under the act they repealed) and force people to stay home (also, they repealed this too). But any of this would now require new legislation to pass Parliament, and would it?


We need to make sure that any mitigations applied are proven effective and proven to have the benefits which outweigh the side effects of doing so.



I for one would resist wearing masks as much as possible if they tried to reintroduce them. Not because I'm unwilling to comply, but that the mask rules in their previous incarnations (though last winter made more sense with them not applying at all in some places or activities where wearing a mask was impractical) were really pointless. Cloth and disposable masks do have an effect but only a minor one in relation to wearing proper masks such as KN95 or FFP2. Popping a scarf over your mouth and nose constituted a face covering, but probably did little to stop you spreading covid. How many people then took the mask off and used it again without throwing it away or washing it? Or left it in a pocket or on a table when not wearing it? All of that potentially could do harm more than good. How much worse is not wearing a mask when you go in tesco or to church or whatever if you keep distance and don't go if you're feeling ill? How much of it is also psychology; a visual sign you're in a pandemic, and to steer clear of people?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Herd immunity this time's a charm.

I hadn't picked up a seasonal virus meant a wave every season.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You say this.


But doesn't the same thing happen, to varying extents, with stomach bugs, colds, flu?


Once you've had the chucks and 10 bobs it doesn't stop you getting it again.


And noro is one of the viruses which mutates a lot, and which natural immunity also wanes quickly.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not every few months for a significant portion of the population, no.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yet the ONS study is showing that pretty much all adult groups over 99% of people have covid antibodies. The lowest is 16-24 but not by much, and school kids (lower down) 94.5 from 8-11 and 95.5. from 12-15, however none of these three groups are at more risk of the virus than older adults provided they don't have any underlying conditions.


The level of infection we are getting now is low, especially serious ones, with the country fully open to pre-pandemic freedoms. But the levels we are getting are more than the 1% - but then they always said omicron was easily capable of getting through some of the vaccine protection. In any case, this isn't how vaccines or antibodies are supposed to work anyway, they aren't 100% preventing infections in people, they just train the immune response.


We need better vaccines to stop it, but do we need them that much? The immunity from the ones we have is still good enough to significantly reduce infections and serious illness. Right now I seem to recall some scientists saying that the best immune protection now is being 3x jabbed and then infected. Whilst we shouldn't practice covid parties (and should still probably stay home if we might have it) being jabbed isn't enough to stop getting it and getting it, whilst unpleasant, is no longer the serious issue it was for a lot of people.


We should probably stop worrying about it, but those who consider still wearing tinfoil hats, should be respected for their views, as should those not.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Both My partner and myself currently have it and are isolating. Thankfully its relatively mild for us both.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I presume you are aware thats no longer an actual requirement ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Still best not to spread an infectious disease to others if you know you have it though isn't it?


WFH if you can, and are well enough to, only shop for essentials (and wear a single use FFP2 in the shop and avoid busy periods, keep away from others), avoid public transport... basically if you have to go out keep away from others.


This is where employers/gov should support people who are ill from infecting others and not losing out financially due to isolating.


There are still people out there who would get seriously ill or die if they get covid, either because they can't get vaccinated or because they have and it doesn't work well enough, so yes this would happen with other viruses too, and we can't lock everyone else away to keep them alive or keep them locked at home, but it's common sense really to minimise contacts if you're ill. You might give a virus to someone who isn't CEV but has an important meeting or interview/appointment in the coming days which they would lose out if they got ill... for example.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Radio adverts from the Welsh Arsembly advise 5 days isolation if you test positive (LFT tests still available here).

---------- Post added at 15:47 ---------- Previous post was at 15:40 ----------

The decision to only publish figures Monday to Friday, then only on Tuesday and Thursday seems to have been shelved due to the slight uptick in cases, hospitalisations and deaths.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm sure they do, however, as noted, its advice, not a requirement.
Staying at home if you are ill is common sense, but there is no need to treat it like the plague anymore, its just another virus now, treat it like you would the Flu.

LFT's are not available (free) in England, as you probably know.