1. at the time you said immunity only lasts 3 months... and you misrepresented the limited finding and said it applied to everyone. verdict 100 percent lie by GWBe-lying. 2. you lied about the what the paper / study found. verdict... 100 lies by GWBe- Lying 3. The website never recorded the amount of deaths you stated for that particular day in October... you totally lied. Would you like to bet $10,000 for charity on this? Verdict... GWBe-lying 100 percent lie.
I would suggest that you go back, read the posts, and educate yourself. Time to dispel your ignorance. As a starting point, please tell us what days of the week Sweden reports COVID data on.
people can see you making shit up and lying about the CDC study here. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-masks-plus-some-vague-pc-stuff.351910/page-3
What crawled up the butts of the herd immunity folks that still wish the United States was like Sweden ??? Science did in fact state initially that immunity last 3 months. One particular article by the CDC stated the following... ------- ...People who have tested positive for COVID-19 do not need to quarantine or get tested again for up to 3 months as long as they do not develop symptoms again... These statements could be read as suggesting that those recovering from COVID-19 will likely be safe from reinfection for three months even with close exposure to infected people. Media reports took this as a tacit acknowledgment of immunity from the agency. Friday's CDC statement chided the media for misinterpreting its guidance, which was about retesting, not immunity. ------- The above was stated on August 3rd by the CDC that has since changed (updated). Anyone suggesting that the CDC never stated the above is a LIAR. wrbtrader
Immunity may last on 3 months in those who had mild cases or no symptoms. GWBelying - applied that claim to everyone only had immunity for 3 months. Immunity to the Coronavirus May Last Years, New Data Hint Blood samples from recovered patients suggest a powerful, long-lasting immune response, researchers reported. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html How long might immunity to the coronavirus last? Years, maybe even decades, according to a new study — the most hopeful answer yet to a question that has shadowed plans for widespread vaccination. Eight months after infection, most people who have recovered still have enough immune cells to fend off the virus and prevent illness, the new data show. A slow rate of decline in the short term suggests, happily, that these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time to come.
Regarding immunity outside of antibodes.... GWBe-lying again https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html A study published last week also found that people who have recovered from Covid-19 have powerful and protective killer immune cells even when antibodies are not detectable. ... Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale University, said she was not surprised that the body mounts a long-lasting response because “that’s what is supposed to happen.” Still, she was heartened by the research: “This is exciting news.” A small number of infected people in the new study did not have long-lasting immunity after recovery, perhaps because of differences in the amounts of coronavirus they were exposed to. But vaccines can overcome that individual variability, said Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto. “That will help in focusing the response, so you don’t get the same kind of heterogeneity that you would see in an infected population,” she said.
Yes there are all sorts of articles and numerous studies.... most of the studies plus the re-infections demonstrate that natural immunity only lasts for a period of months in most infected individuals. Let's provide some more information about the recent study with some important points bolded and a link to the study... Coronavirus antibodies decline after infection, study finds, raising questions about herd immunity https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/27/her...tibodies-fall-after-infection-study-says.html Researchers from Imperial College London screened 365,000 people in England over three rounds of testing between June 20 and September 28. Analysis of finger-prick tests carried out at home found that, rather than people building immunity over time, the number of people with antibodies that can fight Covid-19 declined roughly 26% over the study period. The findings suggest that there may be a decline in the level of population immunity in the months following the first wave of the coronavirus epidemic, potentially dashing the hopes of those calling for a controversial herd immunity response strategy. Antibodies against the coronavirus fall as people recover from the disease, according to the findings of a major U.K. study, potentially dealing a blow to those pushing for so-called herd immunity. Researchers from Imperial College London screened 365,000 people in England over three rounds of testing between June 20 and September 28. Analysis of finger-prick tests carried out at home found that, rather than people building immunity over time, the number of people with antibodies that can fight Covid-19 declined roughly 26% over the study period. The REACT-2 study, which has not yet been peer reviewed, found that 6% of those tested had antibodies to the virus when the U.K.’s lockdown measures were relaxed over the summer. However, by the start of the second wave of cases last month, this figure had fallen to 4.4%. “This very large study has shown that the proportion of people with detectable antibodies is falling over time,” said Helen Ward, one of the authors of the study and professor at Imperial College London. “We don’t yet know whether this will leave these people at risk of reinfection with the virus that causes COVID-19, but it is essential that everyone continues to follow guidance to reduce the risk to themselves and others.” What does it mean for herd immunity? The findings suggest that there may be a decline in the level of population immunity in the months following the first wave of the coronavirus epidemic, potentially dashing the hopes of those calling for a controversial herd immunity response strategy. Herd immunity occurs when enough of a population is immune to a disease, making it unlikely to spread and protecting the rest of the community, according to the Mayo Clinic. It can be achieved through natural infection — when enough people are exposed to the disease and develop antibodies against it — and through vaccinations. Health experts estimate that around 70% of the population would need to be vaccinated or have natural antibodies to achieve herd immunity. Some epidemiologists have suggested that aiming for herd immunity would be a better response to the pandemic than lockdown measures. Many others, however, have sharply criticized a strategy that could require vulnerable people to shield at home while the virus spreads through the young and healthy. Earlier this month, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the U.S.’s top infectious disease expert, described calls to let the virus rip through the U.S. population unchecked as “nonsense” and “dangerous.” To date, more than 43.5 million people around the world have contracted the coronavirus, with 1.16 million related deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Implications for reinfection The results of the REACT-2 study showed a downward trend of antibodies in people of all age groups and in all areas of the U.K., but not in health workers. The decline was largest for people aged 75 and above, the study said, while the smallest fall was among those aged between 18 to 24 years old. Researchers found that the decline in prevalent antibodies may initially be rapid, before plateauing. They cautioned that data on this was only now beginning to emerge.
You see that is the difference between someone who tells the truth and a lair. I acknowledge there is are a variety of opinions amoung experts. I think your are article was good for one thing. You see how it shows antibodies have not faded for healthcare workers. Perhaps showing that locking down the low risk and causing their antibodies to be extinguished is a really dumb policy in the absence of a hospital bed shortage.
So moron GWB denied that T Cell immunity could exist for post after post... making all sorts of unfounded statements like the one above... for months. https://www.ibtimes.com/individual-...uld-last-days-decades-scientists-find-3168292 "The presence of T-cell immunity provides hope of longer-term protection which will require more studies and time for epidemiological and clinical evidence to confirm," the author said. and so clicked on the study... Here is the part which not only discusses the concept of t cell immunity... it actually studied it. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00025-2/fulltext For a subset of 23 samples randomly selected from each group at day 180, we tested T cells that were reactive to peptides of S, M, NP, ORF3a, and ORF7/8 proteins to investigate if there was a correlation between T-cell immunity and different antibody kinetics. We made two observations (appendix p 6). First, all patients in each group maintained substantial specific T-cells at 180 days post-symptom onset and the T-cell response was multi-specific, with most donors having T-cells reactive to NP, M, and S. Second, there was no clear difference in T-cell immunity between the groups, consistent with previous findings.
Yeah.. just one study and you are reading it out of context. Once again T-Cell response which reduces the symptoms is not antibody immunity which stops the person from catching & spreading the disease. Two totally difference things. Stop confusing them.