advertisement


Anyone had a COVID-19 antibody test?

A friend tested negative, having been pretty certain he'd had it.

Hasn't it been established that the antibodies last only a couple of months? Which isn't to say that immunity doesn't last longer.
 
gintonic said:
I've had flu despite being vaccinated. happened in 2010, got vacced in autumn 2009, got flu in jan 2010
Click to expand...
I think the flu vaccine is only good for something like 75% of flu viruses. As I understand it, it’s based on the previous Winter’s viruses so can never be 100% as the viruses are changing/new.

Mick
 
Just about everyone I know thinks they have had it. Oddly no-one I know has ever been to hospital with it.
 
Wolfmancatsup said:
I think the flu vaccine is only good for something like 75% of flu viruses. As I understand it, it’s based on the previous Winter’s viruses so can never be 100% as the viruses are changing/new.

Mick
Click to expand...


I know, my data science group has datasets for influenza and vaccination going back decades
 
Wolfmancatsup said:
As above. I was sent a test kit as part of a random survey by Imperial College & Ipsos MORI. Sadly, despite having a really strange cold/flu thing in March, my test came out negative, although the accompanying paperwork did say the test wasn’t 100% accurate.

Mick
Click to expand...
My club st Mirren had 7 positive covid tests. They all received another test only one was positive for the second test. Me thinks these tests are unreliable.
 
I.D.C. said:
Me thinks these tests are unreliable.
Click to expand...

they might not be 100% accurate, but swabbing can be hit and miss as well. Those with low viral loads, may have swabs with insufficient viral matter on them for an accurate outcome.

Also the swabbing methodology may fail to pick up virus, especially where self swabbing is concerned
 
I’m 99.9% certain I’ve had it. My Docs surgery won’t even do any tests, saying that results are inaccurate.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Mrs P-T is having one on Friday. We tested positive for Covid in April, and she had a work-related antibody test a few weeks later (positive) and is now having another to see whether her antibody levels are still high enough to donate plasma for the NHS trials. It’ll be interesting to see what levels of antibodies have persisted 3 months down the line.
Click to expand...
Put me down for a pint.
 
I had the throat/ nasal swab a few days ago as a condition of entry to another country and got the result texted 10 hours later (negative).
In early March I had the only symptoms I can think of causing suspicion (loss of appetite, fever, very marked muscle aches for 48hrs) but in a country with allegedly no cases. I put that down to food poisoning and it’ll be interesting to see the result of antibody testing I I get tested ( I’ve volunteered for government supported vaccine trials).
 
At least 20,000 died (both males and females) from the flu in the winter of 99/00 in the UK.

There has been a vaccine for the flu since the 1940's.
 
Wolfmancatsup said:
I think the flu vaccine is only good for something like 75% of flu viruses. As I understand it, it’s based on the previous Winter’s viruses so can never be 100% as the viruses are changing/new.

Mick
Click to expand...

The flu vaccine is based on the strains circulating in the southern hemisphere (their winter). The vaccine can be targeted at two or three strains and due to the cost implication the two most prevalent strains are usually targeted. (blame the governments) (all of them).

In the same way some think all 60 million of our population will be vaccinated for Covid 19, more likely just the 'at risk' categories, as with the flu vaccine.
 
Seanm said:
A friend tested negative, having been pretty certain he'd had it.

Hasn't it been established that the antibodies last only a couple of months? Which isn't to say that immunity doesn't last longer.
Click to expand...

o_O I thought immunity was based on having antibodies but maybe I'm out of date. How can you be immune without them?
 
hc25036 said:
This. Best immunity is having circulating antibodies, but I heard a nice description from a leading virologist describing this cell-based immunity as having a ‘virus memory’ which offers some immediate immunity but also enables the antibody response to ramp up more quickly.
Click to expand...
Having had Covid, my assumptions are somewhat different to Cheese. I am not relying on immunity, though I have assumed some immunity for the months immediately following infection. But I am assuming that any reinfection is highly likely to be less severe than the first time, and almost certainly no worse. Partly because of the presumption of T cells, so my immune system should respond more effectively more quickly next time, but also because I know how my body responded the first time. There was no damaging cytokine storm, or overreaction, so it seems logical that any reinfection with a now familiar agent would not elicit a more severe reaction than the first time.

I do accept that some would prefer to adopt the precautionary principle. For me, however, the reduction in worry and stress makes my approach infinitely to be preferred, and I think it is a reasonable one, not merely whistling in the dark.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Having had Covid, my assumptions are somewhat different to Cheese. I am not relying on immunity, though I have assumed some immunity for the months immediately following infection. But I am assuming that any reinfection is highly likely to be less severe than the first time, and almost certainly no worse. Partly because of the presumption of T cells, so my immune system should respond more effectively more quickly next time, but also because I know how my body responded the first time. There was no damaging cytokine storm, or overreaction, so it seems logical that any reinfection with a now familiar agent would not elicit a more severe reaction than the first time.

I do accept that some would prefer to adopt the precautionary principle. For me, however, the reduction in worry and stress makes my approach infinitely to be preferred, and I think it is a reasonable one, not merely whistling in the dark.
Click to expand...

Viral load! Not trying to be a killjoy, but do consider it in your risk assessment.
 
‘Highly likely’ is the key phrase here, but the risk:benefit ratio should be much more in your favour compared to if you hadn’t already had COVID-19!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top