You need to read your own link
Who decides how ill is ill enough to produce enough antibodies for meaningful protection? Would you put your neck on the line to tell somebody with a mild case that they are immune or me who had it bad and tested positive,no because no scientist will do it,yet,studies show some age group,the younger ones produce none or low amounts,it is still up in the air
We just do not know for sure with this virus because The science is not there yet to be sure,do not assume because you had it that you have enough antibodies to protect you,especially whilst there are people getting reinfected,we have only had this virus for three months so your six months just doesn't hold up,every scientist is saying immunity will be not be certain until patients have been tested and retested over the course of a year plus
From your linkThis no-immunity stuff really is scientists protecting their own arses to the ultimate degree.
The chances of those who have been ill or worse (not just a cough and/or fever either) of NOT being immune for a good few months are infinitesimally small. You probably have more chance of getting 5 numbers on the National Lottery (1 in 144,415 before you ask).
As to those who where barely ill or asymptomatic, well that's another story altogether. Many had very few antibodies after recovering.
Read it properlyBeen around for a couple of weeks as I said last week after people I know had been tested at a private clinic in town. Obviously got shot down by the usual Bluemoon professionals but glad it's finally been approved. Like I said testing for IgM and IgG, doctors were pretty confident that by testing positive for the antibodies you will have at least short term immunity.
According to the Chinese they have,prof whitty and others are suitably concerned,we don't know if they are reinfected or is bad collection of samples or dodgy tests but if you say there is no definitive proof of reinvention then I am convinced,i will ring the WHO and put them rightYou say not to assume immunity then assume reinfection. There is no proof that anyone has been reinfected, more likely poor quality testing that has produced an incorrect result when they tested negative.
Hey - I am just getting back involved...Gosh. A misunderstanding between what the Government and Health Boards are responsible for on this thread. Now, if only someone 'in the know' would post a description of the various responsibilities. Wouldn't that be helpful. Oh, sorry they won't because it might get questioned. Carry on in ignorance everyone...
Please stop and read your own links4-6 months depending on the number of antibodies.
The big issue is what happens when your body flushes these antibodies out of your system? Do your antibody factories have the template to make more if required.
Accepted - TBF - I recognise that I was making a wider reply to address the issues and misunderstanding of othersThat's a hell of a long reply considering my post didn't attempt to apportion blame to any single area and you hadn't read the article anyway!
FWIW there seems to have been a collective failure by DHSC, PHE and NHS management to implement the lessons of the simulated pandemic.
Hey - I am just getting back involved...
But, as one of only two consultants - across the UK - commissioned by the (then) DH PS, NHS Board and Cabinet Office to prepare a report for Simon Stevens ahead of his appointment on the processes and practices existing within the Health Sector with regard to the management and reporting of strategic initiatives across all departments that constitute the provision of health service, I feel that I have a valid view...…..
So yes - I have personal experience and awareness of all the governance and management arrangements across the Government/DHSC and NHS - but......
I have to say that I find your comment disappointingly cheap and uncalled for.
I have previously wanted to engage with you - because (previously) you have not appeared to be one of the.......
You have asked me to get involved and provide the insights of my direct experience and qualifications - and when I do - you behave like one of the many dicks on here that make cheap comments....
Excuse me if I just take this response to justify my attitude of the last weeks - of not giving a fuck about the utter bollocks posted and not being bothered any further.....
AKA - do one
We have had outbreaks before (saudi 2012)
Is it as serious as the news is scare mongering or like other virus outbreaks gonna be over not long after it starts.
4-6 months is the normal minimal imminity value for the vast majority of viruses if you get ill and recover.Please stop and read your own links
Seems you have come down from six to four months in two pages
I accept that the way that I have explained things may seem bluntYou are patronising and lack communication skills and emotional intelligence. That is being factual, no offence. :)
You suggest that the DHSC is independent of Govt. Which is incorrect.
Sorry Tim - IMO, you are confusing the hierarchy of accountability with responsibility for strategy and deliveryThe Minister for Health with responsibility for procurement is Philip Dunne
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/minister-of-state--40
No he's not responsible for ordering every box of gloves or aprons but he has policy responsibility for the Government.
Data from NY state which has the highest infection rate in the world suggests that the death rate is around 0.75%. This was based on random sampling for the infection rate and the measured death rate. That’s probably as reliable a figure as we’re going to get at this stage. So to get the real infection rate in any country with a similar demographic to NY, divide the deaths by 0.0075. That suggests 3.5 million infected in the UK, 20 times the measured figure. Thankfully most must be a asymptomatic.but we'll have no idea of a death rate until we have a good idea of those that are and have been infected. Can't work the other way round.
I will stop repeating myself now but your links don't bear out what you say,it is wrong to tell people they are certainly immune and for how long to a new virus when the world's experts will not commit yet, and there is not a test anywhere that is specific enough or cleared for use in individuals ,to base care on,prof whitty said that this week,everyone needs to wait and stick to the rules until such time that your dr is told he can look you in the eye and say you are immune and for how long ,your links explain the variations in antibodies,weak,strong and what protection they give you as an individual,it is being studied by every scientist and none have yet nailed their colours to the mast4-6 months is the normal minimal imminity value for the vast majority of viruses if you get ill and recover.
SARS and MERS antibodies last 2 years+
Data from NY state which has the highest infection rate in the world suggests that the death rate is around 0.75%. This was based on random sampling for the infection rate and the measured death rate. That’s probably as reliable a figure as we’re going to get at this stage. So to get the real infection rate in any country with a similar demographic to NY, divide the deaths by 0.0075. That suggests 3.5 million infected in the UK, 20 times the measured figure. Thankfully most must be a asymptomatic.
Easy tiger. You are simply getting annoyed because I am pointing out the truth. I did ask you to get involved three weeks ago to describe roles and responsibilities between government and health service as a recurring theme on this thread is misunderstanding of them. You agreed. Nothing posted. Then you said you would put your views in a dm to me. Nothing. And here you are tonight pulling people up that they don’t understand these responsibilities. Well forgive me for pointing out what you are doing. You are not interested in debate, just massaging your own ego. And the next time you bemoan the lack of debate on these threads, just think on mate.Hey - I am just getting back involved...
But, as one of only two consultants - across the UK - commissioned by the (then) DH PS, NHS Board and Cabinet Office to prepare a report for Simon Stevens ahead of his appointment on the processes and practices existing within the Health Sector with regard to the management and reporting of strategic initiatives across all departments that constitute the provision of health service, I feel that I have a valid view...…..
So yes - I have personal experience and awareness of all the governance and management arrangements across the Government/DHSC and NHS - but......
I have to say that I find your comment disappointingly cheap and uncalled for.
I have previously wanted to engage with you - because (previously) you have not appeared to be one of the.......
You have asked me to get involved and provide the insights of my direct experience and qualifications - and when I do - you behave like one of the many dicks on here that make cheap comments....
Excuse me if I just take this response to justify my attitude of the last weeks - of not giving a fuck about the utter bollocks posted and not being bothered any further.....
AKA - do one
Sorry Tim - IMO, you are confusing the hierarchy of accountability with responsibility for strategy and delivery
I did think that I had explained the difference - such that your point was clearly dealt with, but please re-read and let me know If I had not done so and I will be happy to expand in more detail