Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ms. Toad

(38,666 posts)
22. No it disproves your point.
Thu Jul 23, 2020, 12:27 PM
Jul 2020

You said:

The reports I have seen are that people have tested positive, then negative, then positive again, without symptoms on the first test.

This does NOT mean they had COVID twice - much more likely that the first test was a false positive


From the article I linked to:

Two patients in New Jersey, for instance, appear to have contracted Covid-19 a second time almost two months after fully recovering from their first infection. Daniel Griffin, a physician and researcher at Columbia University in New York, recently described a case of presumed reinfection on the This Week in Virology podcast.

It is possible, but unlikely, that my patient had a single infection that lasted three months. Some Covid-19 patients (now dubbed “long haulers”) do appear to suffer persistent infections and symptoms.

My patient, however, cleared his infection — he had two negative PCR tests after his first infection — and felt healthy for nearly six weeks.


First, it was three patients - not one. One patient is specifically discussed, but two more are identified.

For the patient specifically discussed, the second illnesses came nearly two months after the first.

They actually had significant symptoms (not a false positive test without symptoms)

They tested negative between the first and second illness.

They they had worse symptoms and tested positive again (again, not a false positive test without symptoms)

Following the link in the article would have taken you to this description of the two additional patients referenced:

https://dailyvoice.com/new-jersey/monmouth/news/central-jersey-doctor-reports-patients-reinfected-with-coronavirus/790555/

Ditchek said the first patient had COVID-19 a few months ago, tested negative for months in between, went to a party last weekend, and then tested positive for coronavirus this week. "So that is a reinfection," the doctor said.

. . .

Ditchek said he encountered a second reinfected patient on Wednesday from the same family. This patient had accumulated so many antibodies from his previous COVID-19 infection that he was able to donate plasma to other coronavirus patients two times.

"He'd been negative for seven weeks and sure enough was re-exposed," Ditchek said, and diagnosed positive for COVID-19 this week.


That is not at all the situation you have described. It is the situation you say is not happening.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

The issue is, as it stands 50% who get Covid have no or beachbumbob Jul 2020 #1
thx, I was thinking this when I heard the vaccine shenanigans in the British study where they test uponit7771 Jul 2020 #3
No. denem Jul 2020 #2
CDC says median R0 for CV19 is 6 (link) not three ... does that change anything? tia uponit7771 Jul 2020 #4
R0 is a moving target. denem Jul 2020 #11
Looks like they're were figuring for median Ro vs relative Ro that the median Ro is still sky high.. uponit7771 Jul 2020 #18
Problem is nothing points to any permanent immunity, matter of beachbumbob Jul 2020 #5
+1, this is what I'm seeing too. There are way too many studies showing immunity doesn't last uponit7771 Jul 2020 #7
That is not an established fact Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #8
Not going to debate this as fact been established on beachbumbob Jul 2020 #10
Post link to source - I think you are misremembering Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #13
No. There are people who have recovered, tested negative, become ill again Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #16
That link proves my point- 1 patient, small number of other patients in inconclusive research Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #19
No it disproves your point. Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #22
No, the Spanish study was 60,000 people who were tested for immunity (link) do NOT retain it uponit7771 Jul 2020 #20
I have never heard of a vaccine that is 50% effective- maybe 50/50 chance of effectiveness? Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #6
From AAFP: CDC Releases Interim Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Report (link) looks like its even less ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #12
Glue vaccine is a guess as to yearly strains. mjvpi Jul 2020 #9
Correct. n/t Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #15
I am far more likely to take a COVID 19 vaccine that is 50% effective Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #14
Yes, I'm thinking absolute protection seeing this even a little bit of CV19 becomes horrible to ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #24
I don't know duforsure Jul 2020 #17
It doesn't matter. Jirel Jul 2020 #21
early aids drugs were a cocktail mix to treat the symptoms, not provide immunity beachbumbob Jul 2020 #23
Obviously. You've missed the point. Jirel Jul 2020 #27
Its black and white as far as we know when it comes to transmission, that's an black/white that even uponit7771 Jul 2020 #25
It's anything but black and white. Jirel Jul 2020 #28
50% effectiveness doesn't mean the same no. of people get it but it contains their symptoms halfway gollygee Jul 2020 #49
Is that 50% per capita? It all depends on the per capita. There are many types of per capita. Midnight Writer Jul 2020 #26
I have a rational skepticism of anyone claiming not to be an anti-vaxxer, but using language like Aristus Jul 2020 #29
"... in the past sure it happened... " WTF? That's the point of my statement you can't dismiss what uponit7771 Jul 2020 #30
That's not what I said. Aristus Jul 2020 #31
temp uponit7771 Jul 2020 #32
I disagree 100%, Abbot labs lack of accuracy in CV19 test has most likely not been a net positive uponit7771 Jul 2020 #33
There's going to be a huge potential for miscommunication if a vaccine is developed Aristus Jul 2020 #34
Got it, that's true .. so what would be a safe way to react to a vaccine? uponit7771 Jul 2020 #36
The common cold (rhinovirus) has 160 strains gollygee Jul 2020 #43
I agree gollygee Jul 2020 #35
Not if its absolute immunity, that does no one good with the Case Fatality Rate is so high and the uponit7771 Jul 2020 #38
You were already told that isn't the R0 number gollygee Jul 2020 #40
That's not the median Ro that's a relative one. The median Ro is 6 is from the CDC and not 2.5 uponit7771 Jul 2020 #50
It's R-naught (or zero) and not the letter o gollygee Jul 2020 #53
The CDC says 6 & was done in July after your two articles, its 6 and uponit7771 Jul 2020 #56
Most scientists, including this week, are saying about 2.5 gollygee Jul 2020 #57
I wonder why the CDC declared a 5.7 median Ro then uponit7771 Jul 2020 #61
I looked at your link gollygee Jul 2020 #59
+1 BannonsLiver Jul 2020 #37
...or people who give Trump too much of the benefit of the doubt that he or his pharma cronies ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #39
I'm operating on the belief those engineering the vaccine aren't exclusively Trump cronies BannonsLiver Jul 2020 #41
Not the engineers but the heads of the pharma companies are too involved with Trump admin on some uponit7771 Jul 2020 #47
The scientists working on this vaccine are not Trump cronies gollygee Jul 2020 #42
... Trump doesn't do science or scientist IE the reasons I'm rationally skeptical about anything .. uponit7771 Jul 2020 #44
He isn't working on a vaccine gollygee Jul 2020 #46
True, his pharma cronies are involved in working on one though. It sounds like I'll look for an uponit7771 Jul 2020 #54
They are scientists and not his cronies gollygee Jul 2020 #55
They can be both if its the guy who's associated with opperation warp speed and they sold their uponit7771 Jul 2020 #58
There's pretty much no chance of a vaccine before the election gollygee Jul 2020 #60
👍 uponit7771 Jul 2020 #62
Don't get your hopes up. This is not going to be an easy vaccine. hunter Jul 2020 #45
It wouldn't kill anyone fescuerescue Jul 2020 #48
And it would reduce the transmission rate gollygee Jul 2020 #51
Exactly. fescuerescue Jul 2020 #52
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»QUESTION: Wouldnt any CV1...»Reply #22