Two studies: "memory B cells", hyaluronan

[Librarian]

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/10/05/Another-study-suggests-common-cold-protects-some-from-COVID-19/3371601912308/

The common cold can make you miserable, but it might also help protect you against COVID-19, a new study suggests.

The researchers added that people who've had COVID-19 may be immune to it for a long time, possibly even the rest of their lives.

https://www.studyfinds.org/covid-filling-patients-lungs-with-liquid-jelly/

[duenor]

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020...3371601912308/


https://www.studyfinds.org/covid-fil...-liquid-jelly/

I believe Trump was supposedly treated with dexamethasone . It's fair to say that the US has gotten really good at treating COVID19. It's probably the one bright spot that we have in this whole mess - we've really been able to improve the outcomes for COVID19 patients, and IIRC we rank pretty much at the top of the world list when it comes to patient survival. We're awful at controlling it's spread, but at least we are good at keeping people alive.

As for the other article, the sample size is incredibly small. In fact, both articles suffer from very small sample sizes. This doesn't mean we should dismiss either of these proposals, but I'd be interested in hearing more study done into it.

The study authors compared blood samples from 26 people who were recovering from mild to moderate COVID-19 and 21 healthy people whose samples were collected six to 10 years ago, long before they could have been exposed to COVID-19.

[SAN compnerd]

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020...3371601912308/


https://www.studyfinds.org/covid-fil...-liquid-jelly/

Yep, Dr. Scott Atlas made this point about a week ago in a WH presser. He contradicted Dr Redfield who testfied to congress a couple weeks ago that 90% of the population is at risk. Dr. Atlas and some other experts say that's just not true, there is T cell immunity as well as other types of immunity to this virus.

That would explain why only 1/3 of the people on board the cruise ship in Japan who had been on the ship for near a month got the virus. Some are immune.

Of course this gets censored by the tech giants as the only acceptable source of information is the anointed experts spreading disinfo in the new 'science tribe' that doesn't follow science but insists they do. Think AGW where no debate is allowed any longer.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/09/14/youtube-censors-video-of-trump-coronavirus-adviser-for-contradicting-w-h-o/

Here's an exchange from the WH presser:

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/23/s...bert-redfield/

[SAN compnerd]

I believe Trump was supposedly treated with dexamethasone . It's fair to say that the US has gotten really good at treating COVID19. It's probably the one bright spot that we have in this whole mess - we've really been able to improve the outcomes for COVID19 patients, and IIRC we rank pretty much at the top of the world list when it comes to patient survival. We're awful at controlling it's spread, but at least we are good at keeping people alive.

As for the other article, the sample size is incredibly small. In fact, both articles suffer from very small sample sizes. This doesn't mean we should dismiss either of these proposals, but I'd be interested in hearing more study done into it.

Can you cite specific countries that have done a better job and what exactly they did to control the spread better than we did?

I'd like to see data on the specific actions taken elsewhere that gives some source of proof that we could have acted differently and prevented some of the spread.

Of course one cannot overlook the elephant in the room of 25 million Americans taking to the streets in the middle of the worst global pandemic in history while the members of the 'science tribe' told the public that the risk of black genocide by police was worse than the risk of catching the Wuflu and therefor justified to protest and riot and not isolate and try to stop the spread.

Give me something concrete here.

[balgor]

And then there's a nature paper, that suggests cross reactive T-cell immunity is rare:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18450-4

The only correct answer is: "We do not know whether cross reactive T-cell immunity is A) protective or B) common."

[elSquid]

And then there's a nature paper, that suggests cross reactive T-cell immunity is rare:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18450-4

Gave it a skim, seems antibody focused, with very minimal discussion of t cells.

What am I missing?

-- Michael

[HibikiR]

The cells that make antibodies (B-cells) do not act unless given orders by T-helper cells. That's how HIV F's you up by taking out the T-helper cell.

[elSquid]

The cells that make antibodies (B-cells) do not act unless given orders by T-helper cells. That's how HIV F's you up by taking out the T-helper cell.

That's fine, but I thought that one of the points being made by the Swedes and others was that they were seeing a T cell response in a noticeable number of actual sar-cov2 cases with no detectable antibodies. ( Basically, these were the asymptomatic cases IIRC )

So absence of antibodies does not necessarily imply no ( or very rare ) reaction by T-cells to an infection...?

As far as cross reactive T-cell immunity goes, I read a little while ago...

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563

: shrug :

-- Michael

[balgor]

Gave it a skim, seems antibody focused, with very minimal discussion of t cells.

What am I missing?

-- Michael

There's a whole section, but it's kinda buried in a long paper:
Cross-reactivity and antigenic diversity

[balgor]

That's fine, but I thought that one of the points being made by the Swedes and others was that they were seeing a T cell response in a noticeable number of actual sar-cov2 cases with no detectable antibodies. ( Basically, these were the asymptomatic cases IIRC )

So absence of antibodies does not necessarily imply no ( or very rare ) reaction by T-cells to an infection...?

As far as cross reactive T-cell immunity goes, I read a little while ago...

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563

: shrug :

-- Michael

There's definitely cross reactivity, but is it protective??? and how common is it??? No one knows right now. I think we'll have a vaccine before this question is answered, T-cell assays are much harder than antibody assays.

[HibikiR]

That's fine, but I thought that one of the points being made by the Swedes and others was that they were seeing a T cell response in a noticeable number of actual sar-cov2 cases with no detectable antibodies. ( Basically, these were the asymptomatic cases IIRC )

There's always the most basic answer: you might not be understanding what the Swedes were trying to say. Misinterpreting the reports is one of many possible explanations.

Just post the link to Swede article(s) and we can see if it has anything to do with the other links.

[elSquid]

That's fine, but I thought that one of the points being made by the Swedes and others was that they were seeing a T cell response in a noticeable number of actual sar-cov2 cases with no detectable antibodies. ( Basically, these were the asymptomatic cases IIRC )

There's always the most basic answer: you might not be understanding what the Swedes were trying to say. Misinterpreting the reports is one of many possible explanations.

Just post the link to Swede article(s) and we can see if it has anything to do with the other links.

https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covid...sts-have-shown

The article in Cell:

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31008-4

-- Michael

[HibikiR]

Our study was cross-sectional in nature and limited in terms of clinical follow-up and overall donor numbers in each outcome-defined group. It therefore remains to be determined whether robust memory T cell responses in the absence of detectable circulating antibodies can protect against severe forms of COVID-19.

1) As a cross-sectional study (If a randomized controlled trial is #1 in evidence strength then cross-sectional is a lowly #5*) it can only provide motivation for further study rather than evidence to guide medical decisions.
2) There is evidence of cross-reactivity, but that's not surprising really since cross-reactivity has been in medical science for centuries. The trick is finding a good cross-reactive virus candidate that's not MERS or SARS1.0.
3) CD8 T-cells need to be activated just like CD4 T-cells, so some kind of exposure and adaptation must happen before you run across COVID-19. You can't assume your CD8 cells have gone through this anymore than you can assume a gun is not loaded.
4) The biggest takeaway is that there's enough going on in that paper to support efforts to produce a vaccine. Cross-reactivity was the basis for the first vaccines against small-pox, and the word vaccine is derived from "vaca", which is in reference to cow-pox.

*If a Systematic Review is #1 then cross-sectional drops to #6.