Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is it true if you are infected and then recover that you are immune from being infected again?

max2 said:
The easiest way to catch the virus is on your mobile device most likely sense we bring the device home with us and continue to use it. We put out hands on it constantly even after touching doors, stair handles (at least if you touch them I rarely do unless I am feel like I am going to fall), etc.
Click to expand...

Everything I read keeps saying that the most likely way to catch Covid-19 is through respiratory droplets yet we're constantly being told to wash our hands. Lots of research is being done into the various routes of transmission and they find that even though the virus can live for up to 3 days on some surfaces, it drops in viability not long after it no longer has a human host so it appears that touching infected surfaces isn't the most likely way people are getting sick. [WashingtonPost]

A study done on influenza and transmission on NYC subway trains done in 2011 found that only 4% of the studied cases could be traced back to transmission on the subway even though the subway train was the place that everyone feared the most. [NYTimes]

Regardless of if it's likely that you'll get sick from your phone or not, clean it regularly. It's gross. I'm a part time photographer and after I take people's official photos, they often hand me their phone and ask me to take another one for their own collection. Half the time the phones are N-A-S-T-Y!

I would also keep up the hand washing even if it's a minor way to get the virus. It could very well be that surface transmission is considered a minor route of transmission because people are getting it through direct person to person contact so regularly when we're talking a cold or the flu. In cases like the Coronavirus, it may be that because we're so much more careful with social distancing that surface transmission jumps up as a more likely route of transmission.
 
  • Like
Reactions: compwiz1202 and max2
smirking said:
You do realize that this kind of info isn't like asking Google what the capital of Idaho is, yeah? Just taking the first three results off the top of Google for a topic as difficult as the Coronavirus may not yield dependable results.



Well, could you be so kind as to track down the clinical sources because some of the links you posted aren't known to be very credible sources for this type of information.
[automerge]1584161764[/automerge]
No. You can't get reinfected as stated by the WHO and reported by the South China Morning Post. [South China Morning Post]

It appears like you can get reinfected because you can test positive for the virus weeks after you've recovered, but the test results in a weak positive and they're not able to harvest viable virus from the subjects. [StatNews]

One of the interesting things they're finding is that people who get Covid-19 are extremely contagious immediately before the onset of symptoms or right at the start of symptoms before they start to feel really bad and this might be why it's so hard to control. By the time people are sure they're sick, they've likely infected other people. [StatNews]
Click to expand...

This is not about potential false positives or weak positives this would be more likely about false negatives where the viral load is so low it doesn't register which at best suggests a relapse situation (same infection becoming productive again at a measurable rate). I based my statement on the Osaka case which remains debated but unless the negative found after she tested positive was problematic, she certainly fits the bill of having been infected twice. Let's also not preclude the fact that a virus of this sort can mutate and while some of its components may remain the same it can still be enough to generate an legitimate reaction by the host.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smirking
phrehdd said:
It appears that a few sources are working on vaccines and may have something in the near future. Most interesting seem to be the one coming out of Israel that supposedly turns the virus into (or its symptoms) to something akin to a common cold. As for this particular virus, there is no typical immunity generated from a subject which means it would be possible to get it again and again and more so if variants start to appear.
Click to expand...

True. There are currently four variants of the Coronavirus. No one can say with any authority at this juncture that re-infection is not possible
 
  • Like
Reactions: smirking
HappyDude20 said:
Hearing conflicting reports from different news sources. Some are saying that if you get infected with CoronaVirus and then recover that you are then immune from the virus onward? I’m guessing you can still be a carrier of the virus and infect other ppl as well.

True or not? Seems like if anything someone that gets the corona virus and has a bad month and then recovers can get it again. Clarification is appreciated.
Click to expand...

I don't think your free from anything... The only difference I reckon is we haven't found a cure for this yet..

If someone who has not been tested is/was not aware, then you could. (e.g in situations when you, and others lapse being out of work, then return) o possibly in other large gatherings

I still wonder why its only 500 people in 'large gathering', because 2 or more people is sufficient to infect one another.
 
If you recall HIV was originally found only in primates. After eating by humans, it crossed over and has infected millions of people. It is entirely possible that one of the Coronavirinae crossed over to humans by Zoonotic transmission. In any event, there are over 30,000 genomes and over 95,000 proteins present - it will be a monumental task to determine the specific replication route in humans and what form (s) it will evolve into after transmission from one human host to another - and perhaps combining with existing genomes to create something else entirely. It is a dangerous scenario to be sure and should not be taken lightly. Some people appear to be immune - for now - but remain active transmitters to others who will succumb fatally. It’s entirely possible that young people can be carriers all of their lives only to succumb later in life - and in what form that may end up being - well you would need a crystal ball to answer that. There are just too many variables right now.
 
HappyDude20 said:
Hearing conflicting reports from different news sources. Some are saying that if you get infected with CoronaVirus and then recover that you are then immune from the virus onward? I’m guessing you can still be a carrier of the virus and infect other ppl as well.

True or not? Seems like if anything someone that gets the corona virus and has a bad month and then recovers can get it again. Clarification is appreciated.
Click to expand...

Just think FLU and why there is a yearly flu shot.
 
cmaier said:
As you said, there are conflicting reports. Normally, if you are infected with a viral disease and recover you are protected from that disease, but some viruses mutate over time. As the virus gets more and more different, you are not immune from new varieties (e.g. the flu, which is different nearly every year). Other diseases, like a cold, have many different viral variations, and immunity from one doesn’t render you immune from the rest.

With corona virus, it doesn’t appear to have mutated yet, and the report of someone getting reinfected appears, based on later reports, to have been incorrect.
Click to expand...

I reckon that is correct in terms of conflicting reports.. No one knows, and until there is a unanimous decision, i'll continue to believe you can get re-infected. We all believed at one point stay in isolation for 14 days as when returning from overseas, as 100% fool proof way as well, but look out that turned out.

People that come back have not even tested positive and as a result, let back into the country..,.. following week they closed shop.. for infection..

You can't tell me that is the better..
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
It is probably wise to assume that re-infection is theoretically possible and continue to observe infection control practices even after a confirmed infection.
The test kits have been rapidly developed and appear to (generally) have a slightly error false read rate than more established tests so that would also contribute to confusion. Your body's antibodies will do a good job of rapidly fighting off any closely related viruses it encounters immediately after infection, but this will drop with time and the rate and which the virus mutates in the population.
That being said as the virus mutates it tends to become more mild as the milder it is the greater the chance it spreads as people feel well enough to keep spreading it, so we should expect it to continue to become more mild until it's closer in behaviour to other human coronaviruses. It's the toll it takes on that route.

The discussion about travel is a highly political one as once you have sustained domestic transmission as most countries do have now, stopping a flight from overseas that might have a handful of infected individuals on is fairly irrelevant compared to the numbers occurring within your borders ( and you're just as likely to net export infected individuals so the healthcare burden is probably negligible). New Zealand is one of the few outliers on that rule with no current evidence of domestic transmission so for them quarantine of inbound travellers is a very sensible action.
 
It has already been confirmed that re-infection is not only possible but has already happened to many people in China. It’s a complicated virus - it’s doing what viruses do best - mutate to keep moving forward.
 
Whilst there are a large number of different sources of information out there and interpretations of those, the medical reviews and professional opinions I've seen have generally been a consensus that these are positive retests rather than reinfections. The positive test has always been very shortly after a negative test and suggests that the initial negative test was incorrect or that the second positive test was more sensitive.
But obviously not to say it can't happen or that it should lull anyone who has previously tested positive in to dropping their guard or good hygiene habits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back