Imperial College Fingerprick test

Should add that neither of us has ever felt that we’ve had anything like COVID, nor been knowingly exposed to anyone who’s had it, so presumably the antibodies came from the vaccine.

As part of ongoing ONS tests, we recently did a finger prick test as well as the usual nose/throat dittos.

Results (by later letter) said that we were both positive for antibodies. However this was several weeks after we’d both had the 2nd AZ jab, which might make a difference.

Thanks everyone. I feel much more comfortable now I have had the two vaccines and trying not to read too much about the new variants and the effectiveness of the AZ vaccine with these new ones!

It doesn't matter. Both my friend and myself had no antibodies. I'm sure it said something in the instructions.

Esspee

Manhattan
Do you feel that if this is the case, i.e. that we have weathered this virus before (presumably under the “flu” banner) that this world reaction, or should I say overreaction? is unwarranted?

It would depend how many millions of people you could tolerate dying.

Thank you for that article Manhattan. It has been added to my copy and save file, along with a numbe of others.

The lesson I learn from it, is that no theory, no idea should be taken to excess. In human terms, most people love cream cakes. An occasional cream cake is fine and dandy and enjoyable. Eat too many and you grow fat and unhealthy.

There is one thing the author said that I would add to. Discussing the Lab-escape theory of corona virus he says:

Could a world full of scientists do all kinds of reckless recombinant things with viral diseases for many years and successfully avoid a serious outbreak? The hypothesis was that, yes, it was doable. The risk was worth taking. There would be no pandemic.

I would add that the Chernobyl nuclear accident was also caused by scientists thinking they could do reckless experiments and avoid a serious nuclear event. The hypothesis was that, yes, it was doable. The risk was worth taking. There would be no nuclear meltdown.

Bears thinking about.

I did a similar test and the instructions made it absolutely clear that no antibody line was nothing to worry about.

My test produced a barely visible line, so faint, it was very difficult to see, unless I looked at it ia a very good light, can't say this bothered me at all. I have had my jabs and I assume they worked because the 'failure' rate, if any is infinitely small.

Manhattan
Do you feel that if this is the case, i.e. that we have weathered this virus before (presumably under the “flu” banner) that this world reaction, or should I say overreaction? is unwarranted?

Great link Manhattan thanks

Yes, Esspee, it does. That seems to be the main thrust of the BMJ article, that this may not a novel coronavirus after all. It'll be very interesting to see what comes of the lab-leak investigations.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/01/wuhan-coronavirus-lab-leak-covid-virus-origins-china

Manhattan
To me that implies that the people showing T cell reactivity must have, in the past, had contact with a similar virus.
Not that they were born with natural immunity.
Am I reading that correctly?

Manhattan To me that implies that the people who showed T cell reactivity must have contracted some similar virus previously. Have I got that right?
It doesn't mean some of us are born with inbuilt immunity.

Esspee

Babs758

Thanks! Both very good explanations. The fortress test I took checks for M ie natural immunity (I apparently don’t have any) but not for the spike results due to the vaccine. The article on T cells is quite reassuring. Thanks both!

I can’t see how any of us can have natural immunity unless we have been exposed to the virus. It is a completely new virus after all.
You don’t need to worry.

From Peter Doshi associate editor of the BMJ:

Not so novel coronavirus:

At least six studies have reported T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 in 20% to 50% of people with no known exposure to the virus.

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

I've jst seen a mistake in my post. Instead of "If you have been ISOLATED, you will have developed antibodies but . . " I should have put "If you have been VACCINATED . . " I hope it still made sense?

That is very useful. Thanks!

If you have been isolated for a year, you will not have come into contact with the virus, so will not have developed natural immunity! Natural is the keyword here. If you have been isolated, you will have developed antibodies, but not as many as if you had caught the virus and had to fight against it.

I took a BioBank rapid Test (they are constructing a database of who has antibodies and who hasn't) I was disappointed to find that the result was negative, after both jabs, but it was explained that there would be enough antibodies stimulated by the vaccine to fight off the virus (or to weaken it at least) but they might not come up to the level that they were testing for. I think my negative result will be in the database, but marked as being after vaccine.

Babs758

Thanks! Both very good explanations. The fortress test I took checks for M ie natural immunity (I apparently don’t have any) but not for the spike results due to the vaccine. The article on T cells is quite reassuring. Thanks both!

I can’t see how any of us can have natural immunity unless we have been exposed to the virus. It is a completely new virus after all.
You don’t need to worry.

Yes it is!

GN is amazing !

Sounds like good news Babs, very reassuring.

Thanks! Both very good explanations. The fortress test I took checks for M ie natural immunity (I apparently don’t have any) but not for the spike results due to the vaccine. The article on T cells is quite reassuring. Thanks both!

After the initial immune response to a vaccine, antibodies will gradually disappear but the Memory B cells created remain. As the name suggests, it is these cells which remember the antigen and trigger an immune response to future infection. A good explanation here:

www.mydr.com.au/travel-health/vaccination-and-antibodies/

Here it is:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE47JhlV39g

Its right at the start of the video. I don't know if this is valid or not but it seems pretty sensible and he's usually right about things.

That’s not an explanation btw?. Just me burbling.

T-cells are more important apparently.