Let me fix this for you. “Possible”- in the sense that anything is possible in certain circumstances. “Each reinfection confers no immunity”- a flat out lie and blatant misinformation at best. I’m not finished. This article is just plain wrong and needs to be challenged
To start, the article claims: “As a consequence it is now possible to be reinfected with one of Omicron’s variants every two to three weeks.” This is utterly false. Now, STOP right there. I’m NOT saying it’s not possible to get reinfected within three weeks. I’m saying the use of the word “every” is an issue. This did happen for an unfortunate few with regards to Delta (as we know from studies an infection with Delta alone didn’t provide much immunity to Omicron BUT vaccination on top of a previous infection DID). In other words, this should be deemed
as a RARE occurrence and NOT as a “this is going to happen to everyone so brace yourselves” kind of thing. What we haven’t seen is ANY substantial evidence of reinfection EVERY 2-3 weeks (3 infections within 6 weeks and implication of this being ongoing). Is this possible?
Perhaps. Anything is. But there hasn’t been any substantial evidence of it besides anecdotal evidence and the occasional tweet that can’t really be verified. However, if you are interested in reinfection data and the statistics on it, I would see ONS and https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-reinfection-data
There is absolutely NO data shared in the article to back up their claim on reinfections. Interesting, right? Moving on. “The data also shows that each reinfection confers no immunity. A summer infection, for example, will not protect you against a fall infection.”
Wrong. Just PLAIN WRONG. This one is so wrong it almost hurts. The data shows NO such thing. The data shows a REDUCTION in NEUTRALIZING ANTIBODIES, and thus some immune escape. It DOES NOT show “NO IMMUNITY.” By the way, population level data shows us unequivocally that it DOES
confer immunity. If you have followed me for a while now, you know that I have said numerous times now that immunity is MORE than just neutralizing antibodies. This claim made in this article (with absolutely NO data shared to back it up once again) completely ignores
immunological memory. Now, why would that be? Immunological memory consists of antibodies, memory B-cells, memory CD8+ T-cells, and memory CD4+ T-cells. These responses are what give us enduring protection even against newly emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.
“But each and every infection will damage your immune system regardless of how mild the symptoms.” Questionable at best on current data, but becomes an outright falsehood with the use of the word “will.” That’s a definite and therefore is an issue, especially with no sufficient
data to back up such a claim. They utilize a now “infamous” reinfection study but NO mention in the article of that study being a preprint, meaning NOT yet peer reviewed and the numerous challenges, limitations, and countless issues pointed out by experts made around the study.
Instead, the study is just taken at utter face value. While we are here, and since Twitter is very strange sometimes about QRTs, please be sure to check out these threads that go more in-depth on issues (I only have 14 tweets to a thread) with this article and data to debunk it.
“Meanwhile protection against severe disease has declined as the effectiveness of our vaccines progressively wanes.” WRONG. There is no substantial evidence of protection waning against severe disease. These ARE peer-reviewed. •https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2203965 •https://thelancet.com/journals/lanre
One comes to realize this is clearly a very biased article. The data we DO have has been largely misrepresented to fit the desired narrative and most sections of the article are just pure speculation. It drips with scientific language to appear accurate but is largely WRONG.