So last year at the beginning of the lockdowns many of us noted that people exposed to other corona viruses like the approximately 30% that make up the "common cold" would likely have T-Cell cross-reactivity to Covid-19. Therefore; it was a bad idea to depend on the presence of anti-bodies to determine whether someone was currently immune from C-19 and that anti-bodies should not be the be all and end all of "ending the pandemic".
The usual suspects did everything they could to dismiss these notions. I was personally called all manner of bad things for making such an argument. Of course those dismissing this claim could NOT explain why Japan had seen so many people with T-cell responses to C-19 even though they had not been infected. But you know, no need to answer questions when you're "on the right side of history" and not an "anti-vax conspiracy theorist".
Nearly a year later:
Unexposed what?
"In 14/33 (42.4%) unexposed donors and 85/87 (97.7%) COVID-19 convalescent subjects a positive result for at least one SARS-CoV-2 antigen was observed."
More from the full text:
Studies reported highly activated T cells patients who experienced COVID-19 [8, 9, 10] and the documented presence of T-cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 antigens in unexposed subjects raise interesting question about cross-reactivity and cross-protection [11].
Fourteen out of 33 (42.4%) unexposed donors showed a positive T cell response for at least one SARS-CoV-2 peptide pool. Of them 4/14 (28.6%) experienced a proven HCoV infection in the past while no information was available for the other 10 subjects. Seven out of 33 (21.2%) were positive for spike-specific T-cell response, 9/33 (27.3%) showed a positive response T-cell response against nucleoprotein peptide pool, 4/33 (12.2%) were positive for membrane –specific T-cell response and 4/33 (12.2%) for NS8; in 7/33 (21.2%) we observed a positive T-cell response against NS7B peptide pool and 3/33 (9.1%) were positive for whole SARS-CoV-2 lysate.
And:
We observed that SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response was detectable in more than 97% of convalescent COVID-19 positive subjects and in about 40% of unexposed donors sampled before the pandemic period, in agreement with previous observations [13-15]. The data obtained in healthy population could reflect the endemic circulation of common cold coronaviruses (HCoVs), since they account for about 20% of common cold cases and are ubiquitous [16,17]; thus, the possible cross-reactivity between HCoVs might be due to the recognition of conserved epitopes. According to this observation, it could be speculated that SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive T-cell response derived from previous infection with common cold HCoVs might contribute to the understanding of protection mechanisms or COVID-19 disease severity. It is widely known that humoral immune response to coronaviruses is variable and commonly short-lived while coronavirus-specific T-cell response might be more sustained and long-term detectable [6,18].
Despite 40 to 60% of unexposed individuals showed positive SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response, less is known about its relevance in the clinical outcome of COVID-19 infected individual. In keeping with some authors, it could be speculated that the presence of cross-reactive T cells correlates with mild disease [19,20]. [My underlines]
Now those who have been following the blog should have had the underlined portion jump out at them because it was a part of a previous posting:
Our immune system develops typically something like five or six different types of antibodies to protect us from mutations that might happen while we are infected to make sure that even if there is a mutation in one of the epitopes, the targets of the antibodies, if there is a mutation, then there should be other antibodies that still are sufficient to prevent the virus from being replicated and from spreading.
So right then.
So not only were we correct about the cross reactivity due to exposure to other corona viruses but this analysis may support the idea that lockdowns have actually harmed the population by NOT exposing people to other, less lethal viruses that would have conferred a level of immunity, perhaps enough to prevent severe illness.
Not only that but it also provides evidence for the idea that the reason why the Asian countries are not seeing the levels of illness as other countries is NOT because of the masks or general sanitary habits of the people, but that they have been exposed to CVs so frequently that they are largely immune to this particular one.
So once again the MSM (and big tech) have been shown to be wrong. Do you still trust them?
