Ok, I am having trouble reconciling their abstract and their data - could someone double check? They claim "memory antibodies selected over time by natural infection have greater potency ... than antibodies elicited by vaccination."
But then they say:
But then they say:
https://twitter.com/ydeigin/status/1423522718599811073
"memory antibodies obtained from convalescent individuals showed improved neutralizing activity between 1.33 and 6.2 months with IC50 of 171 ng/ml to 116 ng/ml (Fig. 3f)"
BUT
BUT
The vaccine-generated neutralizing titers are as follows:
"There was no further improvement in neutralizing activity of the monoclonal antibodies obtained between 2 and 5 months after vaccination (IC50 140 vs. 144 ng/ml, Fig. 3f)."
"There was no further improvement in neutralizing activity of the monoclonal antibodies obtained between 2 and 5 months after vaccination (IC50 140 vs. 144 ng/ml, Fig. 3f)."
So the vaxx and natural numbers are essentially a wash as seen in Fig 3f (attached), so why such a strong statement in the abstract (beyond which no antivaxxer is ever going to read)?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
