Hacker News Reader

Comment by capableweb | Hacker News Reader

Sounds like the only misleading happening here was peoples understanding of how science works. Just because something is not confirmed doesn't mean it's not true.

Tweet reportedly said:

> There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from #COVID19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

How can they then write that the tweet is misleading? Bloomberg News et al that reported "WHO Warns You May Catch Coronavirus More Than Once" and similar should be the ones shamed for misinformation here, not WHO.

View on HN

It's not misleading but the problem is the policy adopted by most countries (and the message coveyed to people) is that having the infection can convey immunity.

The real question should be why are countries taking economic and what will ultimately be life destroying policy measures when there's no evidence that those policies will lead to the desired results of herd immunity and often are specifically against the advice of the WHO.

The WHO specifically recommends against travel bans, but nearly every country has implemented one. They specifically state the negative social and economic impact of such bans and how they do not work to prevent the spread.

https://www.who.int/news-room/articles-detail/updated-who-re...

I'm not sure about other countries but policy and public perception in the US seem to be largely based on TV doctors and armchair statistics majors instead of the advice of the WHO.

It is misleading because basically every virus ever has produced some degree of immunity to reinfection.

And because saying "there is no evidence that.." is often a weazelish way that doctors with unproven prior beliefs push their personal theories.

WHO should say "there is no strong evidence either way, however based on our understanding of similar viruses there is likely to be at least some residual immunity post infection."

Tedros has apparently been on a hiring spree focused more on "representation and diversity" than competence and experience: https://www.politico.eu/article/tedros-adhanom-ghebreyesus-g...

And it's likely that the world is now paying the price for overemphasis on wokeness as well as pandering to the corrupt ccp.

It's misleading because there is no evidence either way. It's just not been studied yet (in humans, at least -- it's been studied in other animals).

Pretty much everyone equates "there's no evidence for X" to "X is wrong" in their mind. Maybe they are committing a logical fallacy, but the point of WHO's tweets is to provide accurate information to people. They can't just say "well, what we said is technically correct, so it's people's fault for not understanding!"

A responsible way of conveying the same information would be "Whether people who have recovered from the virus are protected from a second infection is currently unknown". This way it doesn't seem to take a stance either way.

I was under the (possibly mistaken) impression that having antibodies for a virus does in fact protect you from the virus. Like it's baked into the definition of "antibody". That's why it sounds a bit misleading to me.

But I have Biology 101 level of knowledge, so I'm curious to learn why it's not misleading.

It will protect for the exact strain of the virus and similar strains for some time. Probably the reports that people is reinfected a few weeks after they get cured are wrong. It is not clear how long will last the immunity.

For example the vaccine against tetanus must be taken again every 10 years, other vaccines protect you forever.

So yeah, the tweet is misleading..?

Disclaimer: I'm not a virologist and not even a medical doctor.

From a previous thread, I remember that someone said that with other coronavirus the protection last a few months. Let's hope that this strain produces a longer immunity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com