News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents hav... by badfrog on Thursday April 23, 2020 @05:39PM (#22961817)
> The closer we get, the better it is. Having 21% "immune" leads to far different outcomes than .1%.

It depends on how long the immunity lasts. If it's permanent, this is indeed great. If it lasts only a few months, this 21% won't make any difference for another wave of infections this fall.

Re:Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents hav... by __blockcipher__ on Thursday April 23, 2020 @06:36PM (#22962361)
We use the term "immunity" but we should remember that there is a difference between the presence of active antibodies and the presence of immune "memory cells". The latter hang around long-term, even if the former disappear. So at a minimum if one does develop infection they will recover far sooner and with better outcomes. And likely will reach a far lower peak viral load which might bring down transmission.
Re:Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents hav... by maxerickson on Thursday April 23, 2020 @07:24PM (#22962795)
That is not well established.

It's likely enough, but we don't gain long term immunity to every virus that we successfully clear.

Re:Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents hav... by __blockcipher__ on Thursday April 23, 2020 @09:29PM (#22963691)
It is well established.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_T_cell

You are conflating active circulating antibodies with the memory T cells. Which is literally what my entire comment was about.

Re:Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents hav... by mlyle on Friday April 24, 2020 @12:05PM (#22969534)
Of course, there's other confounds. Like the somewhat recent discovery that we end up with antigen experience / "memory" of diseases that we've never contracted. (Perhaps from viral fragments in the environment??)