Surprise surprise it was in Europe lot earlier than most people thought.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117 ... b++0pubmed&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33176598/
Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy
-
- Permanently Banned
- Reactions: 94
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 10:42 am
-
- Permanently Banned
- Reactions: 94
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 10:42 am
So they will probably have to add further numbers to the death toll.
And in other countries I'm sure.
Fred, what was the result from your antibodies test?
Fred, what was the result from your antibodies test?
-
- Permanently Banned
- Reactions: 94
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 10:42 am
You can guarantee if it was in Europe in September 2019 it was in Cambodia beforehand.
Dylan I had the antibodies.
Dylan I had the antibodies.
Not surprising when Chinese sat images shown busy hospitals before the official outbreak. So when the WHO decided at first a travelban to/from China was not necessary (based on incorrect Chinese data about infection) did China commit an act of biowarfare or bioterrorism? Look at the state of the world now. Many lives are lost and businesses have collapsed. They should be held accountable.
Cut and paste is an art form.
Leaving out this critical detail is not good - see below. As the piece is several months old by now and has not become mainstream we can assume that it is flawed.
For myself I stick with respected experts. To the best of our knowledge the virus came from China even if the Chinese communist party has a problem with that.
The Journal Editor and SAGE Publishing hereby issue an expression of concern for the following article:
Apolone G, Montomoli E, Manenti A et al. Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy. Tumori. Epub ahead of print 11 November 2020. DOI: 10.1177/0300891620974755.
The Editor and SAGE were alerted to a potential issue regarding the peer review carried out for this paper. SAGE and the Editor are investigating the matter.
The Editor and SAGE strive to uphold the very highest standards of publication ethics and are committed to supporting the high standards of integrity of Tumori Journal. Authors, reviewers, editors and interested readers should consult the ethics section of the SAGE website and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website for guidelines on publication ethics. Tumori Journal is a member of COPE.
Leaving out this critical detail is not good - see below. As the piece is several months old by now and has not become mainstream we can assume that it is flawed.
For myself I stick with respected experts. To the best of our knowledge the virus came from China even if the Chinese communist party has a problem with that.
The Journal Editor and SAGE Publishing hereby issue an expression of concern for the following article:
Apolone G, Montomoli E, Manenti A et al. Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy. Tumori. Epub ahead of print 11 November 2020. DOI: 10.1177/0300891620974755.
The Editor and SAGE were alerted to a potential issue regarding the peer review carried out for this paper. SAGE and the Editor are investigating the matter.
The Editor and SAGE strive to uphold the very highest standards of publication ethics and are committed to supporting the high standards of integrity of Tumori Journal. Authors, reviewers, editors and interested readers should consult the ethics section of the SAGE website and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website for guidelines on publication ethics. Tumori Journal is a member of COPE.
One would guess that the Editors are acting on a comment to the article, and so doing their due diligence and probably asking the authors to re-do some of their tests using other technology. It hasn't been retracted, only given an EOC at this stage. This is sometimes the issue with peer review, where articles are sent to reviewers who may not necessarily be "experts" or are peripherally experienced in the area of research. The commentary raises some good points, and they (who are experts) themselves have not dismissed the article, just also raised caution in the interpretation of the results.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117 ... 1621992430
For those who can't be bothered to click.......
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117 ... 1621992430
For those who can't be bothered to click.......
Comments on: “Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy”
Show less
Adalgisa Palermo, Carlo Salvarani, Mario Sarti, Giorgia Boaretto, Laura Manni, Maria Teresa Mascia
To the Editor
We read with interest the study by Apolone et al.1 on the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a healthy population of 959 smokers from all regions of Italy previously enrolled between September 2019 and March 2020 for a cancer screening study in Lombardy.1 The presence of immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 11.6% of individuals through enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method as early as September 2019 (14.2%), with a cluster of positive cases (>30%) in the second week of February 2020. It is therefore clear that the results of this study could play a very important role from an epidemiologic point of view, because they could mean that the virus circulated in Italy well before the detection of the presumed index patient in February 2020.
If it is true that SARS-CoV-2 was already circulating in our regions, it is possible that data of this study are overestimated. Although serologic surveys are valuable tools for understanding public health, they can still suffer from some problems: they are indirect measures of the presence of the infection and do not have complete diagnostic reliability. The gold standard for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is molecular testing.2 In a recently published metanalysis regarding the accuracy of COVID-19 serologic assays, it was estimated that ELISA has a sensitivity for IgM + IgG of 84.3 (75.6 to 90.9 confidence interval [CI]) and specificity of 97.6 % (93.2 to 99.4 CI).3 Nevertheless, in low seroprevalence environments, serologic tests should be interpreted with caution. The authors of this study did not report whether the serologic positivity found was strong or weak. Furthermore, in particular, in this study, IgM antibodies were detected in 97 (10.1%) and IgG in only 16 patients (1.7%).
We retrospectively researched patients with COVID-19 (unpublished data) and documented isolated IgM positivity in the beginning of February 2020 in one patient by receptor-binding domain (RBD)–specific enzyme-linked fluorescent assay (ELFA), not confirmed by chemiluminescence enzyme or chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (IgM assay uses S1-RBD as antigen and IgG assay uses S1 and S2, subunits of the spike protein immunoassay). The patient had a history of pneumonia in February 2020 but did not have other diseases in her history. After 10 months, we performed a new serologic test in this patient and the result was the same: IgM positive in ELFA and negative in CLIA, IgG absent. We concluded this as a nonspecific result and not compatible with COVID-19.
The immunoglobulins detected in this study are almost entirely IgM, which are known to have poor reliability and cross-reactivity with other infections.4 In the work by Apolone et al.,1 the age of the tested subjects is between 55 and 65; they are smokers, and smoking can lead to increased production of rheumatoid factor (RF) immunoglobulin and middle to high level of RF-IgM could lead to false-positive reactivity of SARS-CoV-2 IgM.5,6 As RF binds to the constant parts of IgG, this could cause precipitation of other antibodies present in an immunoassay in an unspecific way. In the literature, positivity of RF is reported in 5% of subjects aged 50 and in 10%–25% in subjects aged 70.7 The problem is important: the presence of RF could interfere with screening tests, so much so that a trial has been started to verify the impact of RF on serologic testing performance for COVID-19 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04407559). The presence of false positivity for the serologic test for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgM and IgG) has also been described in patients with several autoimmune diseases regardless of positivity for RF.8
The results obtained by Apolone et al.1 are important and interesting not only from an epidemiologic point of view; it is possible that in the group of patients studied there may be some patients with COVID-19 and therefore it is important to continue research to verify this with certainty. The study could clear up many doubts about false-positive results and RF. Therefore, it is suggested to repeat the remote test to assess whether the patients remain positive for IgM (as our patient), if the positivity has disappeared, or if it has converted to IgG, and at the same time to check whether the sera are positive for RF-IgM.
The major wrong idea around SARS-COV-2 is, that people assume, it got viral and deadly right from the beginning. Not.
During 2020 and early 2021, we have seen coming up several strains, being more virulent and (probably) more deadly. The UK variant, the South-African variant, the Brazil variant and now potentially the India variant.
We see, Cambodia "managed" to stay Covid-19 free for nearly a year. Yeah, with all the illegal boarder crossings, the people fleeing home-quarantine, etc, so, no. Cambodia (and other "hot" countries without large scale Airco availability&use), do simply not have the natural environment to have an R0 > 1, implying incoming initial infections just die out, without getting noticed.
Now, with the UK variant (40-70% more infectious) having escaped in Cambodia, we see, the R0 gets (much) bigger than 1 and hell breaks loose (especially among people living close together). Not to say, the initial escape was among people who live in Airco bubbles, where the virus can more easily spread and it did, the first 2-3 weeks.
So, back to the OP message: Yep, I think, it's highly likely, the SARS-COV-2 variant was all around the world, much earlier than Dec 2019. We have seen indications for around Sept 2019, where China hospitals were quite busy. The latter may have been caused by a virus mutant which did have an R0 (in that area and natural habitat) of just over 1 (and with some precautions return to just below 1).
And, then the great hit came in Wuhan, where a mutant showed up with an R0 significantly higher than 1. Which mutant got spread out all over the world, simply due to natural people movements around the globe.
And then, we got the UK variant, which also made its escape around the world, now causing havoc for countries which got saved until then.
And, I would not be surprised, when the UK variant spreading in India got its subsequent variant, which is even more virulent and deadly.
So, no "sudden" outbreak, just a gradual increase in virulent characteristic and from there it becomes a pandemic (the moment a lot of deaths are involved).
Doesn't look that difficult for me.
During 2020 and early 2021, we have seen coming up several strains, being more virulent and (probably) more deadly. The UK variant, the South-African variant, the Brazil variant and now potentially the India variant.
We see, Cambodia "managed" to stay Covid-19 free for nearly a year. Yeah, with all the illegal boarder crossings, the people fleeing home-quarantine, etc, so, no. Cambodia (and other "hot" countries without large scale Airco availability&use), do simply not have the natural environment to have an R0 > 1, implying incoming initial infections just die out, without getting noticed.
Now, with the UK variant (40-70% more infectious) having escaped in Cambodia, we see, the R0 gets (much) bigger than 1 and hell breaks loose (especially among people living close together). Not to say, the initial escape was among people who live in Airco bubbles, where the virus can more easily spread and it did, the first 2-3 weeks.
So, back to the OP message: Yep, I think, it's highly likely, the SARS-COV-2 variant was all around the world, much earlier than Dec 2019. We have seen indications for around Sept 2019, where China hospitals were quite busy. The latter may have been caused by a virus mutant which did have an R0 (in that area and natural habitat) of just over 1 (and with some precautions return to just below 1).
And, then the great hit came in Wuhan, where a mutant showed up with an R0 significantly higher than 1. Which mutant got spread out all over the world, simply due to natural people movements around the globe.
And then, we got the UK variant, which also made its escape around the world, now causing havoc for countries which got saved until then.
And, I would not be surprised, when the UK variant spreading in India got its subsequent variant, which is even more virulent and deadly.
So, no "sudden" outbreak, just a gradual increase in virulent characteristic and from there it becomes a pandemic (the moment a lot of deaths are involved).
Doesn't look that difficult for me.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
Honey Cocaine’s Unexpected Cambodian Canadian Life Story
by Bong Burgundy » Tue May 30, 2023 7:27 am » in 'Not' Cambodia - 1 Replies
- 290 Views
-
Last post by Dylan Quint
Tue May 30, 2023 7:39 am
-
-
-
Foreigners banned from entry: Italy, Germany, Spain, France and the United States
by GMJS-440 » Sat Mar 14, 2020 9:16 am » in Cambodia News - 164 Replies
- 25135 Views
-
Last post by v12
Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:29 pm
-