22,698 people recovered in Ireland so far. But how many of them are 100% ok after?

I only know one person who had it. Ended up hospitalised.

3 weeks after being discharged they were still barely able to move off the bed/couch.

'Recovered' is a bit vague I think.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

They got a false negative.

This person wouldn't be on these statistics

stephenjmcd wrote: »

So again theres no confirmation so you don't know therefore can't say it's a false negative.

Get an antibody test so when they become available.

They are available in most travel vaccination clinics

Even if you have had it and 'recovered' that may not be the end of the story.

No one knows the complications this disease can cause.

This is part of the problem. If it was a simple cold or flu no country would be closed up. But it's not and no one knows what the complications are for those you have had it.

The asymptomatic are in a far worse position. It's a question then of dormancy and when it starts to attack the immune system, when it 'activates'. Is it when the person hits 21, 30, 45, 50 or 60? Will it activate at the first sign of weakness - i.e common illness? Is it measured in months or years before activation? Will it activate based on the season?

No one knows.

This is why it so dangerous.

Beasty wrote: »

We don't know how many have had it, so any "recovery" figures are not particularly useful

That's not quite true. We can look at a population of people who we know have had it, and monitor their recovery.

For obvious reasons, the long-tailed consquences of CV-19 aren't known yet. There's a lot of diseases where many sufferers recover quickly; some sufferers recover slowly; and some have long-term or permanent consequences. CV-19 may well turn out to be one of these.

We already know that, even in the acute phase of the disease, different people have different experiences. Some, for example, develop pneumonia while others do not. And it's already the case that pneumonia has a long recovery time, so CV-19 sufferers who develop pneumonia will typically have a longer recovery time than those who do not.

You'd expect that, as a rough rule of thumb, the more severe your condition during the acute phase of the disease, the longer your recover period will be and the more likely you are to have diverse complications and consequences. But in the nature of things it will be some time before a clear picture emerges; you can't study how well people are, say, six months after being diagnosed with CV-19 until you have a population who were diagnosed 6 months ago, which of course we don't.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Even if you have had it and 'recovered' that may not be the end of the story.

No one knows the complications this disease can cause.

This is part of the problem. If it was a simple cold or flu no country would be closed up. But it's not and no one knows what the complications are for those you have had it.

The asymptomatic are in a far worse position. It's a question then of dormancy and when it starts to attack the immune system, when it 'activates' . . .

It doesn't attack the immune system; the immune system attacks it. It is in fact the immune system going into overdrive which is in fact the immediate cause of most of the obvious symptoms. Most asymptomatic cases are likely the result of the immune system attacking the virus successfully at an early stage. Asymptomatic sufferers do not remain infected indefinitely.

The main problem with asymptomatic cases is that, while they are infected, they are infectious, but generally neither they nor anyone around them knows that they are. Most or all cases have an asymptomatic period of a week or so before they develop symptoms; some have a longer asymptomatic period and never develop symptoms. It is the fact that sufferers can be asymptomatic but infectious that makes it very difficult to control the spread of the disease.

Peregrinus wrote: »

It doesn't attack the immune system; the immune system attacks it. It is in fact the immune system going into overdrive which is in fact the immediate cause of most of the obvious symptoms. Most asymptomatic cases are likely the result of the immune system attacking the virus successfully at an early stage. Asymptomatic sufferers do not remain infected indefinitely.

The main problem with asymptomatic cases is that, while they are infected, they are infectious, but generally neither they nor anyone around them knows that they are. Most or all cases have an asymptomatic period of a week or so before they develop symptoms; some have a longer asymptomatic period and never develop symptoms. It is the fact that sufferers can be asymptomatic but infectious that makes it very difficult to control the spread of the disease.

You're just wrong on all of that. And very foolish if you actually believe it.

This is why we are in so much trouble - people thinking they are immunologists and virologists all of a sudden.

What I say is reality - we don't know - and what you say is nonsense. Very annoying. My reality has to be put level with your nonsense in the interest of 'balance'.

It flusters me.

But you're entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to your own 'facts'.

:cool:

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You're just wrong on all of that. And very foolish if you actually believe it.

This is why we are in so much trouble - people thinking they are immunologists and virologists all of a sudden.

What I say is reality - we don't know - and what you say is nonsense. Very annoying. My reality has to be put level with your nonsense in the interest of 'balance'.

It flusters me.

But you're entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to your own 'facts'.

:cool:

It's fact that the immune system attacks the virus, and not the other way around. That's pretty much all the immune system does; attack viruses, microbes, germs that it identifies as "foreign". Seriously, you didn't know that?

So your belief that the virus attacks the immune system is an opinion, but defitnitely not a fact.

Simlarly, your belief that in asymptomatic CV19 cases the virus is latent and awaiting "activation" is an opinion but not a fact; the virus is not latent at all. I think you, or the person who is informing you, may be confusing viral latency and clinical latency.

It's known that the test does throw up false negatives. This is unfortunate, but we are where we are. A test that is only 80% reliable (or whatever) is still more useful than no test at all. You just need to understand its limitations

We don't have a handle on the false negative rate. It partly depends on how carefully the test is administered, but it appears that it also depends on where you are in the cycle of infection. If you are tested very shortly after being exposed (and infected), you may very well get a false negative. But in patients who have been symptomatic for several days before they get tested, the false negative rate seems to be much lower.

On the plus side, the test gives very few false positives. It does give some, but very few. If you test positive, then you can be pretty certain that you do, in fact, have CV19.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Chicken pox can lie dormant and re-surface as shingles.

Aot of people's immune system is good at suppressing the cold sore virus and warts but they too can re-surface.

To tell that poster is just an opinion is absolutely stupid. We do not know how this will affect people in the future.

I was responding to a claim that the established phenomenon of clinically latent (asymptomatic) CV19 arises because the virus is latent.

It doesn't. While viral latency is, as you point out, a real thing, it has nothing to do with the asymptomatic period of CV19. During the asymptomatic period the virus is not latent, but active.

It is possible that SARS-Cov-2 wil manifest viral latency but so far as I know there is as yet no evidence that it does.

I see reports from relatively ‘normal’ people in the US who say that their lung function and lung capacity is severely impaired months later from being discharged from hospital, and then we have that ITV presenters husband who is not the only one left unresponsive in a coma after he was declared covid 19 ‘free’ and ‘recovered’ from the covid.

That and the fact that you can catch it mutiple times and have different or increasingly negative outcomes each time means I will be staying away from crowds and the pub for a while longer even when we officially ‘reopen’ .