The claim by President Donald Trump on Twitter that he is now “immune” to Covid-19 having survived an initial infection has sparked a new wave of controversy.
“A total and complete sign off from White House Doctors yesterday”, he announced to his 87 million followers on Sunday afternoon. “That means I can’t get it (immune), and can’t give it. Very nice to know!!!”
——Advertisement starts here ——
NRIForShaadi.com World’s #1 App for NRI Matrimony. Thousands of members near your GPS Location. Download from NRIApps.com ———Advertisement ends here ———
The social media channel quickly moved to mute the Mr Trump’s message, saying it had violated its rules about “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to Covid-19”, while experts labelled his claims presumptuous.
The president’s supporters, meanwhile, cheered their hero for being “unstoppable” and attacked Twitter for “hypocritical censoring”.
“Please reschedule your rally in Tucson!!!”, one user urged the president.
So who’s right? Is it safe to assume that having contracted the virus once you won’t catch it again, or are Twitter and others right to flag such claims as potentially harmful?
The answer, like so much with Covid, falls unhelpfully into a grey area characterised by ongoing uncertainty.
“Studying immunity and reinfection is incredibly difficult,” says Dr Al Edwards, from the University of Reading’s school of pharmacy. “So it shouldn’t be a surprise that we don’t have clear cut, conclusive answers to these questions – and we might not for some time.”
Most immunologists say it is reasonable to assume a level of immunity once an individual has recovered from the virus. But the science is not clear on the power of that immunity (will it stave off infection altogether or just lessen symptoms?), or crucially, how long it might last.
Immunity to most other coronaviruses – including those that cause the common cold – fade relatively fast, often giving protection that lasts less than a year. Evidence to date suggests Covid-19 will be similar.
Research at King’s College London showed antibodies fading after only three weeks, with a “potent” antibody response detected in just 17 per cent of participants three months later.
T-cells may provide a degree of more lasting protection – they have been found in Sars patients 17 years after they contracted the disease – but it is not yet clear how much protection they provide.
There are also B-cells, which are responsible for making the antibodies themselves. These have been found in people up to nine decades after the Spanish flu pandemic. If the same is true for Covid, there are hopes that repeat infections may be less severe.
Yet, just 24 hours after President Trump posted his tweet, a new report in the Lancet detailed the first confirmed case of reinfection with Covid in the US in a 25-year old man in Nevada.
The man had recovered from a relatively mild Covid infection in April, only to end up severely ill in hospital in June. Genetic sequencing, as well as PCR tests, left no doubt that the patient had caught the virus twice.
“[The findings] are very concerning both from the point of view of the very short time between the two infections and the fact that the second illness was more severe than the first,” says Paul Hunter, professor in medicine at the University of East Anglia.
“It is becoming increasingly clear that re-infections are possible, but we can’t yet know how common this will be,” adds Dr Simon Clarke, associate professor of cellular microbiology at the University of Reading. “It might prove to be a rare phenomenon, but it’s equally possible that these could be the first few cases and that there are many more to come.”
So who was right – President Trump or Twitter? The answer comes down to the president’s wording. Had his Tweet read: “My doctors say I’ve largely recovered and should, for a short time at least, be immune from the virus” all would be well.
But that’s not the president’s style and it is clear from his Tweet he overstepped the mark, stating his case unequivocally when there is still scientific doubt.
Twitter knows that precise wording matters. Under its rules, it therefore had little choice but to act
