es, you would need genomic sequencing to highlight the mutations.

PCR can give issues in detection for this very reason.

Most antigen-based tests will continue to work, because most are targeting the N antigen of the virus. And so far, the N antigen remains conserved in these variants.

For molecular tests, whether or not they continue working will depend on the number and location of genes that the test targets. The new variants have mutations in the S gene that have been found to impact some assays targeting this particular gene. However, if a test is targeting one or more conserved regions other than the S gene, then the test can be presumed to detect these new variants.

If they are correctly assessing via genomic sequencing, they can provide insight into number and dominance in a region.

GENOMIC SEQUENCING IS REQUIRED TO ASSESS MUTATIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

WE KNOW THIS.

>>14502444

There most likely is a quantitative antibody test that shows the amount of antibody created to antigen provided, but it shouldn't be used to asses the level of protection.

>>14502444

>>14502444

Quantitative Measurement of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Analytical and Clinical Evaluation

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Molecular-based testing is used to diagnose COVID-19, and serologic testing of antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 is used to detect past infection. While most serologic assays are qualitative, a quantitative serologic assay was recently developed that measures antibodies against the S protein, the target of vaccines. Quantitative antibody determination may help determine antibody titer and facilitate longitudinal monitoring of the antibody response, including antibody response to vaccines. We evaluated the quantitative Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay. Specimens from 167 PCR-positive patients and 103 control specimens were analyzed using the Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay on the cobas e411 (Roche Diagnostics). Analytical evaluation included assessing linearity, imprecision, and analytical sensitivity. Clinical evaluation included assessing clinical sensitivity, specificity, cross-reactivity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and serial sampling from the same patient. The Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay exhibited its highest sensitivity (84.0%) at 15 to 30 days post-PCR positivity and exhibited no cross-reactivity, a specificity and PPV of 100%, and an NPV between 98.3% and 99.8% at ≥14 days post-PCR positivity, depending on the seroprevalence estimate. Imprecision was <2% at 9.06 U/ml across 6 days, the negative quality control (QC) was consistently negative (<0.40 U/ml), the manufacturer’s claimed limit of quantitation of 0.40 U/ml was verified, and linearity across the analytical measuring range was observed, except at the low end (<20 U/ml). Lastly, antibody response showed high interindividual variation in level and time of peak antibody titer and trends over time.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8092751/

I am not promoting vaccines.

But this is to highlight the importance of immunity to nucleocapsids.

This can be naturally attained as well.

Nucleocapsid-based vaccines may prevent SARS-CoV-2 dissemination to distal organs.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210427/Nucleocapsid-based-vaccines-may-prevent-SARS-CoV-2-dissemination-to-distal-organs.aspx

Link directly to study.

A SARS CoV-2 nucleocapsid vaccine protects against distal viral dissemination

>>14502695

Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations

L Tomljenovic 1 , C A Shaw

Affiliations

PMID: 22235057 DOI: 10.1177/0961203311430221

Abstract

Immune challenges during early development, including those vaccine-induced, can lead to permanent detrimental alterations of the brain and immune function. Experimental evidence also shows that simultaneous administration of as little as two to three immune adjuvants can overcome genetic resistance to autoimmunity. In some developed countries, by the time children are 4 to 6 years old, they will have received a total of 126 antigenic compounds along with high amounts of aluminum (Al) adjuvants through routine vaccinations. According to the US Food and Drug Administration, safety assessments for vaccines have often not included appropriate toxicity studies because vaccines have not been viewed as inherently toxic. Taken together, these observations raise plausible concerns about the overall safety of current childhood vaccination programs. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, several key points ought to be considered: (i) infants and children should not be viewed as "small adults" with regard to toxicological risk as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults; (ii) in adult humans Al vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of serious autoimmune and inflammatory conditions (i.e., "ASIA"), yet children are regularly exposed to much higher amounts of Al from vaccines than adults; (iii) it is often assumed that peripheral immune responses do not affect brain function. However, it is now clearly established that there is a bidirectional neuro-immune cross-talk that plays crucial roles in immunoregulation as well as brain function. In turn, perturbations of the neuro-immune axis have been demonstrated in many autoimmune diseases encompassed in "ASIA" and are thought to be driven by a hyperactive immune response; and (iv) the same components of the neuro-immune axis that play key roles in brain development and immune function are heavily targeted by Al adjuvants. In summary, research evidence shows that increasing concerns about current vaccination practices may indeed be warranted. Because children may be most at risk of vaccine-induced complications, a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine-related adverse health impacts in the pediatric population is urgently needed.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22235057/

Are there negative CNS impacts of aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines and immunotherapy?

Christopher A Shaw 1 , Dan Li, Lucija Tomljenovic

Affiliations

PMID: 25428645 DOI: 10.2217/imt.14.81

Erratum in

Corrigendum.

[No authors listed] Immunotherapy. 2019 Apr;11(6):555. doi: 10.2217/imt.14.81c1. PMID: 30860442 No abstract available.

Abstract

In spite of a common view that aluminum (Al) salts are inert and therefore harmless as vaccine adjuvants or in immunotherapy, the reality is quite different. In the following article we briefly review the literature on Al neurotoxicity and the use of Al salts as vaccine adjuvants and consider not only direct toxic actions on the nervous system, but also the potential impact for triggering autoimmunity. Autoimmune and inflammatory responses affecting the CNS appear to underlie some forms of neurological disease, including developmental disorders. Al has been demonstrated to impact the CNS at every level, including by changing gene expression. These outcomes should raise concerns about the increasing use of Al salts as vaccine adjuvants and for their application as more general immune stimulants.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25428645/

Aluminum in the central nervous system (CNS): toxicity in humans and animals, vaccine adjuvants, and autoimmunity

C. A. Shaw & L. Tomljenovic

Immunologic Research volume 56, pages 304–316 (2013)Cite this article

6941 Accesses

141 Citations

574 Altmetric

Metrics details

Abstract

We have examined the neurotoxicity of aluminum in humans and animals under various conditions, following different routes of administration, and provide an overview of the various associated disease states. The literature demonstrates clearly negative impacts of aluminum on the nervous system across the age span. In adults, aluminum exposure can lead to apparently age-related neurological deficits resembling Alzheimer’s and has been linked to this disease and to the Guamanian variant, ALS–PDC. Similar outcomes have been found in animal models. In addition, injection of aluminum adjuvants in an attempt to model Gulf War syndrome and associated neurological deficits leads to an ALS phenotype in young male mice. In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders. Many of the features of aluminum-induced neurotoxicity may arise, in part, from autoimmune reactions, as part of the ASIA syndrome.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12026-013-8403-1

Aluminum in allergen-specific subcutaneous immunotherapy – A German perspective

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14007397?via%3Dihub

Abstract

We are living in an "aluminium age" with increasing bioavailability of the metal for approximately 125 years, contributing significantly to the aluminium body burden of humans. Over the course of life, aluminium accumulates and is stored predominantly in the lungs, bones, liver, kidneys and brain. The toxicity of aluminium in humans is briefly summarised, highlighting links and possible causal relationships between a high aluminium body burden and a number of neurological disorders and disease states. Aluminium salts have been used as depot-adjuvants successfully in essential prophylactic vaccinations for almost 100 years, with a convincing positive benefit-risk assessment which remains unchanged. However, allergen-specific immunotherapy commonly consists of administering a long-course programme of subcutaneous injections using preparations of relevant allergens. Regulatory authorities currently set aluminium limits for vaccines per dose, rather than per treatment course. Unlike prophylactic vaccinations, numerous injections with higher proportions of aluminium-adjuvant per injection are applied in subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and will significantly contribute to a higher cumulative life dose of aluminium. While the human body may cope robustly with a daily aluminium overload from the environment, regulatory cumulative threshold values in immunotherapy need further addressing. Based on the current literature, predisposing an individual to an unusually high level of aluminium, such as through subcutaneous immunotherapy, has the potential to form focal accumulations in the body with the propensity to exert forms of toxicity. Particularly in relation to longer-term health effects, the safety of aluminium adjuvants in immunotherapy remains unchallenged by health authorities - evoking the need for more consideration, guidance, and transparency on what is known and not known about its safety in long-course therapy and what measures can be taken to prevent or minimise its risks. The possibility of providing an effective means of measuring aluminium accumulation in patients undergoing long-term SCIT treatment as well as reducing their aluminium body burden is discussed.

Aluminum and the human diet revisited

Abstract

Concerns about aluminum (Al) exposure in the human diet have persisted for one century. We suggest that continued research would benefit from better reporting of environmental factors that are known to influence Al accumulation in plant organs that are consumed, focusing on subsets of the general public that exhibit the highest risk for neuropathological responses, increased evaluation of commercial processing procedures that may concentrate Al or other toxic substances, and designing studies with low dose, chronic exposure rather than further study of acute, brief exposure.

Areas of Concern

To view Al in biological systems as either inert or without toxic consequence is to ignore a rapidly growing body of evidence to the contrary. Inter-disciplinary teams may offer the most efficient means of advancing our understanding of risks of Al exposure in the human diet and from other sources. The following are issues to guide ongoing research.

• Aluminum availability to plants is governed by soil pH, and in accumulator plant species by age of organ. Our study revealed that young noni leaves from trees growing in alkaline soils posed minimal calculated risk, but old leaves from trees growing in acidic soils posed the greatest risk.7 During recent years, substantial advances have been made in understanding the mechanisms of Al toxicity in plants and approaches to assess the potentially toxic Al species in environmental samples.33 Yet soil traits, harvested organ age, and other arguably mandatory experimental details are omitted from research articles on traditional knowledge and folk medicines. These omissions do not acknowledge the current status of knowledge and disallow adequate comparisons among studies.

• Consumption of unprocessed herbal products or home concoctions carries relatively minimal risk of excessive Al exposure. However, superfruits, nutritional therapeutics, neutraceuticals, and functional foods are among the arsenal of innovative marketing strategies to reach consumers who demand what they believe to be healthy food options.34-36 Some commercial procedures concentrate herbal products, then boast about the supposed added benefits of the concentrated product. These processing and concentrating steps may take a raw herbal product that carries minimal risk and turn it into an internationally marketed product that carries greater risk.

• Risks of Al toxicity are elevated for some easily defined subsets of the general public. For example, infants and small children carry greater risk because intake limits are based on body weight and individuals with kidney immaturity or abnormalities because the normal pathway for excreting aluminum from the body is via urine and feces.37 Continued research on pediatric, geriatric, and other high risk groups rather than the general population may increase efficiency of research.

• Numerous investigations have revealed that the chronic component of exposure to Al is what leads to neurotoxicity.8,17 The body burden of Al is spread among various tissues, but incremental doses of small amounts of Al over a lifetime favor brain tissues as the site of bioaccumulation. This form of exposure reproduces neuropathological traits of Alzheimer Disease. Long-term studies on chronic exposure to Al should be the thrust of dietary research.

• Al compounds are numerous, and the biological responses may be highly specific to the form of Al to which the body is exposed. Studies should be specific to the form of aluminum administered.

A high percentage of the world’s population uses alternative self-medication and herbal treatments for prophylactic purposes without being aware of the possible toxic components and toxin synergies that may impact their health. When these herbal treatments inadvertently contain Al or other known toxins, environmental conditions, post-harvest treatment in processing, and age, general health, and genetic traits of the consumer are factors that may increase risk of developing neurological disorders. These examples illuminate why the public should be better informed on health risks associated with using herbal products in self-medication.38

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3914913/