唉，原文多處可都是用的 “likely“ 哦。關鍵在最後1段。

These findings suggest that antibodies elicited by primary infection and by the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine are likely to maintain protective efficacy against B.1.1.7 and most other variants but that the partial resistance of virus with the B.1.351 spike protein could render some individuals less well protected,  supporting a rationale for the development of modified vaccines containing E484K.

老兄啊，你這標題 跟原文的原意可有不小差距哦。還是得對現有疫苗進行改進開發啊。

 

 

 

所有跟帖： 

• 看不懂吧 -吃與活- ♂ (239 bytes) () 02/08/2021 postreply 18:00:33

• 還嘴硬，1 這僅限血清樣本對比測試，2 “likely” 是 “可以” 的意思嗎？ -pickshell- ♀ (650 bytes) () 02/08/2021 postreply 18:48:31

• 有原文上來就很好啦，各人可以得出不同的結論，越辯越明 -Blue_Snow- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/08/2021 postreply 20:37:14

• 對原文，讀者可發表各自不同看法。吃與活問題是轉述把原文裏關鍵詞給改了。對不看英文的人就是誤導 -pickshell- ♀ (47 bytes) () 02/09/2021 postreply 12:11:59

• 不懂的人不知道看數據 -吃與活- ♂ (38 bytes) () 02/09/2021 postreply 05:12:10

• 數據與結論都得看。7，都到這份上你居然還能死強耍賴，這可真沒勁。 -pickshell- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/09/2021 postreply 05:39:42

• 懂不懂都是相對的，咱中國不是還有不恥下問一說嗎 -Blue_Snow- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/09/2021 postreply 06:07:17