3 ms·
To be clear, there is no good data on either of those assertions. The important takeaway here is that this Coronavirus, and likely others, will have persistent
by koheripbal 7y ago
To be clear, there is no good data on either of those assertions.
The important takeaway here is that this Coronavirus, and likely others, will have persistent animal reservoirs that make humans endemically exposed to it.
...which means that even after a vaccination campaign, the virus will still be endemic to the population. ie. It's not going away.
...what more worrying is that Coronaviruses have a tendency of re-infecting patients and have dwindling immune response in people (source=TWIV podcast from April 3rd). ...which worryingly means that we may need regular vaccinations against covid-19 forever.
- ComputerGuru 7y ago> To be clear, there is no good data on either of those assertions. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00984-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00984-8
- CardenB 7y agoCan you share data on reinfection? I have not been able to find enough evidence to rule out testing error being mistaken for reinfection.
- Jommi 7y agohowever, evolution theory is on our side. With the virus going through mutations it will end being less deadly as time goes on )as a general rule=. It makes sense: Deadlier versions of the virus die away when they kill their host. Healthy mutations infect more people.
- koheripbal 7y agoCoronaviruses with error correction in their RNA replication mechanisms, like covid-19, do not mutate very much. This is different from Influenza which easily shifts its RNA sequence and this requires new yearly vaccinations / and avoids immunity in humans.
- Jommi 7y agoSo then that means that likely immunization duration will be long and vaccine cycle less dense? That's positive isn't it?