3 ms·

>While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal and t

>While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to be optimal for receptor binding Sounds like it could evolve to be more transmissible in humans. The more people it infects, the more likely that is to happen. With that in mind, "flattening the curve" is even more essential.

djsumdog 6y ago
Most viruses will start very harmful but tend to mutate into less lethal stains causing them to spread further. The Oxford study talks about the S and L strains. The L strain is the more deadly one, but it's likely not made it very far.
- zbjornson 6y ago
  Source on the first claim? The S/L strain study has been heavily challenged, see commentary at https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-of-the-covid-19-virus-more-severe https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-of...
  - KarlKemp 6y ago
    I do remember this phenomenon being mentioned quite a few times in my genetics classes. Don’t remember the name, unfortunately. But the logic is fairly obvious:a virus wants you to die just as little as humans want the earth to die. As I remember it, it probably wouldn’t make much of a difference here. The classic case mentioned were extremely fast & lethal viruses such as Ebola & Marburg: When a virus kills you within two or three days of infection, any small change can easily double that time and thereby gain significantly better chances of transmission. But for Covid (and, before that, HIV) the infectious period is pretty long already and any improvements would matter less in relative terms.
    - zbjornson 6y ago
      Pathogens can definitely evolve to improve fitness and settle into an ecological balance with their hosts. I more meant to contest that most start out very harmful. I don't think we have data to support that, or to be able to separate virus vs. host adaptations that would cause the appearance of lessened severity, given that most viruses circulating today have ancient origins.

djsumdog 6y ago

Most viruses will start very harmful but tend to mutate into less lethal stains causing them to spread further. The Oxford study talks about the S and L strains. The L strain is the more deadly one, but it's likely not made it very far.

zbjornson 6y ago
Source on the first claim? The S/L strain study has been heavily challenged, see commentary at https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-of-the-covid-19-virus-more-severe https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-of...
- KarlKemp 6y ago
  I do remember this phenomenon being mentioned quite a few times in my genetics classes. Don’t remember the name, unfortunately. But the logic is fairly obvious:a virus wants you to die just as little as humans want the earth to die. As I remember it, it probably wouldn’t make much of a difference here. The classic case mentioned were extremely fast & lethal viruses such as Ebola & Marburg: When a virus kills you within two or three days of infection, any small change can easily double that time and thereby gain significantly better chances of transmission. But for Covid (and, before that, HIV) the infectious period is pretty long already and any improvements would matter less in relative terms.
  - zbjornson 6y ago
    Pathogens can definitely evolve to improve fitness and settle into an ecological balance with their hosts. I more meant to contest that most start out very harmful. I don't think we have data to support that, or to be able to separate virus vs. host adaptations that would cause the appearance of lessened severity, given that most viruses circulating today have ancient origins.