5 ms·
That would be a very obvious thing to detect (and we have not seen evidence of that).
by JshWright 7y ago
That would be a very obvious thing to detect (and we have not seen evidence of that).
- serf 7y agoevidence of what? two separate strains? this paper mentions two strains[0], 'L' and 'S' type, was it refuted? [0]: https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/doi/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036/5775463 https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/doi/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036...
- bmsran 7y agoyes: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/mutations-can-reveal-how-coronavirus-moves-they-re-easy-overinterpret https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/mutations-can-reveal...
- Muuuchem 7y agoJust read it and they were not disputing the existence of two strains but rather that the virus didnt jump from animals twice. The article disputes the claim that because L strain is 70% of the cases, that it must be more virulent.
- bmsran 7y agothe distinction is important here because this subthread started from the suggestion that there are multiple strains circulating, with different virulence. The fact there are multiple lineages is a natural consequence of how viruses spread
- bcrosby95 7y agoThere's probably hundreds or even thousands of mutations of this coronavirus. It's kinda what it does. But they're basically meaningless, although it is useful for tracking how it spreads - kinda like a family tree. See: https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global There is pretty much no evidence of what common people would call "multiple strains" - as in, immunity doesn't transfer, different infection characteristics, etc. The paper you posted was debunked pretty much instantly by people that know what they're talking about. There's a lot of junk papers out there written by people on coronavirus that aren't even in the field.
- JshWright 7y agoEvidence of one, less dangerous, strain, followed by a more dangerous strain that arrived months later. No such evidence exists.