4 ms·
Is it? I read the original comment as saying there were significantly different symptoms based on the transmission method. Even assuming that the transmission m
by grandmczeb 7y ago
Is it? I read the original comment as saying there were significantly different symptoms based on the transmission method. Even assuming that the transmission method results in a significantly different viral load, that's not enough to explain differing symptoms since there's not a whole lot of observable difference between cases with different severities[1,2]. There are some studies that show a relationship, but nothing strong enough to explain a dramatic difference.
If it's true that the transmission method makes a big difference, it's more likely due to some other reason. E.g. maybe mild strains spread more easily in the air (although as far as I know there's no evidence that's true.)
[1] https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2003/2003.09320.pdf https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2003/2003.09320.pdf
Page 3. "We did not observe significantly different viral loads in nasal swabs between symptomatic and asymptomatic."
[2] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.15.20036707v2.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.15.20036707v...
Page 4. "There was no obvious difference in viral loads across sex, age groups and disease severity"
- taeric 7y agoFair. My entry to this thread should have begun with a question mark. I thought the point of different transmission methods, as frames, was referring to potential differences in viral load.
- grandmczeb 7y agoRereading your first comment, I think you might be thinking of infection dose. Viral load is the amount of virus present in a patient. Infection dose is the amount you're exposed to.
- taeric 7y agoSo, I was indeed mixing those up. I think most of the following points stand?
- grandmczeb 7y agoThere's not much evidence that infection dose matters in terms of case severity either, other than you're just less likely to be infected in the first place.