4 ms·
That is very old news, this is from March 11: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.20031096v2.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/20
by mikhailfranco 6y ago
That is very old news, this is from March 11:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.20031096v2.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.20031096v...
Type A is:
32% in the population
38% of those infected
41% of those that die.
Type O is:
34% in the population
26% of those infected
25% of those that die.
- raverbashing 6y agoAm I missing this or the % in the 23aM page are not considering the proportion of the different types in the population? Also given that there seems to be an important coagulation component in the disease, this can make sense. But interesting enough, this is not too obvious. Because O type blood has both Anti-A and Anti-B antibodies, so if there was something in the virus that looks like the A or B antigen this would make sense, but it's the opposite.
- bacr 6y agoThe article does reference that Chinese study, as well as a more recent one from researchers in Italy and Spain. It is great to see the scientific process at work — building evidence for a phenomenon. It also underscores one of the biggest benefits of preprints: faster dissemination of information.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]