4 ms·

Why scientists are worried about the coronavirus variant from Brazil

47 points by mike_h 6y ago

u678u 6y ago
It would be nice to know if the Brazil variant is more dangerous or not. The ideal case is a variant that gets more easily transmissible but less harmful - everyone could pass it on and become immune to the other strains.
- ISL 6y ago
  The key point of this article is that the new variant is sufficiently unlike the original strain that it may be able to infect those who have already had the original strain. If that is true, 2021 will be another memorable year.
  - timr 6y ago
    > may be able to infect those who have already had the original strain. ...the "may" in your response re-affirms the OP's question. We don't know yet. This is speculation.
  - u678u 6y ago
    > If that is true, 2021 will be another memorable year. Eish, Dont say it!
- guscost 6y ago
  That is not just the ideal case, it is the case supported by both historical precedent and theory: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873896 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873896 > By far, the most widely studied trade-off involves transmission and virulence (Anderson and May, 1982; Frank, 1996; Alizon et al. 2009).
  - masonic 6y ago
    That paper is about parasites, not viruses.
    - guscost 6y ago
      Academically, a virus is a kind of parasite, one that cannot reproduce (or really do anything at all) independent of its host. All “parasite” means is that the organism depends on a host, but yes outside the academy it is often used in place of “multicellular parasite”.
siltpotato 6y ago
@mike_h, please edit the title to say "Coronavirus variant" to reduce confusion. Current title: "Why Scientists Are Worried About the Variant from Brazil"
timr 6y ago
> But for some scientists, the most worrying variant might be the newest one. A variant called P.1, which emerged in early December in Manaus, Brazil, and by mid-January had already caused a massive resurgence in cases across the city of 2 million people. The blatant editorial tone here is off-putting. It's worth pointing out that the resurgence in Amazonas appears to be of about the same magnitude as the one in the winter, and is currently declining: https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+cases+manaus&oq=covid+cases+manaus&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30i457.4087j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+cases+manaus&oq=covid+... I don't know why the news media can't simply report facts anymore.
- ISL 6y ago
  It sounds like the first peak managed to infect 75% of the population? If so, a second, similar, peak, at 1% case-fatality-rate is likely to case 20,000 deaths in the city alone.
  - timr 6y ago
    > It sounds like the first peak managed to infect 75% of the population? If so, a second, similar, peak, at 1% case-fatality-rate is likely to case 20,000 deaths in the city alone. 1) There's no way of knowing what percentage of the population has been infected. 2) You're assuming that this strain can re-infect the same people, which is speculation. 3) You're assuming that this strain will be just as fatal as the original strain after re-infection, which is speculation.
    - ISL 6y ago
      Regarding points 1 and 2, from the article: "If you were to ask me right now, what's most concerning of all the things that I've heard so far, it's the fact that they are reporting a sudden increase in cases in Manaus, Brazil," virus expert Jeremy Luban at the University of Massachusetts told NPR two weeks ago before the variant arrived in the United States. "Manaus already had 75% of people infected [in the spring of last year]." Regarding point 3 -- it is, of course, speculation, but for millenia the most-effective method of weather forecasting was constancy: "Tomorrow will be just like today". It could be better, it could be worse, but if we don't know anything, assuming that it will be similar seems like a good bet. Edit: On first read, I missed "on reinfection" for point 3. Agreed. One definitely hopes that on reinfection, cases will be more mild.

47 points by mike_h 6y ago

It would be nice to know if the Brazil variant is more dangerous or not. The ideal case is a variant that gets more easily transmissible but less harmful - everyone could pass it on and become immune to the other strains.

ISL 6y ago
The key point of this article is that the new variant is sufficiently unlike the original strain that it may be able to infect those who have already had the original strain. If that is true, 2021 will be another memorable year.
- timr 6y ago
  > may be able to infect those who have already had the original strain. ...the "may" in your response re-affirms the OP's question. We don't know yet. This is speculation.
- u678u 6y ago
  > If that is true, 2021 will be another memorable year. Eish, Dont say it!
guscost 6y ago
That is not just the ideal case, it is the case supported by both historical precedent and theory: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873896 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873896 > By far, the most widely studied trade-off involves transmission and virulence (Anderson and May, 1982; Frank, 1996; Alizon et al. 2009).
- masonic 6y ago
  That paper is about parasites, not viruses.
  - guscost 6y ago
    Academically, a virus is a kind of parasite, one that cannot reproduce (or really do anything at all) independent of its host. All “parasite” means is that the organism depends on a host, but yes outside the academy it is often used in place of “multicellular parasite”.

siltpotato 6y ago

@mike_h, please edit the title to say "Coronavirus variant" to reduce confusion. Current title: "Why Scientists Are Worried About the Variant from Brazil"

timr 6y ago

> But for some scientists, the most worrying variant might be the newest one. A variant called P.1, which emerged in early December in Manaus, Brazil, and by mid-January had already caused a massive resurgence in cases across the city of 2 million people. The blatant editorial tone here is off-putting. It's worth pointing out that the resurgence in Amazonas appears to be of about the same magnitude as the one in the winter, and is currently declining: https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+cases+manaus&oq=covid+cases+manaus&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30i457.4087j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+cases+manaus&oq=covid+... I don't know why the news media can't simply report facts anymore.

ISL 6y ago
It sounds like the first peak managed to infect 75% of the population? If so, a second, similar, peak, at 1% case-fatality-rate is likely to case 20,000 deaths in the city alone.
- timr 6y ago
  > It sounds like the first peak managed to infect 75% of the population? If so, a second, similar, peak, at 1% case-fatality-rate is likely to case 20,000 deaths in the city alone. 1) There's no way of knowing what percentage of the population has been infected. 2) You're assuming that this strain can re-infect the same people, which is speculation. 3) You're assuming that this strain will be just as fatal as the original strain after re-infection, which is speculation.
  - ISL 6y ago
    Regarding points 1 and 2, from the article: "If you were to ask me right now, what's most concerning of all the things that I've heard so far, it's the fact that they are reporting a sudden increase in cases in Manaus, Brazil," virus expert Jeremy Luban at the University of Massachusetts told NPR two weeks ago before the variant arrived in the United States. "Manaus already had 75% of people infected [in the spring of last year]." Regarding point 3 -- it is, of course, speculation, but for millenia the most-effective method of weather forecasting was constancy: "Tomorrow will be just like today". It could be better, it could be worse, but if we don't know anything, assuming that it will be similar seems like a good bet. Edit: On first read, I missed "on reinfection" for point 3. Agreed. One definitely hopes that on reinfection, cases will be more mild.