http://virological.org/t/response-to-on-the-origin-and-conti...
"An analysis of genetic data from the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak was recently published in the journal National Science Review by Tang et al. (2020). Two of the key claims made by this paper appear to have been reached by misunderstanding and over-interpretation of the SARS-CoV-2 data, with an additional analysis suffering from methodological limitations."
I've read in the press that corona virus might be biphasic, which is a big problem for an air-borne transmissable disease. In the jet age, quarantining potentially thousands or millions of passengers becomes expensive and disruptive when there's a week between phases.
Lyme disease is like that. First you get a bullseye rash and flu-like symtoms, it goes away, then later your organs are attacked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphasic_disease
That's different than a chronic disease, where you never recover.
Shouldn’t the first phase act as a sort of vaccine?
This is purely based on other comments I've read, I personally know nothing about viruses.
Technically not true - coronaviruses cause 15-30% of common colds. The most common cause of the common cold is rhinovirus (30-80%); coronavirus is next, followed by influenza (10-15%), adenovirus, and then other viruses like RSV. The rest of your comment is fairly likely IMHO, though.
I’d think you’d never clear it to begin with if that was the case.
> "After exposure to one strain of virus, these memory cells are then better able to recognise variants of the virus if they encounter them in the future. The immune system learns to protect against a whole group of related viruses, not just the one it experienced."
Say the virus mutates so that only 50% of its features are recognizable.
You'd think that the fact that your cells can recognize this is good, and it is to some extent, but, it also prevents new cells from learning about the virus(in efforts to prevent autoimmunity in analogous scenarios with non malicious objects; our immune system has to walk the fine line between being too permissive and allowing infections, and being too restrictive and murdering its own host through nasty autoimmune diseases).
So, it mounts a 50% response, which is often good enough, and more than makes up for the more limited response with speed.
But what happens when the % recognizable drops to like 3%? Some percentage of cells will recognize the 3%, and be able to mount a weak response, but more critically, block other cells from developing new responses. This limited response will slow down a proper response and itself will be likely ineffective.
Its known as "original antigenic sin", if you want to read more.
It's also unknown whether it's possible to develop immunity to COVID-19 at all, with reports of reinfection in both China and Japan.
Thanks for that. There are a lot of subreddits popping up and I've been trying to distinguish between the legit ones and the cryptoprepper ones.
The effectiveness of a vaccine is related to the effectiveness of the bodies immune response to the virus.
As long as different mutations do not affect the effectiveness of a given immune response provided for by a vaccine, that vaccine will be effective against those mutations.
Mutations can affect many aspects of a disease, and often this means a different level of effectiveness of an immune response, but it really does depend on the specific mutation.
For now, there are no selection pressures on different strains from vaccines; it will be interesting to see what mutations become prevalent once testing of vaccines starts.
https://shotofprevention.com/2018/03/14/how-flu-strains-are-...
https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/fdsltf/about_the_l...
Basically, there are 111 different mutations, not 2, and it's misleading to point to a single point mutation and set that as the arbitrary division point between strains while ignoring the other 110 mutations that have been catalogued. There is currently not enough evidence for the researcher's claims that this particular mutation causes observable differences in the virus's reproduction or virulence characteristics that the other mutations do not.