Patterico's Pontifications

5/5/2020

Yay: Scientists Report Discovery of New, More Contagious Strain of Coronavirus

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am



Dog Trainer:

Scientists have identified a new strain of the coronavirus that has become dominant worldwide and appears to be more contagious than the versions that spread in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a new study led by scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The new strain appeared in February in Europe, migrated quickly to the East Coast of the United States and has been the dominant strain across the world since mid-March, the scientists wrote.

In addition to spreading faster, it may make people vulnerable to a second infection after a first bout with the disease, the report warned.

Let’s see how long it takes for this news to somehow become a partisan football. I have no idea which way it bounces but I’m sure we’ll find out.

In the meantime, in the real world where partisan politics does not rule everything, it’s not great news, is it? Especially as everyone seems intent on “reopening” regardless of whether infection rates are dropping (the theoretical requirement of Phase One of the Opening Up America Again guidelines) … well, you know where I’m coming from and it’s no fun reading the rants of a pessimist every day. Not good, is all I’m saying.

28 Responses to “Yay: Scientists Report Discovery of New, More Contagious Strain of Coronavirus”

  1. Am I reading this correctly that the ‘new’ mutated strain is what we’ve been dealing with in the US in April?

    Italy was one of the first countries to see the new virus in the last week of February, almost at the same time that the original strain appeared. Washington was among the first states to get hit with the original strain in late February, but by March 15 the mutated strain dominated. New York was hit by the original virus around March 15, but within days the mutant strain took over.

    Based on this it’s definitely interesting information, but I don’t see how that would change the plans currently in place.

    Time123 (c9382b)

  2. This had been speculated about before — since it seemed that what hit Italy and New York was more virulent than what hit China.

    How long do you think you can keep everyone locked up, Patterico? When does Coronavirus become another risk factor in existing (which we find ways to mitigate), rather than the thing we must hide from, costs to the economy be darned?

    We don’t have leadership that can help make that decision at the Federal level. This is the consequence of electing Trump. So it is going to be done state by state. Georgia is “open”, but it isn’t really, because it feels like is too soon. It appears that it will open gradually.

    There will be a second wave — wasn’t that always the plan? It’s just that the healthcare system will be in a better position to handle it?

    Appalled (1a17de)

  3. This is grim news, but not entirely unexpected given the nature of other strains of the influenza virus and the need to “adjust” flu vaccines every year.

    It seems reasonable to conclude that the “original” strain of COVID-19 mutates once it is present in the body, which then passes on the more virulent virus. This really is a “nightmare scenario” and it makes one wonder if “herd immunity” is a realistic expectation.

    John B Boddie (f7954e)

  4. > It’s just that the healthcare system will be in a better position to handle it?

    In theory, by the time we hit a second wave, we should have robust surveillance testing and contact tracing so that we discover cases early and quarantine known contacts quickly. This should limit the rate of spread through the population.

    Of course, we aren’t actually building a robust surveillance testing capacity in most places, and many places aren’t building robust contact tracing. So the second wave will be a bloodbath.

    aphrael (7962af)

  5. This makes sense, that a more lethal strain hit the east coast. It also makes sense that the virus arrived earlier than reported.
    We should pray that we get a vaccine going before an even more lethal strain comes out.

    Paul Montagu (45ec23)

  6. The unemployed have a 63% higher mortality rate than the employed. When will the shutdown become more deadly than getting back to work? Flattening the curve by social distancing was never meant to reduce the number of people who would get COVID-19. It was designed to make it so that hospitals wouldn’t be overwhelmed all at once. Some people are saying we are beyond that now, so why don’t we stop isolating healthy people and start dealing with people who are more susceptible to die from the virus and let healthy people get back to work?

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070776/

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  7. Over the last 4 decades the study of unemployment and its association with health and mortality has expanded significantly (see Hanisch, 1999 for an early comprehensive review on unemployment research). Whether unemployment is causally related to mortality remains an open question (Urban Janlert, 1997; Lundin, Lundberg, Hallsten, Ottoson, & Hemmingsson, 2010; Martikainen, 1990; Martikainen, Maki, & Jantti, 2007; Moser, Goldblatt, Fox, & Jones, 1987), and recent research has begun to focus on possible confounding, mediating, and moderating factors.

    You can torture numbers to the point where they’ll tell you anything.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  8. Right, folks who are going to die are also less likely to be employed. Though Tanny’s point stands in large part because having a good job and having good health/dental care are the same thing in our society.

    But it is very tiresome that we’re not having an actual argument. Tanny’s comment about how we already flattened the curve is not responsive to the post, about how there is another strain of the disease, and therefore we did not already flatten the curve in most of the country. Just ignoring the post (if you even read it) is one way of owning the libs I guess.

    Why don’t we stop isolating healthy people and start dealing with people who are more susceptible to die

    Because diseases are contagious.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  9. > Because diseases are contagious.

    And because people are infectious before they are symptomatic, and we have insufficient infrastructure set up to see who is or isn’t infectious.

    Why aren’t we building that infrastructure?

    That’s the real question.

    aphrael (7962af)

  10. Why is it important that there is a new strain of COVID-19 which has been in the US since late February early March and is the current version of COVID-19 that we’re dealing with now? I did read the article before commenting on it and noticed the new version of COVID-19 isn’t something that happened in late April or in May. Knowing that there’s a new version doesn’t change anything right now. The question is if the original COVID-19 became more contagious, could it happen again? That question didn’t seem to be addressed. What we’re finding out now is most of the people who die are elderly and in long-term nursing home care.

    In Minnesota 80% of the people who die of COVID-19 are elderly and in long-term care. Most of those who are younger who die are also in long-term care or have comorbidity problems. Yes it’s contagious, but most people are asymptomatic. So that leaves us with who we should protect which I addressed in my previous comment.

    Flattening the curve by social distancing helps hospitals by not overwhelming them with a large number of patients all at once, but doesn’t prevent you from eventually getting COVID-19. Or do you want to stay in isolation until they come up with a vaccine so that no one will get it? So let’s return to the original question because it doesn’t matter how contagious this new version of COVID-19 is, which doesn’t seem to be that new. When will the shutdown become more deadly than getting back to work?

    Ragspierre, I’m not seeing in your comment a refutation of the NIH article.

    Dustin, I’m insulted that you would think that I would not have read the whole article, which I did. I even read it a second time and referred to it several times to make sure I had my facts straight before writing this comment. I thought more of you and I have been commenting, though not very much as of late since 2004.

    It’s difficult for me to comment with Parkinson’s. It takes quite a long time because I have to use dictation and then do my best to make corrections.

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  11. What we’re finding out now is most of the people who die are elderly and in long-term nursing home care.

    That’s a mighty glib statement. Would you tell that to the parents of the children dying? Or are you unconcerned about the debilitation in “other than dead” from the disease.

    Ragspierre, I’m not seeing in your comment a refutation of the NIH article.

    What I posted was FROM the NIH article. It sorta refutes itself.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  12. The headline ought to say that they discovered that the one that has been prevalent now is a stronger strain of the original so it doesn’t sound like there’s yet another more virulent one.

    Lazlo Toth (cbb623)

  13. Sorry about your Parkinson’s. I have something similar. Some of my posts seem terse…at best…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  14. aphrael,

    How contagious COVID-19 is, isn’t all that important. What is important is how many people per million get seriously ill, how many people per million have to be hospitalized, and finally most important is how many people per million die. Once you know those numbers then you look at the demographics of those people and make informed decisions on how to best direct resources from there. You can’t test everybody in the United States to see if they have COVID-19.

    “A comprehensive review of contact studies indicate ‘close & prolonged contact is required for #COVID19 transmission. The risk is highest in enclosed environments; household, long-term care facilities and public transport.’”

    — Virginia Hume

    Maybe we should try something different.

    Why instead of doom and gloom all the time isn’t the news media touting things like, Professor Didier Raoult Releases the Results of a New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients?

    I have a friend that I’ve known since 2003 who has had COVID-19 for over a month. He is at home now, but suffering greatly. He refuses to take hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc because if it works it will make President Trump look good. Really? That’s dangerous. Even a broken clock can be correct twice a day.

    While it’s anecdotal, I have two acquaintances, one in his 50s and the other 86 years old who have been cured of COVID-19 through the use of hydroxychloroquine treatments.

    BTW. Has anyone looked at the projection failure rate of Neil Ferguson? It’s epic.

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  15. Why instead of doom and gloom all the time isn’t the news media touting things like, Professor Didier Raoult Releases the Results of a New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients?

    Right on these threads, Raoult has been exposed as the quack he apparently has been for his career.

    There’s plenty you’ll find if you want.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  16. Why aren’t we building that infrastructure?

    That’s the real question.

    aphrael (7962af) — 5/5/2020 @ 2:36 pm

    We’re still picking little fights.

    This will be a two year challenge, but it also highlights how a maximum efficiency medical infrastructure fails in a crisis. We learned this in the 1918 pandemic too. Every major city should have public hospitals with surplus capacity, and it doesn’t necessarily need to be downtown. Trump could very easily be spearheading a visionary rebuilding. But he got his name on the $1200 checks and picks fights every day.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  17. Sorry about your Parkinson’s. I have something similar. Some of my posts seem terse…at best…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 5/5/2020 @ 3:59 pm

    Even with Parkinson’s, unfortunately it’s very difficult for me to do terse. Most people think of Parkinson’s patients as having a tremor which is true and also true is for most people with Parkinson’s the major symptoms are pain and stiffness. I was up at 4 AM this morning in pain and could not go back to sleep. I took a dose of carbidopa/levodopa then put a massager against my back and finally over an hour later I was able to go back to sleep. I’m also experiencing off periods between doses where my symptoms come back, sometimes heavily.

    The good news is that I can still walk, those sometimes dragging my feet. Dress and take care of myself and even do chores with some difficulty. The most common reason for Parkinson’s patients to show up in the hospital is because they have fallen and I haven’t fallen since 2017. I took a road test from the DMV and passed so I can drive. I didn’t get anything wrong in my road test. My brain is still active those sometimes I forget words. My neurologist who specializes in movement disorders and dementia has told me the reason for forgetting words is not from dementia, but simply from getting old. Is that a sideways complement?

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  18. Dustin,

    I’ve read that Raoult is a quack, mostly from people saying that he’s a quack without any proof. I wasn’t interested in him and so I haven’t researched him. Let’s say that he is a quack. It doesn’t matter if the numbers in his latest study are true.

    OK, I’m tired and making too many mistakes now so I’m going to go away for a little while and take a nap. I’ll be back later I’m not taking my football home so to speak.

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  19. Tanny, I read the comment I responded to again for any sign it was related to the post and wouldn’t just fit in any COVID 19 thread. I disagree with your view that it showed a lot of responses to the post due to your repeated referral to the post.

    Sorry you’re interpreting disrespect from my point: that arguments that can’t relate to what they are arguing against aren’t that persuasive to me.

    I agree with you that we will need to re-open. But so does everyone. The idea that Trump is for re-opening and his opponents are opposed is one of those false-dichotomies intended to manipulate, not inform. The economy will continue to reopen and as things work out, largely thanks to city governments, I’m sure Trump will take credit for anything good and deny credit for anything bad, and it will be as stupid as Trump claiming he gave every black American his job, but had nothing to do with them losing it this year.

    To re-open, localities need to recognize the lay of the land. That in some places, we’re on the left side of bang, others, on the right, due to different strains. We need to recognize how insidious it is that asymptomatic people are spreading disease, but also recognize that some in our society lack the mental capacity to care for others, and therefore there are limits on how effective and long lasting many mandates can be. There are people with rifles screaming at state legislators, gleeful about spreading disease to the old and sick. There are people shooting security in the back of the head for asking them to wear a mask. The feds screwed up by destroying our preparation for a pandemic from China, something we used to have in place, then waffling for months hoping for a miracle. But here we are today.

    I want to see more re-opening but with some strong restrictions and strong enforcement. I’d go so far as to mandate masks in public places. But re-opening is inevitable and probably sooner than ideal in a strict scientific sense. Too many people recognize they can ‘protest’ by screwing up the shutdown, so they will. It’s powerful. They think that means it’s right. They take no responsibility for the tens of thousands dead, the hundreds of thousands to die. It’s never their fault

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  20. The idea that Trump is for re-opening and his opponents are opposed is one of those false-dichotomies intended to manipulate, not inform.

    Dustin

    I’m not sure why you wrote that in response to me since I never made that falls dichotomy. From what I’ve read there are some from both sides that are for reopening the economy, though there are some who believe that we should be in isolation until there is an actual vaccine. As I wrote before we need to look at how many per million get seriously sick and how many per million die. Then once we have determined the demographics of those people, then we can make an informed decision as to how to proceed. Also, we need to make sure that our data is accurate. From the guidance document from the CDC as to how to count COVID-19 deaths shows it’s not accurate. The Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health actually said “It means, technically even if you died of clear alternative causes, but you had COVID at the same time, it’s still listed as a COVID death.” No, that’s not a COVID-19 death. The numbers have to be accurate for us to make informed decisions.

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  21. I think only Zeke Emmanuel types think we should “hide” for 18 months, and even he’s backed down from that a bit.

    But we do need lockdowns until the hospitals and related facilities have capacity and equipment in place to handle new cases. That can vary from place to place, of course. And we have to be ready to lockdown particular areas if cases spike to the point that their local facilities start to get overwhelmed.

    But I think you’re underestimating the difficulties of isolating the most at risk. I am one that fits that moniker: 61 with an autoimmune disorder. I need to work, and I live alone, so I can’t hand over the groceries and other errands to someone else. (I can’t trust Doordash or some other remote shopping service for groceries because my diet is extremely limited for medical reasons. I need to check everything before I buy for kashrut, for expiration dates, for ingredients. I am a bit obsessive.)
    I can do without a lot of things and avoid crowds. But I can’t avoid all human contact.

    Kishnevi (9dfc8c)

  22. BTW, if someone had COVID19 at the time of death, and the virus led to them dying earlier than they would have died without it…they should be listed as a COVID19 death.

    Kishnevi (9dfc8c)

  23. The new strain appeared in February in Europe, migrated quickly to the East Coast of the United States and has been the dominant strain across the world since mid-March, the scientists wrote

    That may actually be the original Wuhan strain, while the strain that went to South Korea, Taiwan and the West Coast of the United States was a milder mutant version that first went to the rest of China.

    Mutations usually render a virus less harmful.

    Sammy Finkelman (375edc)

  24. Kishnevi,

    I’ll agree that if that was the case then COVID-19 was a comorbidity, not the reason. What if a person died from stage 4 cancer and tested positive for COVID-19 yet was asymptomatic? Is that considered a COVID-19 death?

    Tanny O'Haley (8a06bc)

  25. What if a person died from stage 4 cancer and tested positive for COVID-19 yet was asymptomatic? Is that considered a COVID-19 death?

    Based on what I’ve read, yes, it would.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  26. Why instead of doom and gloom all the time isn’t the news media touting things like, Professor Didier Raoult Releases the Results of a New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients.

    Unfortunately, we are saddled with a media that believes its responsibility is to gin-up/promote panic, uncertainty, and to help get Democrats elected. And it’s a damned shame.

    I hope you’re doing well, Tanny. You’re a positive influence and it does not go unnoticed or unappreciated!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  27. Why instead of doom and gloom all the time isn’t the news media touting things like, Professor Didier Raoult Releases the Results of a New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients.

    Or chicken soup.

    nk (1d9030)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0901 secs.