You make a great point. Yet medical diagnosis is part presumption, part evidence based. If you do not know to look for a disease mechanism, you are unlikely to find it unless you are a research hospital.
As to acquired immunity, I would hope that would be the norm, but like common flu, the strains mutate.
“If you do not know to look for a disease mechanism, you are unlikely to find it unless you are a research hospital.”
—
But I wonder if they wouldn’t have to report seeing something new (or maybe did report it)? Could doctors just look at such things as being within the bounds of statistical oddity and not be too concerned?
If you do not know to look for a disease mechanism, you are unlikely to find it unless you are a research hospital.
Excuse me buckalfa, but I was not making any point, I was really asking if you would check, because if this true it will blow the minds of virology community.
If there are NO fatal viral pneumonia cases but there is SARS-CoV-2 in the community that would be huge and we need to know that.
Are your hospitals doing the routine CT scans when someone presents with pneumonia? Because everybody knows how sars-like pneumonia appears and believe me everybody is looking for it.
You have any viral pneumonia in your hospitals and clinics that are not getting tested?
“You do not know to look...”
It is routine to do a bronchoalveolar lavage fluid check on serious pneumonia cases. Are they not doing that where your wife works? (Were you the commenter whose wife who was a nurse?)
What is being suggested in this article, could conceivably happen, I get that, but if so then this germ would be WAY, WAY, LESS virulent than we thought and they need to figure out why. The virology of this thing matches the epidemiology as currently reported.