Posted on 04/21/2020 5:53:30 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Scientists in China have discovered more than 30 mutations of the new coronavirus, which they say may partly explain why it has been more deadly in certain parts of the world.
Researchers from Zhejiang University said they had "direct evidence" that the virus "has acquired mutations capable of substantially changing its pathogenicity".
The study was written by a team including Professor Li Lanjuan, one of China's top scientists who was reportedly the first expert to propose a lockdown in Wuhan - where COVID-19 originated.
Samples were taken from 11 patients admitted to hospitals in Hangzhou, 470 miles east of Wuhan, between 22 January and 4 February during the early phase of the outbreak.
Using "ultra-deep sequencing", researchers identified 33 mutations of the new coronavirus - known as SARS-CoV-2 - of which 19 were new.
The deadliest mutations in the patients in the study had also been found in most patients across Europe, the South Morning China Post reported.
Meanwhile, the milder strains were the predominant types found in parts of the United States, such as Washington state, the newspaper said.
One mutation found in five patients involved in the research had previously only been seen in one case in Australia, according to the study.
The researchers said the findings indicate "the true diversity of the viral strains is still largely underappreciated"
(Excerpt) Read more at news.sky.com ...
Interesting thing to have a closed mind by assuming others do...
We said months ago it was a virus. Viruses mutate. Yeah, how’s those regular flu shots working?
But of course there does exist naturally acquired immunity for Influenza Type A and B, which would be protective against the four strains of influenza that are present in the vaccine (generally 2 Flu A strains (H1N1,H3N2) and 2 Flu B strains dependent on the season. But no health professionals are ever interested in testing individuals for the presence of these antibodies before recommending the flu vaccine. What other pharmaceutical do you know of is recommended without first knowing whether it is necessary?
...I’m pretty sure bioweapon people would start with a fairly accomplished killer from the outset..
now if they wanted to keep plausible deniability, (mistake) they might use something less lethal but damaging to the economy...like corona..no need to kill everyone just the economy..but getting caught has unintended consequences china is not to be trusted or believed and not relied on in the future return manufacturing to the usa and europe
Sounds like a bio-weapon to me.
Influenza is a very special case where vaccines are involved.
For most diseases, antibody mediated immunity decreases over time. This is the case with influenza, as well. In addition, influenza mutates a lot through various mechanisms, so that even if you are immune to a particular strain of H1N1, you are not necessarily completely immune to the strain that circulates the following season. While there is, as you noted, some cross-immunity, that does not substitute for a fresh dose of (hopefully more targeted) immunity conferred by vaccine.
Would you mind answering a question? In your practice, have you ever recommended a pregnant woman receive the annual flu vaccine? If you have, would you mind telling me the vaccine brand that would be used?
How could you possibly know this if no one is tested before they are given the vaccine? Isn't it just an assumption based incorrectly on vaccine-acquired immunity which indeed is much shorter lived. I believe I read somewhere on the CDC website that the maximum length of immunity from the vaccine is 126 days.
I ask again, why would you not first find out if someone retains their immunity before shooting them up with a quadrivalent vaccine cocktail?
Are you of the belief that vaccine-acquired immunity is superior to naturally acquired immunity?
Common colds can come from both rhinoviruses (which the Chinese Frankenvirus amazingly seems to start out as in most symptomatic patients) and the milder coronaviruses (which tend to occupy the lower respiratory tract). This POS pretends to be a rhinovirus, and should the body’s response not be robust enough, then goes south to the lungs, heart, kidneys, etc. The Chicomms really created a monster here, albeit one that won’t have a high a death rate, in the end, as we feared.
I know about the decay of immunity over time, because this is a very heavily researched subject. Most diseases do not cause permanent immunity.
I ask again, why would you not first find out if someone retains their immunity before shooting them up with a quadrivalent vaccine cocktail?
Why would I subject someone to a painful and invasive blood test, especially when the justification is so thin? I *know* they have some influenza antibodies, that isn't the issue. Whether they have antibodies that will protect them from the circulating strains is something different, and not that straightforward to test. I think that developing such a test for every single circulating strain of influenza would be expensive, and not quite as precise as people might believe.
Personally, I do not inject anyone with anything. I am a PhD, not an MD, and have no direct involvement in patient care. I am, however, a medical researcher, and vaccines (influenza, especially) are one of my subspecialties. Influenza vaccine technology is decades old, with the exception of the newer cell-based vaccines. It has a long and proven track record. I'd rather get a little injection that have someone pierce my arm with a huge needle to draw out copious quantities of blood for a questionable test of whether I'm immune to the circulating strains.
“Mutated.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.