
Spike mutation pipeline reveals a more transmissible form of SARS-CoV-2: study - sunraa
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054v2
======
chrisamiller
This thread from another virologist casts some doubt about the claims of
selective advantage proposed in this preprint:
[https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1257825352660877313?s=19](https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1257825352660877313?s=19)

Science in action, folks. It's sometimes messy, but usually converges on the
truth

~~~
joshgel
Any good takes on the benefit/harm ratio of these pre print servers?

Yes, it’s good to get info out quickly, especially in a pandemic. Yes, it’s
very important that this kind of science is not stuck behind paywalls. But I
really worry about the quality of data being published there and the ability
of interested but non-technical readers to understand it in the appropriate
context. Many news reports about this article didn’t reference this Twitter
thread. But likely if it were published in a major journal after review and
with an accompanying editorial, the context might have gotten through better.

~~~
jrockway
I think that's always up for debate. I notice the cultural differences even in
the technology field. On HN, I feel like people generally publish their work
openly in early stages; make a Github, upload code, tell people about it when
they think it's good enough. Over on Reddit, people do the opposite. People
will write about something they're doing, but then when asked "can we see the
code?" or "is the STL available on Thingiverse?" they hem and haw about it not
being good enough and as a result nobody can ever build on the work. (I have
never ever seen someone that said on Reddit that they'll publish it later
publish it later. The fun is over for them, and they're on to the next thing.
So a lot of interesting ideas / code / 3d models are completely lost to
history and just have to be reinvented.)

I don't think you'll ever make someone who sees the world one way see it the
other way. All you can do is decide for yourself what to do, and do that. Some
people will follow you. Those set in their ways will continue to do it their
way.

------
citrusx
[https://gizmodo.com/what-to-know-about-that-new-paper-
claimi...](https://gizmodo.com/what-to-know-about-that-new-paper-claiming-the-
coronavi-1843265388)

------
jostmey
RNA viruses like this coronavirus mutate an alarming rates. I would be shocked
if these mutations have not already occurred in people. There must be a reason
why these mutations were not selected. They must be detrimental in other ways

~~~
nostromo
There are many reports that SARSCoV2 actually mutates quite slowly.

[https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutation-
rate.html](https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutation-rate.html)

~~~
pdxandi
Yeah, my understanding is that SARS-CoV-2 has a proofreader enzyme that error
corrects, which ensures fidelity during replication. In other words, it
mutates a lot slower than say the flu.

~~~
acomjean
According to a viroligist (UC Berkley) you are correct.

The polymerase it uses to duplicate contains a profreading function. Its a big
virus too:

A way detailed presentation on the Virus: (I think about 40 minutes in it
talks about the duplication). Its kind of an interesting talk:

[https://hhmi.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id...](https://hhmi.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=045b42dc-e129-4ac8-98f3-ab9f0156e76d)

