
New coronavirus losing potency, top Italian doctor says - adventured
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-virus/new-coronavirus-losing-potency-top-italian-doctor-says-idUSKBN2370OQ
======
glaugh
Coronavirus have “proofreading” functions that make them less likely to mutate
meaningfully than many other kinds of viruses.

While it’s true that viruses often mutate to become less potent over time (bc
that makes them less detectable and therefore more likely to spread, an
evolutionary advantage), any claims that this is happening should require very
strong evidence to be believed. This isn’t even weak evidence.

Most of the above is googleable. I don’t have direct citations because most of
my understanding comes from the excellent This Week in Virology podcast where
various virologists chat about such issues. They’re quite dismissive of the
frequent “The virus is mutating” stories (though of course all viruses mutate
in small, unimportant ways all the time)

~~~
rectang
It sounds to me like the doctor is anthropomorphizing the virus and saying
what the people want to hear. It may be that the pandemic is receding for a
variety of reasons, but that's almost certainly not because the virus itself
has mutated.

~~~
lbeltrame
He actually said he's aware there are no known mutations that can be traced to
a different clinical phenotype (Reuters did not report that part).

------
lbeltrame
Reuters touched only briefly what Dr.Zangrillo said. He is aware there are no
mutations that could be traced to any change in clinical outcome (everyone
else who talks about "reduced potency" also acknowledges that fact).

But indeed, lockdowns or not, there has been a decrease in ICU usage and in
viral load of patients. Treatments have also improved somehow (aside the
"ventilator yes or no" debacle, according to Dr.Gattinoni, an Italian doctor
working in Germany, the actual intubation parameters like flow of oxygen, etc.
have also changed).

People think social distancing and masks may have played a role (probably),
but bear in mind that until the beginning of May, the government was still
saying that masks were useless (a thesis still shared by some Italian
experts). Only Lombardia mandated them also outside (as far as I remember).

Personally (I don't have any evidence to back it up so far, so it's just
speculation), I think that the route of infection matters. The vast majority
of cases in the past two months were in nursing care homes (a complete
screening in Lombardia in the past days found 30% positives there) and in
hospitals, which also mean more viral load (closed systems) and more
vulnerable people.

That is no longer the case now. I know that some doctors are now handling
people in "house confinement" rather than bringing them to the hospitals.

P.S.: Testing capacity indeed increased but there's a lot more to do to get to
decent levels.

------
nikolay
I am suprised who weak doctors are in Math! You don't need to be a Math genius
to grasp this: initially, they were testing symptomatic people, mostly people
with high fever, and we know not all develop fever. So, now, testing has
opened up to more people, i.e. asymptomatic and with mild symptoms. It's
beyond obvious that CFR will drop! CFR will always drop with time - unless the
virus mutates and becomes more severe. Also, many dilute the mortality with
some unreliable antibody tests, which also are not randomized samples. In the
Balkans, the antibody tests show very low infection rate, yet, the epidemic
has effectively stopped - more than 2 weeks after the restrictions got
removed. Obviously, the Summer weather is helping, but this also means that,
for sure, there will be a second wave in the Fall as infections are still
growing and in some areas they are literally just in the beginning.

~~~
nextos
I think it's also for evolutionary reasons. A virus that is milder survives
better and spreads more. A virus that kills the host, or in this case makes it
sick so that it self-isolates, has lower fitness.

The so-called Spanish flu pandemic (not Spanish at all, probably from Asia as
well) went this route. It became very mild and the pandemic vanished quickly
after killing millions.

~~~
T-A
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Deadly_second_wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Deadly_second_wave)

[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/31/second-wave-
coro...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/31/second-wave-coronavirus-
uk-winter-peak-covid/)

~~~
perl4ever
Posting only links or references can leave it unclear if you are agreeing,
disagreeing, clarifying, or what.

~~~
yellowapple
Does it matter? As long as the information is factual, it is useful. Not every
comment must take some side in some imagined argument or debate.

------
im3w1l-alt
There was some report quite a while ago from Singapore that they saw deletion
variants with lower potency iirc.

------
pwned1
As the global diagnoses go up, the daily death rate is declining, so this
makes sense.

~~~
neatze
Variables changed; social distancing is in effect, medical field is much more
effective then it was two month ago. But hey lets say magically virus is
changed.

In what way it makes sense to you ?

~~~
dougmwne
Viruses mutate. There is a selection pressure for them to become more
contagious but less incapacitating since sick people in bed do not infect
others. It is possible, though not guaranteed that common strains of COVID
could become less deadly over time. That said, public health decisions should
be based on the science and not wishful thinking or what one doctor said.

~~~
neatze
Scientists use data from here:
[https://nextstrain.org/](https://nextstrain.org/) to make such claim, to best
of my understanding, there no-such claim.

~~~
joyj2nd
The directed evolution of a virus, as mentioned, to become more invective but
less lethal can be explained by game theory and is backed up by experience.
But is is not a law, could also go otherwise around.

~~~
neatze
I do not dispute such possibilities, there is also possibility it will mutate
into flying AIDS. The process is about complex systems interactions and claim
that it is attributed slowly to virus mutation without such evidence is
outright reckless, unprofessional, and unscientific.

~~~
joyj2nd
I don't care what you dispute or not. It is unlikely that you are qualified to
make any statements about this or that you have ever worked in genetics on a
high level.

It is Biology 101:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_virulence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_virulence)

~~~
neatze
Not sure if you have enough cognitive abilities to understand this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)

~~~
joyj2nd
You just made a statement about a field of science where you seem to have zero
educational background and understanding and described something as "without
such evidence is outright reckless, unprofessional, and unscientific" and I
called you out on it with some Biology 101 information with a Wiki Link. Where
is your problem?

~~~
neatze
My fist problem is that; you did not refute what I stated, but instead choice
to attack my experience. While I am not medically trained, I studied genetic
optimization extensively, most importantly phenotypes effective behavior
within individual phenotype cells; functions, locations, and connections.

My second problem is that; you linked article without any explanation how my
statement is false in relation to linked article.

My third problem is that; I just don't understand what in my statement is so
false that grants attacking my experience, in simple analogy; in case 5 years
old tells you 2+2=4, clearly his age is irrelevant for what he is saying to be
true.

Finally, I explain what I said in original statement; if you have x, y, z
variables claiming without evidence that x is only responsible for output
value, and without providing evidence why y and z is not responsible is
reckless, unprofessional, and unscientific in another words it is just
speculation. Note that article ended with “It is clear that today the COVID-19
disease is different.”

------
ttul
Says one doctor.

~~~
joyj2nd
No, says science, experience and game theory. While this outcome is not
guaranteed, it is basically expected.

------
tim333
>The strength the virus had two months ago is not the same strength it has
today

If the virus had not mutated maybe it's that people have got some kind of
immunity through low level eposure?

------
Simulacra
Could this be due to mutations?

~~~
jrmg
Mutating to survive less successfully in your environment would be
evolutionarily unusual...

~~~
thisiszilff
Success in this case is spreading to more people. Mutating to cause less
severe symptoms + be more contagious is evolutionary the way these things go.

~~~
jrmg
Thanks - yeah, I guess that does make sense.

------
loopz
Sure, for less and declining viral loads. But this is mostly anecdotal.

------
neatze
This is not science, this is magic right there.

“It is clear that today the COVID-19 disease is different.” The only
difference is social distancing, for fucks sake.

~~~
dombesz
Not exactly, there was a series of articles from a virologist here on HN (cant
find it), the idea is that he wanted to infect people with the less deadly
corona versions so we all gain immunity. This would prevent a lot of
casualities. This idea also works the same way in nature, as in the less
deadly virus can spread more, because it produces milder symptoms and even no
symptoms. This means you are more likely to catch a milder version, which
leads to the fact that the virus becomes less dangerous, as deadlier strains
will fade out quicker. This does not mean we need to let go the social
distancing at all, but on the other hand we have to reach herdimmunity at some
point, preferrably without too much casualities.

~~~
neatze
I re-read the article and might be mad, but this is your interpretation or
rationalization of what doctor said.

~~~
dombesz
I wrote down the reason why the virus is “getting” weaker. There is no
explanation of the phenomena in the article, the doctor just talks about what
he experiences without an explanation. Social distancing alone wouldn’t help
us, we also need the herd immunity, otherwise the virus would just flare up
randomly the second we ease the restrictions. The mechanism I mentioned helps
us to achieve herd immunity with time. I don’t understand why is that getting
downvoted... Meanwhile I found the article:
[https://www.tillett.info/2020/04/05/a-solution-to-
covid-19/](https://www.tillett.info/2020/04/05/a-solution-to-covid-19/)

