Fascinating article. But I struggle with this kind of writing:
> In other words, perhaps, the coronavirus virus uses long-term infections as a mutational testing ground. While inside one person, they can try out all these different combinations of mutations and figure out, through trial and error, which ones are best at evading the immune system or helping the virus become more infectious.
Viruses don’t have agency. They don’t choose to try out combinations of mutations. I think it’s quite misleading to suggest any form of intelligence or decision making as an analogy for how viruses evolve.
I agree, these people should take a refreshing course about evolution.
Every cell from any organism gets variations of base chemicals in their DNA/RNA when dividing. These variations are called mutations.
Most mutations wither away, however some of them under the right circumstances, when an evolutionary gap presents itself, have a chance to become a dominant mutation.
As long as we humans cause evolutionary gaps, you know killing off species (plants, insects and animals), something will fill that gap, and don't be surprised if that turns out to be hostile to our species.
Also when we weaponize viruses without developing antidotes together and stupid doctors carry them to markets without setting off alarms at their laboratories, we should not be surprised that this will bite our species.
> In other words, perhaps, the coronavirus virus uses long-term infections as a mutational testing ground. While inside one person, they can try out all these different combinations of mutations and figure out, through trial and error, which ones are best at evading the immune system or helping the virus become more infectious.
Viruses don’t have agency. They don’t choose to try out combinations of mutations. I think it’s quite misleading to suggest any form of intelligence or decision making as an analogy for how viruses evolve.