COVID strain more transmittable - D614G

2,156 Views | 9 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by dermdoc
Cepe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-not-mutating-to-spread-genetics-show-2020-9

Quote:

Scientists have been regularly collecting and genetically sequencing samples of the virus to track how it's changing. Over time, that monitoring has revealed, one version became more prevalent than the rest: a strain with the mutation dubbed D614G.

According to a new, preliminary study from researchers at Houston Methodist Hospital, that mutated strain was responsible for nearly every COVID-19 infection there this summer, during in Texas' second peak of infections.

James Musser, the senior author of the new research, thinks that means the mutated strain which contains the amino acid glycine, or G is more transmissible than the original.
Quote:

Geneticists classify the original version of the coronavirus as the "D lineage," whereas strains with the D614G mutation are categorized as the "G lineage." The G lineage didn't crop up until January, Hodcroft said. Since then, according to her Nextstrain colleague Richard Neher, it has come to dominate "almost all places in the US, Europe, and Latin America."

The particular mutation that differentiates these strains is a swap at the amino acid labeled 614 the part of the virus' genome that codes for the shape of its spike protein.

That spike is what the coronavirus uses to invade our cells, so it's possible a tweak there could make it easier for the virus to infect our bodies. Indeed, a June study found that the D614G strain is three to six times better at infecting human cells in the lab than its predecessor. Other preliminary research has also suggested that the mutation enhances the virus's ability to invade cells.
Quote:

His research the largest genetic study of the virus to date in the US involved more than 5,000 virus samples from Houston collected between March and July. The team classified the samples collected between March 5 and May 11 as part of the city's "first wave" of infections. In that group, the data showed, 82% contained the D614G mutation. But in the set of samples collected between the end of that first wave and July 7, the figure jumped to 99.9%.

Musser said this shows the G variant "out-competes the D variant."
Quote:

Most mutations her team is seeing are harmless, Hodcroft added, and the coronavirus is mutating slowly. Hodcroft's project sees a maximum of 20 to 25 differences between sequences that contain about 30,000 genetic building blocks.

"People are getting the same virus now that we saw in the spring," she said.
AggieBiker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cepe said:

Quote:

"People are getting the same virus now that we saw in the spring," she said.

This seems to suggest that proportionally to the infections fewer people in Texas are now dying from this because (a) we have found better ways to treat patients; (b) the most vulnerable people passed early on or are now better protected through measures they/we have taken. Both of these reasons have been discussed before. I would tend to think it is more attributable to (a) than (b) but that is just my guess. Either way this is good information to know especially since it is so close to home.
BrisketTaco10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm no scientist or Doctor, but strains that have mutated to spread more easily are also likely to be less deadly, right? Killing the host would see their effectiveness at getting their "offspring" far into the future greatly decrease.
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That would be true if the virus killed the host instantly or quickly, but the normal pattern with this virus is 21-28 before death, including the normal 10 day period at the beginning of the virus where the person can be a spreader.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BrisketTaco10 said:

I'm no scientist or Doctor, but strains that have mutated to spread more easily are also likely to be less deadly, right? Killing the host would see their effectiveness at getting their "offspring" far into the future greatly decrease.
Sounds like you can critically think and have common sense. I agree with what you posted. This is what almost all respiratory viruses do historically.

So bravo to you.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieBiker said:

Cepe said:

Quote:

"People are getting the same virus now that we saw in the spring," she said.

This seems to suggest that proportionally to the infections fewer people in Texas are now dying from this because (a) we have found better ways to treat patients; (b) the most vulnerable people passed early on or are now better protected through measures they/we have taken. Both of these reasons have been discussed before. I would tend to think it is more attributable to (a) than (b) but that is just my guess. Either way this is good information to know especially since it is so close to home.
I agree with you but also think the virus has mutated to a less lethal strain.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston94 said:

That would be true if the virus killed the host instantly or quickly, but the normal pattern with this virus is 21-28 before death, including the normal 10 day period at the beginning of the virus where the person can be a spreader.
So how quickly did people die from the Spanish flu? Or swine flu? Or basically every other respiratory spread virus?

And why are we still not dying from the Spanish flu?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Bird Poo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was also under the impression that all respiratory viruses become more infectious but less deadly as well. What exactly did this study tell us that every other virus hasn't?
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PearlJammin said:

I was also under the impression that all respiratory viruses become more infectious but less deadly as well. What exactly did this study tell us that every other virus hasn't?
Great question.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
BusterAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm on a mobile now, but we were anticipating this on this board back in July.

Sars and Mers both had the same genetic mutation.

It does make the virus less deadly. But it also makes it spread more.

I'll try to find the discussion in the AM
It takes a special kind of brainwashed useful idiot to politically defend government fraud, waste, and abuse.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So if lay people and an old pimple popper know this, why are not our geniuses mentioning this?

Makes you wonder.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.