A (possible) solution to Covid-19

robocat wrote: post #3

Another strain that might be less deadly: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987222v1.... Also it is a paper from Singapore which should avoid the China negative bias.

This is exactly the sort of strain we want to be looking for all though we want a strain that doesn’t come from hospitalised patients. This deletion is still too pathogenic for our needs, but it does prove these deletion strains are out there. If we look we will find.

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#5

Post by elcomet » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:04 AM UTC

The best would be to find a mutation that cannot jump from human to human .

Otherwise it could be dangerous if it mutates again to a more dangerous virus, even if not the original coronavirus (as you said we choose a mutation with a deletion).

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#6

Post by AbrahamParangi » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:06 AM UTC

The author should test this idea on himself and demonstrate skin in the game.

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#7

Post by danieltillett » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:12 AM UTC

elcomet wrote: post #5

The best would be to find a mutation that cannot jump from human to human . Otherwise it could be dangerous if it mutates again to a more dangerous virus, even if not the original coronavirus (as you said we choose a mutation with a deletion).

No. A major part of the value would be the host to host transmission as it would get herd immunity into those people not directly given the virus. Only a transmissible virus strain can drive the pathogenic strains to extinction too.

Large deletion mutations don’t back mutate in practice.

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#8

Post by danieltillett » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:13 AM UTC

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #6

The author should test this idea on himself and demonstrate skin in the game.

I am more than happy to be exposed to an attenuated SARS-CoV-2 strain, but first we have to find one. My idea is how we can find one.

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#9

Post by dmichulke » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:14 AM UTC

I see two problems with this approach, both political / social:

- No one will want to be the one "deploying" the attenuated strain in a human and then be responsible for some unforeseen death (even if it's just 1 in a billion). Utilitarianism is not widespread nor socially accepted. Even less so in politicians, who are quite risk averse.

- There is no lobby supporting it. There's no $$ to be made and the "vaccine" is basically free.

Re: A (possible) solution to Covid-19

#10

Post by jka » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 7:15 AM UTC

This seems risky but worth consideration.

Can you provide peer / concept review from virologists?

A few items of feedback:

- You could use a title that includes a distinct word to identify your proposed solution: "Using accentuated COVID-19 strains as a (possible) solution". This helps people to communicate and refer to the idea concisely.

- The top three paragraphs may be known to your target audience; consider allowing the reader to get straight to your point.

- It took me a while (certainly to the Q&A section) to grasp that attenuated virus strains are different from dangerous ones. Explaining this (perhaps in a brief sentence, then repeated and elaborated in a more detailed paragraph) near the top may also help.

- Further references (especially peer review from respected authors) may help gain traction. Decision makers can be -- sensibly -- risk averse in global crises like these.

Good luck!