Is the SARS-CoV-2 genome prone to mutations? I'm seeing contradictory information and would love clarifications from an expert. MINI-THREAD.
The New York Intelligencer writes, "According to the current research, the virus that causes COVID-19 has a low “error rate,” meaning that its pace of mutation remains slow despite its rapid spread."
But a preprint by an American team reveals: "Like RdRps (RNA-dependent RNA polymerases) in other viruses, the coronavirus enzyme is highly error-prone." biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
So which is it? And does it have a 3'-5' exonuclease activity? I'll keep digging but any expert help will be appreciated! #SARSCoV2#virology#RNA#scicomm
Just seeing that the reference in the preprint is to an article from 2018 on flaviviruses. Grrr... that's not the same thing!
I got an answer from an expert (whom I'm not naming here since this was over email, just in case he doesn't want to be identified). But his answer is quite illuminating.
"All RNA viruses have high error rates compared to DNA polymerases. However, the CoV error is lower than other RNA viruses because they have ExoN proofreading activity. This is because the genome is so big that a normal error rate would drive the virus to extinction.
"So in a sense, both claims are correct."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I read Chris' book chapter, from which he quotes in his piece, and want to share a few very interesting insights from it. Dare I say, I may have changed my mind on this topic.
"Were all who claimed psychic abilities either deliberate frauds or suffering from some sort of mental illness? This was certainly true of some claimants, but my personal view [...] is that the vast majority are neither fraudulent nor crazy."
"A widely ridiculed paper about jade amulets possibly protecting against COVID-19 makes us wonder what systems are in place to review outlandish claims."
I felt it important to reach out to the lead author. We chatted for over an hour. A few details that didn't make it into the article to follow.
The NIH did not fund this paper. It funded other studies of his that involved rats. When some of these rats got sick, Bility tied that to his hypothesis and wrote the paper.
"We propose that the ferromagnetic-like iron stores in humans are the unifying determinant for COVID-19-induced morbidity and mortality."
Seriously, WTF? What decides if you get severe COVID and die from it is how much iron is in you because of magnetic fields??
"This work seeks to advance the science of public health, as it lays the foundation for the unification of dynamics in the ferromagnetic-like iron-containing human-biosphere and geosphere via the empirical laws and the theoretical frameworks of condensed matter physics."
Dr. Andrew Kaufman made the rounds in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic by claiming the virus did not exist. Now, he tells hundreds of thousands of YouTube users that everything they know about medicine is wrong.
There was so much I didn’t have room to discuss or link to in my article, so here are some extra thoughts and links.
THREAD!
If you’re curious about the scientific link between exosomes and viruses, there’s a pretty cool piece here that I skimmed while looking into this topic: quantamagazine.org/cells-talk-in-…
"But if we are all shouting into our own echo chambers about risky behaviors, shaming may better serve our own reputations than the collective welfare."
"She stressed that she trusted Weiss far more than other experts because he had an open mind & no agenda. When I asked what would increase her trust in medical expertise, she said part of the problem was that 'People think doctors know everything. But you’re just people'."
"She wished they would admit when they were wrong and more readily acknowledge uncertainty. 'I just wish the experts would say, I don’t know'."