6472
Comments (2753)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
23
kimdid311 23 points ago +23 / -0

Apparently the virus has mutated, losing the parts that fucks with blood clotting and thus became much less dangerous, according to Prof. Raoult.

Might also explain why the number of deaths remains very low in spite of hundreds of thousands of new infections in France.

Some biologists also say that quick degradation is something that happens with genetically engineered organisms. We don't know how to splice things the way Nature does, so modifications tend to break quickly, unlike naturally evolved organisms, and the virus degrades after a few months.

Just like most stuff from communist China.

10
Italians_Invented_2A 10 points ago +11 / -1

No, it was expected that the chinavirus would lose potency over time. Its origin is irrelevant. It's just natural selection that happens with every virus.

A virus strain that is less deadly and more often asymptomatic has much higher changes to spread than a deadly virus strain. Killing the host is not a good thing for the virus.

4
kimdid311 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes but it's a matter of speed. The original virus wasn't very deadly to begin with. That means it wasn't seeing much selection pressure from killing its hosts too quickly. On the other hand, it makes sense that an artificially spliced virus is not fully adapted and would rapidly evolve before starting to stabilize.

3
unable_afternoon 3 points ago +3 / -0

stuff that's made in china is always low quality.

1
MAGA_Master 1 point ago +1 / -0

COMMENT GOLD!!!!!!!!

1
HeavenPiercingMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

That sounds like vitalism. I prefer to subscribe to the "made in China" theory.