A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
Not entirely unexpected given some of the common cold coronas. The classic literature (by Phil Minor) was suggesting multiple infection episodes within a year.
-
But in this case it smells fishy. I don't believe there was enough SC2 around in Beijing for 6 out of their 273 patients even to have multiple exposures of radically different viruses, let alone actually become infected.
-
Perhaps, but the official numbers from China are clearly large underestimates.
-
I agree but even so. One of the 6 is 2 years old.
-
2020-09-01 14:42
Andrew Rambaut
(but I don't know how I know that because I haven't seen the paper)
-
Excellent educated guess.
-
There are two different things: (i) does the paper show reinfection; (ii) does it give a reliable frequency of reinfection because of sampling biases.
-
Trying to get clarity on some of these questions - because both are important. I requested the raw data, so going totake a look at that first in case something got mixed up.If these six are actual my high risk (e.g. frontline workers assuming they're immune) than I can believe it. But ifthey're a random sampling, then it looks really unlikely - and yes, there's a baby in there too....
-
Or toddler - whatever - little human (I don't know kids...)