Covid Thoughts and research. I am curious to what you think of this.

I have been looking into some stuff. I am not a scientist.

With that written, I was wondering why there are so many as 40 different strains of SARS Covid-2 ( what they now are calling Covid-19). I get that mutations happen. But, that got me really thinking.

I am not going to debate the origins of this. Right now, that really doesn’t matter. What matters is that people are dying.

Then there is a great number of people who have had this virus and had no clue.

My question is; Why?

I got to thinking about the cats and dog that have tested positive for Covid-19. That doesn’t scare me. Usually, when a virus jumps from one species to another it is weakened. There is no way in hell my beasts will be put out over this.

When I was in college my microbiology professor was a veterinarian. When we needed to do anything with blood, she always collected dog blood from her dogs and her friend’s dogs. That way we got to see what anything looked like in real blood.

She used to say that using a dog’s blood was the only way to get a real concept of real blood and in the worst case scenario, the worst thing you could ever get was a very minor cold.

Of course, you could never see a virus in the blood. I’m not suggesting that.

She went on to explain that sometimes things can be transferred from human to canine and vice versa. But it was never bad. We all wore gloves, but we did believe her.

That added to my thoughts.

I know that not Covid, but a coronavirus, can go between a cat and a dog. It has happened before. I went out to confirm what I remembered.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Emergence of Pathogenic Coronaviruses in Cats by Homologous Recombination between Feline and Canine Coronaviruses

…Type II feline coronavirus (FCoV) emerged via double recombination between type I FCoV and type II canine coronavirus (CCoV)...

Then finally, I decided to so some research. These are already existing studies. I am curious to what other people think on this.
In that same study I just wrote about, my understanding is that type IIFCoV ( it started out as FCoV I and then a dog got it, it mutated and then another cat caught the mutated virus) is a very docile version of FCoV.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Emergence of Pathogenic Coronaviruses in Cats by Homologous Recombination between Feline and Canine Coronaviruses

…All of these observations suggest that type II FCoV emerged inside the cat body and is unable to readily spread among cats, indicating that these recombination events for emergence of pathogenic coronaviruses occur frequently….

I wanted to learn more on this. So, I did. I found this;

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
The Evolution and Genetics of Virus Host Shifts

…Another important trade-off in the novel host may be between virulence (the harm a pathogen does to a host) and the transmission potential of the pathogen. A number of theoretical and empirical studies have demonstrated that an intermediate level of virulence is often optimal to maximise transmission [70]–[74]. However, following a host shift, a pathogen may produce maladaptive levels of virulence as the novel host–parasite association has not been under direct selection.…

Now, I’m thinking that maybe this Covid-19 may be going back and forth between house pets and humans making the infection less than noticeable in a lot of humans. Cats and dogs can get our colds and Flu. They are different types of both different viruses but, cats and dogs can also, get coronavirus.
I wondered how that could really happen, why does it happen that way. I had an idea but when I investigated it, I got a lot of information.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Cross-Species Virus Transmission and the Emergence of New Epidemic Diseases

…SARS CoV… …Himalayan palm civets or related carnivores; humans… ….Host switching, adaptation; some adaptation for binding to the ACE2 receptor in humans. 2003-2004….
…while the transfer of a feline panleukopenia virus (FPV) to dogs reflected adaptation between hosts from different families in the order Carnivora….

…The level of genetic variation is important, and most viruses transferred to new hosts are poorly adapted, replicate poorly, and are inefficiently transmitted, so that the greater the rate of variation the more likely a virus is to adapt to the new host. This indicates that cross-species transmission should be more common in rapidly evolving viruses..

That was great but didn’t answer how this happens. Not really. I wanted to know. I found some more studies.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Mechanisms of Zoonotic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Host Range Expansion in Human Airway Epithelium▿

…Virus sequence data isolated throughout the course of the epidemic suggest that the S gene was under heavy positive selection during the early phase of the epidemic but eventually stabilized as the epidemic progressed…
… During the epidemic and the reemergence, the early 2003 SARS-CoV animal isolate, SZ16, and the 2004 reemergent human isolate, GD03, were among the most divergent viruses isolated from civets and humans, respectively. SARS-CoV SZ16 was identified in palm civets in live-animal markets within the Guangdong region of China during the epidemic, and its S protein differs from that of the epidemic...

The S gene has to change to enable cross species transmission.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Cross-Species Virus Transmission and the Emergence of New Epidemic Diseases

…The level of genetic variation is important, and most viruses transferred to new hosts are poorly adapted, replicate poorly, and are inefficiently transmitted, so that the greater the rate of variation the more likely a virus is to adapt to the new host. This indicates that cross-species transmission should be more common in rapidly evolving viruses (12, 24, 41, 147, 149). RNA viruses have error-prone replication (23), lack a proofreading mechanism, and have rapid replication, short virus generation times, and large virus populations (22, 82). …

…For example, it is not clear why influenza A viruses are enteric viruses in their natural avian hosts but mainly infect the respiratory tract in mammals, but this likely influences the host adaptation of the viruses to mammals and the ability to spread efficiently….

…If several changes are required to allow host switching, then intermediate viruses would likely be less fit in either the donor or recipient hosts than the parental or descendant viruses…

My understanding is usually right after the cross-species transmission the virus is very weak because it has to change to enter into the new species.

To others out there;

Does this make sense?

Could this explain the dramatic differences between people dying from this and people never having a clue that they even had the disease?

Could it be, that our pets are really keeping us safe?

Other than an epidemiologists wet dream of totally mapping out the evolution of this virus, could this be why the CDC wants everyone to get tested for antibodies?

I am curious to any other thoughts that you have on this.

Well there is this tiger:

edition.cnn.com...

a reply to: froglette

First, I would suggest looking into how the PCR tests work, and what they actually test for..

That aside, with canines at least.. We have spent thousands of years side-by-side and adapting together.

I think the interactions between us, and our reliance on each other, may run far, far deeper than we realize.

I think its an area of research that is relatively lacking, though not absent, in everything from psychology (of all species involved) to health (of all species involved).

Really fantastic post frog!

originally posted by: Serdgiam
First, I would suggest looking into how the PCR tests work, and what they actually test for..

The testing is suspect ... at best. And ... why'd it take so long? And ... why aren't they being thorough.

FWIW, my brother went 'hot' a couple days ago. He's a walking health disaster, and yet, they sent him home to self-quarantine with his college-aged (with a boyfriend) daughter and walking health disaster wife. Go figure.

originally posted by: froglette
My understanding is usually right after the cross-species transmission the virus is very weak because it has to change to enter into the new species.

Viruses jump species through mutation, or more likely accumulated mutations, giving the virus the ability to infect a new species - say humans. This does not "weaken" the virus per se, but because animals and human have different physiology the impact of the virus may more, or less severe.

a reply to: Snarl

Honestly, even if the testing wasnt suspect.. Im not sure how useful it is (at least now).

At best, it provides a momentary snapshot per patient. Perhaps most useful when used in conjunction with uber-draconian measures though, eh? Dunno why so many are so focused on it. I think I was too, so no smugness there.

Antibody testing could be useful though, if they are able to effectively isolate it for this virus specifically. Not an epidemiologist or doctor though.

a reply to: froglette

While there is a grain of truth in what you say, I think the issue is more of a numbers game.

The virus isn't particularly infective, at least compared to some other pathogens, but seems to be far worse in those who have multiple exposures.

A case in point was the Chinese doctor who blew the whistle on the virus. Despite not being in the 'at risk' demographic, he died from the virus, as did many medical staff who were otherwise healthy.

With any pathogen, there is always a point where the population of the pathogen overwhelms the body's responses.

It is possible for a novel virus to have a number of undetected cell ruptures and to be expelled from the body without immune response and without further infection (say a throat or nasal cell that reproduces the virus but then it is removed from the body encased in mucous or the new viral strands are inactivated by an environment that is destructive to them and therefore the virus doesn't infect other cells).

So, the issue is the number of infections in the locale both internally to the body and also in the adjacent population.

originally posted by: Serdgiam
Honestly, even if the testing wasnt suspect.. Im not sure how useful it is (at least now).

Antibody testing could be useful though, if they are able to effectively isolate it for this virus specifically. Not an epidemiologist or doctor though.

I'm of the belief that this virus began passing through the world's population much earlier than announced (so let's look at the two thoughts you posted above).

Why do you think the narrative is being pushed that a large population of people are asymptomatic carriers? Or that some people fall victim to the virus yet never manifest any symptoms?

If you got sick ... and attributed it to the seasonal flu ... and stayed home and recovered on your own. Did you actually have the flu? What if you went to the doctor and it was just bronchitis or a mild case of pneumonia that was already waning?

I'm sure anti-body testing has its merits. Probably not for me as I don't care if I have the virus or have had the virus. I don't need to Receive The Mark either way.

a reply to: Snarl

I think the idea of antibody tests is so that we can know how much of the population is immune. Even if we don't test everyone, if diverse sampling starts showing that 80% of the population is immune already, then we know we're not facing the possibility of overwhelming the healthcare system anymore.

Of course, some (lookin' at you, among others, Bill Gates) will want it to be like a sort of reverse Star of David scenario, where your identifier will be whether or not you have been cleared (immunity proven) to be in public. While I think that's an idea worth going full-blown revolution against, I'd prefer the option of proven-immunity over forced vaccination.

originally posted by: dogstar23
I'd prefer the option of proven-immunity over forced vaccination.

I won't care if an option is offered. I've already opted out.

Slippery slippery slope there, dogstar. I see it as crossing well over the infringement line of my liberty.

Don't make me get all Patrick Henry on Easter Sunday. LOL

a reply to: chr0naut

I hadn't really thought so much about multiple exposures. Would make sense.

Do you think that some of the immunity may have come from the apoptosis of the cells?

A long time ago I read about nosodes. I don't know if I can wrap my head around that, but I think the theory is pretty much the same. Exposure to dead viral and bacterial matter makes the body form antibodies.

a reply to: EartOccupant

That's very interesting. I will follow that.

Her keeper was asymptomatic. I wonder if they were tested in the same time frame or was he tested before or after she started showing signs of being ill?

I will see what I can find out.

Good catch. I didn't see that.

a reply to: Serdgiam

I agree with you.

The true bond between pets ( I am not P.C.) and humans is something I think is taken for granted. Maybe, we have been taking care of each other in more ways than we know for a long time.

I was surprised not to be able to find many studies regarding both.

a reply to: Snarl

I truly hope everything works out for him, his wife, their daughter and her boyfriend.

You must be worried. I know I would be.

originally posted by: froglette
a reply to: chr0naut

I hadn't really thought so much about multiple exposures. Would make sense.

Do you think that some of the immunity may have come from the apoptosis of the cells?

A long time ago I read about nosodes. I don't know if I can wrap my head around that, but I think the theory is pretty much the same. Exposure to dead viral and bacterial matter makes the body form antibodies.

Usually, I think it is the viral surface structure profile that is trained into the immune system. With the way COVID-19 disrupts T cells, I don't think that information is being captured efficiently but our biochemistry is pretty amazing, so there must be a way to infer immunity, because people do get better.

I think that the apoptosis of the cells has a time before necrotic chemistry could identify the cell as being 'not alive' anymore and by that time inactivated RNA strands from the virus would probably be quite similar to RNA from cellular fragments. Definitely the surface protein structures would be long gone. But, like I said, amazing biochem could easily be happening, rendering everything I presume, to be wrong, LOL.



PS, I'm no expert on biology, just an interested party. My forte is physics, so I tend to grok the numbers and chemistry.

a reply to: chr0naut

The human body is amazing! I don't think we even understand half of what it does or can do.

Kudos on Physics. That is not one of my gifts.

originally posted by: Serdgiam
a reply to: froglette

First, I would suggest looking into how the PCR tests work, and what they actually test for.

First, my understanding is that the actual creator of PCR tests said unequivocally that they should never, ever be used for diagnostic purposes.

Second, my understanding also is that none - not one of the tests currently being used are actually testing for the virus.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
First, my understanding is that the actual creator of PCR tests said unequivocally that they should never, ever be used for diagnostic purposes.

He was quite clear on that!

Second, my understanding also is that none - not one of the tests currently being used are actually testing for the virus.

The PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) tests dont appear to do so. They amplify coronavirus remnants in genetic material, transcribing RNA. Quite a broad net there. Also one of the things that led me to look into RdRPs inhibitors (like Zinc ionophores + Zinc). Actually *really* interesting stuff to me, but.. so many things seem to heavily leveraging ignorance in the media, society, etc.

Supposedly the newer tests are more specific. However, with the intentional deception (imo) about PCR tests, "coronavirus" vs "covid19," and just in general.. I have serious doubts. "Coronavirus" and "covid19" and "SARS-CoV-2" have all been used so interchangeably that many seem to think they are exactly the same thing.

My guess would be that they have found coronavirus RNA remnants in animals, and have spread that notion under the auspices of "covid19." However.. I think there is still a fascinating discussion to be had on that topic. Canines and humans have been so intertwined for so long.. I think its easy to overlook just how deep that relationship might go.

see folks.....gerbils are cool !