Is the original variant from Wuhan still about?

[FlatteredFool]

I've just been reading about the current variants of concern and how the Kent variant has been renamed Alpha, and the Indian variant Delta. There's the SA and Brazilian ones too of course but what happened to the original from Wuhan? Has it gone? Mutated? Of no significance now? I've not been following things except vaguely so I've no doubt missed this information. Can anyone explain please? Thank you.

Anyone?

Good question

I don't know numbers but it's I imagine prevalence is very low or none - it's been outcompeted by the other variants

Delta is now outcompeting the other strains (SA/Kent etc)

Good question. (I don't know).

I agree it’s a very good question. It would be interesting to know more about this, particularly the numbers. I kind of understand the explanation above, but can’t fully understand how that would cause the original strain to just ‘fizzle’ out (if that is what happened?) Can anyone expand on this explanation at all?

The answer is that you cannot step into the same river twice

These new variants make me almost nostalgic for the Wuhan one...

@QioiioiioQ huh? Am I being slow? Is that a joke or are u talking about immunity?

Good question.

I'm sure prof Whitby mentioned it in the last briefing they did and it does still comprise a very small percentage of cases.

are u talking about immunity
Eye am talking about the virus genome

No, it’s not.

The original strain didn’t spread much further than Wuhan. It was out competed by a variant and died out. That variant affected mostly Asian countries, possibly was in S. America too but didn’t really take off in Europe. I think there were isolated cases but it didn’t really spread in the way it did in Asia.

It was another variant that caused things to take off in Europe in Jan/Feb 2020. D456G, IIRC, but might be wrong about that.

No its long been out competed.

Actually, I think I’m wrong, it’s D614G, but I can’t find the paper on genomic sequencing from last year that I’m looking for.

That’s all very interesting! And makes sense now thankyou 🙂

So by the ‘river’ analogy ... do u mean that the virus’ evolution doesn’t survive by going backwards? (When there’s a better one about)

Good question.

I also have a strange question but since we hear a lot about the SA/Brazilian/Delta(Indian) variant - do other places hear about a UK variant that we just see as standard, like the Kent variant I suppose?

The variants that are more successful at reproducing because they are more transmissable, take all the hosts and then the other variants die out. Same with evolution of all things. They are in competition with each other so the ones that have characteristics that help them reproduce more, survive to go on and keep mutating.

Yes the UK variant is well known in other countries. It has caused them massive problems.

@WuhanClanAintNothingToFuckWith I could be wrong but I took the river analogy to mean that with every mutation the original gets pushed further down.

With a river the water is constantly moving so even if you jumped in the same spot 3x it wouldn't be the same.

Ah, thank you @SonnetForSpring

@DoucheCanoe

Good question.

I also have a strange question but since we hear a lot about the SA/Brazilian/Delta(Indian) variant - do other places hear about a UK variant that we just see as standard, like the Kent variant I suppose?

Yes. But not every variant.

Virus mutate all the time. There are loads that we’ve never heard about because they’ve not really given the virus any advantage against existing circulating strains. The ones we know about Kent/south Africa/Brazil or Alpha to Kappa as they are now known we’re aware of because WHO have flagged them up either for investigation (VUI) or that investigation has shown they are an issue. (vOC)

Presumably it’s the countries themselves who flag it up to the WHO based on changes they are seeing in their outbreak, but I don’t know.

Woah! I see, thankyou

@SonnetForSpring

The variants that are more successful at reproducing because they are more transmissable, take all the hosts and then the other variants die out. Same with evolution of all things. They are in competition with each other so the ones that have characteristics that help them reproduce more, survive to go on and keep mutating.

Aren’t they also in competition with restrictions though? Not directly, but in a survival of the fittest way. So in November and the last few months we’ve had restrictions that have been enough to reduce transmission of existing strains and bring cases down and then the introduction/development of a more transmissible strain where the restrictions are not enough to bring the R number below 1.

So you end up with the existing dominant strain competing both with the restrictions and for hosts.

you cannot step into the same river twice
en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Heraclitus

Yes the restrictions add pressure as does the partial vaccination, so that increases the likelihood of a variant who can reproduce irrespective of these factors emerging and becoming dominant. So you could say having restrictions but not doing it properly is actually helping to shape the evolution of the virus to be be more transmissable. I believe letting the delta variant rip through our partially vaccinated population is a serious issue in terms of another variant emerging which is better at vaccine escape
That's why other countries like Singapore, NZ, Australia are being so careful.

So if we ‘can’t’ be as careful as them long term (Could be bad for both UK and Europe’s economies) or even be as careful short-term (until more vaccinations done nationally and internationally) is the plan to ride the storm and wait until the virus mutates into something less deadly!?

I read this tends to happen, until the virus ‘jumps’ species, where it shoots up and becomes more deadly again?

I’m unconvinced by the reasoning that social distancing causes more evolutionary pressure to become more transmissible.

If you abolished all social distancing and let people go about their normal lives then the disease would spread faster. New variants with improved transmissibility would still arise, probably faster because there would be more chances of mutation, and they would still have a significant competitive advantage over the original strain and rapidly achieve dominance. Even in 2019, you’d still have twenty brief arms length contacts for every one close contact, just due to geometry, so any virus which can better infect those more distant contacts would always have an advantage.