Tweet
First the new report, from Helen Branswell:
[snip]
In fact, the SARS cases seen in China in December 2003 and January 2004 were caused by viruses that were SARS-like. They were not identical to the outbreak strain.
-----------------
So how do we know this? Were any coronaviruses actually sequenced from any of these four patients? There were major testing issues and conflicted results from the cases reported at the time. I remember the first case, first reported December 27, 2003, tested initially negative for SARS and positive for OC43. But then later tests came back positive for both viruses. Three days later, WHO released:
The suspected SARS case in southern China remains a suspected case.
Laboratory experts from the Ministry of Health of China, top scientific institutes in Beijing and WHO have reviewed the latest test results carried out on the patient in Guangzhou, and have determined that the results remain inconclusive.
Consequently, experts recommend that further tests are needed.
The Ministry of Health of China has decided that samples will be sent to a laboratory that is part of the WHO international reference network. WHO believes that carrying out tests at multiple laboratories enhances the testing process.
Meanwhile, the epidemiological investigation continues in Guangdong province. A team of international experts from WHO are on a joint mission there with the Ministry of Health of China and the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention.
The male patient, a 32-year-old television producer, remains isolated in hospital. His condition is said to be good, and his temperature has been normal for the past several days.
----------
The patient did recover, as did the other three cases. Have they in fact sequenced the virus that infected them? How does this compare with the original SARS virus? And more importantly, now, how does this virus compare with the new novel coronavirus?
[snip]
In fact, the SARS cases seen in China in December 2003 and January 2004 were caused by viruses that were SARS-like. They were not identical to the outbreak strain.
-----------------
So how do we know this? Were any coronaviruses actually sequenced from any of these four patients? There were major testing issues and conflicted results from the cases reported at the time. I remember the first case, first reported December 27, 2003, tested initially negative for SARS and positive for OC43. But then later tests came back positive for both viruses. Three days later, WHO released:
The suspected SARS case in southern China remains a suspected case.
Laboratory experts from the Ministry of Health of China, top scientific institutes in Beijing and WHO have reviewed the latest test results carried out on the patient in Guangzhou, and have determined that the results remain inconclusive.
Consequently, experts recommend that further tests are needed.
The Ministry of Health of China has decided that samples will be sent to a laboratory that is part of the WHO international reference network. WHO believes that carrying out tests at multiple laboratories enhances the testing process.
Meanwhile, the epidemiological investigation continues in Guangdong province. A team of international experts from WHO are on a joint mission there with the Ministry of Health of China and the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention.
The male patient, a 32-year-old television producer, remains isolated in hospital. His condition is said to be good, and his temperature has been normal for the past several days.
----------
The patient did recover, as did the other three cases. Have they in fact sequenced the virus that infected them? How does this compare with the original SARS virus? And more importantly, now, how does this virus compare with the new novel coronavirus?