• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Four "SARS" cases in Guangdong between December 2003 and January 2004 were caused by a different animal coronavirus?

alert

Senior Moderator
First the new report, from Helen Branswell:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health...+Will+return/8080158/story.html#ixzz2NGrmAwub

[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:

http://www.who.int/csr/don/2003_12_30/en/index.html

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?
 
Back
Top