NO… THERE IS NO CONVINCING COVID RE-INFECTION!

Headline in the New York Times today.

Today, Reuters and the New York Times announced the “first identified case of a true reinfection with COVID-19.” The article referred to a 33-year-old male in Hong Kong who was initially diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized in April months ago, then subsequently went to Spain, and then upon his return tested positive again after returning on Aug. 15. This item was quickly picked up and flashed on literally every news site on the Web.

The investigators suggested they had truly documented a reinfection because they had molecularly (RNA) sequenced the virus found in the patient both times he was identified and was found each time as having a different SARS-CoV-2. The second time the virus genes appeared more likely to have come from Europe than Asia.

This report was in a paper, which was “accepted” but not published by the international medical journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. However, a review of that Journal’s website did not include the accepted manuscript or any press release. Therefore, no definitive judgement about the techniques or report can be made.

However, several aspects of this “article” raise concerns.

-The individual was described as “not being ill” during the second time he was shown to have the virus. Therefore, it is questionable whether he was truly “infected” with COVID-19 or simply contaminated with the virus.

-Apparently the virus was not “grown” from the patient, but the genetic material was identified and amplified presumably by PCR. This means there was no evidence that the virus detected the second time was live and not just fragments of genetic material.

-This single, unusual case goes against data from every other legitimate, published paper on the subject. In fact, the initial report from Korea that suggested reinfection with COVID-19 also demonstrated genetic material in asymptomatic individuals. Subsequently, the investigators showed they could not grow virus from any of these individuals. This indicated they were detecting viral genetic debris and not documenting true “reinfection.” Similar concerns can be raised about this case.

-Infected means the virus has re-infected a person, taken over their cells and is reproducing live virus particles that can be transmitted to others. This means the person is ill and can infect other people. Contaminated means there are small amounts of virus on the mucosal surfaces, but the person is immune, not ill and any virally infected cells are being destroyed by the immune system. This also means there is very little virus so it can only be detected by the billion-fold amplification of PCR. It is very likely there is not enough virus that it would infect others.

Therefore, I disagree with the conclusion; “Our results prove that his second infection is caused by a new virus that he acquired recently rather than prolonged viral shedding,” asserted by Dr. Kelvin Kai-Wang To, an author and a clinical microbiologist at the University of Hong Kong. The patient may have become contaminated with the second virus, but there is no evidence he was infected with it! The immune system was doing its job!

Even worse, the Reuters article leaped to the conclusion: “The findings indicate the disease, which has killed more than 800,000 people worldwide, will continue to spread amongst the global population despite herd immunity.” Reuters later changed the “will” to “may,” but the article’s conclusion that a reinfection in a single person would significantly reduce the potential for immunity to minimize a “re-epidemic” is absurd. 

Published by jbakerjrblog

Immunologist, former Army MD, former head of allergy and clinical immunology at University of Michigan, vaccine developer and opinionated guy.

6 thoughts on “NO… THERE IS NO CONVINCING COVID RE-INFECTION!

  1. Could you explain for the layman the difference between being contaminated and infected? How does this relate to whether the researchers could “grow” virus from the patients? Does this mean that the patient had viral RNA but the RNA was somehow not active?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Infected means the virus has re-infected a person, taken over their cells and is reproducing live virus particles that can be transmitted to others. This means the person is ill and can infect other people. Contaminated means there are small amounts of virus on the mucosal surfaces, but the person is immune, not ill and any virally infected cells are being destroyed by the immune system. This also means there is very little virus so it can only be detected by the billion-fold amplification of PCR. It also is not enough virus that it would infect others.

      Hope this clarifies. Thanks for the question!

      Like

  2. Hi Jim! Can you please check the numbers in Spain? If you look at the number of deaths they had in the first wave, one would calculate they should have herd immunity. However, there has been a resurgence of cases… I am not sure where they are coming feom (haven’t had time to check it out) but you may want to take a look at Spain and see if herd immunity may be working or there could be something else going on (cheating? Some other virus? Maybe I am off).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Looks like most of the prior infections were in the central (Madrid) and northern regions, and the resurgence is in the south. Spain tends to be two regions, north and south, and the infection never made it south before now.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: