Post #1986539
2026-04-29 03:45 UTC
Replies (1)
-
@mediaevalfishsandwich@zeroes.ca 2026-04-29 04:31
@datum Couple of related entry points which interested me also: https://xcancel.com/Nucleocapsoid/status/2047072460739101123 Euan Arnott @Nucleocapsoid Apr 22, 2026 · 9:58 PM UTC …can I float following hypotheses for target practice: a) BA.3.2 is relatively poorly transmissable (whether due Orf7a deletion or closed RBD's) b) Transmission therefore occurs mostly within high-contact settings like nurseries / schools c) For BA.3.2 to win out in school, must have extra advantage over XFG & NB.1.8… (…it continues…) https://xcancel.com/LongDesertTrain/status/2047269989216882732 Ryan Hisner @LongDesertTrain Apr 23, 2026 · 11:02 AM UTC The imprinting hypothesis is the only antibody-immunity one that makes any sense. People claiming kids' undeveloped Ab immunity is the explanation get the story entirely backwards: The most Ab-evasive variant will preferentially infect those w/stronger Ab immunity. We've seen this repeatedly in different countries throughout the pandemic. In China, dominant variants have always been less Ab-evasive than those dominant elsewhere due to their less developed Ab immunity (due to successfully avoiding infections for over 2 years). We've seen the same trend (to a lesser degree) in other countries successful at avoiding infections, like Japan & Australia. There is a correlation between the degree of vaccination w/Wuhan spike & BA.3.2 success—the strongest evidence for the imprinting hypothesis, IMO.