Hacker News Reader

Comment by itcrowd | Hacker News Reader

Your information seems to come from a pre-print on MedrXiv [1], but not all your claims are supported. Especially the spreading rate and "deadliness" of the new mutation are not mentioned in the paper. The paper (which has not been peer reviewed) only notes the discovery of this new mutation. If you have other sources, I'm open for more information.

If you are wondering why D614A is not mentioned in the Nature article: the preprint has been out for 2 days (Nature published yesterday) and this information is only based on a single pre-print, not a peer-reviewed scientific article. I don't think saying "who cares about obscure -stans" is fair towards the author of this article.

[1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.04.20184721v...

View on HN

It has been discovered long time ago, in early August (at least I first heard about it back then) and have been known for quite awhile, but no one paid attention, except for those who lives in Korea and Central Asia. I do not have proofs, but I live in that area, in a major Central Asian city and I can observe myself - say whatever you want, anecdotal evidence etc.; the article you've linked for some reason is actually by South Korean scientists, and of course they would care. I guarantee you, no one will ever care about what happens in less known localities; ex-USSR is not some glamorous location and is often ignored.

Well, unless you can come up with a source (any source, even if it is in your native language), I can't judge your claims other than "made up". There's enough unsubstantiated (mis)information out there about sars-cov-2, we don't need you to post more without evidence.

If you insist here is a proof that is been know at least for a month (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/south-korea-finds-new-...). Emergence of a mutation in relatively big (33 mln people) country is definitely a major event, yet the information is still scarce, which is puzzling. I have no idea why, but I am used to the reality of ignoring my region. I understand there is a type of people, especially in places like HN, who require some rubber-stamped peer reviewed proofs for everything, but for these "reliable sources" to appear at first place, the issue has to catch attention of the scientific world. It is not catching attention, not even tiniest mention in the articles, such the linked by the OP. It puzzles me, and make me think that there might be other mutations, which are not known, in places like ex-USSR.

Nothing in your source about the mutations being slower to spread or more deadly. In fact, the mutations aren't named and D614A is not mentioned. None of your claims held up to even the slightest scrutiny. Your credibility has officially been lost and I will not reply to you any further.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com