Via Kevin Drum (at this new digs) comes a reference to (I think) this study published at Frontiers in Immunology which suggests a genetic basis for the differing prevalences of COVID-19 in different countries:
The world is dealing with one of the worst pandemics ever. SARS-CoV-2 is the etiological agent of COVID-19 that has already spread to more than 200 countries. However, infectivity, severity, and mortality rates do not affect all countries equally. Here we consider 140 HLA alleles and extensively investigate the landscape of 3,723 potential HLA-I A and B restricted SARS-CoV-2-derived antigens and how 37 countries in the world are predicted to respond to those peptides considering their HLA-I distribution frequencies. The clustering of HLA-A and HLA-B allele frequencies partially separates most countries with the lowest number of deaths per million inhabitants from the other countries. We further correlated the patterns of in silico predicted population coverage and epidemiological data. The number of deaths per million inhabitants correlates to the predicted antigen coverage of S and N derived peptides and its module is influenced if a given set of frequent or rare HLA alleles are analyzed in a given population. Moreover, we highlighted a potential risk group carrying HLAs associated with an elevated number of deaths per million inhabitants. In addition, we identified three potential antigens bearing at least one amino acid of the four-length insertion that differentiates SARS-CoV-2 from previous coronavirus strains. We believe these data can contribute to the search for peptides with the potential to be used in vaccine strategies considering the role of herd immunity to hamper the spread of the disease. Importantly, to the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to use a populational approach in association with COVID-19 outcome.
I have been speculating for some time that who you are and where you are may be more determinative than governmental policies in the prevalence and virulence of COVID-19 within a country and this study provides additional evidence that might be the case.
That’s not to say that individual behavior or governmental policy have no effect but I think it’s important to have a clear understanding of the risks faced when formulating a policy.
Genetics/race affects every character of every living organism. The size of the affect varies from gene to gene, but it is there. In the current political climate, US faculty, even tenured, are routinely punished for making that observation, so the authors of the study might find themselves in trouble at some point. The covid panic may give them some cover this time.
There is also the vitamin D thingy, and the possibility that dark-skinned people (esp. sub-Saharan Africans) living in northern latitudes might be D-deficient, increasing their chance of catching covid.
“US faculty, even tenured, are routinely punished for making that observation”
Actually, we make that observation every day and nothing happens to us in medicine. In education/economics it might be different story, bu then that is not really science usually, just bias.
This is an early finding and it needs follow up. Yes, China did not have widespread Covid as far as we can tell, but it did hit Wuhan hard. If the Chinese population is supposedly less susceptible then you have to explain Wuhan. The UK is a lot different than Canada and New Zealand. SO genetics could be a part of it, but I dont expect it to be major. Genetics studies are a lot like diet studies. People like the idea of them so they want them to be true. They usually arent or are minor factors. Unlike Diet studies where nearly 100% are useless we do occasionally get a useful genetic study so lets wait to see if this pans out.
Steve
Steve
Agreed. I’d classify this as “not dispositive but interesting”.
At this point I don’t think we can draw any conclusions from what the Chinese authorities tell us. You have to ask yourself a question: would they tell us something that reflects badly on themselves? I don’t think they would unless they had no alternative. Their control over information within China is sufficient that they do have alternatives.
Also there is genetic variance within the population of Han Chinese.
We now have enough vaccine that it is worthwhile to vaccinate on Saturdays. I will vaccinate for 8 hours on Saturday.
Steve
There are some interesting data that makes one go hmm if you look for it.
Singapore has recorded 59366 cases of COVID, yet only 29 deaths. A CFR of 0.05%. That is an order of magnitude less than the agreed fatality rate of 1%, and less than the flu. I trust Singapore’s government is reporting accurate numbers.
The other is the list of countries that have “controlled” the coronavirus; with reported deaths per capita that is less then South Korea.
By that measure it is a set of Pacific/Oceania and Caribbean islands, Sub-Sahara Africa, Vietnam, Laos, Taiwan, Mongolia, Thailand, Cambodia, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong.
The South East Asian nations are interesting. Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, and Malaysia are not “Sinosphere” nations with cultural traditions that are useful for fighting COVID-19 (high social cohesion, powerful efficient bureaucracies).
Being in the tropics seems to be an advantage. I’ve been pointing that out for most of the last year.