COVID reinfection – sign of super susceptibility or beloved vector-ship or diagnosis error or viral hibernation in immune privilege sites

A few cases of reinfection of COVID 19 are getting reported from different parts of the world and which means, in scientific sense those who got recovered from the virus attack have again turns positive for the virus sooner or later, possibly with symptoms. 

The question is whether they were only positive for the viral genome and or presented with full blown COVID symptoms as well is not clear in most reports.  When someone turned positive for the virus for the second time obviously must have some strong symptoms otherwise why should they go for testing the virus by RT PCR?  What we really need to know is whether the second episode is more severe from the symptom per se or the second episode is quite mild and manageable?  Was there any patient presenting only clinical signs but were negative for the virus?   It is already stated clearly that the lingering effect of COVID would continue post elimination of the virus and hence why all those did not wait patiently for a while for auto-healing and recovery than rushing to hospital?   Does that mean, the second episode was more severe than the first one?

All the above questions need to be answered along with also asking a few separate sets of questions and only then we can conclude whether it was reinfection or the continuation of the previous infection.

The possibility of ‘super-susceptible’ situation we need to clear first in order to establish the facet of reinfection.  The paradoxical side of such possibility is how such people out-survived COVID 19 in the first instance and still remains super-susceptible? 

Is it possible for someone to be so susceptible to a pathogen and at the same time also can get cured and again gets re-infected?  

Is there any possibility that those gets the second infection with novel coronavirus if show higher tolerance means, they are turning out as the beloved vector of the virus?  If so, are we then seeing the formation of ‘beloved vector’ of the virus as well, alongside ‘super susceptible’ people?

 

The initial interaction between the virus and the host and the subsequent preparation of the ground by the virus (recognition of host immune defence mechanism, its strength and blind spots) to establish harmony with the host has to be assumed for better tolerance of the host during reinfection means, why and how the viral elimination has taken place in the first instance.  As on date, no antiviral preparation is available for novel coronavirus.

If the viral interaction with the host is leading to better equilibrium and host-parasite accommodation means, can we really prevent the spread of the virus?  Should we then really worry about such virus as a deadly pathogen or must move ahead with life ignoring the virus?

Are we mixing our panic with science and finally clouding our sense of reasoning and wisdom in understanding the science behind re-infection than simply engaged in fear mongering. 

The reported re-infection can be a simple diagnostic error.  Re-infection can be a misnomer which again helps only the ignorant medical science to fear monger. 

The virus negativity as established by RT-PCR in the first instance might have been due to some error in sampling, Ct value etc.  The inattention blindness is quite possible either during sample collection or during running PCR, especially when the patient who turned negative after first episode and again reports to the clinic for the second time with similar symptoms of COVID.    The first suspicion under such circumstances would be the lingering effect of COVID post viral elimination due to the immune flare up than re-infection.  Such initial speculation is bound to cause inattention blindness at sample collection level and or during running the PCR machine.  Technically the inattention blindness cannot be blamed fully, although cannot be justified.  

It means, the positivity may be just the continuation the previous contraction and need not be ‘reinfection’.  There is also another possibility that we must include in our debate and that is, the invasion and hiding of the virus in immune privileged sites.   If the virus navigates immune privileged sites and then come back to the surface later means, why only in a very few people such possibility exists and not in all those who contracted the virus.

Obviously the medical report may show the person was positive for the virus, became negative by RT-PCR and was then discharged.  Later the person reported back to the hospital, tested positive for the virus, naturally it would point towards nothing but only the possible reinfection and not the recurrence. 

Recurrence possibility in infectious diseases is not commonly assumed because symptoms always ceases with the elimination of the pathogen.  In autoimmune diseases and other medical conditions only recurrences is seen and the term is accepted and used frequently. 

Super-susceptibility and beloved vector-ship possibility, both are quite remote because neither of such situation is medically tenable although may give some fuel to a new scientific speculation.  The reason for inattention blindness and or sampling and testing error cannot be ruled out and such error would naturally favour anyone to assume only reinfection and not the continuation of the previous episode. 

Can there be a situation where the novel coronavirus is going for hibernation which we record as viral negative and later the virus resurfaces which we call reinfection.  If it hibernates means, where else in human body the virus is choosing to hibernate?  Why the virus chose to hibernate when obviously the possibility for the virus to spread across the population is quite high.  Why in only some people the virus may prefer to hibernate if the hibernation theory has any lacus standi.  If the virus has the ability to hibernate means, then why should such people exhibit clinical symptoms than remains asymptomatic? 

We surf over waves of questions and doubts because we made novel coronavirus as the ultimate pathogen and future human life hangs purely at the mercy of the virus.  Most of the medical wisdom our scientists have brought to earth’s crust about COVID 19 is only to defend the virus and fear mongers than to understand the pathogen or the pathology.

Today the whole world is paying the price for ‘ignorance’ and ‘fear mongering’ of medical science.   Several lakhs of people die every year by committing suicide, in road accidents, due to various diseases etc.  Due to various natural calamities, the loss of human life in India itself is incalculable.  But we have overestimated human death due to COVID 19 more than anything and exaggerated the fear and caution among people and finally finished our nation.

If we simply accepts the bitter truth that novel coronavirus is yet another virus, can infect, can spread fast and people must take adequate care not to contract it and if contracted, must avoid socializing to prevent the viral spread to others.  If we are willing to accept the hard truth that some may die of infection but country and people must move forward and so shall our economy; today the world would have been different than what it is now.

But instead of accepting the basic truth, science wants to make mountain out of molehill because the science has recognised the truth that novel coronavirus worth million dollar business and not the virulence or infectivity of the virus is the real worry but the human fear over the virus alone make the virus strong and business happening. 

So the science needs to sustain human fear by all means, call it immune privileged site entry, reinfection, super susceptibility, vector etc.  Expand the fear and suspicion over the infectivity of the virus and make long lasting livelihood out of novel coronavirus and COVID 19 seems to be the sole goal of our medical science.