Covid, “Omicron would be less serious because it affects the throat more than the lungs”: the studies
The results of six different studies, still preliminary, seem to highlight how the new coronavirus strain replicates itself, especially in the upper respiratory tract. This would explain its greater transmissibility but also the lower severity of the diseases resulting from the infection. Some research highlights the variant’s ability to escape the immune protection provided by two doses of the vaccine.
More contagious, but less dangerous than other variants. Six different studies on the Omicron variant – which have yet to be subjected to “peer review”, therefore still to be rechecked through other research in order to be confirmed – indicate that the latest strain of coronavirus discovered, compared to the Delta variant, for example, affects more throat compared to lungs of infected subjects: hence its lower danger. To report it is the Guardian.
Replicating mainly in the upper respiratory tract , Omicron would therefore be more transmissible than other variants of Covid-19, but less deadly , because it would not lurk in the lungs. These features would explain the rapid growth of cases that followed the spread of Omicron around the world.
Less severe symptoms than those previously encountered with other Covid strains have been verified by the University of Liverpool’s Molecular Virology Research Group . The results, published last December 26, were observed on some mouse specimens infected with Omicron. Compared to previous research, the symptoms observed were milder: lower weight loss, lower viral load, and less severe episodes of pneumonia.
James Stewart, head of the Department of Infection Biology at the University of Liverpool, said animal studies suggest the Omicron infection “is less severe than Delta and the original Wuhan strain.” It appears that the mice have been able to recover faster “and this matches the clinical data that is coming,” added Stewart, according to which the results of the study are “good news”, even if “those who are clinically vulnerable” still risk. more serious consequences, even with Omicron.
James Stewart, head of the Department of Infection Biology at the University of Liverpool, said animal studies suggest the Omicron infection “is less severe than Delta and the original Wuhan strain.” It appears that the mice have been able to recover faster “and this matches the clinical data that is coming,” added Stewart, according to which the results of the study are “good news”, even if “those who are clinically vulnerable” still risk. more serious consequences, even with Omicron.
The same conclusions were reached by another study conducted in the United States sent to the journal Nature in recent days. It was observed that mice with Omicron would lose less weight and have a lower viral load than that caused by other variants.
From the virus research center of the University of Glasgow instead, there are indications that the Omicron variant would have changed the way it enters the organism when compared to other variants. The new strain would be able to bypass the levels of immune protection provided by two doses of the anti-Covid vaccine, while a third dose would be able to restore them “partially”.
All of these studies, the Guardian notes, were conducted on the basis of the results collected during two other searches in December 2021.
Already the experience of the University of Hong Kong had shown a lower ability to infect Omicron’s lungs. Thus also the research conducted by Professor Ravi Gupta at the University of Cambridge, whereby analyzing blood samples from vaccinated subjects – Omicron’s ability to escape the neutralizing potential of vaccines was observed on the one hand and its lower potential on the other. pulmonary invasiveness.
Concerning Omicron, there is still confusion about its traceability with antigenic swabs. The thesis of the cell biologist Jennifer Rohn of the University of London seems to confirm the fact that the mutation is replicated more in the throat than in the lungs. Rohn highlights how, in his experience, taking samples of material from the throat rather than the nose gave different results: the rapid tests were negative for Covid in the nose, positive in the throat.
The same was found by some studies in South Africa, which noted that salivary tests were more capable of finding Omicron than nasal swabs.
Warwick University virologist Lawrence Young, however, urges us to be cautious about the new results, because the studies cited by the Guardian would have shown the usefulness of salivary tests, but they would not be large enough to draw meaningful conclusions, having only been conducted on “acutely symptomatic and non-hospitalized” patients.
