Quote:
|
I personally think the severity of an epidemic or pandemic has as much to do with the mutations of the virus as the immunity of those infected. Why, for example, was the 1951 epidemic so much worse in Liverpool as the rest of England? Could the people of Liverpool lacked an immunity that the rest of the country had? I don't think so. The only reasonable explanation would seem to be with the virus - some subtle mutation as it spread.
|
Strange, indeed, especially as it did not carry the signature of a pandemic due to an entirely new strain (high mortality in young adults due to immune system overreaction and cytokine storm). The fact that the epidemic started in Liverpool may have something to do with it, but the rate at which the epidemic spread makes it unlikely that the virus lost potency through mutation in so many directions in such a short time. Perhaps there was some elusive co-factor at work, possibly in the same way that HIV infection now turns otherwise innocuous infections deadly?
