Coronavirus infection rate + outcomes -versus bloodtypes

In summary, this study found that people with type O blood are less likely to die or become infected with coronavirus, but there is no clear reason why.
  • #1
jim mcnamara
Mentor
4,776
3,836
TL;DR Summary
Blood types A, and O influence the rate of infection and death rates
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...ay-be-more-vulnerable-coronavirus-china-study
This is a news report on a Chinese study, not a journal article

Type O population of confirmed patients were disproportionately less like to die and less likely to become infected in the first place - compared to the type A. No reason noted, as far as I can tell. There were cases of all blood types and deaths in all bloodtypes in case you are confused.

Interesting. If anyone knows of a technical article, please post a link.
 
  • Like
Likes .Scott and BillTre
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #3
I can't say that I am convinced that the blood group itself is a causal factor.
Since blood type is a hereditary - perhaps they simply had slightly more families in the A group that contracted COVID-19.
 
  • #4
Blood types are based on surface molecules on blood cells.
It is conceivable that cell surface molecules could affect how easily a virus can enter a cell in some way.
 
  • #5
I didn't find the article convincing.

1. The hypothesis is very complicated when expressed in terms of antigens. Is A good or bad? By itself, it's bad. But with B it's neutral. What about B? By itself it's bad, but with A it's good.
2. The statistics reject the hypothesis that Wuhan and Shenzhen have the same ABO populations at an even higher confidence level than the Covid statistics. Given that diseases cluster in the population, it's far from clear that they are seeing anything but that.
 
  • Like
Likes .Scott and Ygggdrasil
  • #6
I read it again, and if I were the editor, I would reject it. The statistics is muddled. Apart from the uncontrolled confounding factors described above, they perform one test and then draw conclusions as if they performed another. Then they assume causality where they see correlation.

They do an independence test on blood type and disease incidence and progress. Fair enough. But then they draw conclusions like A is bad, O is good. First, this is an a posteriori test. Second, there is no mention of the need for a trials factor when in fact they are performing multiple tests: (A is good, O is bad; B is bad, AB is bad, A is good...)

The authors don't understand statistics. While it's possible that someone else could go through the data and do it right, that's not what we have in front of us.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc, jim mcnamara and Ygggdrasil
  • #7
The point that I was trying to make before is that the cases are not independent measurements of each other. It's as though you flipped 3000 coins and 1000 came up heads and 2000 came up tails. It may at first seem as though the chances of that happening were extraordinarily remote. But if I then told you that the coins were welded together into three clumps and it was simply a case where one clump (and all the coins it in) landed heads and the other two clumps landed tails, it would be far less impressive.

That is what I see as the most important failing of the statistics they are using.

Many small groups within their patient population are connected by both heredity and proximity. Hence the "welding".
 
  • #8
I think we're saying the same thing.

A better-designed study would take the random population, divide it into groups of 1775, and see if one can pick out the one group that's sick. That still won't capture all the correlations, but I suspect that it won't matter: the groups will differ among each other by about the same amount.
 

FAQ: Coronavirus infection rate + outcomes -versus bloodtypes

1. What is the relationship between coronavirus infection rate and blood type?

Recent studies have shown that there may be a link between blood type and susceptibility to coronavirus. People with type A blood have been found to have a higher risk of infection, while those with type O blood may have a lower risk.

2. Does blood type affect the severity of coronavirus symptoms?

Some studies have suggested that people with type A blood may experience more severe symptoms of coronavirus, while those with type O blood may have milder symptoms. However, more research is needed to confirm this relationship.

3. Are certain blood types more likely to develop complications from coronavirus?

There is limited evidence to suggest that people with type A blood may be more likely to develop complications from coronavirus, such as lung injury or kidney failure. However, more research is needed to fully understand this potential connection.

4. Can blood type impact the effectiveness of coronavirus treatments?

Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that blood type plays a role in the effectiveness of coronavirus treatments. However, ongoing research may uncover potential differences in treatment response based on blood type.

5. Is there a specific blood type that is immune to coronavirus?

No blood type has been found to be completely immune to coronavirus. While some studies have suggested that people with type O blood may have a lower risk of infection, everyone should continue to follow recommended safety measures to prevent the spread of the virus.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
42
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5K
Views
262K
Back
Top