@onisillos@mstdn.science
Since I assume this is a sub-toot of our previous interaction I suspect you think I'd say yes without hesitation, although what I said was that some things about COVID might be called "remarkable" not unique. I'd actually ask you to define "unique" better in this context. Every virus is unique in that it's not exactly the same as other viruses, but I don't think that's what you're getting at.
I guess what I'd say is that while all viruses do what they do, COVID's ace2 affinity, the associated ability to easily travel throughout the endothelial system elsewhere in the body, and ease of transmission/inability to confer lasting immunity mean that it has a "skill set" that makes it efficient at causing repeated damage.
Could it be unique in the way I assume that you mean? Perhaps. Science takes time, and I suspect lots of viruses do more damage than is commonly accepted at the moment. I look at something like yesterday's reporting on COVID and the heart and you have experts saying things like:
"Asked whether this direct infection of vascular plaques was unique to SARS-CoV-2 or whether this may also occur with other viruses, both Giannarelli and Hotez said they believe this may be a specific COVID effect."
That sounds kind of unique, actually.
@onisillos@mstdn.science
Couldn't help but notice another use of the word "unique' in this regard today.
"Conclusions
Studies have confirmed a link between persistence of SARS-CoV-2's antigens and post-acute sequelae of SAR-CoV-2 (PASC). Accordingly, even in this study, the researchers detected potentially immunogenic viral antigens in over 10% of plasma samples from COVID-19 patients during the pandemic era for up to 14 months following index SARS-CoV-2 infection, providing robust evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is a unique RNA virus."
