"As of 2nd March 2020, there are 111 nonsynonymous mutations that have been identified in the outbreak, these have been catalogued here in the CoV-GLUE resource 504 and can be visualised in Figure 1. At current, there is no evidence that any of these 111 mutations have any significance in a functional context of within-host infections or transmission rates."

The proposal requires identifying new strains among symptomatic and asymptotic people, find strains that only occur with asymptomatic people, start infecting people with that strain, verify they are at lower risk. Then scale this up to ever larger populations.

If we knew of a less dangerous strain then sure you can start down that path. However, at this point there is significant evidence such a strain does not exist due to the extremely slow mutation rate, making this mostly wishful thinking.

Of course there may not be a strain with the right mutations out there, but should this be a reason for not looking. Nobody has been systematically looking for less dangerous strains (that I know of). My proposal is we look given it will be quick and cheap.

> This entire article is a waste of time from the beginning.

The moment I read that I lost my interest in his comment. Anything he is going to write afterward would not matter. He didn't gave sufficient reasons either why he thinks the article is a waste of time. We can safely ignore his opinion. Anyone who is directly reading GP's comment please read the article and decide for yourself.