Home
COVID-19 and Blood Types: Higher Risk for Blood Type A, Lower Risk for Blood Type O

COVID-19 and Blood Types: Higher Risk for Blood Type A, Lower Risk for Blood Type O

 Rhesusnegative.net4
Share Button

As I have previously posted regarding a different coronavirus (SARS-CoV) , lower numbers for blood type O were expected:

Blood Type O more likely resistant to coronaviruses?

Now we have some specific data for the COVID-19 coronavirus.

People with blood type A show highest risk and people with blood type O lowest risk in the study.

From a translation:

The scientists concluded that there were significantly more blood type A holders among coronavirus than in the entire population and significantly fewer people with blood type 0 A detailed analysis revealed that people with blood type A have 20 % higher risk of infection than people without group A. People with blood type 0, on the other hand, have a 33 % lower risk of infection than people with other blood types. Additional analyses showed that neither age nor gender of patients affected this image.

Here is the study:

Relationship between the ABO Blood Group and the COVID-19 Susceptibility

The Abstract reads:

OBJECTIVE To investigate the relationship between the ABO blood group and the COVID-19 susceptibility. DESIGN The study was conducted by comparing the blood group distribution in 2,173 patients with COVID-19 confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 test from three hospitals in Wuhan and Shenzhen, China with that in normal people from the corresponding regions. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and 2-tailed χ2 and a meta-analysis was performed by random effects models. SETTING Three tertiary hospitals in Wuhan and Shenzhen, China. PARTICIPANTS A total of 1,775 patients with COVID-19, including 206 dead cases, from Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Wuhan, China were recruited. Another 113 and 285 patients with COVID-19 were respectively recruited from Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan and Shenzhen Third People’s Hospital, Shenzhen, China. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Detection of ABO blood groups, infection occurrence of SARS-CoV-2, and patient death RESULTS The ABO group in 3694 normal people in Wuhan showed a distribution of 32.16%, 24.90%, 9.10% and 33.84% for A, B, AB and O, respectively, versus the distribution of 37.75%, 26.42%, 10.03% and 25.80% for A, B, AB and O, respectively, in 1775 COVID-19 patients from Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital. The proportion of blood group A and O in COVID-19 patients were significantly higher and lower, respectively, than that in normal people (both P < 0.001). Similar ABO distribution pattern was observed in 398 patients from another two hospitals in Wuhan and Shenzhen. Meta-analyses on the pooled data showed that blood group A had a significantly higher risk for COVID-19 (odds ratio-OR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval-CI 1.02~1.43, P = 0.02) compared with non-A blood groups, whereas blood group O had a significantly lower risk for the infectious disease (OR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.60~0.75, P < 0.001) compared with non-O blood groups.In addition, the influence of age and gender on the ABO blood group distribution in patients with COVID-19 from two Wuhan hospitals (1,888 patients) were analyzed and found that age and gender do not have much effect on the distribution. CONCLUSION People with blood group A have a significantly higher risk for acquiring COVID-19 compared with non-A blood groups, whereas blood group O has a significantly lower risk for the infection compared with non-O blood groups.

As for the Rh factor:

Do not expect data anytime soon, especially not from SE Asia where frequencies of Rh(D) negative individuals are very low.

Infections of viral origin and Rh(D) negative blood

Generally speaking, when it comes to infections of viral origin, Rh(D) negative individuals tend to do quite well, but that hasn’t been confirmed for every type of infection, so please do not assume.

Also do not let this be an indicator for anything when it comes to personal safety. Do not change your protection behavior. Even if you have some form of resistance, it wouldn’t equal immunity, so with the right amount of exposure, you still would get infected.

Blood Type O Most Protected From Malaria, Blood Type A The Worst
Share Button

About The Author

Rhesusnegative.net

Disclaimer: This blog, all of its content and all of my posts are for Entertainment Purposes Only. Approval of comments does not equal agreement with content. Read at your own risk. Please note that comments will not be approved unless you use your real name. You can use first name only, if no one else has commented under that name before. Otherwise use first name and last initial. If that has been taken, use your full first and last name. No exceptions. Thank you for understanding.

4 Comments

  1. Michal March 22, 2020 Reply

    Ccr5 homogeneous delta32-/- or RH negative’s who have 2 RH negative parents are immune. That number compromises only 1% of all RH negatives.

  2. Ken December 12, 2020 Reply

    fwiw:: here are some comments/posts i created related to these subjects since Mike upped my status late August of this year::

    August 27, 2020 – … some quotes from sections of this book: Chapter 5 The ABO blood group … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/universal-panda-blood-developed-by-engineering-cell-surfaces/#comment-11246

    August 30, 2020 – Human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs) … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/rh-negative-blood-factor-origins/#comment-11277

    September 1, 2020 – fwiw, based on my knowledge & understanding of CVD19 and other things: this virus mutates a lot … CCR5-delta32/CVD19/HIV stuff … see follow-up comments for clarificiations & such (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/rh-negative-blood-factor-origins/#comment-11301

    September 8, 2020 – regarding CCR5-delta32: … from following comment of mine: CCR5 is a suppressor for cortical plasticity and hippocampal learning and memory … https://elifesciences.org/articles/20985 … and see 2nd comment also … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/rh-negative-blood-factor-origins/#comment-11386

    September 30, 2020 – looks like studies (many of these have been suppressed & removed) are continuing to show CVD19/SARS-COV2’s similarities to/with HIV. … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/clarifications-covid-19-and-rh-negative-blood-types/#comment-11662

    October 3, 2020 – you might find some things you’re looking for here: https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/new-study-suggests-blood-types-b-ab-and-rh-positives-at-highest-covid-19-risk/#comment-11095 … and on that page: (link is here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/were-the-neanderthals-rh-negative/#comment-11708 … and my posts start here w/ this: August 9, 2020 – “Blood type and outcomes in patients with COVID-19” – interesting…i’m using this link to the data: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7354354/pdf/277_2020_Article_4169.pdf

    November 28, 2020 – well, it looks like blocking the CCR5 receptor (in other words: what the CCR5 delta32 mutation/gene deletion does) is helpful regarding CVD19: … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/abo-incompatibility-may-reduce-virus-transmissibility-by-60-or-more/#comment-12789

    a quote attributed to Buddha or a condensed version that i like because of the truth in it: “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”

    • Ken December 12, 2020 Reply

      this also: November 8, 2020 – “” “Results from SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) performed March through July 2020 were matched with ABO/Rh test results obtained for the same individual since January 2010. Only one SARS‐CoV‐2 result per patient was considered; a patient was considered to have a positive result if any SARS‐CoV‐2 test result was positive. The ABO/Rh testing is generally performed as part of maternal screening; males were excluded. The influence of race/ethnicity on the associations of ABO type/Rh group with SARS CoV‐2 positivity was assessed in a subset of females with available race/ethnicity data.”

      “The study cohort comprised 276,536 females with matched SARS-CoV-2 and ABO-Rh results from all 50 American states and the District of Columbia. There were 34,178 females who were SARS-CoV-2 positive (12.4%, 95% CI 12.2%-12.5%). The median patient age at the time of SARS-CoV-2 testing was 34.4 (IQR 29.2-40.0) years,”

      “The SARS‐CoV‐2 positivity rate was 38% higher in Rh+ patients (12.7%, 95% CI 12.6%‐12.8%) than in Rh‐ patients (9.2%, 95% CI 8.9%‐9.5%) (P < .001). " … 12.7% vs 9.2%" "" … (more here) https://www.rhesusnegative.net/staynegative/association-of-abo-rh-with-sars%e2%80%90cov%e2%80%902-positivity-the-role-of-race-and-ethnicity-in-a-female-cohort/#comment-12353

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.