Seems like yes, but not because it mutates, it's just that the immune response can be weak. Probably more of a risk for people with weak immune systems to start with.

Everything I've read suggests that Coronaviruses are more stable, genetically speaking, than the flu.

https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/its-possible-...

> Coronaviruses are more stable, genetically speaking, than the flu.

By more stable you mean less likely to mutate?

Would that mean a vaccine would be more effective in protecting against covid19 than a regular seasonaly changing flu?

As far as I can tell, yes:

> Coronavirus non-structural proteins provide extra fidelity to replication, because they confer a proofreading function, which is lacking in RNA-dependent RNA polymerase enzymes alone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus#Replication

AFAIK that's still to be determined due to the number of false positives/true negatives with the testing. Same with the incubation period.

Edit - on the more worrying side of things this article (https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/14-of-recovered-...) was released today saying 14% of recovered patients Guangdong tested positive for the the virus. One of the more annoying things during this is that I have no idea which sources are awful tabloids and which are trustworthy like I do in the anglosphere.

Straits time is reliable. It's very close to the government and a bit of a mouthpiece of it but it's not a tabloid.

I read in a news article that people were catching it again after recovering, IIRC it was in reference to medical professionals working in China.

It seems it's possible to catch over and over, the body stops producing antibodies fairly shortly after infection has been fought off.

There isn't data about mutation yet.

No solid data on that. Everything’s rumor at this point in that front.