Page 139 of 139 FirstFirst ... 3989129137138139
Results 1,381 to 1,387 of 1387

Thread: "Coronavirus and the US" or "We are all going to die!!!!"

  1. Top | #1381
    Contributor repoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,696
    Archived
    2,280
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post
    There is the California mutation. There is the NY mutation. And now Seattle.

    Lockdowns and masking were designed to slow the spread to (1) avoid hospital overloading, (2) defer infections giving time for good treatment protocols to emerge, (3) time for a vaccine to be found.
    An unintended consequence was to provide billions of chances for mutation. The damn thing has, through blind chance, found a way to modify their spike protein so the immune system doesn't recognize it making the mRNA vaccine shooting for the target that is no longer there.
    No--slowing it down doesn't increase the number of mutations. That's based on the number of people infected, not the time period over which they are infected.
    Pushing this to the most extreme two cases that are not possible but just a thought experiment:

    Case 1: Everyone on the whole planet is exposed and infected with covid in the same month.

    Case 2: over a period of two years everyone is exposed to the virus from someone after the virus was in their body for a week or longer. This exposure is done in the most dragged out and steady flow as possible.

    In case 1 the mutations are not building on top of each other.

  2. Top | #1382
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    31,016
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    127,768
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by repoman View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post
    There is the California mutation. There is the NY mutation. And now Seattle.

    Lockdowns and masking were designed to slow the spread to (1) avoid hospital overloading, (2) defer infections giving time for good treatment protocols to emerge, (3) time for a vaccine to be found.
    An unintended consequence was to provide billions of chances for mutation. The damn thing has, through blind chance, found a way to modify their spike protein so the immune system doesn't recognize it making the mRNA vaccine shooting for the target that is no longer there.
    No--slowing it down doesn't increase the number of mutations. That's based on the number of people infected, not the time period over which they are infected.
    Pushing this to the most extreme two cases that are not possible but just a thought experiment:

    Case 1: Everyone on the whole planet is exposed and infected with covid in the same month.

    Case 2: over a period of two years everyone is exposed to the virus from someone after the virus was in their body for a week or longer. This exposure is done in the most dragged out and steady flow as possible.

    In case 1 the mutations are not building on top of each other.
    True, but we have nothing like case 1. The time frame only matters if the infection rate is fast compared to the rate of spread and Covid is nowhere near that. With modern air travel I don't think there's anything that spread remotely that fast.

  3. Top | #1383
    Veteran Member George S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    FL for winter
    Posts
    2,862
    Archived
    16,498
    Total Posts
    19,360
    Rep Power
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by repoman View Post

    Pushing this to the most extreme two cases that are not possible but just a thought experiment:

    Case 1: Everyone on the whole planet is exposed and infected with covid in the same month.

    Case 2: over a period of two years everyone is exposed to the virus from someone after the virus was in their body for a week or longer. This exposure is done in the most dragged out and steady flow as possible.

    In case 1 the mutations are not building on top of each other.
    True, but we have nothing like case 1. The time frame only matters if the infection rate is fast compared to the rate of spread and Covid is nowhere near that. With modern air travel I don't think there's anything that spread remotely that fast.
    I believe that repoman's response was a limiting-case scenario. If the infections had happened quickly and the disease either killed or everyone had antibodies the number of mutations might well have been zero. It can never go that fast. It was the best we could have done given the information at the time. Now we have the problem. Can we accomplish eradication or must it become as endemic as the familiar viruses that are the common cold. What strategy then?

  4. Top | #1384
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    31,016
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    127,768
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by repoman View Post

    Pushing this to the most extreme two cases that are not possible but just a thought experiment:

    Case 1: Everyone on the whole planet is exposed and infected with covid in the same month.

    Case 2: over a period of two years everyone is exposed to the virus from someone after the virus was in their body for a week or longer. This exposure is done in the most dragged out and steady flow as possible.

    In case 1 the mutations are not building on top of each other.
    True, but we have nothing like case 1. The time frame only matters if the infection rate is fast compared to the rate of spread and Covid is nowhere near that. With modern air travel I don't think there's anything that spread remotely that fast.
    I believe that repoman's response was a limiting-case scenario. If the infections had happened quickly and the disease either killed or everyone had antibodies the number of mutations might well have been zero. It can never go that fast. It was the best we could have done given the information at the time. Now we have the problem. Can we accomplish eradication or must it become as endemic as the familiar viruses that are the common cold. What strategy then?
    I'm saying that even at his scenario there's room for mutations.

  5. Top | #1385
    Veteran Member George S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    FL for winter
    Posts
    2,862
    Archived
    16,498
    Total Posts
    19,360
    Rep Power
    52
    The world is entirely strange.
    They did a study in Israel and found that there is a certain treatment effective as a prophylactic against COVID19.
    The dose compared was 81 mg/day. (1/4 of a grain) ("Take 2 grains and call me in the morning" is the cliché.)

  6. Top | #1386
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    5,544
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    8,455
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post

    I believe that repoman's response was a limiting-case scenario. If the infections had happened quickly and the disease either killed or everyone had antibodies the number of mutations might well have been zero. It can never go that fast. It was the best we could have done given the information at the time. Now we have the problem. Can we accomplish eradication or must it become as endemic as the familiar viruses that are the common cold. What strategy then?
    I'm saying that even at his scenario there's room for mutations.
    Aren't mutations a function of total overall reproduction anyway?

    If a billion people get infected in either scenario, a billlion people are still going to have a billion viral loads, wherein each virus in each load could be a mutant.

    It's like asking whether a ton of feathers or a ton of bricks is heavier. They are both a ton.

  7. Top | #1387
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    31,016
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    127,768
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post

    I believe that repoman's response was a limiting-case scenario. If the infections had happened quickly and the disease either killed or everyone had antibodies the number of mutations might well have been zero. It can never go that fast. It was the best we could have done given the information at the time. Now we have the problem. Can we accomplish eradication or must it become as endemic as the familiar viruses that are the common cold. What strategy then?
    I'm saying that even at his scenario there's room for mutations.
    Aren't mutations a function of total overall reproduction anyway?

    If a billion people get infected in either scenario, a billlion people are still going to have a billion viral loads, wherein each virus in each load could be a mutant.

    It's like asking whether a ton of feathers or a ton of bricks is heavier. They are both a ton.
    For any reasonable real-world scenario you are right. For bacteria you're always right--a given number of infected means a given number of splittings however fast or slow it happens. However, viruses crank out many, many copies when they hijack a cell. The higher the number of copies per hijack the flatter the genetic tree becomes and the fewer victims at the bottom of the tree descend from any given mutation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •