Covid - is there trouble ahead? New mutation and travel bans.

[Blobsy]

52 minutes ago, Brave New World said:

 

Saw this when we relocated in the UK, with kids at school and nursery. Had a year or so of getting stuff, one very nasty bout of flu in 2019. (should really join the ranks of I had Covid before Covid was famous, as was that bad)

 

Do Wim Hof, cold showers and breathing exercises. Haven't had a cold or flu in 12 months. 

Cold water immersion is excellent for the immune system.

[pig]

8 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Something that kills in the distant future is unlikely to be affected (well until modern medicine appears on the scene and puts a lot of effort in to wiping it out). I'm guessing but I'd have thought a virus that would have that effect is likely to be nasty short term though. Mind you some diseases take a long time before they finish people off, so maybe not. The difference between 1% and 2% would indeed be negligible I'd have thought though.

Debilitating effects would slowly work against it in the long run I'd have thought, although the evolutionary pressure probably wouldn't be that high; it would likely have the same effect as killing people off. The healthier a person feels the more likely they are to be wandering around spreading viruses, so as few effects as possible and for as long as possible is an evolutionary advantage to a virus.

Anything that stops the infected person contacting other people is a negative consequence for a virus, whether that's because that person dies or because no-one wants to go near someone ill, or because that person doesn't feel like moving much. Indeed it might be the case that feeling crap and thus not moving much is an evolutionary outcome that prevents disease spreading, since we can do that even with fairly mild diseases like colds. I agree that people holed up in hospitals might counteract that somewhat, but people just staying at home in bed instead of mingling with others is a typical outcome. Even in hospitals they may well encounted fewer people than normal (and hospitals try to take measures, with varying degrees of success).

 

I take your points but it looks to me that its not as clear cut as its been made out to be: I went along with the logic of it evolving to a milder disease too until recently,  but for this armchair Darwin at least, the variables and evolutionary pressures don't seem to be strong enough in that direction for that to necessarily happen as quickly as it seems to be assumed. 

Setting medical advances to one side, it could be 'over' this winter, it might be 10 or more years from now with nastier winters in between.

[Bruce Banner]

More jabs.

Moderna are developing a specific Omicron vaccine which should be ready in the new year.

[pig]

2 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

More jabs.

Moderna are developing a specific Omicron vaccine which should be ready in the new year.

Tell them to get on with the polyvalent jabs !

[miguel]

10 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

More jabs.

Moderna are developing a specific Omicron vaccine which should be ready in the new year.

Oh good! Just in time to save the jib a jab clown!

[GregBowman]

12 minutes ago, Dogsy said:

Cold water immersion is excellent for the immune system.

Might give that a miss 

16 minutes ago, winkie said:

Living on this earth is a gamble.......driving a powerful car on a wet and foggy road......around a single track bendy mountain road with the wrong kind of tyers and poor barriers........ everything in life is a risk, all about weighing up the risks laid out in front of us....if a passenger, your life is in another's hands........do you trust them enough?

Didn’t say it wasn’t Mr philosopher but sensible risk mitigation procedures enable you to do more for longer not sure what your point is 

[Riedquat]

11 minutes ago, pig said:

I take your points but it looks to me that its not as clear cut as its been made out to be: I went along with the logic of it evolving to a milder disease too until recently,  but for this armchair Darwin at least, the variables and evolutionary pressures don't seem to be strong enough in that direction for that to necessarily happen as quickly as it seems to be assumed. 

Setting medical advances to one side, it could be 'over' this winter, it might be 10 or more years from now with nastier winters in between.

I was talking fairly generally, I fully get your point, there's no particular reason that a mild variant should have emerged at this point. There's no reason why any mutation shouldn't be either so it can't be ruled out. So I think the behavioural changes (which from an evolutionary perspective are the equivalent of more people dying - why there are fewer people nearby to infect is irrelevant from the evolutionary perspective) will favour a mild variant that people don't notice, but it's a roll of the dice whether one actually turns up, and that's the bit that takes time.

So people who say evolution means Omicron must be milder are barking up the wrong tree, but it's not implausible that it could be and the odds favour a mild variant being successful over a serious one.

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

14 hours ago, Bob8 said:

If he is right, they will all say told you so!

And, if he is wrong, they will all say the same.

LOL!

[slawek]

56 minutes ago, henry the king said:

Ahh, you are one of those guys. I get it now.

I present with with exactly what you ask, evidence it works in 7 days, and you claim it doesn't say what it says.

What is confusing you about the study?

Just calling your bluff.  You posted something claiming it was evidence which clearly is not.

Unfortunately that is quite common for you. You are making lots of claims, that are false or not supported by evidence. The questions is: are you doing this deliberately or just following some other people not being capable to verify their claims? I hope it is the second option. 

 

[slawek]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

What evidence there is though points towards milder being more likely than the same or worse. I'm wondering why you're so keen to accept anything that suggests the latter but dig in your heels at the former? Different standards of proof appear to be getting applied.

My understanding on what I read is: there is weak evidence it is milder. However it is likely this will be more than compensated by much more cases in a short period of time, making it worse than the Delta wave in the UK.  

[anonguest]

57 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

More jabs.

Moderna are developing a specific Omicron vaccine which should be ready in the new year.

Yawn

[Bruce Banner]

3 minutes ago, anonguest said:

Yawn

I thought it was exciting, yet another jab to refuse.

[henry the king]

14 minutes ago, slawek said:

Just calling your bluff.  You posted something claiming it was evidence which clearly is not.

Unfortunately that is quite common for you. You are making lots of claims, that are false or not supported by evidence. The questions is: are you doing this deliberately or just following some other people not being capable to verify their claims? I hope it is the second option. 

 

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&tableId=tbl9&pii=S0140-6736(21)02717-3

There you go I will even pull out the table itself for you.

I like how you just ignore the fact that the study specifically shows antibody levels have peaked or almost peaked after 7 days for Chad/Chad/BNT (Just lower than 28 days) and BNT/BNT/BNT (higher than 28 days).

Want to stand corrected now or double down on boosters not working after 7 days?

Edited December 20, 2021 by henry the king

[Brave New World]

1 hour ago, Dogsy said:

Cold water immersion is excellent for the immune system.

Has had a notable impact on inflammation, tiredness, circulation. All free via a shower, bath, river

[slawek]

2 hours ago, scottbeard said:

I’m sorry but i I didn’t see the underlying research - just the media article.

just Google “how long does Covid booster take to work”!

I did a search and found this. This for Delta. Since the vaccine provide 2-3 times lower protection against Omicron there is practically no benefit of a booster after one week. 

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02249-2/fulltext

[Brave New World]

24 minutes ago, slawek said:

Just calling your bluff.  You posted something claiming it was evidence which clearly is not.

Unfortunately that is quite common for you. You are making lots of claims, that are false or not supported by evidence. The questions is: are you doing this deliberately or just following some other people not being capable to verify their claims? I hope it is the second option. 

 

Responded earlier re Hong Kong study, you ignored.

Hardly calling someone's bluff, when you ignore references to studies showing that this variant is different and impacting in a less invasive manner, whilst also ignoring data points in SA and now Denmark.

[slawek]

20 minutes ago, henry the king said:

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&tableId=tbl9&pii=S0140-6736(21)02717-3

There you go I will even pull out the table itself for you.

I like how you just ignore the fact that the study specifically shows antibody levels have peaked or almost peaked after 7 days for Chad/Chad/BNT (Just lower than 28 days) and BNT/BNT/BNT (higher than 28 days).

Want to stand corrected now or double down on boosters not working after 7 days?

These results were to confirm that people had vaccine before (a quote from the paper below). As you can see from my other post above those lab results didn't translate into high immunity based on a field study.   

"Blood was taken for immunogenicity analyses at days 28, 84, and 365. A separate immunology subgroup comprised of 25 individuals from each treatment group (n=650 participants) attended additional visits to have blood taken at day 7 (to detect evidence of previous immunological priming via rapid spike IgG responses) and day 14 (to detect the peak T-cell response)."

 

[Timm]

Something for everyone:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/15/omicron-found-to-grow-70-times-faster-than-delta-in-bronchial-tissue

"The Omicron Covid variant has been found to multiply about 70 times quicker than the original and Delta versions of coronavirus in tissue samples taken from the bronchus, the main tubes from the windpipe to the lungs, in laboratory experiments that could help explain its rapid transmission.

The study, by a team from the University of Hong Kong, also found that the new variant grew 10 times slower in lung tissue, which the authors said could be an indicator of lower disease severity.

Michael Chan Chi-wai, who led the work, said the result needed to be interpreted with caution because severe disease is determined not only by how quickly the virus replicates but also by a person’s immune response and, in particular, whether the immune system goes into overdrive, causing a so-called cytokine storm."

 

[markyh]

15 hours ago, gruffydd said:

That isn't the point... they just aim to cut the time people are socialising for, which in turns cuts infection rates. That's the idea, anyway. 

Deaths still dropping, now 780 last 7 days, down 6.5% from last week.  The only metric we should be concerned with TBH. 

Eldest kid has now tested positive from PCR on 17th, two positive LFT's in a row on the 14th late night. 

They are fine pretty much, just cold symptoms really, not flu, and my kids will never have jabs if i can help it. I'm actually so glad they can now have covid anibodies naturally. 

[henry the king]

3 minutes ago, slawek said:

These results were to confirm that people had vaccine before (a quote from the paper below). As you can see from my other post above those lab results didn't translate into high immunity based on a field study.   

"Blood was taken for immunogenicity analyses at days 28, 84, and 365. A separate immunology subgroup comprised of 25 individuals from each treatment group (n=650 participants) attended additional visits to have blood taken at day 7 (to detect evidence of previous immunological priming via rapid spike IgG responses) and day 14 (to detect the peak T-cell response)."

 

Double down it is I guess. Those people who showed antibodies spiking at 7 days are obviously fictional beings. 😛

 

[winkie]

1 hour ago, GregBowman said:

Might give that a miss 

Didn’t say it wasn’t Mr philosopher but sensible risk mitigation procedures enable you to do more for longer not sure what your point is 

We are responsible for the risks we place ourselves in.......nothing wrong with taking risks.

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

22 hours ago, andrewwk said:

I am actually genuinely sorry you feel that way, since you seem in general to be a rational contributor to these forums. I'm sorry if this makes me  right-wing in your eyes, but the person I responded has basically been spouting page upon page of gibberish and I think it is ridiculous

Fair enough. Sorry if I picked up your postings incorrectly.

22 hours ago, andrewwk said:

and it is "whose" not "who's" btw

Thank you. 👍

[slawek]

18 minutes ago, Brave New World said:

Responded earlier re Hong Kong study, you ignored.

Hardly calling someone's bluff, when you ignore references to studies showing that this variant is different and impacting in a less invasive manner, whilst also ignoring data points in SA and now Denmark.

Not sure what you mean. You didn't post anything about HK study in a reply to any of my posts.

I was calling a bluff in a specific case, the evidence that booster works well after 7 days.

I am not ignoring the HK study. It is a lab study so it doesn't necessary translate into clinical situation. It is a hint that it could be milder but it doesn't prove it. You need  take into context of other studies and weight it accordingly. For an example the clinical studies are more credible than a lab result and those (SA and UK) paint a mixed view about Omicron mildness regarding hospitalisation. There is no enough data to make any credible claim regarding Omicron death risk yet.

  

[slawek]

7 minutes ago, henry the king said:

Double down it is I guess. Those people who showed antibodies spiking at 7 days are obviously fictional beings. 😛

 

Ignoring the field study results?

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

18 hours ago, henry the king said:

Now they know it will infect the lungs worse. Again due to biology. 

 

16 hours ago, henry the king said:

This is pure science. 

We know now, from two independent studies, that it infects the lungs way way worse. We know this attacking of the lungs is linked to severe disease.

 

 

14 hours ago, henry the king said:

Which is what happened with Omicron. Now we know this as we have the biological data. It changed itself to get round immunity and now it is infecting the lungs. 

 

3 hours ago, henry the king said:

Omicron is much much worse at infecting the lungs, which is the main cause of severe disease. This is the key finding that ties together all the data.

 

2 hours ago, henry the king said:

It infects the lungs MUCH worse. 

 

1 hour ago, henry the king said:

It doesn't infect the lungs. I meant to say much less not much worse.

Yeah sure you did, that's why you've repeated said the same thing. 🤣🤡

2 hours ago, Riedquat said:

I'd have thought infecting the lungs worse would make it more dangerous, not less.

Good spot @Riedquat. You called out his lies.