Coronavirus thread

[greg]

My mother, in her 80s also contracted it, but luckily it struck her only as the equivalent of a mild cold (the old garden-variety Coronavirus, I suppose.

This has been the case for friends and family. Even for my mom, being unvaccinated, it wasn't worse than the flu. Omicron is pretty weak.

[Que]

This has been the case for friends and family. Even for my mom, being unvaccinated, it wasn't worse than the flu. Omicron is pretty weak.

We all got lucky when Omicron turned out to be much milder than Delta, but particularly the unvaccinated.

Yet it does send the wrong, reassuring message: you don't need to be vaccinated.  Might not work out so well if there is a next time... which hopefully won't come!

[Karl Henning]

This has been the case for friends and family. Even for my mom, being unvaccinated, it wasn't worse than the flu. Omicron is pretty weak.

Very glad about your mom.

[MusicTurner]

Self-tests suffer from a lack of efficiency data everywhere, in spite of being massively on the market.

A new test here of 46 labels shows surprising differences in results - spanning from 2.5% to 94%. Generally, tests based on spit were very bad, and an efficiency above 90% is recommended. Plus: PCR tests, but not tested here, are still considered the better option.

In Europe, a 'C' mark on the packet only means that the production itself is regular, it does not tell about any minimum level of efficiency.

Click on 'overall clinical sensitivity'
https://www.hvidovrehospital.dk/presse-og-nyt/pressemeddelelser-og-nyheder/nyheder-fra-hvidovre-hospital/Sider/Antigentests-svinger-voldsomt-i-kvalitet.aspx

The labels listed - a PDF link: https://www.hvidovrehospital.dk/presse-og-nyt/pressemeddelelser-og-nyheder/nyheder-fra-hvidovre-hospital/Documents/graf-antigentests.pdf

Big version in English https://www.hvidovrehospital.dk/presse-og-nyt/pressemeddelelser-og-nyheder/nyheder-fra-hvidovre-hospital/PublishingImages/Sider/Antigentests-svinger-voldsomt-i-kvalitet/A%20nationwide%20analytical%20and%20clinical%20evaluation%20of%2046%20rapid%20antigen%20tests%20for%20SARS-CoV-.pdf

[Que]

"Next Covid strain could kill many more, warn scientists ahead of England restrictions ending"

There's that word again - 'COULD'. No proof, simple speculation by media based on spurious history and flawed science. Along with it's siblings, MIGHT, POSSIBLY, PREDICTED, etc -  any headline that contains any of these words I now simply dismiss. All they do is raise fear levels, encourage conspiracy theorists and sell media time which is money of course. Data is nearly always far more reliable than anecdotal 'evidence'.

Indeed. There are many might be's and no need to speculate. I could name a number of treats that are more scary and perhaps more probable. Multi resistant bacteria anybody?

"Could" as in: a clear possibility. Neither a certainty, nor a speculation.

What to Expect From the Variants to Come How Omicron and earlier strains evolved doesn't bode well for what's next.

Omicron, though far more infectious than the variants that preceded it, has proven to be somewhat less deadly on a case-for-case basis. Assuming that trend continues, SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19, is in the process of evolving into a relatively symbiotic companion to the human species.

But that idea is a fantasy, say virologists who study the disease closely. "We're not going to see that," says Ravindra Gupta, a microbiologist at the University of Cambridge in the U.K. "It's factually wrong." Variants will keep coming, and we have no reason to expect that they'll be less virulent. They could well be both more transmissible and more deadly than anything we've seen so far.

Sensationalism by scientists?   

I guess in this era of "relative truths", anything is possible.

[greg]

Very glad about your mom.

Thanks, same about yours.
She only got it from being desperate to sing in church after a really long time (at that point knew about the weakness of Omicron, so must have felt the risk was worth it).
But until that time was no-lifeing, staying away from others and taking every precaution imaginable the entire time, never getting the virus at all. Pretty extreme and not doable for most people, but some can pull it off.

Yet it does send the wrong, reassuring message: you don't need to be vaccinated.  Might not work out so well if there is a next time... which hopefully won't come!

In general, for the majority of people, vaccination is the better option. It's not one size fits all, though. And as for the message that is being sent, people should be relying on their own (fact-based) judgement more than whatever messages are being sent by people discussing it online- the burden of responsibility is on them to make their own decisions, rather than the burden of randos online to be providing good messages. Which  seems to be a source of disagreement nowadays.

[Que]

In general, for the majority of people, vaccination is the better option. It's not one size fits all, though. And as for the message that is being sent, people should be relying on their own (fact-based) judgement more than whatever messages are being sent by people discussing it online- the burden of responsibility is on them to make their own decisions, rather than the burden of randos online to be providing good messages. Which  seems to be a source of disagreement nowadays.

You are buying into the popular fantasy that the general public knows and understands everything and does not have to rely on more informed expert advice.

Economy, international law, medical sciences, natural sciences? We all understand and know so much better than these so called experts!   

[Karl Henning]

Sensationalism by scientists?   

I guess in this era of "relative truths", anything is possible.

And doctors who don't give us the Happy Talk we want are "doom-sayers."

You are buying into the popular fantasy that the general public knows and understands everything and does not have to rely on more informed expert advice.

[snip]

At times, greg does seem heavily invested in that fantasy.

[Mandryka]

"Could" as in: a clear possibility. Neither a certainty, nor a speculation.

What to Expect From the Variants to Come How Omicron and earlier strains evolved doesn't bode well for what's next.

Omicron, though far more infectious than the variants that preceded it, has proven to be somewhat less deadly on a case-for-case basis. Assuming that trend continues, SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19, is in the process of evolving into a relatively symbiotic companion to the human species.

But that idea is a fantasy, say virologists who study the disease closely. "We're not going to see that," says Ravindra Gupta, a microbiologist at the University of Cambridge in the U.K. "It's factually wrong." Variants will keep coming, and we have no reason to expect that they'll be less virulent. They could well be both more transmissible and more deadly than anything we've seen so far.

Sensationalism by scientists?   

I guess in this era of "relative truths", anything is possible.

This comment from Wendy Barclay, who's a Professor of Virology at Imperial College London, is relevant here. At  about 1.01.30 in the video

The big unknown for people like me at the moment is, how will the virus go next and is antigenic escape necessarily driving milder infection, or will the next solution for the virus be a different combination, perhaps antigenic escape and a severe infection? We can't exclude that at the moment because we don't understand why omicron has changed its behaviour in the way it has. Is it a necessary consequence for the virus, this change in antigenic characteristics, or not. Can they be uncoupled? That's intense research, big questions. There are a number of other worrying things out there, we've seen the virus hop back into certain animal species, from where it could always re-emerge in the future.. . and there's some evidence that chronically infected people incubate these viruses for a long time and give rise to these new variants, there are many many thousands of these people around the world. I don't think that this is the last variant we'll see. I don't know at the moment what the characteristics of the next variant will be. I think that if we continue to see this trend in downward severity after another one or two variants I will feel a lot more comfortable in saying, yes, let's relax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQoxwJWqlP0&t=3708s&ab_channel=ZOE

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

And doctors who don't give us the Happy Talk we want are "doom-sayers."
At times, greg does seem heavily invested in that fantasy.

Talking about Asians on the other thread, how is the Boston mayor doing administratively and politically on this matter and other issues?

[Karl Henning]

Talking about Asians on the other thread, how is the Boston mayor doing administratively and politically on this matter and other issues?

Even in Boston (we might say) there are a lot of people who are more inclined to push back, and to be less civil about it, with a mayor who is an Asian-American woman. She's handling herself well. She may have a future.

[greg]

You are buying into the popular fantasy that the general public knows and understands everything and does not have to rely on more informed expert advice.

Economy, international law, medical sciences, natural sciences? We all understand and know so much better than these so called experts!   

No, that's not my position at all.
My position is that people have different bodies and (hopefully) have the wisdom to make the correct decision for themselves (of course, there are plenty that don't). Mandates are like forcing everyone to wear the same size clothing. There might be an average that is perfect for many, true, but there is no one size fits all.

[Holden]

"Could" as in: a clear possibility. Neither a certainty, nor a speculation.

What to Expect From the Variants to Come How Omicron and earlier strains evolved doesn't bode well for what's next.

Omicron, though far more infectious than the variants that preceded it, has proven to be somewhat less deadly on a case-for-case basis. Assuming that trend continues, SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19, is in the process of evolving into a relatively symbiotic companion to the human species.

But that idea is a fantasy, say virologists who study the disease closely. "We're not going to see that," says Ravindra Gupta, a microbiologist at the University of Cambridge in the U.K. "It's factually wrong." Variants will keep coming, and we have no reason to expect that they'll be less virulent. They could well be both more transmissible and more deadly than anything we've seen so far.

Sensationalism by scientists?   

I guess in this era of "relative truths", anything is possible.

clear possibility? Is it fact, does it have a solid basis in fact?

Speculate: verb
1. form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence.

Anecdotal evidence is not fact, (especially if it's historical).

They could well be both more transmissible and more deadly than anything we've seen so far.

and they could well be the opposite as well. A pound each way? You don't need to be a scientist to make two statements that contradict each other at almost the same time. 

[prémont]

clear possibility? Is it fact, does it have a solid basis in fact?

Speculate: verb
1. form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence.

Anecdotal evidence is not fact, (especially if it's historical).
  and they could well be the opposite as well. A pound each way? You don't need to be a scientist to make two statements that contradict each other at almost the same time.

This is psoudoargumentation. From experience (and this is not anectodical) we know that mutations will come and some of them will be less virulent and some of them will be more virulent. It's only a question of time before a more virulent variant emerges. If you think otherwise, you are deluding yourself. But you are right, we don't need experts to tell us this, which is indeed evident.

[Karl Henning]

This is psoudoargumentation. From experience (and this is not anectodical) we know that mutations will come and some of them will be less virulent and some of them will be more virulent. It's only a question of time before a more virulent variant emerges. If you think otherwise, you are deluding yourself. But you are right, we don't need experts to tell us this, which is indeed evident.

And, to repeat what we've all known for months now, COVID-19 is a virulent novel mutation of what had been the unremarkable coronavirus.

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Even in Boston (we might say) there are a lot of people who are more inclined to push back, and to be less civil about it, with a mayor who is an Asian-American woman. She's handling herself well. She may have a future.

Sounds like she is a pragmatic politician rather than purist ideologue. For such people (most politicians), politics determines policy rather than policy determining politics.

[Karl Henning]

Sounds like she is a pragmatic politician rather than purist ideologue. For such people (most politicians), politics determines policy rather than policy determining politics.

Just so.

[Holden]

In an earlier post I intimated that Covid deaths included those who died from the virus and those who had Covid but died from other causes. A couple of posters queried this especially as any evidence I had at the time was purely anecdotal and from my own experiences. Now this from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and also Queensland's Chief Health Officer. This from the 'Brisbane Times' today

The ABS data was up to January 31 and included 2639 deaths nation-wide, including people who died from the disease and others who had died from different causes while also testing positive for COVID-19.

Queensland CHO John Gerrard has emphasised the distinction at recent media conferences, saying the increasing complexity of cases meant

some deaths were "from" COVID while other people infected with coronavirus had died of other causes.

The other interesting stat concerns who is now dying from Covid and why

The Australian Bureau of Statistics' report found that, on average, a person who died from COVID-19 also had 2.7 other illnesses at their time of death. I saw this disease overseas in 2021. These were young people getting classic viral pneumonia and dying," Dr Gerrard said. "What we're seeing now is very different – you're seeing older people with multiple medical problems, and often it's difficult to determine to what extent the virus has played a role in their death.

Of course, this is here in Australia, but we're finally getting some transparent demographic data to show what is actually happening. If this had been done right at the start then a more focused approach could have been adopted.

[Karl Henning]

Is anyone talking as if the number of coronavirus fatalities is no longer a concern, or even negligible?

The coronavirus is here to stay. We now have a tool kit to live with it.

By Carolyn Y. Johnson and Aaron Steckelberg
Feb. 15, 2022

When the pandemic began, the medical tool box was empty. There were no coronavirus vaccines, no treatments, not even tests to tell who was infected and who was not.

For the past two years, scientists and doctors have been building and expanding an arsenal. None of these tools are silver bullets. They can't eliminate the coronavirus. But together, they can help turn the virus into a manageable risk, allowing people to hug relatives, go to the movies and travel without fear.

Deaths from covid-19 still have a long way to drop before the crisis of the pandemic recedes. But most experts believe that as immunity is broadened through vaccination and waves of infection, covid-19 will eventually blend into the other illnesses that are part of the daily background of respiratory disease.

That doesn't mean the virus becomes harmless. Every year, respiratory diseases cause tens of thousands of hospitalizations and deaths. Precisely how much covid-19 contributes to that suffering remains to be seen.

What is certain is that the world needs to prepare the tools now to help control future waves and iterations of the virus and reduce their harm: vaccinations, antiviral pills, and other treatments and preventive measures.

"We're looking forward, as I think everyone feels is appropriate, that ultimately ... we're going to have to 'live' with something that will not be eradicated and very likely would not be eliminated," Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said at a coronavirus task force briefing.

One model for how to move forward comes from HIV. There isn't a vaccine, but a slew of treatments and prevention strategies means infected people with access to health care can live nearly normal life spans with the right support and access to medicine. In the case of the coronavirus, scientists hope to build a medical tool kit stacked with vaccines, boosters, pills, monoclonal antibodies and other countermeasures that will provide layers of protection and defense, helping tame the pandemic.

"For HIV, we have a plethora of stuff, because we haven't been able to have a vaccine," said Larry Corey, a virologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. "Here, we may have a vaccine, but we still may need a plethora of stuff.

[Madiel]

No, that's not my position at all.
My position is that people have different bodies and (hopefully) have the wisdom to make the correct decision for themselves (of course, there are plenty that don't). Mandates are like forcing everyone to wear the same size clothing. There might be an average that is perfect for many, true, but there is no one size fits all.

That "hopefully" in brackets is a huge issue. Your position makes theoretical sense, but doesn't work because it presupposes a kind of knowledge that people do NOT have. How many people ACTUALLY know enough about their immune system to make an informed choice?

Nearly zero. I'm not talking about people who believe they can "boost" their immune system with vitamins or zinc or something that's actually dangerous rather than pointless. People who actually know enough about their own individual immune system, one of the most complex things in the human body, to make an informed choice as to where they sit on the statistical probabilities? That's almost nobody. That's ONLY people who have previous experience of an unusual issue that gave them specific information.

The problem is, in some parts of the world there are far too many people who BELIEVE they know way more about their own immune system in ways that would make a scientist double over with laughter if it wasn't goddamn serious. A steady diet of wellness industry junk science designed to sell you stuff has people believing they have total control over bodily functions they haven't a clue about.

Making the "correct decision" isn't based on wisdom. It's dumb luck. It's the same dumb luck that means most people who decide not to wear a seatbelt on a car trip won't die. It doesn't mean not getting vaccinated was a wise decision, it just means people played a round of Russian roulette and didn't lose. But they will BELIEVE they made a smart informed decision because the result was okay, in a shocking case of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking.

Not getting vaccinated is not a wise, informed choice unless you have specific knowledge of a medical condition that makes vaccination a bad idea. Tell your Mum.