2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Serious discussion of the novel Corona Virus outbreak.

Understanding the basis and treatment of disease.

Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#821  Postby Spearthrower » Sep 25, 2021 6:47 am

Deep research!!

https://en-volve.com/terms-of-service/

The information presented on or through the Website is made available solely for general information and entertainment purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents.


That's where we're at as a society - a significant portion of our citizenry are unable to tell reality from entertainment.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 28870
Age: 45
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#822  Postby Blip » Sep 25, 2021 7:05 am


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Locked for review.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 21054
Female

Country: This septic isle...
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#823  Postby Blip » Sep 26, 2021 9:50 am


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Spearthrower, please restrict your robust disagreements to the content of others' posts rather than seasoning them with such forms of address as 'fucking clown', 'naive fool, 'nut job' and 'Infowars loon'.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 21054
Female

Country: This septic isle...
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#824  Postby hackenslash » Sep 26, 2021 10:55 am

That's not true. The vast majority of the time it takes to develop a new vaccine revolves around research and the necessity [of prolonged observation] to determine potential [nasty] side-effects. It is for good reason that the effects of all other vaccines ever created had to be thoroughly scrutinised for a good few years.


You have no idea of what you’re on about. All the current vaccines underwent exactly the same testing regimens as any other vaccine on the market. Nothing was skipped.

Let's not tell any lies here.


How dare you?

The fact is that the process of creation [of a NEW class of vaccine] to observation of side-effects to approval and final widespread implementation, happened [here in the UK] within about 9 months. If that in itself doesn't ring any alarm bells for you here, then I don't know what will.


Except that, unlike you, I know how that time-frame was achieved, but you dismiss it as a lie with exactly zero justification.

The thing you don’t get is that, because of the technological simplicity of mRNA vaccine tech, not only is it safer, it’s inherently quicker and cheaper to develop.

You say that we'd been researching DNA technology for several years before that, but so what?


And this is a beautiful pointer to exactly why you aren’t competent to make any sort of assessment. You can’t even recapitulate a single unambiguous sentence accurately, because this bears no resemblance whatsoever to anything I said. The difference between what I said and what you’ve presented it as is stark, and critical.

ALL ideas/inventions stand on the shoulders of previous thought/research. It doesn't detract from the fact that in late March of 2020, the UK went into lockdown because of covid, and by early December of the same year we were injecting a NEW class of vaccine into the arms of UK citizens!! Similarly, elsewhere.


It’s not a new class of anything, and there’s nothing in these vaccines that isn’t in just about everything. The ingredients are trivially in oodles of products we ingest and imbibe on a daily basis in higher amounts.

Clearly, the whole process was ultra-rushed and safety was NOT the primary concern. Indeed, if safety had been the primary concern then we would have known much more about the SHORT-term adverse effects of vaccines before they started implementing them.


We did know about them, which is exactly why administering to children was delayed until we had more data after rollout. In fact, the links to the safety data are all in the article I linked to. You’re talking bollocks again, only this time it’s genuinely dangerous bollocks. Thank fuck your only audience is people who know what an inveterate bullshitter and scientific illiterate you are.

The truth is that even the short-term effects of the vaccine were not known for at least a few months after we had already injected several million people in this country alone (and elsewhere).


Except for those pesky safety data published prior to rollout, you mean.

You’re simply lying.

Or, alternatively, the authorities-that-be knew about them but 'we' didn't until at least a few months later. I.e., they either withheld information from us or they didn't know. In either case, they were taking the piss [out of 'us'].


You have no understanding on which to base any of this, you’re simply pulling out of your arse what ‘feels’ right to you. It’s bullshit, and overlooks the fact that the safety and risk profiles were PUBLISHED prior to rollout. Those risks were a slight hump in the data showing a risk of clotting based on D dimers, and another showing risk of myocarditis. These factors have since been shown to be respectively 10 and 37 times higher from the virus.

Every ingredient of every vaccine is a known ingredient. The technology is trivially simple and, once again, you’re overlooking the simple fact that mRNA vaccines are FUNDAMENTALLY safer than conventional vaccines. The only thing different is the specific transport mechanism - a charged lipid. Now, you could make the case that ingesting a molecule of fat is harmful in the long-term, but since a Happy meal has about a gazillion times the fat content, and since the exact same type of fat molecule is also what your cell walls are made of, we can safely disregard that

Bollocks. All you're doing here is feeding certain [follow the money and power] conspiracy theories, for you more-or-less suggest that we more-or-less had the technology to create a vaccine for covid prior to it happening, so "let it rip". Are you suggesting that it is pure coincidence that the world is facing "its biggest danger since WW2" and that we just happened to have the cure for it within a handful of months after the event? FFS, have a word.


The well-poisoning fallacy isn’t an argument, and nor is the dumbfuck non-sequitur. Yes, mRNA vaccine technology was sufficiently well-developed that it could be pressed into service, and no, that still isn’t going to be quick. The tech challenges were mostly adapting for purpose and having sufficient information on the viral genome to isolate the RNA that codes for the spike protein. Because you have zero scientific literacy, it’s all just fucking magic to you, so no wonder you see it as a massive conspiracy to bluetooth enable you, or whatever dumb shit you think is going on.

Unlike you, squire, I've done my due diligence too, which in my case DEMANDED a necessity to research BOTH sides of the argument.

Except for the tiny problem that you have no fucking clue of what due diligence looks like, because you lack even rudimentary scientific competence, let alone the more sophisticated scientific literacy require to do any diligence, due or otherwise. You don’t know how to scrutinise science, as a matter of overwhelming and voluminous public record.
Such sources are low to access in quantity, since Western Civilisation has from day one more-or-less demonised and suppressed anyone from countering the status quo of getting everyone in lockdown and getting them vaccinated asap.


That speaks to your incompetence. Why? Because I don’t get my information about science from the University of fucking Youtube.

I'm guessing that you've heard of The Great Barrington Declaration? (lockdowns), which was completely overlooked/ignored/unreported, at a time when we didn't have vaccines? Why was this?!!!


Because it was economically-motivated bullshit that ran directly counter to the science?

Let's talk about it, though, because it's instructive on what it takes to achieve competence in assessing sources.

The big clue is who funded this declaration, The American Institute for Economic Research.

Jay Bhattacharya was co-author on the ridiculous Santa Clara seroprevalence study.

This study could have been written by a creationist it was so riddled with errors. Errors in basic statistics, failing correctly to read the sensitivity and specificity of their testing kits as indicated by the manufacturer of the test, miscalculations of population intervals, plugging the wrong miscalculated interval into a formula followed by multiple basic maths errors in executing the formula, and glossing over several critical calculations.

All of this led to a massive over-estimation of infection rates, which in turn led to a massive under-estimation of the lethality of the virus.

The paper was debunked up the wazoo within two or three days of it hitting the preprint server. Bhattacharya has been a proponent of the natural herd immunity experiment which underpins GBD and which has informed the UK government since the outset, and is directly responsible for Johnson's 'let it rip' attitude.

Sunetra Gupta was co-author on a similar study suggesting that 50% of the UK public had been infected, again widely criticised for modelling naïveté.

And finally, Martin Kulldorff. I don't think I need say much more than that he vaunted Sweden's approach (how's that going?0 and argued vociferously against testing asymptomatic children.

I read a critique of GBD a while back, and the opening of that critique, by David Gorski, will hit home with many hereabouts, particularly regarding the skillset involved in differentiating between sources for quality:

David Gorski wrote:When you’ve been examining pseudoscientific and quack claims for over two decades, you start to recognize patterns in the strategies and technique used by those denying science to promote their pseudoscience or quackery. Those who don’t pay attention to these sorts of issues might have been surprised by or unfamiliar with these techniques, but many skeptics were not.


In another respect, the declaration is very much like another statement made by 'scientists'. We all recall the famous 'Scientific Dissent from Darwinism' and the enormously fun 'Project Steve' that it spawned. Well, among the signatories of GBD are the pre-eminent epidemiologists 'Dr Johnny Banana' and 'Dr Person Fakename'.

So, have you actually read the declaration?

I have.

or the record, your link was interesting and did make me question my decision to not have the vaccine. I mean, I'm OPEN to having my fears about the vaccines overturned. However, ultimately your link was to a relatively ordinary immunologist's view on a very ordinary platform.


A relatively ordinary immunologist. Holy shit, it wants to play scientific-competence calculus. Let’s look at the tower of scientific intellect he wants to pit against a well-respected and well-known EXPERT in this specific field…

However, two can play at that game. For instance, do you want to hear the views of a Canadian GP with nearly three decades of experience wrt the effects a vaccine had on his own patients, whom he knew? Have a look at this (give the link several seconds to load)...

"A Canadian doctor demands further study into the link between Covid-19 vaccines and blood clots after his research found clots in a majority of vaccinated patients"


Lovely. Dismiss recognised expert in the field, vaunt somebody NOT an expert in the field, and give credence to obvious fallacies.

This is precisely what I mean when I talk about your incompetence to do due diligence. A GP is not an expert in epidemiology, he's an expert in general practice. And yes, general practice is a medical specialism and its own field of expertise, and that field is not epidemiology, virology, immunology or vaccinology.

His fallacies should be obvious to somebody like you, James, since you’ve been excoriated oodles of times for the same fallacies. His fallacies, incidentally, as the post hoc fallacy and affirming the consequent. If you dig beyond the fact that he’s a medical professional and, rather than holding him up as your faux expert-du-jour, look at what he’s actually saying and from where he derives his conclusion, you discover that the basis for his claim is… a positive D dimer.

To an ill-educated, scientifically illiterate rube, that might sound like a stick-on, because D dimers are usually formed as a result of clots breaking down. However, clots aren’t the only reason for a positive D dimer. Just the front page of google lists several causes:

D-dimer levels can be positive due to:
Pregnancy.
Liver disease.
Recent surgery or trauma.
High lipid or triglyceride levels.
Heart disease.
Being over 80 years old.

Even David Icke was kicked off youtube after being there for donkey's years. Not for spreading "misinformation" about humanity or the moon etc.., but because he questioned the status quo regarding covid and vaccines.


Even? You make it sound like he should have some sort of special status.

Also, nice bit of dog-whistling there. He didn’t question the status quo, he actively discouraged vaccination and spread dangerous disinformation. Fucking lunatic should be charged.

Disregarding issues of free speech, which we should not, the authorities have made it extremely difficult for anyone to counter their policies during this 'pandemic' to the point that anyone with a brain should be wondering what's going on.


This isn’t an issue of free speech, so spare me the wander into your understanding of civil liberties.

Harmful speech is not protected speech, nor can it be, despite the bleatings of those invoking Orwell without having the first fucking clue of what he actually thought about free speech and its limits (or, indeed, ever having read any Orwell; maybe they saw the film – Animal Farm, of course, as anything else would be well beyond them).

You're a smart bloke so I'll always review your posts, but I do not think that your views are balanced.


When it comes to science, I don’t have views, I report what’s in the literature.

You somehow believe that ALL scientists have the same views, even of NEW issues, which is bollocks.


This is trivially untrue. I’m not interested in scientists, because scientists aren’t valid authorities. There is only one valid authority in science; the data.

I construe from this that, therefore, you are driven by a specific cultural/philosophical/political agenda and are NOT open to questioning this agenda.


More well-poisoning. My agenda is sound public health policy driven by evidence.

Me, I'm open to almost anything, including the fact that the vaccines may in the long-run be the best bet. However, I know for a fact that you do not believe this is absolutely true, because I know for a fact that there is insufficient data and [free] opinion to support it as so. You're just blurting out your baaaas, like most.


Still wrong. The data are in, and they tell us that you’re talking through your rectal sphincter. Again.

Regardless, I hope that you are well.


You too.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21851
Age: 52
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#825  Postby Blip » Sep 26, 2021 11:15 am


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Vaccination discussion split from 'new eye discovery' thread in Creationism.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 21054
Female

Country: This septic isle...
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#826  Postby felltoearth » Sep 26, 2021 2:54 pm

jamest wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
jamest wrote:I am however seriously concerned about the medium-term+ effects of repeatedly pumping that stuff into our bodies, for our immune systems, for a virus which ultimately cannot be eradicated.


https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/

4,737,553 deaths from covid 19.


https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... d2july2021

Numerous studies around the world show that the vaccinated are vastly less likely to die or be hospitalized due to covid 19 infection.

So, given your supposed serious concern about the effects of vaccination, on what empirical grounds are you conceiving of this as outweighing the potential for death or serious long-term effects of contracting covid 19 while unvaccinated?

What empirical data are you using that would justify such a position?

If you have no such data, then the lint from your navel will not suffice.

If you look, for instance, at the link I provided for hackenslash, you will have the researched opinion of a doctor with
nearly 3 decades of experience suggesting that 62% of all vaccinated people are currently suffering from blood clots, whether they know it or not, which [according to him] will bite them in the ass within the next handful of years.

Having researched this issue extensively, I've come across similar opinions on numerous occasions. I'm not just making this stuff up to annoy you, I promise. For example, I remember another article about 57 scientists/doctors demanding that ALL vaccinations should cease immediately...

https://en-volve.com/2021/05/08/57-top- ... cinations/

So, "following the data" is not what this is about. It's about following the 'authoritative' representation of the data and discrediting all others. I.e., it's all politics, squire.

The first person I selected from the list of “doctors” is a fucking veterinarian.

You’re a fucking joke.

https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/609780/bio


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14299
Age: 54

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#827  Postby hackenslash » Sep 26, 2021 3:14 pm

I went and had a trawl on scholar for that dreck. The results were interesting.

One entry on a pre-print server in early May with a revised version in the last third of May, and several on 'natural health', denialist and other conservative-leaning propaganda mills (and yes, James, the link you gave hits the full trifecta). Not a single pick-up by a reputable journal and, in four months since the revised version was uploaded to the pre-print server, not a single academic citation anywhere. A total impact factor of 'I see no ships!'

And all long after we knew about the effects of long COVID.

Oh, and I came across another long-term effect of COVID while I was digging for something else. We've known for some time that diabetics were a high-risk group for COVID because of elevated sugar levels; there's now emerging evidence that COVID can in fact give you type 2 diabetes, via inflammation-driven insulin resistance.

NEJM article here: New-Onset Diabetes in Covid-19

But yes, let's keep probing the long-term safety of the vaccine, despite all the data being in and showing the vaccine to be as safe as putting foreign objects in your body can ever be, and considerably safer on every marker than the virus.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21851
Age: 52
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#828  Postby Blip » Sep 26, 2021 3:18 pm


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
felltoearth, 'fucking joke' is also the sort of thing I had in mind here. Please don't resort to this when addressing a post.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 21054
Female

Country: This septic isle...
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#829  Postby Spearthrower » Sep 26, 2021 3:28 pm

jamest wrote:I've done my due diligence


jamest wrote:Having researched this issue extensively,


felltoearth wrote:The first person I selected from the list of “doctors” is a fucking veterinarian.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 28870
Age: 45
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#830  Postby Spearthrower » Sep 26, 2021 3:29 pm

hackenslash wrote:
One entry on a pre-print server in early May with a revised version in the last third of May, and several on 'natural health', denialist and other conservative-leaning propaganda mills (and yes, James, the link you gave hits the full trifecta). Not a single pick-up by a reputable journal and, in four months since the revised version was uploaded to the pre-print server, not a single academic citation anywhere. A total impact factor of 'I see no ships!'


Bloke down the pub said, so it must be true.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 28870
Age: 45
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

#831  Postby OlivierK » Sep 27, 2021 2:01 am

jamest wrote:I've not had the vaccine. Does that mean that I believe that covid is a hoax? No. Does that mean that I believe I am not at risk of serious illness and/or death from covid? No. Does it mean that I believe that the vaccine does not significantly negate the impact of covid? No.

I am however seriously concerned about the medium-term+ effects of repeatedly pumping that stuff into our bodies, for our immune systems, for a virus which ultimately cannot be eradicated.

If that makes me a nut job, then so be it.

James, serious question: why would uneradicability of COVID tilt you away from getting vaccinated? I could understand, if not sympathise with, freeloading on the vaccinated for your own protection if you thought that would buy you time while the virus was eradicated, but if you think it won't be, then you're left with balancing the risk of the vaccine against the risk of COVID, which you claim to accept as serious.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9858
Age: 55
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#832  Postby hackenslash » Sep 27, 2021 12:01 pm

Incidentally, on that question, there's been a lot of talk of late, even some from academics - albeit speaking slightly out of their area of expertise, much like the GP holding forth on epidemiology - about 'living with the virus' and the notion that it will 'become more benign over time as we learn to live with it.

I know most here don't need it explained why that's bollocks, but I cobbled together an explanation for some of the social media wallies in layman's terms.

Endemicity and COVID; a primer

Lot of talk doing the rounds about COVID becoming more benign over time.

It's certainly the case that many viruses do, in fact, tend to become more benign over time, but this is because of some of the features of evolution, and some of them are being quite catastrophically overlooked in these analyses.

The first is about selection and how selection pressures work.

In general, a virus that is really deadly may well tend to wane over time, because if you kill your host before you've had a time to transmit and effect somebody else, it imposes a negative selection pressure, meaning that only those variants of the virus that keep the host alive long enough to transmit will be strongly represented in future generations.

In the case of SARS-CoV-2, peak infectiousness is reached up to two days before symptoms manifest, so that's not a pressure this virus is subject to.

The other factor is the fitness landscape. Fitness gradients in a population - differentials in levels of immunity in the population, dfor example - impose a positive selection pressure. That is, they drive evolution to accelerate, and to accelerate very specifically in the direction of that gradient. When we're talking about gradients in immunity, that means evolution drives toward full immune escape.

There are also people comparing this virus to seasonal flu, which is a catastrophically bad idea. All else aside, rates of evolution, while not directly tied to genome size, are strongly correlated. Influenza A, the virus that causes flu epidemics, has a genome approximately twice that of SARS-CoV-2, so we can expect (and have pretty much seen) commensurate rates of evolution.

It's worth noting here that 'rates of evolution' doesn't really refer to time, because it's a serial trials thing. The specific odds of, say, tossing ten heads in a row with a fair coin, are 1:1024. That means that, if a single person conducts this, taking twenty seconds per cycle, it will take about six days. If you have 1024 people tossing coins all at once, it will take about (checks notes...) twenty seconds, because it approaches certainty that somebody will do it on the first attempt.

Naïve appraisals of these issues are driving a lot of the pseudoscientific discourse on COVID, and it isn't all coming from pseuds.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21851
Age: 52
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#833  Postby hackenslash » Oct 02, 2021 1:32 am

Merck announce that interim phase-3 testing on a new antiviral, molnupiravir, reduces risk of hospitalisation and death by 50%.

Awaiting peer-review of findings and ready to apply for EUA.

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-and-ridgebacks-investigational-oral-antiviral-molnupiravir-reduced-the-risk-of-hospitalization-or-death-by-approximately-50-percent-compared-to-placebo-for-patients-with-mild-or-moderat/
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21851
Age: 52
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#834  Postby kiore » Oct 02, 2021 7:53 pm

hackenslash wrote:Merck announce that interim phase-3 testing on a new antiviral, molnupiravir, reduces risk of hospitalisation and death by 50%.

Awaiting peer-review of findings and ready to apply for EUA.

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-and-ridgebacks-investigational-oral-antiviral-molnupiravir-reduced-the-risk-of-hospitalization-or-death-by-approximately-50-percent-compared-to-placebo-for-patients-with-mild-or-moderat/


The most promising thing about this new group of treatments and there are a number of others not far behind, is that although so far not as effective as the current monoclonal antibodies, they are much easier to use and do not require intravenously administration. What also looks possible with these kinds of early interventions is that close contacts of positive cases could also receive this and stop possible infections very early on. In conjunction with vaccination this looks very powerful in preventing serious illness.
Folding@Home Team member.
Image
What does this stuff mean?
Read here:
general-science/folding-home-team-182116-t616.html
User avatar
kiore
Senior Moderator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16421

Country: In transit.
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#835  Postby Macdoc » Oct 03, 2021 2:27 am

And for those on immuno-supression drugs as one of my associates is. He is fully vaxxed but a breakthrough covid infection would be devastating.

Good article on covid ennui
https://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/hea ... 58ooa.html
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17273
Age: 74
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#836  Postby Cito di Pense » Oct 03, 2021 4:28 am

hackenslash wrote:
But yes, let's keep probing the long-term safety of the vaccine, despite all the data being in and showing the vaccine to be as safe as putting foreign objects in your body can ever be, and considerably safer on every marker than the virus.


I'm a happy recipient of two doses of Moderna, four months down the line from my second. I don't post much any more, but I'm as hale and hearty (and dour) as I was before "the dose".

I recently read something about how the variants are evolving toward stronger airborne transmissibility, not surprising at all. Was that in this thread? I've lost the link.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29564
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#837  Postby hackenslash » Oct 06, 2021 11:50 am

I don't know about airborne transmissibility, but transmissibility generally is one of the fitness gradients along which evolution is directed.

In general, in a population with a degree of immunity and all the attendant gradients, this occurs either by resisting the vaccine better and pushing the window of transmissibility open by being infectious for longer, or by reaching peak infectiousness much earlier compared to first symptoms. The vaccine reduces the window at both ends for alpha, but it seems not to have the same effect on the beginning of the window for delta, because it reaches peak infectiousness (and symptoms) much earlier.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21851
Age: 52
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#838  Postby ElDiablo » Oct 07, 2021 2:57 am

I see jamest is still doing the "look-at-me" posts and accusing members of group think.
Unfortunately, I know too many people like this who will only look at the fringe doctors and fringe cases to say the vaccine is a sham even while hospitals and staff are being crushed by the unvaccinated. Their short-sighted solution to this whole thing would be to let the virus run wild.
God is silly putty.
User avatar
ElDiablo
 
Posts: 3125

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#839  Postby Spearthrower » Oct 07, 2021 7:03 am

ElDiablo wrote:I see jamest is still doing the "look-at-me" posts and accusing members of group think.
Unfortunately, I know too many people like this who will only look at the fringe doctors and fringe cases to say the vaccine is a sham even while hospitals and staff are being crushed by the unvaccinated. Their short-sighted solution to this whole thing would be to let the virus run wild.



Ninety nine second opinions until you get the diagnosis you were hoping for. Sadly, the real world gives no fucks about jumped up monkeys' feelies.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 28870
Age: 45
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

#840  Postby Stagman » Oct 10, 2021 9:02 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
I'm a happy recipient of two doses of Moderna, four months down the line from my second. I don't post much any more, but I'm as hale and hearty (and dour) as I was before "the dose".

Out of curiosity, do you know if your antibody levels are sufficient? I am 5 months after my second Moderna dose, yet the IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies have since subsided to below what is accepted as sufficient. I might add I am immune suppressed.
User avatar
Stagman
 
Posts: 532
Age: 45
Male

Country: Netherlands
New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Medicine

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest