All things CoronaVirus

[Typical Lax Dad]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

[Peter Brown]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

I agree, a virus is not biased. Others however....

There shall be a hundred variants and each one will wring in the pearl clutching doomsdayers. Meanwhile, rational analysts after the hysteria proves the need to go out and live your life.

https://www.reuters.com/business/health ... 021-07-26/

Do not wear masks outside, people.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

I agree, a virus is not biased. Others however....

There shall be a hundred variants and each one will wring in the pearl clutching doomsdayers. Meanwhile, rational analysts after the hysteria proves the need to go out and live your life.

https://www.reuters.com/business/health ... 021-07-26/

Do not wear masks outside, people.

I don’t wear a mask outside….London just lifted its mandate a little over 1 week ago I believe. Was talking to someone that lives in Norbury the day it was lifted. We will see how it goes as people start getting out and about unvaccinated.

[tech37]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Of course I'm not a scientist and this is all from a layman's POV (although I am trying to be as informed as possible).

As stated before, I'm vaccinated and this is by no means an anti-Covid-vaxx post. If anything, let's admit the importance of having therapeutics available to work hand-in-hand with the vaccines. By combining both approaches, variants may not be such an issue.

[tech37]

Vax Mandates OK, DOJ Says; FDA Wants More Kids in mRNA Trials; Long-COVID Disability
— A daily roundup of news on COVID-19 and the rest of medicine

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectious ... ate_active

[Typical Lax Dad]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Of course I'm not a scientist and this is all from a layman's POV (although I am trying to be as informed as possible).

As stated before, I'm vaccinated and this is by no means an anti-Covid-vaxx post. If anything, let's admit the importance of having therapeutics available to work hand-in-hand with the vaccines. By combining both approaches, variants may not be such an issue.

I was hoping that we would have a therapeutic and that this would be the way out. As I mentioned a client was tasked to work on one and it never got out of phase 3. We have learned how to deal with COVID better in hospitals and that has actually relieved some of the pressure and has improved outcomes. Otherwise it would have been even worse.

Vaccines slow down and eventually nullify the potential for variants.

[Typical Lax Dad]

[Bart]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

[tech37]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

Thanks Bart.

As mentioned, it is a hypothesis and may well be proven false over time. Even if variants already existed, the fact that the vaccines were developed narrowly/specifically for the original virus, it does seem plausible that they are/will be less effective against variant strains.

Also, anyone traveling to India from another country could have introduced the Delta variant there. Delta may or may not have originated in India prior to vaccines.

[Bart]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

Thanks Bart.

As mentioned, it is a hypothesis and may well be proven false over time. Even if variants already existed, the fact that the vaccines were developed narrowly/specifically for the original virus, it does seem plausible that they are/will be less effective against variant strains.

Also, anyone traveling to India from another country could have introduced the Delta variant there. Delta may or may not have originated in India prior to vaccines.

To me, unencumbered by data, the greatest chance for mutation is in populations with high viral replication. The greater the replication, the greater the chance the virus will mutate. IMO, vaccine do just the opposite.

You would vary well have a mutation in a virus in a break through infection but I would think that would be much rarer than in an unvaccinated population. It is just a numbers game. Unfortunately we will see...........it is playing out right in front of us.

[jhu72]

AAMBRUA.jpeg (73.57 KiB) Viewed 1405 times

[Typical Lax Dad]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

Thanks Bart.

As mentioned, it is a hypothesis and may well be proven false over time. Even if variants already existed, the fact that the vaccines were developed narrowly/specifically for the original virus, it does seem plausible that they are/will be less effective against variant strains.

Also, anyone traveling to India from another country could have introduced the Delta variant there. Delta may or may not have originated in India prior to vaccines.

To me, unencumbered by data, the greatest chance for mutation is in populations with high viral replication. The greater the replication, the greater the chance the virus will mutate. IMO, vaccine do just the opposite.

You would vary well have a mutation in a virus in a break through infection but I would think that would be much rarer than in an unvaccinated population. It is just a numbers game. Unfortunately we will see...........it is playing out right in front of us.

Yes. Spreading the idea that vaccines may lead to more mutations is just foolishness, in my opinion. Having someone reconsider getting vaccinated because of that is just going to potentially contribute to the problem…..walked out for lunch, just saw a woman get vaccinated in a park under a tent.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

Thanks Bart.

As mentioned, it is a hypothesis and may well be proven false over time. Even if variants already existed, the fact that the vaccines were developed narrowly/specifically for the original virus, it does seem plausible that they are/will be less effective against variant strains.

Also, anyone traveling to India from another country could have introduced the Delta variant there. Delta may or may not have originated in India prior to vaccines.

If you have any interest…



Part of the reason for vaccinations is to avoid a mutation that gets around the vaccine, like you mentioned. The more the virus spreads, the likelihood increases…..Whether it happens is an unknown. Why chance it?

[MDlaxfan76]

AAMBRUA.jpeg

ok, so that is funny.

[wgdsr]

guess we're getting a briefing now on new guidance.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/27/politics ... index.html
one expectation, k-12 masks.

[tech37]

Unreal. The paper is not anti-vaxx... that's your "take away". It's a peer-reviewed scientific paper which makes claims not presented before... in time, those claims may or may not be accurate. Although you and TLD only want to hear that more vaccines are being performed, science moves on and new evidence/ideas may be considered at the same time vaccines are being promoted. Narrow thinking...

Tech, I am pretty certain that I hear about the science of COVID more than you do….who said the paper was “anti-vaccination”? I live with a scientist, son. She was talking about COVID before you heard about it. I believe “Bart” was too. She was worried about variants over a year ago….she actually teaches an infectious disease course but what does she know about viruses.

So what "son"? Scientists can be biased too (whether they realize it or not). Or is that another fact you choose to ignore? Are you also best buddies with Fauci? Would not be surprised if you made that claim as well.

Every now and then I drop something….champ, sport, ace…I hadn’t rotated son through yet. The way a virus works is the way a virus works….it ain’t biased, sailor.

Whatever.

Re variants... you probably already know this (since you're a Renaissance Man) but try looking into (or ask your wife) the hypothesis that the vaccines themselves are helping to create variants. It goes something this... because the vaccines were developed during the pandemic and not before, they are too narrowly focused on stopping the original specific form of the virus. The virus has learned workarounds (variants) in the meantime. No one's fault... there was no time to waste in development as it were.

Here is a Reuters article discussing just this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2OZ1PU

If you look at the recent emergence of Delta. It got is origin in India, I believe in December and prior to any mass vaccination in that country. This was prior to the WHO deciding it was a Virus or Concern.

Thanks Bart.

As mentioned, it is a hypothesis and may well be proven false over time. Even if variants already existed, the fact that the vaccines were developed narrowly/specifically for the original virus, it does seem plausible that they are/will be less effective against variant strains.

Also, anyone traveling to India from another country could have introduced the Delta variant there. Delta may or may not have originated in India prior to vaccines.

To me, unencumbered by data, the greatest chance for mutation is in populations with high viral replication. The greater the replication, the greater the chance the virus will mutate. IMO, vaccine do just the opposite.

You would vary well have a mutation in a virus in a break through infection but I would think that would be much rarer than in an unvaccinated population. It is just a numbers game. Unfortunately we will see...........it is playing out right in front of us.

Yes. Spreading the idea that vaccines may lead to more mutations is just foolishness, in my opinion. Having someone reconsider getting vaccinated because of that is just going to potentially contribute to the problem…..walked out for lunch, just saw a woman get vaccinated in a park under a tent.

Don't be afraid TLD, no one is "spreading" ideas. Isn't science about asking questions, seeking truth, looking for answers through observation and experimentation? You seem to want to shut that down unless of course it's only source is the medical establishment. Unfortunately, the medical establishment has shown itself to be politically corrupt (see Fauci for one).

To be clear, I never suggested the variants were being caused by the vaccines. Nope. If that's how it came off, apologies. The idea is that the variants will be strengthened because these novel vaccines were not developed broadly enough to completely protect against them. But who knew? I certainly hope the variant hypothesis is wrong but it should be considered plausible until it can be ruled out by scientific methods, not politics, short-sighted policies, or cancellation.

[tech37]

guess we're getting a briefing now on new guidance.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/27/politics ... index.html
one expectation, k-12 masks.

No surprise there.

[ggait]

TL/DR on the new mask guidance.

The unvaccinated refuse (a) to get vaccinated or (b) to wear masks.

So now everyone has to wear masks. Even the vaccinated people who don't need to.

Just like when you were in grade school. Teacher cancels recess for the whole class, even though just a couple of jerk kids were acting up.

[youthathletics]

Biden is fine with spreading germs, as he gives a kid his mask. https://www.instagram.com/reel/CR1wjECF ... _copy_link

[tech37]

guess we're getting a briefing now on new guidance.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/27/politics ... index.html
one expectation, k-12 masks.

More on this...

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectious ... ews_Active