Letting the virus spread means it will mutate and make whatever kind of immunity anyone arguably has less and less relevant. Concerted efforts must be made to shut down transmission and deal with all the social problems that entails. The measures necessary to deal with the virus in an intelligent way offend those with lots of money, though, so they are not likely to happen in the United States and many other capitalist countries.
Our Covid Response
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
What bullshit science? 1) natural immunity is stronger than vaccine immunity. 2) people that had covid don't need the vaccine. 3) the vaccine doesn't stop the spread. Those all are scientific facts.
Why are you making up bullshit logic just to defend you bullshit stance that's not inline with science? A gun is a weapon, a screwdriver isn't so why would you treat both the same anyway? Unless you gonna use technicality bullshit that anything can technically be a weapon.
You literally can't stop the virus from spreading. What data do you have to prove that the virus is more dangerous because it mutated? What intelligent way can you get to 0 covid? Please tell the world the way to get to 0 covid that you secretly know that no one else knows. China, I think, is still trying it and it's not going well at all if you hadn't noticed. They are killing pets, taking kids from parents, locking people in their homes with no food, etc.
You literally can. It is not particularly easy, but it is possible. It's just not something vaccines alone can do. And masks, while helpful, are probably not enough either.
Are you really that unfamiliar with the concepts of both immunity and mutation? A demand for data to support the conclusion that a virus changing is likely to make existing immunities-- based on previous iterations of the virus-- less effective is, frankly, bizarre. I'm not saying such data doesn't exist, but the conclusion you're asking me to show evidence for is so uncontroversial that I am not going to bother finding it for you; what I wrote is true not just about COVID and vaccines or natural immunities (as disappointing as both already are in the case of COVID-19), but about literally any virus.
When someone is infected with a virus, that virus replicates. A lot. And sometimes it replicates imperfectly. And those imperfections that will tend to be replicated more are ones that make it more likely to spread because that's just how natural selection works.
They've proven that it is quite possible to stop the spread of the disease. But, largely because other places are not taking similarly effective measures, the disease still exists to be constantly reintroduced back to their society by the rest of us. There should be a global effort to isolate and eradicate the disease. I'd say we have a lot to learn from China, but it's not a lack of knowledge that we have. It's a lack of a politics that values human life. I expect whatever you've read about China's difficulties is exaggerated because capitalist media has an interest in maintaining the status quo of people going to work and making money for their employers; COVID measures would disrupt that-- they might even require government spending or methods of economic organization that (quelle horreur) do not rely on private owners and the market. Not even the fact that constantly getting COVID means constantly suffering risks of long COVID symptoms, all the worse with repeated exposure, is enough to shake sense into us.
You can't stop the spread without shutting down society. And shutting down society will cause much bigger problems than covid. You'd also have to get the entire world to take all the same steps as well, which very very very very highly unlikely to happen. And even if you did all that, and completely removed the virus from the human population, the virus is in animal reservoirs so it's only a matter of time before it starts spreading in humans again. And what is the need to do all this anyway. To a post-immune population covid is probably about as dangerous as the flu (and covid removes the flu from the playing field) so what are you really accomplishing with such extreme measures that have very negative impacts to get a rather minor benefit out of it? Excess deaths NOT CAUSED BY COVID are already up by ~16% because of the covid measures we've done the last 2 years. When you make a single thing the entire priority of public health, other more dangerous public health issues get ignored and they have.
As viruses mutate, they also get less deadly as well. What data do you have that these mutations are actually making the virus more hazardous? That's a pretty big assumption to make without literally any data saying that is true. As long as people still hold immunity to severe disease, that's all that matters and there's nothing saying that isn't still lasting. Immunity to infections isn't nearly as important as that and is impossible to a virus like covid anyway.
You can temporarily slow the spread greatly (because you still need essential workers and the virus will still be circulating) but you can't for any prolonged period. Everyone will catch covid and catch it again, all methods to slow the spread is just delaying that to next week or next month or whatever. What is the point of that when everyone has acquired immunity. I agree it was a valid thing to try as we were waiting for vaccines to get out there and having as few people exposed to the virus before having immunity. But now, why? There's very little data on long covid and there is definitely a mental aspect to it and not just all covid. The flu also caused long flu too, it's just that we don't know much about that either. Any infection causes some long symptoms because the immune system overreacting and not the actual virus itself.
OK, so from a practical, policy standpoint, how do you ensure everyone (who can be) has either natural immunity or is vaccinated?
So say 1 in every 3 people has natural immunity. Do you propose that the government test everyone to determine who needs it and who doesn't? Do you realise what a gigantic undertaking that would be?
Or do you rely on self-reportage? Or-- and I suspect this is your actual proposition-- they just throw their hands up and say, "well, since some people don't need it, let's give up altogether"?
Letting COVID rip is shutting down society too-- in slower motion, but more permanently. People have been unable to receive medical treatment because too many nurses or doctors are out sick, and so forth. And fatigue is such that nurses are tending more frequently to retire now, too. The United States already had a shortage of nurses and now we're making the normal course of their jobs significantly more likely to kill or disable them.
We've detected long term health problems from COVID exposure after just two to three years of it. The virus is already a serious strain on our medical resources. What do you think society is going to look like when we've had full lifetimes of repeated exposure to COVID including whatever new variants arise in the future? For want of properly timed and targeted solitude, our lives will be poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
That is 110% not universally true and is a fantastically dangerous thing to assume
Well, that's plainly false. There were plenty of societies that closed off and stop the spread
Also, letting it spread shuts down society. Either you going to do it or COVID will do it for you
A lot of the world's inflation is caused by COVID
Either way, you going to have to deal with societal and economic consequences. Stop pretending that keeping society open has no economic downside
Exactly the same as it looked before covid. There are dozens of viruses with mild symptoms that repeatedly rip through society, many with potential ties to long term health issues. We've gotten a better understanding of this one by living through the effects of it, but there have been coronavirus pandemics in the past and will be in the future, this is not the end of human civilization, no matter how much you want it to be.
Who the fuck cares if everyone has natural immunity or vaccinated? It doesn't provide community benefit, it's all personal risk. Do you care that the person behind you in their car isn't wearing a seat belt?
Again, where's your evidence that covid is gonna cause anything more hazardous to a post-immune population than the flu? Nurses get shit on all the time and don't have enough help, that's why they quit. I know one travel nurse that just switched to work from home and it literally had nothing to do with covid. Where are people not getting medical treatment because doctors are out sick? The covid restrictions caused for more people not getting medical treatment than covid itself. My cousin is a new nurse for oncology and he had to wait months to get a job because they shut down the department for covid when he graduated that semester.
What long term health problems from covid that's anything more serious than the flu? You're going way down this rabbit hole that is completely fake information. Getting exposed to viruses over and over again is not bad for you, why do you care if you get covid once or 10 times in your life? Do you can how many times you get the flu? Nope, why would you care about covid like that? What proof do you have for literally anything you have claimed?
PEOPLE, FOLLOW ACTUAL FUCKING SCIENCE. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU ALL?
We shouldn’t worry when a virus mutates during disease outbreaks
Mutation. The word naturally conjures fears of unexpected and freakish changes. Ill-informed discussions of mutations thrive during virus outbreaks, including the ongoing spread of SARS-CoV-2. In reality, mutations are a natural part of the virus life ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The pervasive claim that a virus will mutate to become more virulent during an outbreak is particularly illustrative of this phenomenon, even though this spectre of a ‘super killer’ virus is baseless.
Please explain how to stop the virus that literally nobody on the planet has figured out. Society has been completely open by me for like the whole time outside the 1st few months, I don't know what you're talking about.
A lot of the world's inflation is caused by dumping billions into the economy because of covid that wasn't needed.
Last edited:
He says, posting an article that says you also shouldn't assume that viruses are going to mutate to be less deadly.PEOPLE, FOLLOW ACTUAL FUCKING SCIENCE. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU ALL?
We shouldn’t worry when a virus mutates during disease outbreaks
Mutation. The word naturally conjures fears of unexpected and freakish changes. Ill-informed discussions of mutations thrive during virus outbreaks, including the ongoing spread of SARS-CoV-2. In reality, mutations are a natural part of the virus life ...
The pervasive claim that a virus will mutate to become more virulent during an outbreak is particularly illustrative of this phenomenon, even though this spectre of a ‘super killer’ virus is baseless.
So...thanks?
The risk to me and my loved ones is increased if those around us are infectious. That's established, basic knowledge.
And... uhrm, yes, I do fucking care if the person behind me in the car isn't wearing a seatbelt. You've actually provided a perfect example. Because it endangers them, but it also increases the danger to me: if others in the same vehicle aren't buckled, the chance of injury to other passengers is increased.
Do viruses such as the coronavirus become less deadly?
Understanding virus evolution can help us understand what future variants of the coronavirus we might see and if we need to fear them.
news.northeastern.edu
Because the goal of a virus is to survive, replicate, and spread, it tends to evolve toward being more infectious and less deadly. There are exceptions and other factors, but in general, says Auclair, that’s what virologists expect to see occur with SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19.
So this is 110% not true? I go by science, you go by whatever you want to believe.
Yes, the risk is increased if you're around infectious people. Where the fuck does that equate to being more dangerous around people that aren't immune?
How is an unbuckled person going to affect the people in your car unless you thinking up some Final Destination shit in your head?
Just to take the analogy further, if someone from another vehicle isn't buckled, there's a decent chance they could be embedded in me. At best, embedded through my windshield or airbag
You dont need constant close contact before things become problematic
Congratulations, your first article argues against your secondDo viruses such as the coronavirus become less deadly?
Understanding virus evolution can help us understand what future variants of the coronavirus we might see and if we need to fear them.
Because the goal of a virus is to survive, replicate, and spread, it tends to evolve toward being more infectious and less deadly. There are exceptions and other factors, but in general, says Auclair, that’s what virologists expect to see occur with SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19.
So this is 110% not true? I go by science, you go by whatever you want to believe.
COVID-19 and variants do not have mild symptoms; it is straining the capacity of our medical system already.
Buddy, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but people who aren't immune to something are more likely to have it.
I love that you think this is some crazy thing I've cooked up. Its statistically known.
Someone directly behind you suddenly flies forward. Their skull, an extremely hard ball, is directly behind yours. It's not hard to see how it happens.
It does once you've been exposed to it. The increasingly prevailing theory of the pandemic of 1890, which killed a strikingly similar amount of the global population to covid 19, is that it was not influenza as they believed at the time, but rather coronavirus OC43. OC43 today is one of the viruses responsible for the common cold. I'm not saying that virus wasn't deadly in 1890, but rather that it isn't that deadly in modern times, specifically because people have been exposed to it at younger ages when their immune system can adapt to it.
Covid-19 and variants are nearly guaranteed to follow the same pattern. It's not a mild cold if you inject it into an elderly population that is both immunologically naive to it and immunocompromised, but that happens once, and then the world moves on.
You think there is a DECENT chance they become embedded in your car or you? It's probably not even one in a million chance plus it's really hard to go through a windshield nowadays let alone 2 windshields (theirs and yours) to actually "embed" in you. You guys have no idea about how risky anything is... If life was as dangerous as you think it is, I would've died like 100 times over as a kid.
The literal title of the 1st article is "We shouldn’t worry when a virus mutates during disease outbreaks" and you think it states that we should worry about mutations?
Where? I work in hospitals all over Indiana and Illinois and the only time you might say they were strained was fall 2020. You do realize hospitals are meant to be run at high capacity, right? So when the news says such and such hospital is at 90% capacity, that most likely doesn't mean much of anything.
No, they ain't, that isn't true for covid.
It's really hard to go through windshields nowadays. The chances of someone from another car entering your car in a crash is so very unlikely.
Let's get this straight: you believe that people who don't have immunity are... just as likely to be infectious as those who are immune?
It beggars belief that anyone can believe the sheer nonsense you do.
I wasn't even necessarily talking about that. Whiplashing into someone else in your own car, or going limp and smacking them, is a real threat that happens mid crash.