Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mutation that helps Delta spread

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 641 posts

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#141

Post by pengaru »

Trasmatta wrote: post #119
baxtr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why indefinitely? If that was the case we would need shots for the other cold viruses as well, which we don't. As you say, Sars-2 will turn into an endemic virus and thus we will get used to it over time, death rates will drop and it will turn into a cold. There is absolutely no historic precedent to think it will turn out differently.

We get shots for the flu every year (or at least we should). That's the historical precedent.

Influenza is a different virus which mutates aggressively (recombinant), I'm not under the impression sars-cov2 is similar in this regard.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#142

Post by pfyon »

seaman1921 wrote: post #107
seaman1921 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thank you for the numbers! But i think you got them wrong > 10.25/100k among people who are unvaccinated that should be 10.25k - so your statement at the end about 10% ICU admissions does not hold.

and honestly given this huge error in your statement, I have lost confidence in your entire comment unless you are willing to share the source.

The source is provided in the second paragraph.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#143

Post by ldjkfkdsjnv »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #94
hncurious wrote: post #70

Covid is going to be endemic like the flu and cold. It's not going to be eradicated, unfortunately, and I don't think we've come to terms with this yet. Now what's our plan exactly? Get vaccinated every 6 - 12 months indefinitely and always wear masks? What's our goal and what's our new normal?

Due to COVID not mutating as quickly, I think the end game is everyone getting immune, through a combination of repeated vaccinations and infections.

I got covid last march, and got it again one month ago. I was very sick for three weeks on my second covid infection. I think we are about to face the harsh reality that covid is never going away, and immunity and is never going to happen. The virus will mutate and find new ways to infect

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#144

Post by baxtr »

Trasmatta wrote: post #119
baxtr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why indefinitely? If that was the case we would need shots for the other cold viruses as well, which we don't. As you say, Sars-2 will turn into an endemic virus and thus we will get used to it over time, death rates will drop and it will turn into a cold. There is absolutely no historic precedent to think it will turn out differently.

We get shots for the flu every year (or at least we should). That's the historical precedent.

Yes, you are right. At the same time, flu viruses are very different from coronaviruses. We didn't get any shots against OC43 and the three other already endemic coronaviruses.

Also, note that older people and immune-deficient people (who are most likely those needing a shot every year) have been dying from ordinary cases of flu before, too.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#145

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

johnbaker92 wrote: post #133
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is downvoted because it's pseudo-science.

According to "science": - Lockdowns should have stopped covid. - Masks should have stopped covid. - Vaccines should have stopped covid. - "Health" passports and those ridiculous mandates should have stopped covid. The fact is, we're two years down the road and we're still talking about this virus - so "true" science (that advocated by governments / media I imagine?) is obviously not working. Time to take a step back…

> - Lockdowns should have stopped covid.

Maybe if people obeyed them, which they did not.

> - Masks should have stopped covid.

Maybe if people wore them, which they did not.

> - Vaccines should have stopped covid.

Maybe if people got them, which they did not.

And now that there are new variants in the wild because of people not doing all of those things, the vaccines, lockdowns, and masks still keep ICU beds from overflowing. But you have to actually do them.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#146

Post by volfied »

johnbaker92 wrote: post #133
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is downvoted because it's pseudo-science.

According to "science": - Lockdowns should have stopped covid. - Masks should have stopped covid. - Vaccines should have stopped covid. - "Health" passports and those ridiculous mandates should have stopped covid. The fact is, we're two years down the road and we're still talking about this virus - so "true" science (that advocated by governments / media I imagine?) is obviously not working. Time to take a step back…

You're acting in bad faith and you know it. You can't just say "lockdowns/masks/vaccines should have stopped covid, but they didn't", when you know that a lot of people out there refused to mask up, refused to quarantine and refused to get the vaccine.

People with your thinking are the reason we're still in this pandemic.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#147

Post by rajin444 »

tunesmith wrote: post #113
sreque wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem is that the U.S. federal government in particular has been pretending for a while that we can get to zero COVID, then blaming the unvaccinated when it doesn't happen. First, they said we need 50% vaccination to achieve, herd immunity. Then 60%. Then 70%. Then 80%. When things don't work out, they vilify and blame the unvaccinated. In reality, unvaccinated with natural immunity are likely more protect…

That first paragraph really isn't fair because R0 has changed. So of course scientific opinion has changed. That's not same thing as pretending and then vilifying. Your second paragraph is eliding a lousy "therefore" - obviously, the cost of shooting for natural immunity versus vaccination is that you have to experience the actual disease and all its risks. Survivorship bias.

Scientists are allowed and should be allowed to say "the data changed, so our recommendation changed". Politicians and health leaders have a responsibility to interpret the data and develop communications and policies that build trust and inform the public. It's a failure on the part of the latter when they make promises to the public that they know are not guaranteed.

They have made definitive statements that are wrong too many times in the past year and a half. That is a massive failure. The average joe has nowhere near the time nor expertise required to interpret the scientific data out there, so trust is everything for them. At some point, you run out of the good will required to say "ok, I'll trust you again". Maintaining trust is a leader's most important job.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#148

Post by ssklash »

johnbaker92 wrote: post #133
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is downvoted because it's pseudo-science.

According to "science": - Lockdowns should have stopped covid. - Masks should have stopped covid. - Vaccines should have stopped covid. - "Health" passports and those ridiculous mandates should have stopped covid. The fact is, we're two years down the road and we're still talking about this virus - so "true" science (that advocated by governments / media I imagine?) is obviously not working. Time to take a step back…

> - Lockdowns should have stopped covid.

Not everyone cooperated with lockdowns, rendering them less effective.

> - Masks should have stopped covid.

Not everyone wore masks, rendering them less effective.

> - Vaccines should have stopped covid.

Not everyone is getting vaccinated, rendering it less effective.

I see a pattern here with an obvious solution, and it's not doubting the "true" science and declaring ourselves epidemiologists, virologists, and public health experts.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#149

Post by baxtr »

tshaddox wrote: post #130
baxtr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why indefinitely? If that was the case we would need shots for the other cold viruses as well, which we don't. As you say, Sars-2 will turn into an endemic virus and thus we will get used to it over time, death rates will drop and it will turn into a cold. There is absolutely no historic precedent to think it will turn out differently.

The only reason we don’t “need” vaccines for other cold viruses is that they’re very rarely severe, right? I’d certainly take the shot if they existed.

Yes exactly. But how was it when they first appeared in the human population? We can't know for sure, but most likely they caused a heavy pandemic in the first years and then over time became "harmless".

Just think about how bacteria/viruses which were not really dangerous for Europeans wiped out entire populations in Middle and South America.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#150

Post by bparsons »

chitowneats wrote: post #137
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to COVID not mutating as quickly, I think the end game is everyone getting immune, through a combination of repeated vaccinations and infections.

What evidence do we have that covid "doesn't mutate as quickly"? There have been at least 3 distinct variants, separate from the original strain, since the virus was detected in late 2019 / early 2020.

Relative to perhaps, the seasonal flu.
Post reply on HN