The mutation that helps Delta spread • Hacker News Board

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#461

Post by OrvalWintermute » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 2:54 AM UTC

civilized wrote: post #266

criticaltinker wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What really should be happening should be a mass vaccination program Compulsory mass vaccination using the current vaccines poses a serious public health risk [1][2][3]. See my other comments here for more explanation and citations. For these reasons, vaccination strategies should be highly targeted towards vulnerable populations, and should be heavily supplemented by additional therapeutic modalities. > and a mass…

> Compulsory mass vaccination using the current vaccines poses a serious public health risk [1][2][3] None of your references say this or anything remotely implying this. Backing up a provocative claim with a snowblind of irrelevant references is a shameful misinformation tactic and you should stop doing it immediately. Doing it in a public health context is particularly dangerous and frankly disgusting.

I didn't read it as a stretch because first generation vaccines used in the campaigns all have shared targeting, and medical treatment is being discounted.

> Such a narrow molecular focus raises the specter of viral immune evasion as a potential failure mode for these biomedical interventions

This was from [1]

> Backing up a provocative claim with a snowblind of irrelevant references is a shameful misinformation tactic and you should stop doing it immediately. Doing it in a public health context is particularly dangerous and frankly disgusting.

Please, be kind.

The references were applicable but not written for the everyday consumer.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#462

Post by MagicWishMonkey » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 2:58 AM UTC

betwixthewires wrote: post #415

MagicWishMonkey wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The numbers don’t lie, .001% of vaccinated people end up dying from covid, which is an order of magnitude less than folks who aren’t vaccinated.

OK, that's good, but the claim I was responding to was that the new variant is not less deadly than the old one. I was asking about infection v hospital rates for the old and new variants. Also with all these different variants going around, if the newer one is less deadly it would skew that number unless the different variant cases, deaths and vaccination statuses are all accounted for.

A variant can be more dangerous even if it’s not technically more deadly simply because it’s more contagious.If a virus is 10x as transmissible, and a lot more people get infected than would otherwise, a 1% mortality rate would result in a lot more dead bodies

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#463

Post by civilized » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 2:59 AM UTC

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #461

civilized wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Compulsory mass vaccination using the current vaccines poses a serious public health risk [1][2][3] None of your references say this or anything remotely implying this. Backing up a provocative claim with a snowblind of irrelevant references is a shameful misinformation tactic and you should stop doing it immediately. Doing it in a public health context is particularly dangerous and frankly disgusting.

I didn't read it as a stretch because first generation vaccines used in the campaigns all have shared targeting, and medical treatment is being discounted. > Such a narrow molecular focus raises the specter of viral immune evasion as a potential failure mode for these biomedical interventions This was from [1] > Backing up a provocative claim with a snowblind of irrelevant references is a shameful misinformation tact…

It's not valid to go from "vaccine escape may occur" to "mass vaccination is a public health risk". You can't claim B, which doesn't follow from A, and follow B up with a bunch of citations that only support A. That's misinformation about a high-stakes public issue, it's irresponsible, and it warrants harsh criticism.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#464

Post by jader201 » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:00 AM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #395

OliverGilan wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wear glasses and masks are basically untenable. I have yet to wear a mask and not fog up my glasses. Maybe I'm just an idiot, I don't know, but being able to see properly is far more valuable to me than not getting COVID (in it's current state and threat level to me).

With some work it's possible to find and fit masks that don't fog glasses. Fwiw in order to work effectively as an "outbound" filter , the mask must not duct exhaled air around it's seal with the face. So fogging means it isn't working.

Then most masks, by your logic (and not necessarily arguing your logic) aren’t working.

The only way to completely seal off your mouth and nose is to wear a more fitted mask. The masks most (probably 99%+) people are wearing are ducting air on either side of the nose.

And yes, most masks have the metal piece to help with this, but it doesn’t work. No matter how I adjust the metal piece, air makes its way out.

So if what you’re saying is true, these cloth/disposable masks are not working, and the CDC should be telling everyone to stop wearing them, and switch to ones that properly seal your nose/mouth.

> With some work it's possible to find and fit masks that don't fog glasses.

I’m not convinced this is true, or maybe my face just won’t work with the typical mask. But most (all?) people I know that have glasses fog them up, with any amount of adjustment of the metal piece/mask.

EDIT: I see a downvote already, so curious how this is a flawed extrapolation. My logic is simply assuming the parent’s logic is true, and extrapolating from that. I’m not explicitly agreeing or disagreeing with it. A downvote means you either feel my extrapolation is flawed (please explain), or you think the parent’s logic is flawed (in which case you shouldn’t be downvoting my extrapolation).

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#465

Post by criticaltinker » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:00 AM UTC

civilized wrote: post #440

criticaltinker wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These concerns and warnings are coming from the scientific literature - from experts at top institutions in the world. Your dismissal of them is completely unsupported.

I am not dismissing them. On the contrary, every post I have made takes pains to distinguish between the legitimate analysis and claims in the scientific papers you have cited (e.g. that vaccine escape is worthy of concern) and your unwarranted, irresponsible inferences from them (i.e. that mandatory vaccination is a public health risk - especially stated with such a definitive air of authority, followed by a flurry…

It doesn't make sense to me how you can admit that "vaccine escape is worthy of concern" (which is an understatement at best), but then say it's "deeply misleading" to call it a public health risk. Yes you're right that none of the citations literally say "this is a public health risk" - but is it really an "inference" to say that viral resistance driven by mass vaccination poses a risk?

We clearly disagree so we needn't go on longer - but FWIW I can't help but feel as though you've been downplaying the significance of these risks with very little supporting evidence, other than your own logical reasoning and accusation of misinformation. I do appreciate you conveying your opinions in a respectable manner.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#466

Post by s5300 » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:02 AM UTC

ls612 wrote: post #376

aflag wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's so bad about face masks? Just trying to understand.

I for one like having the right to show my face in public

You may find this sentiment to sour in our near future in which it will be mandatory to show your face in public for facial recognition tech to keep track of you...

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#467

Post by s5300 » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:05 AM UTC

tiahura wrote: post #372

dcolkitt wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a question of preferences that too often gets buried in this debate. If Covid becomes endemic at around its current severity, what level of pandemic restrictions are you willing to accept forever? For me personally, Covid would have to be at least 100 times worse before I’d support masking forever. But I get the sense that some people barely see any downside to it. I think these cross-views drive so much if t…

“what level of pandemic restrictions are you willing to accept forever?” That’s the question our leaders seem to be terrified to answer. How long until Fauci admits that its not just going to go away?

Speaking of the US

I think at this point, most of the vaccinated would no longer care if it weren't for the fact that procedures for things like cancer treatments and major surgeries are being outright canceled, for months, so that all resources can be spent treating all of the unvaxxed who are now scared enough about their "little cough" that they need to go to the doctor for it.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#468

Post by lazide » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:05 AM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #446

mynegation wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it may all look like small potatoes, but this is HN and you are two orders of magnitude off. 0.01% is pretty close to annual death rate from flu in pre-COVID years [1] so the situation that "one hundred times worse than the current situation" will make it 100 hundred times worse (i.e. significantly worse) than seasonal influenza. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

Okay, fair enough. But a major difference is that flu deaths are much more heavily burdened on the the young, whereas Covid is on the very elderly. The death of a 6 month old from flu results in approximately 20 times more QALY loss than an 85 year old. Let me approach it from another angle. Pre-vaccine, it appears that Covid roughly doubled everyone's all-cause mortality.[1] Like it killed 30 year olds at a much low…

No idea where you are getting the idea that the flu predominantly kills the young? It is one of the major causes of death for the old. You generally seem to just be wrong with almost all of your points?

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#469

Post by civilized » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:06 AM UTC

criticaltinker wrote: post #465

civilized wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not dismissing them. On the contrary, every post I have made takes pains to distinguish between the legitimate analysis and claims in the scientific papers you have cited (e.g. that vaccine escape is worthy of concern) and your unwarranted, irresponsible inferences from them (i.e. that mandatory vaccination is a public health risk - especially stated with such a definitive air of authority, followed by a flurry…

It doesn't make sense to me how you can admit that "vaccine escape is worthy of concern" (which is an understatement at best), but then say it's "deeply misleading" to call it a public health risk. Yes you're right that none of the citations literally say "this is a public health risk" - but is it really an "inference" to say that viral resistance driven by mass vaccination poses a risk? We clearly disagree so we nee…

Thank you. I appreciate you bringing these legitimate concerns to light and I hope there is open debate about all costs and benefits of mass vaccination. The lack of public discourse from a position of humility and curiosity has led to many bad decisions during this pandemic, IMO.

That said, public health requires the analysis of all costs and benefits using a consistent, logical methodology. We need to be very clear about the inferences supported and not supported by our evidence.

Saying that mass vaccination carries the risk of vaccine escape is very different from saying that mass vaccination is a public health risk.

Re: The mutation that helps Delta spread

#470

Post by empthought » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 3:06 AM UTC

dannyz wrote: post #158

empthought wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't understand what "herd immunity" means. Herd immunity means eliminating a disease within a community ("herd"). It does not mean endemic case incidence with socially tolerable outcomes, or whatever loosey-goosey idea you mean by "equilibrium." Herd immunity means the contagion is eliminated. It has never happened worldwide without a vaccine, and I'm unaware of any virus where it has been sustained within a co…

At some point this is just arguing semantics, but my understanding is that the herd immunity threshold is defined when Reff < 1. You could have Reff=0.99999999, which counts as herd immunity being reached, but it would take a very long time for the virus to actually disappear. Even if we do momentarily hit Reff < 1 for the delta variant, there could be mutations/waning immunity that causes it to stay around 1 becomin…

No, it is impossible to reach herd immunity if Reff >= 1, but Reff Hence, “herd” immunity.