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

Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

who.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 337 posts

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#181

Post by brandmeyer »

Eliezer wrote: post #161
brandmeyer wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious edit history. This pile of garbage originally used "vaxtard", "sin", and "purebloods". You really shouldn't take anything seriously from a source that uses those trigger phrases.

> Curious edit history. This pile of garbage originally used "vaxtard", "sin", and "purebloods". You really shouldn't take anything seriously from a source that uses those trigger phrases. There's no edit histories on HN, unless I missed something. Never forget the windowless buildings in Russia, where people are working to make you hate each other. At least make it harder for them than simple semiautomated tricks li…

I saw what OP initially wrote before they started editing it down a bit. This is one of the ways that misinformation viruses spread. OP saw it on a radicalized forum somewhere, copied it into a less-radical forum and started watering the message down a little to aid in radicalizing others.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#182

Post by plutonorm »

acqbu wrote: post #107
hh3k0 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will people ever get over sensationalism and learn to live it? You see, that's the crux of the matter: Not everyone can live with it. Literally. So far, it killed more than 5 million people globally. There is also the issue with possibly lasting brain damage (even occuring in cases that weren't severe enough for hospitalization) and life-wrecking long covid. Compassionate people have a problem ignoring all that.

Compassionate people should have a problem with being enslaved, mentally and physically, by a disease that, according to your stats has killed 0.06% of the world population - albeit, it's debatable how many people died as a direct result of it.

then you should also have problem with capitalism/plutocracy.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#183

Post by whymauri »

mdni007 wrote: post #132
reindeer76 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>vaccine developer >Chair of ...Maryland's Newest Anthropomorphic Convention! Not sure how I feel about this. Are many vaccine developers also furries?

And he's a scientist but believes in horoscopes. I don't think I've seen someone living a more hypocritical lifestyle

Wait, I know some physicists and scientists who use Costar. It's almost always somewhat tongue-in-cheek, just a little fun to add spice to life. Not a 100% serious religious guide... in the same way I know serious scientists who own a and cleanse a few crystals for the 'aura.'

It's kinda like pointing at a scientist who plays DnD and carries a DnD good luck pin and saying "DnD isn't even real! It's just play."

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#184

Post by robbintt »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #63
crate_barre wrote: post #60

I gotta say, COVID releases new features faster than a lot of teams do.

Which is funny because I've heard that feature branching isn't the cool way to go about things now.

Covid uses trunk based development.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#185

Post by throwawayboise »

bmakdbd wrote: post #162
op00to wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are people getting sicker with it?

> However, Dr Angelique Coetzee, chair of the South African Medical Association and a practising GP based in Pretoria, said it was “premature” to make predictions of a health crisis. “It’s all speculation at this stage. It may be it’s highly transmissible, but so far the cases we are seeing are extremely mild,” she said. “Maybe two weeks from now I will have a different opinion, but this is what we are seeing. So are…

"the cases we are seeing are extremely mild"

So, like most COVID infections?

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#186

Post by spookthesunset »

brazzy wrote: post #179
spookthesunset wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is plenty of evidence that masks and contact reduction in various forms have a massive effect on how quickly the virus spreads. If this is true, why is it when showing a chart of data it is almost impossible to pick when any of these measures went into effect? If these measures worked to any worthwhile degree their effect on any data should be absolutely profound. Thus far, you'd have a hard time picking flor…

>If this is true, why is it when showing a chart of data it is almost impossible to pick when any of these measures went into effect? Quite exactly the opposite is actually true: it's always very clear from such charts that the measures are very effective. Some examples: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/images/corporate... https://www.nejm.org/na101/home/literatum/publisher/mms/jour... https://coronavirus.…

Correlation does not equal causation. And of course studies done by people with a vested interest in proving all this worked will say this worked.

You’d be hard pressed to find studies that say none of this worked. Such researchers would destroy their careers and be labeled as kooks.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#187

Post by trhway »

crate_barre wrote: post #60

I gotta say, COVID releases new features faster than a lot of teams do.

thus to slow down and potentially bring the virus into complete disarray and stop it in its tracks we need to force the virus into the Six Sigma Lean Agile Scrum process.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#188

Post by throwawayboise »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #109
jacquesm wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given a population of almost 8 billion and a six months head start you are now looking at a reservoir of many millions of people infected at any given time. Each of these will provide 1 to 100 billion new virions, and each of those is an opportunity for the virus to undergo a mutation, which RNA viruses are particularly receptive to because they lack the same level of error correction that DNA based viruses enjoy. Ed…

With that said, then a one sise fits all vacinne is highly unlikely, correct? That there will be variants and mutations that will out pace (so to speak) the protection a given jab is engineered to offer? Long to short, if death prevention is the objective then we need to shift to finding solution that are less specific but still effective. For example, anti virals.

It's like the ideal scenario if you are a multinational pharmaceutical company.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#189

Post by naasking »

brazzy wrote: post #179
spookthesunset wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is plenty of evidence that masks and contact reduction in various forms have a massive effect on how quickly the virus spreads. If this is true, why is it when showing a chart of data it is almost impossible to pick when any of these measures went into effect? If these measures worked to any worthwhile degree their effect on any data should be absolutely profound. Thus far, you'd have a hard time picking flor…

>If this is true, why is it when showing a chart of data it is almost impossible to pick when any of these measures went into effect? Quite exactly the opposite is actually true: it's always very clear from such charts that the measures are very effective. Some examples: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/images/corporate... https://www.nejm.org/na101/home/literatum/publisher/mms/jour... https://coronavirus.…

It's not nearly as straightforward as you're pointing out because people voluntarily change their behaviour in response to circumstances, like case numbers, deaths, etc. Your big assumption is that top-down policies/controls are the biggest factor causing delayed change in numbers, but that isn't at all clear from the data alone.

Re: Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern

#190

Post by throwawayboise »

throwaway4good wrote: post #53
nope96 wrote: post #5

How was "Omicron" chosen as the name of this variant?

They use the greek alphabet to avoid stigmatising or politicizing the origins the various variants. They also pick names that are easy to remember and pronounce as opposed to the more technical names (ie. B.1.1.529).

Any thoughts on whether they would have done this greek alphabet thing had the first outbreak been in Africa instead of China? And why change now, when viruses (and variants) have long been named after the country or region where the first outbreak was recorded?
Post reply on HN