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

Update on Omicron

who.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 794 posts

Re: Update on Omicron

#491

Post by raverbashing »

artificialLimbs wrote: post #487
raverbashing wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And catching Covid is safe? Funny how you won't hear about the cardiac issues that Covid causes from the fringe crowd But I'll add one thing, it's not only ignorance, it's straight up spite and sadism from the anti-vax crowd Because they will take any BS and try to run it as far as they can with it. Including a 2001 paper like the one it was posted yesterday

Catching covid is definitely not safe if you’re in that tiny minority that is strongly affected, mostly because the NIH advice for the infected is currently ‘Wait until it gets bad enough to go to the hospital’.

The "tiny minority" includes obese people, which are which % of Americans again?

Though I agree that recommendation to wait is not great.

Re: Update on Omicron

#492

Post by seoaeu »

wallacoloo wrote: post #320
yufeng66 wrote: post #285

The omicron variant could be a blessing in disguise if the early stories on how it is less deadly checks out. That means people refuse to get the vaccine shot will be infected with the omicron variant with relatively low consequence and get immunity that way. Btw this is how it suppose to work. The virus has no incentive to kill its host. The variant that is fast spreading and less deadly eventually wins out.

this makes me think that there’s got to be at least some people in power who believe that engineering and releasing a more transmissible but less deadly variant is a prudent way to respond to this pandemic. i wonder how many people are working on this right now.

Not sure why this is downvoted. Given all the google hits for "transmissible viral vaccines", people have surely thought about it. I'd honestly be more surprised if people in power hadn't at least tried to look into the feasibility

Re: Update on Omicron

#493

Post by scottcodie »

yufeng66 wrote: post #285

The omicron variant could be a blessing in disguise if the early stories on how it is less deadly checks out. That means people refuse to get the vaccine shot will be infected with the omicron variant with relatively low consequence and get immunity that way. Btw this is how it suppose to work. The virus has no incentive to kill its host. The variant that is fast spreading and less deadly eventually wins out.

Healthy people will generally continue being fine. However, people who are at high risk have a new reason to be concerned. I'm not sure what you mean by 'how it's suppose to work'.

Re: Update on Omicron

#494

Post by scotty79 »

koheripbal wrote: post #100
belter wrote: post #38

South Africa's COVID-19 adviser, Prof Barry Schoub told Sky News that so far, most Omicron cases, were mild. https://youtu.be/3RSRtuRm92o Edit: "South African doctor who raised alarm about omicron variant says symptoms are ‘unusual but mild’" https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-diseas... "Dr Angelique Coetzee said she was first alerted to the possibility of a new variant when patients in her busy pr…

This is a novice interpretation of the data. Most early cases are recorded as mild. Severe cases and hospitalizations lag infections by 2-3 weeks, and deaths lag by 2-3 months. It's frankly irresponsible to report this factoid without that caveat.

Peak deaths lag peak new cases by 2 weeks. Given that testing takes some time (about a week?) deaths most usually lags infection by 3 weeks and in 90% of cases less than a month.

Re: Update on Omicron

#495

Post by hiharryhere »

edmcnulty101 wrote: post #328
dunco wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "work". Countries that pursued zero covid largely avoided hospital overcrowding and massive amounts of preventable death. It might never have been possible to actually zero covid out to extinction, but it was possible to be close to zero for long enough to get everyone vaccinated. Millions of lives have likely been saved because of these strategies. "zero covid" is still the right strategy for a disease for wh…

>> Countries that pursued zero covid largely avoided hospital overcrowding and massive amounts of preventable death So did countries that didn't.

"Massive amounts of preventable death"

Compare Australia vs UK.

Re: Update on Omicron

#496

Post by esyir »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #394
PostOnce wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's plausible, but it's not the whole picture. It may only partially explain some of the problem. We have, in the wealthy west, millions of vaccine-hesistant and vaccine-denialist people. I'm not just talking about poor or uneducated people, either. I personally know wealthy, educated, analytical people who have bought into the fearmongering and propaganda. I was shocked to find how deeply skeptical they were. I w…

> I personally know wealthy, educated, analytical people who have bought into the fearmongering and propaganda Same, including medical professionals who fit this description. It's clearly an emotional and tribal issue at this point. The animating factor of nearly all of this denialism is a narrative of distrust and outright animus for the "establishment" and the organizations that represent it.

I think this hits the nail on the head. That the academic space is not just dominated, but overtly hostile to right wingers probably worsens this. Why would they trust advice given by people who proclaim their hatred of them?

Re: Update on Omicron

#497

Post by DenisM »

metamet wrote: post #256
maxerickson wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the proposed method of actually isolating the most vulnerable parts of society? I don't see how you do it in any meaningful way (At the very most vulnerable end, they are dependent on lots of people that are less vulnerable...).

To that point, my grandma's retirement home was as well locked down as possible. But you know who didn't take it seriously? The staff who worked there and brought COVID in, which ended up killing her. There's no way of isolating them without isolating their staff, their families, everyone they interact with. With a virus as contagious as COVID, there doesn't appear to be a way to target portions of the population eff…

The staff could work like oil rig workers - in month-long shifts. Get quarantined for a week on the way in, do your shift, go home to your family. Not pleasant, but doable and a lot simpler than placing everyone's life on hold.

Re: Update on Omicron

#498

Post by TheDong »

JamesBarney wrote: post #466
noahmasur wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think their point was that you need to have EVERYONE vaccinated in order to reduce spread and protect people for whom vaccines are ineffective.

If you're talking about herd immunity, you might not be as up to date on the newest variants. We could theoretically reach herd immunity against the original covid-19. But there was no practical way to get to herd immunity with delta without mandating three vaccine shots at gunpoint which would be about as popular as burning Medicare to the ground. With Omikron herd immunity is impossible. 100% vaccinated population…

> With Omikron herd immunity is impossible. 100% vaccinated population wouldn't get us there.

But, as the linked page says:

> Transmissibility: It is not yet clear whether Omicron is more transmissible

We do not know enough about Omicron for you to be able to make a statement like that. Do you have a source that has a better understanding than the WHO?

In addition, even if there are covid variants that our current vaccines are not effective enough with a 100% vaccinated population to cause herd immunity, that doesn't mean it's impossible, just that we need better vaccines. There are some viruses that mutate so quickly that it's unlikely for us to ever have full herd immunity (i.e. the flu, though even for the flu, if we had good enough vaccines and coverage, it might cease to exist), but I don't see you making a compelling argument about that.

Re: Update on Omicron

#499

Post by rajup »

supernovae wrote: post #444
rajup wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly agree, but have you considered that perhaps falling sick once in a while allows your immune system to adapt and become more stronger? I mean vaccines have been around for all of 100-200 years...

You do realize that that vaccines are what teaches your immune system to combat diseases, right? Your only "sick" because you didn't pro-actively teach your immune system to handle that flu.

Sure, for diseases we know and are actively fighting (how long was it before we got vaccines for COVID?). My point was that for unknown diseases you might be exposed to in the future you are probably (I say probably, because hey let's not kid ourselves we're all mostly speaking out of our a**s here :)) better off if you had been exposed to milder diseases beforehand.

Re: Update on Omicron

#500

Post by rajup »

Frondo wrote: post #397
rajup wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly agree, but have you considered that perhaps falling sick once in a while allows your immune system to adapt and become more stronger? I mean vaccines have been around for all of 100-200 years...

> allows your immune system to adapt and become more stronger This is precisely what vaccines do, without the "falling sick" part first.

Fully agreed, requires having a vaccine first though. I just didn't fully agree with GP's goal of never ever falling sick ever.
Post reply on HN