191–200 of 324 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you should ask for sources instead. Authority is the wrong thing to trust in science
Unless you have a background in immunology the sources are probably not terrible useful to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are some pretty significant leaps here, where are these questions coming from? If someone were to say "no, that's not how it works" what would you do? What evidence (and please be specific, none of this "they went to fast" non-answer) would convince you?
Evidence? Specifically? OK I will try. A list of the variants and their DNA code? Or whatever makes them vary. A solid explanation of how these variants are more infectious, not just saying that "The numbers show it" but instead what is the real world physical change in the shape or attack vector that makes them more dangerous, or admiting it is unknown but being studied. True numbers of deaths caused by covid and va…
Why a mutation improves transmission takes a lot of investigating to understand. I am not sure why you were under the impression that we know the mechanisms. If you type something like “E484K molecular dynamics” you can find a lot of computer simulations trying to investigate the mechanism, this is standard biological research. Of course we E484K you have a mutation from a negative to a positive residue, so that might give you a hint why it’s harder for the antibody to stick.
I can assure you that here in Japan we do not care about Trump. Perhaps we should be more grateful to his good support for the Pfizer vaccine, which is the one we are now deploying at scale (after the government here did their own review of the evidence).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go to your local hospital and see for yourself how deadly the disease is.
I can't just walk in. That said I know several people that have had it. Some elderly with existing conditions. Worst case was my aunt who got pneumonia from it. She's in her mid sixties and diabetic. She was in the hospital for a week. Was in the emergency room with my son a few months back, not overflowing or anything, but I wasn't there to track Covid cases.
In most (all?) hospitals, Covid cases are separated from general emergency because you don't want your emergency room transformed in a constant cluster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not rendered ineffective per se, but it's part of why you need a flu shot every year. There are a lot of strains and they mutate a lot, so we do a best guess of which current strains will be the most infectious in a given year and develop vaccines targeting those strains. Generally the vaccines are moderately effective, but it's because we update them every year. If we didn't, they wouldn't be. That being said there…
>but it's because we update them every year. OK, this is the part I wasn't aware of. I assumed (dangerous, I know) that each year's 'new' flu vaccine was really just a new 'blend' of existing proven vaccines, for the most prevalent strains that year. Edited to remove badly conceived question. New Question: How often do we have to develop novel vaccines for new Flu variants?
That being said, the process generally doesn't change — you still grow and kill (or grow and weaken) viruses the same way, you just start from a different base strain. For already-approved inactivated-virus flu vaccines, the FDA does not require new clinical trials for strain updates, and for already-approved attenuated virus vaccines, they only require very minimal trials (300 adults to prove adequate attenuation) [2]. So they're not novel in the sense of the COVID vaccines, which needed large scale clinical trials to prove efficacy — the flu vaccines have generally already proved efficacy, so for strain updates the most they need to prove is safety.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m curious, what is your education background in? Do you have some sort of medical education or this is a regurgitation of some sources you’ve read as a hobbyist? I ask this because you seem to talk from a place of authority and fact and i respect that but typically thought of Ycomb as a place comp sci folks usually congregate.
Maybe you should ask for sources instead. Authority is the wrong thing to trust in science
I literally saw the opposite headline about Pzifer versus a strain in India today The actual article said "modest antibody evading capabilities“ I hate that the internet has become this way
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Authority is constantly used as an effective source of trust in science.
As an effective shortcut but it's still the wrong thing, ultimately, to trust .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you should ask for sources instead. Authority is the wrong thing to trust in science
However, isn't this how Bayesian thinking works? You give a higher prior to your believe depending of the source.