New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

Post by ehsankia » Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 1:26 AM UTC

blindmute wrote: post #272

ehsankia wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also worth noting that a lot of the narrative makes it sound like people called him racist for the ban, but it was mostly his use of "Kung-flu" and "china virus" that people had an issue with, not the ban itself.

This is absolutely not true. Every public figure left of center in the country commented viciously about the racist, stupid travel ban.

Post by gfodor » Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 1:30 AM UTC

tinus_hn wrote: post #131

gfodor wrote: post #3

> Travel bans are not evidence-based: It may seem like travel bans for individual countries are a necessary step, but I cannot stress enough that they do not work. This one point compromised the article for me. The standard for “working”, like all measures, is to slow down the spread. We all know travel bans got a bad name because you-know-who proposed them. But all countries imposed travel bans and we ought to be co…

You need to be clear about the cost of these measures and about the benefit of the delays they buy. > to buy time for the “weeks” of analysis needed that could help with further reducing risk, We’re not going to learn anything useful in the few weeks bought by stopping these flights. And remember, even though the general public insists on these bans, international law proscribes no country can prevent its own citizen…

Post by biophysboy » Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 1:36 AM UTC

ummonk wrote: post #299

With 32 mutations spread out over the ~1300 base pair spike protein, we're approaching the point where antibody resistance will be an issue. But knowing how our bureaucracy works, there is basically zero chance they'll update the vaccine to target omicron (which is very likely to become the dominant variant within a few months).

Post by GekkePrutser » Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 1:37 AM UTC

cthalupa wrote: post #266

timr wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We cannot do the science, because such a randomized test would be deeply unethical. Thank you for perfectly illustrating the problem. I was actually sort of worried that people wouldn't take me seriously when I said that science has become so political that we actually can't do any . It sounds conspiratorial, doesn't it? But, alas: 1) I post results of RCTs showing that masks do little, if anything. 2) Someone repl…

It isn't a political issue to not do studies that require doing things that actively and intentionally put people at things we know are highly likely to put them at risk of physical harm. The world decided this was unethical long before the current political climate.

Post by biophysboy » Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 1:41 AM UTC

contravariant wrote: post #247

johnchristopher wrote: post #235

> We know that B.1.1.529 is not a “Delta plus” variant. The figure below shows a really long line, with no previous Delta ancestors. So this likely means it mutated over time in one, likely immunocompromised, individual (see my P.S. note at the end of the post). How does that work ? Virus mutate inside the host until either death or the immune system stops it ? Why is the absence of selective pressure producing a vir…

This isn't really my area so this is conjecture and guesswork. If various immunocompromised people get infected then by a fluke their immune system could be just powerful enough to contain the infection but not eradicate it, this will remain the case until the virus becomes too powerful and the host dies. It's not the absence of selective pressure that is driving the mutation here, it's the mere fact that the virus m…