5 minutes ago, connda said:

Is new COVID-19 variant a cause of concern for Thailand?

Yes!  It will kill everyone.  Close the borders now!!!

Stop.  Please. This helps no one.

11 hours ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

how crucial it was for the country to open in order to avoid a complete economic meltdown.

That's what happens when your economy is based on brothels fronting as bars. 

2 hours ago, CartagenaWarlock said:

That's what happens when your economy is based on brothels fronting as bars. 

Clearly you don't know much about the country. You really think Thai economy is made of brothels? Have you ever walked in a major city? I'm baffled.

1 hour ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

Clearly you don't know much about the country. You really think Thai economy is made of brothels? Have you ever walked in a major city? I'm baffled.

20% of the economy, I meant. Keep all the brothels (fronting as bars where you can get a girl for pay for play after paying a bar fine) closed and let's see how many tourists dollars Thailand can generate. 

 

Edited November 30, 20214 yr by CartagenaWarlock

10 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Mutations can occur randomly (in which case they can be anything, having any or - most commonly - no effect on how transmissable or deadly a virus is) - and through natural selection or a combination of both.

 

Mutations that occur due to natural selection will always be ones that favor increased viral replication. Viral replication in turn depends on how easily a virus can be transmitted and how long it can live in a host. Quickly killing a host is not in a virus' interests so typically, over time within a population, a virus will become less lethal. But this can take quite a while to occur (years or even generations). Also, being less lethal can mean either not causing serious disease OR having a long time lag between infection and severe disease/death. This was the secret behind the HIV virus's success: while being extremely lethal in the absence of treatment, it took 5-10 years to get to that point, and during much of that time the person did not even feel ill. So the fact that it eventually killed was not a deterrent to viral spread.

 

 

Not sure I understand what you are saying here.

The way this is written:  "Mutations can occur randomly.... - and through natural selection or a combination of both."

is not correct,  mutations do not occur through natural selection.

 

"Mutations that occur due to natural selection will always be ones that favor increased viral replication."

This seems to confuse the two processes that are separate and distinct; mutation and natural selection.  As written, it is not correct. 

 

 

Natural selection acts on populations, the process of differential reproduction (usually a result of differential survival) allows one variant in a population to become more numerous than others.

Natural selection acts on the existing variability in a population.

 

Mutations create variability in a population.

Mutations are the result of changes in DNA or RNA (usually errors in copying of DNA or RNA) that create individuals with different characteristics.

Mutations are random with respect to whether they are beneficial or detrimental.

 

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetic-mutation-1127/

"In other words, mutations occur randomly with respect to whether their effects are useful. Thus, beneficial DNA changes do not happen more often simply because an organism could benefit from them."

 

"to the best of our knowledge, the consequences of a mutation have no influence whatsoever on the probability that this mutation will or will not occur. In other words, mutations occur randomly with respect to whether their effects are useful. Thus, beneficial DNA changes do not happen more often simply because an organism could benefit from them."

 

This is not nit-picking, discussion of these processes is not helpful if it is jumbled and confused.

Obviously, you recognize that differential reproduction is the key but natural selection does not cause mutations.

If you want to see what the Lambda and Mu variants are they are in Wikipedia, Nu is

maybe avoided as it means something else in Thai, same as Xi is too common in Chinese so

not used as well.  Maybe the WHO could supply their reason for these 2 letters being used,

  otherwise speculation is just that. Any variant should be a cause of concern, at least until

 everything is know about how bad it is. Just my opinion.

6 hours ago, CartagenaWarlock said:

20% of the economy, I meant. Keep all the brothels (fronting as bars where you can get a girl for pay for play after paying a bar fine) closed and let's see how many tourists dollars Thailand can generate. 

 

     Tourism might be 20% of the economy but brothel tourism certainly is not--despite some posters here believing it is such.  Despite the bewilderment of some posters here that Pattaya could, pre-covid, support not one but two major malls, and lots of other nice, new development, from plenty of non-brothel visitors.

On 11/30/2021 at 8:02 AM, Jeffr2 said:

No credible scientist has said that. None.

Mea Culpa ... I shouldn't read newspapers or look at Sky News or BBC  or CNN...SILLY ME ! 

53 minutes ago, terryofcrete said:

Mea Culpa ... I shouldn't read newspapers or look at Sky News or BBC  or CNN...SILLY ME ! 

Put up a link! Would love to see it.

On 11/30/2021 at 1:53 PM, Sheryl said:

There is no mystery about this and nothing being hidden.

 

Who openly stated Xi was not used because it is a common last name in China, including that of the current leader.

 

It is standard to omit names that sound like other common worlds or names.

 

 

I didn't say anything was being hidden. But why didn't they omit Delta, its the worlds largest airline??

15 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

If you want to see what the Lambda and Mu variants are they are in Wikipedia, Nu is

maybe avoided as it means something else in Thai, same as Xi is too common in Chinese so

not used as well.  Maybe the WHO could supply their reason for these 2 letters being used,

  otherwise speculation is just that. Any variant should be a cause of concern, at least until

 everything is know about how bad it is. Just my opinion.

They have stated their reason

 

Nu omitted because it sounds liek the word "new"

 

Xi omitted because it is a common Chinese last name, including that of the current leader of China.

 

Which brought them to Omicron.

37 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

They have stated their reason

 

Nu omitted because it sounds liek the word "new"

 

Xi omitted because it is a common Chinese last name, including that of the current leader of China.

 

Which brought them to Omicron.

Elon Musk had no qualms in using uppercase Xi for Tesla... clearly the eminent WHO DG is more cautious with his masters.

10 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

Elon Musk had no qualms in using uppercase Xi for Tesla... clearly the eminent WHO DG is more cautious with his masters.

Why do you persist in peddling this garbage. The WHO have stated their reasons for skipping the letter Xi and a number of posts here have explained it. Conspiracy theories are a religion for some people.

5 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Put up a link! Would love to see it.

http://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-most-omicron-cases-are-mild-and-theres-no-evidence-to-suggest-vaccines-may-be-less-effective-against-the-variant-says-who-12483729

On 11/28/2021 at 6:15 PM, HappyExpat57 said:

When in trouble, when in doubt,
Run in circles, scream and shout.

 

Yes, it should be a concern. No, it should not be the reason to shut the country down again. News flash - we're going to have viruses and variants the rest of our lives. What doesn't kill you . . .

You have to admit, it’s an amazing business plan.You have to admit, it’s an amazing business plan.

On 11/30/2021 at 2:08 AM, Jeffr2 said:

Stop.  Please. This helps no one.

Correction. I can think of a few people that it helps.  

Edited December 1, 20214 yr by Harveyg

8 hours ago, terryofcrete said:

http://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-most-omicron-cases-are-mild-and-theres-no-evidence-to-suggest-vaccines-may-be-less-effective-against-the-variant-says-who-12483729

From your article.  Seems you didn't read it:

 

He added: "What we have seen is Alpha has been more severe than the previous strain, a little, and Delta more severe again, so the trend we've seen is greater severity, not less severity

 

It comes as experts on the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG), which advises the government, warned the new strain could trigger a surge in virus infections bigger than previous waves in the UK with a risk it may overwhelm the NHS.

4 hours ago, Harveyg said:

Correction. I can think of a few people that it helps.  

Only trolls...

On 11/30/2021 at 1:52 PM, cdemundo said:

 

I didn't know this, do you have some references?

I read about the field hospitals on ASEAN a few days ago.  WHO, NIH, CDC and doctors in Europe and S.A. [and other epidemiologists] have been stating facts about viral behaviors for months. Most reliable info says (there is a lot) that there will be more and more varieties and "so far" the "behavior of this virus is following the typical."

5 hours ago, pizzachang said:

I read about the field hospitals on ASEAN a few days ago.  WHO, NIH, CDC and doctors in Europe and S.A. [and other epidemiologists] have been stating facts about viral behaviors for months. Most reliable info says (there is a lot) that there will be more and more varieties and "so far" the "behavior of this virus is following the typical."

I was referring to the idea that viruses "typically become more transmissible and less dangerous."

Which would be great news.

 

Since you didn't provide a reference I did a quick search.

Apparently, this is not quite true.

 

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-011488089270

 

[But in fact, there have been cases of viruses that mutated to become more deadly.

“That claim as a whole is just nonsense,” said Troy Day, a professor of mathematics and biology at Queen’s University in Canada, who has studied the ways infectious diseases, including coronavirus, can evolve.

Some examples of viruses that became more deadly over time includethose that developed drug resistant variants, and animal viruses such as bird flu, which were harmless to humans initially but then mutated to become capable of killing people, according to Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security.

“Flu viruses have developed resistance to certain antivirals that make them more difficult to treat, and therefore make them more deadly,” Adalja said, also noting the same has happened with HIV and certain Hepatitis C strains.

...

“Becoming more transmissible and less lethal are absolutely what’s best for the pathogen,” said Day. “But the problem is that it’s not always possible, and in many instances is never possible, to be more transmissible and also less lethal.”]

 

So in theory the optimum for the virus to proliferate is to let the host live and for the virus to become more transmissible. But the selection process acts on the variations in the population, and the variation is a result of random mutation (random with respect to benefit to the virus) so the optimum variants may not (may never) occur.

 

 

17 hours ago, cdemundo said:

I was referring to the idea that viruses "typically become more transmissible and less dangerous."

Which would be great news.

 

Since you didn't provide a reference I did a quick search.

Apparently, this is not quite true.

 

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-011488089270

 

[But in fact, there have been cases of viruses that mutated to become more deadly.

“That claim as a whole is just nonsense,” said Troy Day, a professor of mathematics and biology at Queen’s University in Canada, who has studied the ways infectious diseases, including coronavirus, can evolve.

Some examples of viruses that became more deadly over time includethose that developed drug resistant variants, and animal viruses such as bird flu, which were harmless to humans initially but then mutated to become capable of killing people, according to Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security.

“Flu viruses have developed resistance to certain antivirals that make them more difficult to treat, and therefore make them more deadly,” Adalja said, also noting the same has happened with HIV and certain Hepatitis C strains.

...

“Becoming more transmissible and less lethal are absolutely what’s best for the pathogen,” said Day. “But the problem is that it’s not always possible, and in many instances is never possible, to be more transmissible and also less lethal.”]

 

So in theory the optimum for the virus to proliferate is to let the host live and for the virus to become more transmissible. But the selection process acts on the variations in the population, and the variation is a result of random mutation (random with respect to benefit to the virus) so the optimum variants may not (may never) occur.

 

 

"may never". Key words. In most cases, viruses behave as I posted. Good for you, doing your own research.  Demanding that others do your research, is a way of 'disagreeing'. The vast amounts of data available from virologists, epidemiologists, and government-funded health institutes, agree on the general behavior of viruses.  I also note that, "most" research indicates that natural immunity from infections, results in greater protection by our immune system.  E.g. more protection from "variants".  

1 minute ago, pizzachang said:

"may never". Key words. In most cases, viruses behave as I posted. Good for you, doing your own research.  Demanding that others do your research, is a way of 'disagreeing'. The vast amounts of data available from virologists, epidemiologists, and government-funded health institutes, agree on the general behavior of viruses.  I also note that, "most" research indicates that natural immunity from infections, results in greater protection by our immune system.  E.g. more protection from "variants".  

Not now.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/safricas-health-body-sees-threefold-higher-risk-reinfection-omicron-2021-12-02/

S.Africa's health body sees threefold higher risk of reinfection from Omicron

8 hours ago, pizzachang said:

"may never". Key words. In most cases, viruses behave as I posted. Good for you, doing your own research.  Demanding that others do your research, is a way of 'disagreeing'. The vast amounts of data available from virologists, epidemiologists, and government-funded health institutes, agree on the general behavior of viruses.  I also note that, "most" research indicates that natural immunity from infections, results in greater protection by our immune system.  E.g. more protection from "variants".  

Conparative studies of the presence of antibodies show that natural immunity from Coronavirus infection wanes more rapidly than immunity via mRNA vaccination.