Omicron may become dominant variant with its high transmissibility – Dr. Yong Poovorawan

[Bkk Brian]

21 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

True.  And younger and healthier.  We'll know more in a few weeks, but based on what's happening in SA, with hospitalizations skyrocketing, it's not looking good.

5 cases just found in New York now, community transmission well underway.

 

5 cases of Omicron variant confirmed in New York state: governor

[Danderman123]

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

True.  And younger and healthier.  We'll know more in a few weeks, but based on what's happening in SA, with hospitalizations skyrocketing, it's not looking good.

The cases in South Africa are younger, but the infected travelers, not so much, not likely they are all young. But, it seems that the vaccinated get infected, but have mild cases. 
 

i suspect the hospitalized in South Africa are mostly unvaccinated.

 

Its early days, all of this may change with more data.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Danderman123

[placnx]

23 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

There has been some very legitimate and studious scientific research that has suggested that in some vaccinated instances, the protein spikes will begin to resist the newly introduce antibody properties and in some cases creating a lessened mutated form. These types of random scientific oddities are never made public in the broader sense, as it contradicts their ever-promoting proposals to "conquer" Covid and related. 

 

What science does know, is that Covid and it's ever changing offspring is extremely clever regarding it's mechanisms for survival. 

Selection pressure. However, most variants don't rise to the level of variants of concern (VOC) because they are outrun by Delta (and now Omicron?).

[placnx]

19 hours ago, Blumpie said:

WE will know very very shortly.  ????  IF people were falling over like flies you would know about it immediately.  From my limited knowledge of pandemics they usually become less virulent as time goes on.  Again, just to be clear, I am not a doctor.

The 1918 pandemic was worse in the second year. There's been a lot of discussion on the question of virulence. Sheryl did a good post (but not sure on which Omicron thread) which quoted a deeper explanation, that while eventually a virus would tend to be less virulent, that could take quite a long time to happen. In the interim it could go either way.

[Jeffr2]

1 minute ago, placnx said:

The 1918 pandemic was worse in the second year. There's been a lot of discussion on the question of virulence. Sheryl did a good post (but not sure on which Omicron thread) which quoted a deeper explanation, that while eventually a virus would tend to be less virulent, that could take quite a long time to happen. In the interim it could go either way.

Even if less deadly than Delta, with so many unvaccinated, it's going to be bad.

[placnx]

9 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Vaccinations are critical to stopping the spread of this virus.  Sadly, some won't get inoculated for ridiculous reasons.  Mandatory vaccinations seem to be the only way.  Unfortunately.

 

Seems Omicron is better at reinfecting those who've been previously infected.  Not good.  We need more to be inoculated.

 

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

South Africa had been seeing a sudden spike in daily reported cases of coronavirus with the government reporting 11,535 new infections on Thursday, up from 312 ten days ago.

 

When those who were previously infected get reinfected they should now get vaccinated to have strong immunity. It would have been better to get vaccinated after the initial infection. Would probably have avoided second infection.

[Jeffr2]

Zimbabwe COVID update: 1,042 new cases, up from just 27 last week

- New cases: 1,042
- Average: 372 (+145)
- Positivity rate: 12.6% (+1)
- In hospital: 80 (+28)
- In ICU: 3 (-)
- New deaths: 0
- Average: 0 (-)

[placnx]

9 hours ago, blackprince said:

I agree Jeff, there's a lot of deliberately false stuff flying around for political reasons. Books have been written about the bot armies that have been deployed in an attempt to shape public opinion (I've even read one of them).

 

I think there's also a grey area where the stats aren't detailed enough (yet) or where the stats are just too obscure for the non-statistician to understand.

 

I read in this morning's headlines from Europe that Germany is considering closing society to the unvaxxed. This raises a number of ethical questions, one of which I'd like to ask the anti-vaxxers and non-vaxxers:

 

If you don't participate in government health schemes (ie covid vax) do you think it's ethical or fair to receive the benefit of government health care when you get covid?

If these antivaxxers go untreated the risk is that they spread Covid more. Older ones could be sick longer and possibly develop variants with capability to infect others. The ethical or fair question: Not ethical. But we should also keep in mind public health. Might also save public money in the long run to treat such antivaxxers. 

[paul1804]

On 12/2/2021 at 10:47 AM, ozimoron said:

Also be careful if you just happened to have maintained sufficient good health to have attained the age of 60 as the human immune system naturally declines significantly after this age. Anyone over the age of 60, regardless of their health status is vulnerable to severe illness or death from covid-19.

Well we are all going to die one day so if your time is up then its time to go! The death rate in healthy people over 60 is absolutely tiny so stop scaremongering. 

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, paul1804 said:

The death rate in healthy people over 60 is absolutely tiny so stop scaremongering.

You are right... nobody has died yet who was healthy at the time!

[VBF]

18 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

It seems you would rather that Covid change the lives of the unvaccinated.

The unvaccinated (at least those unvaccinated by choice) appear to have made their own decision - up to them!

The unvaccinated who haven't been able to get vaxxed deserve sympathy. 

Edited December 3, 2021 by VBF

[placnx]

12 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Zimbabwe COVID update: 1,042 new cases, up from just 27 last week

- New cases: 1,042
- Average: 372 (+145)
- Positivity rate: 12.6% (+1)
- In hospital: 80 (+28)
- In ICU: 3 (-)
- New deaths: 0
- Average: 0 (-)

It's too early to get a handle on mortality - only 3 in ICU so far.

[Jeffr2]

21 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

You are right... nobody has died yet who was healthy at the time!

Right...pure misinformation.

[Jeffr2]

21 minutes ago, placnx said:

It's too early to get a handle on mortality - only 3 in ICU so far.

Yeah. It's a lagging indicator. By a few weeks. But the increase in hospitalizations is kinda scary.

[Kadilo]

2 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Yeah. It's a lagging indicator. By a few weeks. But the increase in hospitalizations is kinda scary.

I guess that would depend on how easily scared you are. 

[Jeffr2]

9 minutes ago, Kadilo said:

I guess that would depend on how easily scared you are. 

Not easily.

[Bkk Brian]

11 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Yeah. It's a lagging indicator. By a few weeks. But the increase in hospitalizations is kinda scary.

Shows why WHO said all countries must prepare for this now.

[Mr Derek]

59 minutes ago, placnx said:

The 1918 pandemic was worse in the second year. There's been a lot of discussion on the question of virulence. Sheryl did a good post (but not sure on which Omicron thread) which quoted a deeper explanation, that while eventually a virus would tend to be less virulent, that could take quite a long time to happen. In the interim it could go either way.

Isn't it counter-evolutionary for a virus to kill its host? Is it not therefore a fair assumption that a virus will evolve to be more compatible with its host? I assume this is what has been happening all along and I have predicted something like the omicron variant since the beginning. Therefore it's appearance is the best news possible. Given that this one appears to be very mild (okay, give it a while to be sure), then surely the strategy should be to let it spread, stop vaccination, and switch the focus to natural immunity.

[Kadilo]

29 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Not easily.

Ok. Your  regular “it’s gonna get bad” type posts suggest otherwise despite no real data yet being published and early indications from the UK that the vaccines will offer some protection. 
 

For me the time for concern will be once the number of patients in ICU “sky rocket” and deaths follow. Neither which as yet has happened anywhere. 
 

Far too early for all the scaremongering rhetoric being written and for people being scared. 

[ozimoron]

31 minutes ago, Mr Derek said:

Isn't it counter-evolutionary for a virus to kill its host? Is it not therefore a fair assumption that a virus will evolve to be more compatible with its host? I assume this is what has been happening all along and I have predicted something like the omicron variant since the beginning. Therefore it's appearance is the best news possible. Given that this one appears to be very mild (okay, give it a while to be sure), then surely the strategy should be to let it spread, stop vaccination, and switch the focus to natural immunity.

No, evolution is a random process. Viruses which kill too fast may die out sooner like SARS and MERS but there's nothing to say that any mutation of a virus will be more or less deadly. See Darwin vs Lamarck.

[Mr Derek]

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

No, evolution is a random process. Viruses which kill too fast may die out sooner like SARS and MERS but there's nothing to say that any mutation of a virus will be more or less deadly. See Darwin vs Lamarck.

Then why don't we see deadly variants of the ordinary flu virus cropping up all the time? Could it be that viruses contain information that prevents them 'going backwards'?

 

Anyway, the point is that if omicron is as mild as it appears then we should give up the futile and misguided attempt to eradicate it completely. 

[ozimoron]

46 minutes ago, Mr Derek said:

Then why don't we see deadly variants of the ordinary flu virus cropping up all the time? Could it be that viruses contain information that prevents them 'going backwards'?

 

Anyway, the point is that if omicron is as mild as it appears then we should give up the futile and misguided attempt to eradicate it completely. 

There is no data as yet to suggest how mild omicron is or is not. Your use of loaded terms like misguided and futile show you to be an anti vaxxer. Like polio, smallpox, sars, mers and the spanish flu, eradication is far from futile. It must remain the goal. One certain way to eradicate it is for 100% compliance in vaccinations, masks and social distancing. There will be a newer vaccines developed which are more effective but those we have will buy us time and may even prevent the mutations you are asking about.

[Mr Derek]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

There is no data as yet to suggest how mild omicron is or is not. Your use of loaded terms like misguided and futile show you to be an anti vaxxer. Like polio, smallpox, sars, mers and the spanish flu, eradication is far from futile. It must remain the goal. One certain way to eradicate it is for 100% compliance in vaccinations, masks and social distancing. There will be a newer vaccines developed which are more effective but those we have will buy us time and may even prevent the mutations you are asking about.

The flu viruses you mention were not eradicated by human agency. They morphed into oblivion on their own. (Smallpox is no comparison - flu is universal and air travel nowadays carries it around the whole globe faster than bad news.)

 

If you really believe a flu virus can be eradicated by human effort you are gravely mistaken. Even 100% vaccination is useless given that the virus can and will mutate (and you claim above that it can mutate into something more deadly). Moreover, as we all know, vaccination doesn't prevent anyone contracting the virus or passing it on. 100% compliance in social distancing? Seriously? You expect everyone to live in hermetically sealed chambers forever?  All it takes is a tiny loophole (or a gap at the edge of a mask) and a virus will spread like osmosis.

 

Individuals can behave prudently to minimise their risk (I certainly do), but humanity can't run and hide forever. Well, fortunately, they don't need to. Covid is morphing itself into nothing more serious than ordinary flu, just like Spanish flu. I don't know if that process is over yet, but the doctor in South Africa who discovered omicron has been clear that all cases are mild to asymptotic.  

 

 

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, Mr Derek said:

The flu viruses you mention were not eradicated by human agency. They morphed into oblivion on their own. (Smallpox is no comparison - flu is universal and air travel nowadays carries it around the whole globe faster than bad news.)

 

If you really believe a flu virus can be eradicated by human effort you are gravely mistaken. Even 100% vaccination is useless given that the virus can and will mutate (and you claim above that it can mutate into something more deadly). Moreover, as we all know, vaccination doesn't prevent anyone contracting the virus or passing it on. 100% compliance in social distancing? Seriously? You expect everyone to live in hermetically sealed chambers forever?  All it takes is a tiny loophole (or a gap at the edge of a mask) and a virus will spread like osmosis.

 

Individuals can behave prudently to minimise their risk (I certainly do), but humanity can't run and hide forever. Well, fortunately, they don't need to. Covid is morphing itself into nothing more serious than ordinary flu, just like Spanish flu. I don't know if that process is over yet, but the doctor in South Africa who discovered omicron has been clear that all cases are mild to asymptotic.  

 

 

All of these viruses were eradicated entirely due to human effort, not necessarily just through vaccines but social distancing and mask wearing etc.

 

"Why did the original Sars epidemic come to end? Well, SARS-CoV-1 did not burn itself out. Rather, the outbreak was largely brought under control by simple public health measures. Testing people with symptoms (fever and respiratory problems), isolating and quarantining suspected cases, and restricting travel all had an effect. "

 

https://theconversation.com/the-original-sars-virus-disappeared-heres-why-coronavirus-wont-do-the-same-138177

 

The chances that omicron is significantly milder than delta is "slim".

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03614-z

Edited December 3, 2021 by ozimoron

[Mr Derek]

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

All of these viruses were eradicated entirely due to human effort, not necessarily just through vaccines but social distancing and mask wearing etc.

 

The chances that omicron is significantly milder than delta is "slim".

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03614-z

I don't know where you get that idea from except that you clearly are a great believer in medicine to the point of it being something magical. I won't be able to change your opinion, but please answer me this: why then has ordinary flu not been eradicated? Alright, I'll tell you: a) because it's not possible, and b) because it's not worth trying.

 

As to omicron, we'll see, but it stands to reason to me as a biological principle that anything that spreads more rapidly must necessarily be less deadly (I extrapolate this from that the fact that humans have not been wiped out by viruses long ago). With omicron, I don't worry about transmissibility, only severity, and the Nature article has nothing to offer about that except trying to concoct reasons we should doubt its apparent mildness - in other words reasons to spread alarm -  therefore I discredit the article's objectivity.

 

We'll see.

[ozimoron]

11 minutes ago, Mr Derek said:

I don't know where you get that idea from except that you clearly are a great believer in medicine to the point of it being something magical. I won't be able to change your opinion, but please answer me this: why then has ordinary flu not been eradicated? Alright, I'll tell you: a) because it's not possible, and b) because it's not worth trying.

 

As to omicron, we'll see, but it stands to reason to me as a biological principle that anything that spreads more rapidly must necessarily be less deadly (I extrapolate this from that the fact that humans have not been wiped out by viruses long ago). With omicron, I don't worry about transmissibility, only severity, and the Nature article has nothing to offer about that except trying to concoct reasons we should doubt its apparent mildness - in other words reasons to spread alarm -  therefore I discredit the article's objectivity.

 

We'll see.

It's a fallacy that it has to be less deadly if it's more contagious. There's no logic to that at all. It can be any permutation of the two metrics.

 

It's definitely worth eradicating the flu but it evolves too fast and is too contagious. It is possible to eventually eradicate flu but it will take further advances in rapid vaccine development and high rates of vaccination. Covid-19 will be difficult to eradicate for the same reason. Possible but requires very high rates of vaccination.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johncumbers/2020/01/10/the-end-of-the-flu-can-we-immunize-the-world-against-a-seasonal-killer/?sh=6c42c812518e

Edited December 3, 2021 by ozimoron

[Scott]

Troll post reported and removed.

 

[Lingba]

get on with your lives people

[Sanookmike]

14 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

I am so sorry you are tired of Covid, but, if left unconstrained, Covid may mutate into another form that is more infectious and nastier.

 

BTW, Covid kills some 4 million per year now.

For a start it is random but viruses tend to get weaker and more infectious not the the other way round.. it's basic micro biology.

 

Also you are aware right the first signs of a "deadly" mutation would be a huge rise in hospitaliaztion's and deaths. Not some lab announcing they found it.. by the time a variant is identified it's been in the wild for quite some time. The virus being is spread unconstrained all the time.. imposing restrictions is just a futile act.. and WHO agrees with me, they even said locking down boarders etc would not stop the spread ????

Edited December 3, 2021 by Sanookmike

[ozimoron]

10 minutes ago, Sanookmike said:

For a start it is random but viruses tend to get weaker and more infectious not the the other way round.. it's basic micro biology.

Wrong.

"Delta is believed to be more than twice as contagious as previous variants, and studies have shown that it may be more likely than the original virus to put infected people in the hospital."

 

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

 

This large national study found a higher hospital admission or emergency care attendance risk for patients with COVID-19 infected with the delta variant compared with the alpha variant. Results suggest that outbreaks of the delta variant in unvaccinated populations might lead to a greater burden on health-care services than the alpha variant.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00475-8/fulltext

 

Study suggests Delta more than doubles death risk

 

https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/study-suggests-delta-more-than-doubles-death-risk

 

Canadian research into COVID-19 variants found a person with Delta is almost twice as likely as someone with the Alpha variant to be hospitalised.

They are one-and-a-half times as likely to die.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-21/doherty-institute-vaccine-covid-modelling-delta-outbreaks/100477998

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by ozimoron