Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV/COVID-19)

[killramos]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Had a friend tell me last night that 'we are as bad as india'. Fucking Nenshi

I have some friend like this on both sides of the spectrum. I just don’t talk to them much anymore.

Maybe I will once this is all over, maybe I won’t.

[sabad66]

Looking like the US will never reach herd immunity. Original strain was estimated to require 60% of people with immunity but with the new variants being 50%+ more contagious, they are estimating you need 80% of people with immunity to reach herd immunity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/h...y-vaccine.html

I think we might be slightly better in Canada for vaccine hesitancy but if 80% is the real threshold I don’t think we will get all the way there. Yay for yearly covid shots!

[Buster]

People just need to stop reading the NYT, it actively makes you stupider.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

... but with the new variants being 50%+ more contagious...

When did this become a fact?

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

When did this become a fact?

If I have a mantra, this is it.

[vengie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Had a friend tell me last night that 'we are as bad as india'. Fucking Nenshi

Had a friend say the same thing to me this weekend...

Friend: "We are two times worse than India right now, let that sink in!"
Me: "Are we running out of oxygen and letting people sit on the side of the road and suffer/ die?"
Friend: "No"
Me: ".............."

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

When did this become a fact?

Just summarizing what the article says.

Early on, the target herd immunity threshold was estimated to be about 60 to 70 percent of the population. Most experts, including Dr. Fauci, expected that the United States would be able to reach it once vaccines were available.

But as vaccines were developed and distribution ramped up through the winter and into the spring, estimates of the threshold began to rise. That is because the initial calculations were based on the contagiousness of the original version of the virus. The predominant variant now circulating in the United States, called B.1.1.7 and first identified in Britain, is about 60 percent more transmissible.

As a result, experts now calculate the herd immunity threshold to be at least 80 percent. If even more contagious variants develop, or if scientists find that immunized people can still transmit the virus, the calculation will have to be revised upward again.

Do people still think the mutations have not made any difference in transmissibility compared to the original strain?

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just summarizing what the article says.



Do people still think the mutations have not made any difference in transmissibility compared to the original strain?

I believe that no one knows, yet. There are many who "think" or "are pretty sure" that it's ____% more transmissible. But I want someone to know, and then share that knowledge.

[sabad66]

Here’s a study from April in the Lancet:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...170-5/fulltext

Interpretation

Emerging evidence exists of increased transmissibility of B.1.1.7, and we found increased virus load by proxy for B.1.1.7 in our data. We did not identify an association of the variant with severe disease in this hospitalised cohort.

If peer reviewed study published in the lancet isn’t good enough then I really don’t know what the bar is. Always happy to be educated/proven wrong by people smarter than me but that’s where my simple mind is at for now.

[killramos]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here’s a study from April in the Lancet:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...170-5/fulltext


If peer reviewed study published in the lancet isn’t good enough then I really don’t know what the bar is. Always happy to be educated/proven wrong by people smarter than me but that’s where my simple mind is at for now.

From your own quoted study. And no mention in the findings of anything regarding transmissibility.

We found no evidence of an association between severe disease and death and lineage (B.1.1.7 vs non-B.1.1.7) in unadjusted analyses (prevalence ratio [PR] 0·97 [95% CI 0·72–1·31]), or in analyses adjusted for hospitals, sex, age, comorbidities, and ethnicity (adjusted PR 1·02 [0·76–1·38]).

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here’s a study from April in the Lancet:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...170-5/fulltext



If peer reviewed study published in the lancet isn’t good enough then I really don’t know what the bar is. Always happy to be educated/proven wrong by people smarter than me but that’s where my simple mind is at for now.

Yeah but can you provide a facebook article though? That's the only real news source.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

From your own quoted study. And no mention in the findings of anything regarding transmissibility.

I don’t think I ever said variants cause increased disease did i? I just mentioned transmissibility which is mentioned in the summary under Interpretation.

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Had a friend say the same thing to me this weekend...

Friend: "We are two times worse than India right now, let that sink in!"
Me: "Are we running out of oxygen and letting people sit on the side of the road and suffer/ die?"
Friend: "No"
Me: ".............."

Today was the first day in over a week where none of our staff in India reported a death in their family. This is what we consider a good day right now.

[killramos]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don’t think I ever said variants cause increased disease did i? I just mentioned transmissibility which is mentioned in the summary under Interpretation.

So you posted a study with a finding that had nothing to do with what you were talking about?

Sounds about right

[schurchill39]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So you posted a study with a finding that had nothing to do with what you were talking about?

Sounds about right

Who pissed in your cheerios this morning?

[ExtraSlow]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who pissed in your cheerios this morning?

he's been grumpy since he became a dad. I can relate.

[suntan]

His name isn't NICEramos.

[Darkane]

I like Kill’s outlook. It’s to the point.

I like how he says he might not talk to people again because they just don’t comprehend. Lol.

[ExtraSlow]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

His name isn't NICEramos.

Quoted for Sig.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So you posted a study with a finding that had nothing to do with what you were talking about?

Sounds about right

How do you figure it has nothing to do with what i was talking about? Here is the background of the study:

Emergence of variants with specific mutations in key epitopes in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 raises concerns pertinent to mass vaccination campaigns and use of monoclonal antibodies. We aimed to describe the emergence of the B.1.1.7 variant of concern (VOC), including virological characteristics and clinical severity in contemporaneous patients with and without the variant.

"Virological characteristics" includes transmissibility.

Then in the details of the study, they investigated the theory of enhanced transmissibility and it was supported by the finding that it has increased viral load:

Following concerns that the B.1.1.7 VOC has enhanced transmissibility,1, 16 we investigated whether this characteristic is reflected by an increase in viral load, using Ct values from an in-house N-gene real-time RT-PCR assay and genomic read depths as surrogates. Although our Ct value analysis was limited by data availability, other studies have shown that NGS read counts can be used as a reliable predictor of viral load.26 Given that we found significant differences for Ct values and genomic read depths between B.1.1.7 and non-B.1.1.7 samples, we believe that B.1.1.7 infections were associated with higher viral loads than were non-B.1.1.7 infections in this study. This finding is in keeping with results from similar independent analyses, including that of approximately 1400 genomes assembled as part of the UK test and trace programme, which reported a 0·5 increase in median log10-inferred viral load in B.1.1.7 relative to non-B.1.1.7 samples.27 Our observed higher read depths are equivalent to a 0·2–0·3 increase in log10 read depth in B.1.1.7 relative to non-B.1.1.7, a smaller increase than observed in the previous study, which might be a consequence of sampling patients at later stages of infection than was done for test and trace swabs, which are typically derived from recently symptomatic individuals when viral loads are likely to be high.28

Again i'm happy to be educated otherwise if you can show me some quality evidence that variants aren't more transmissible than the original strain. I don't have any skin in the game and doesn't matter to me personally whether the variants are more contagious or not. I just simply like to be aware of the latest info.