We could have gotten rid of Dallas. Perhaps there will be another chance

The meat packing places that are continuing to operate with minimal mitigation look like they will be an accelerated version of the herd immunity strategy in microcosm. Whoever dies dies and the rest will have either had it or can't seem to catch it. Compare the deaths to the total number of workers and you have an estimate of the death rate as a function of the general health of meat packing workers. If their health compares with that of the general population you have an estimate of codiv's real death rate.

Grist For The Mill





PairTheBoard

A link for the wise

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/manus...052413297.html


PairTheBoard

Zeno its bad. Its not 1968. And we have a moron US dream traitor of mega proportions at the top now that cant die already to not have to experience every day. Only solution is to get a very strong antiviral treatment proposal soon that cools the attack down when it gets bad. But what about all that recover and have compromised lungs now or clots. What about the possibility it starts mutating every 3-6 months and you have no permanent immunity and face every year a 1-2% risk if over 50-60 say that is a great number of good people out there and 5% over 75? Even if its 0.2% every year starting age 20 that is terrible to have to live with it permanently with a problem 10-100 times worse than flu.

All the idiots that compare it to flu and say its no big deal have to only look at what happened to Italy and New York and see that this was big even with efforts to contain it. This can repeat 10x over and the disaster in 3rd world is only beginning. It may not be about just getting herd immunity. It may be a permanent problem that will require to solve all viruses for good as i believe is the next step. It will happen but not with the morons that lead now or it will happen much harder because of them.

If the problem was little the market would be back to all time highs now. The economy will recover always with proper leadership. There is none now. Its not left right politics. Fack them all. They are all wrong from the most left pipe dream reckless idiots to the most right lunatic nazis and the middle is still idiots. Because very few of them look at the world scientifically, pragmatically and mathematically, with love for the community, desire for self growth and yet a proper sense of responsibility, progress with effort , healthy cooperation and competition and merit that creates a strong society.

Society is idiotic and indeed makes big deals about topics that are sensational and ignores other long term problems like cancer, heart disease etc. That is true typically. It finds things to obsess about.

But look at world data and see that at the peak we can easily experience population decline daily with all the planet infected in full explosive action. This is ok if it weren't coming with massive unrest and failures and simply due to design to not grow as fast.

I am not going out any time soon. Fack them all. I can last 1 year inside with minimal trips out and driving at night and sunrise in parks when finally all is open. Not returning to 2 meter so 5 meters daily interactions with others unless this is understood properly. Let them facking solve this mess first with their bs choices before taking risks to find yourself in some hospital with bs experimental treatments of overworked hero doctors that fear for their lives on a life you built with so much effort and its now a statistical event.

Of course 99% of the time its nothing. I might have had it even. And you have a facking government that dares to say tests for all is unreasonable. When it is the core of the solution. Where in a facking mega superpower? Really? BS to US and all the mfing voters that consistently make it possible for good people to suffer such daily insult to logic that never deserved this trash bags for leaders so long now. They piss on the dream. Traitors. Tribal mfers unable to unite and care for the country with dignity and not fear, lies, moronic ignorance and bs nationalism out of their asses...N1 really? BS. Earn it with better choices.

That 0.2-1% risk is a terrible way to die according to the stories by the way. Without genetic testing to know if one has a risk to face it badly why risk it. This virus is very strange. Fack conspiracy theories but it plays like a designer game to destroy the world. Yes it does. It has properties rarely seen before. China played a facking game to the rest of the planet and they deserve the rage of the planet and even war or some level if it proves there is a play here. But also the rest of the planet was not ready and had morons that thought it was nothing looking for excuses now.

At the peak this problem could be killing hundreds of thousands per year in US if it starts mutating and making herd immunity irrelevant. But what if it creates also long term problems to 5-10% of the people that experience it like reduced lung function? This must end properly soon. It also opens the door for a death spiral motivated well funded terrorist hands.

Except that meat packing plants have incredibly high employee turnover during the best of times.

Never a misanthrope. A true misanthrope doesnt care about the world going to hell. I do. I do but i know it deserves it this way and with such choices. And yet i still believe its possible to get it together and create the better system that is founded first on solving its core problems and then doing the other things.

You cant predict everything that can hurt a system and it does grow by failures also but some things are important and not respected. You can have nuclear power if you do it right. You can have as plan to end fossil fuels consumption unless fuels are synthetically produced in a cycle. You can act seriously to reduce pollution and recover ecosystems. You can plan to protect society from epidemics by having a back up society structure in place and by planning ahead to have not only the resources to fight but the ability to isolate a country for 20 days with only 5% of the people functioning and then after 1 month another 5 % replaces them to then follow by another 5% until 3 months later there is nearly nothing out there except the threat now from airports which you keep closed unless the persons entering go over a 15 day monitoring and even a strict gps localization system with severe penalties if violated to allow people be outside with stay at home restrictions for a while and all their basic needs met until then. You can have extreme measures for a period and then win recovery. But there is never planning for any of this.


You could have had your economy back in 3 months that way and then with strict checking and statistical monitoring you can contain the problem while you work to solve it for good.

Why couldnt math be used properly to already imagine that the virus is in US by December already because so many travel daily. Why couldnt be immediately a priority to develop testing of the population randomly to learn the truth before it became a problem? What exactly is the world waiting after you see China build hospitals in record time and news of suppressing it for weeks? What do you think China was doing for months but exporting it everywhere?

The less virus exists out there the less the chance to mutate. So a society prepared to operate on 5% in 3 revolving cycles for 3 months can reduce R0 to 0.5. But we do not have such structure in place. That makes the system vulnerable to a dangerous epidemic. You cannot eliminate it now easily everywhere due to very poor countries everywhere if its out of control from a small starting location because it is a very bad probability game but you can make it die within a continent if you are serious and have a properly designed society.

You can plan ahead and research in advance how to synthesize antibodies and how to research drugs that mess with virus replication. Why cant a system spend a few trillions to solve its energy problems and its health risk problems and its environmental destruction problem. Why arent these things the top 10 priorities of a world? Why cant it be the business of a society to respect and deal with its problems rather than ignore them and try to produce impossible quick fixes when its too late.

You can design a better world that cares for its people that makes it ridiculously unlikely for losers to become leaders and then if they do find ways to gradually neutralize them based on objective error rates and gross unethical behavior (yes you can define that properly to not be abusive to common sense).

All the weaknesses of current system become alive now. Efficiencies only built on narrow self interests. From the care the system has for its citizens ,to the planning, to the ignorance of the masses about the poor people that serve functions important to society in the sidelines never recognized, all is revealed now.


It is impossible to imagine that a country that won ww2 in record time and took us to the moon cannot defeat modern day problems that are vastly inferior in power? Look at great countries in Europe too similarly inept. This system here has become inept, weak, divided and focused on bs unimportant things. To hate this misery is not to be a misanthrope. It is to be fighter for a new paradigm and the original dream.

Michel Eyquem de Montaigne is hard to surpass. Appreciate the effort nonetheless.

Dallas and Ft. Worth; they are almost one complex now.

We could also have gotten rid of Northern Ireland, a really great opportunity lost. Marvelous opportunities only come along rarely. We will all be sorry for not grabbing them wholeheartedly and squeezing out the best that chance gives us for free. [In honor of Montaigne]

Viruses tend to chill out as they evolve. They become less deadly. From an evolutionary perspective it makes sense. Make the host too sick too soon you don't have as much chance to spread and reproduce. Like SARS 1, people got sick quickly and were out of the community quickly. This one is more sucessful, long incubation period, not too deadly, highly contagious relatively speaking. So I wouldn't be worried about this mutating into something deadlier.

I think I had this in January. Bed bound for over a week and never so sick in my life. Fever and coughing. I assumed I just never had the flu before. But I was around my parents who both got the flu jab and neither got sick so most likely the flu. I wonder though

https://youtu.be/Tj66mUEvKNY

There's a misunderstanding in here. What we should understand from the way evolution works is that if it mutates into a far more deadly version than that mutation will be relatively unfit and die out over time. But the process by which it's unfitness plays out over time is huge numbers of deaths - it does not make it less likely to happen in the short term. The short term evolutionary 'mistake' of more deadly mutations is that humans are not passive and we have the mighty weapon of science on our side.

You are of course right that early symptoms are bad for the virus but that's far from synonymous with more deadly.

If you have two versions of a virus spreading in a population then the one with the higher contagion rate will tend to dominate in the population. If one version has a contagion rate greater than 1 while the other has a contagion rate less than 1 (because it kills quickly), the first version will take over in the population while the second version will die out. The two versions may be equally likely mutations but the first version is the one we would be more likely to see in the population.


PairTheBoard

True but deadly and killing quickly are far from synonymous.

The deadliest killer will be silent but infectious - exactly a characteristic of this virus and likely to be just as true for both more deadly mutations and the less deadly ones.

Good point. As far as the contagion rate goes, it doesn't matter whether an individual is infectious during an incubation period and then gets over it with mild to no symptoms (and immunity) or then progresses toward death. In either case there's the same infectious period with the individual finally removed from the non-immune population. In fact, if the progression toward death is longer than the "getting over it" phase the contagion rate might be higher for the more deadly form.


PairTheBoard

Except that mutations oftentimes defeat our immunity. In that case, it just sucks more, depending on your point of view.

Except, typically virus mutations are usually not remarkable. Most appear and then die out again as they lose properties. Or it's about as fatal. Likewise The strain that began in Italy that is now dominating can't be said to be deadlier than the strain in wuhan. Theres not information or evidence.
So I think it is unlikely we will have a deadlier strain of this virus. Its mutation behavior is expected. Also its mutating much slower than the flu.

That said I don't really want to see the SARS trilogy. But that will be a new virus.

https://youtu.be/vrL9QKGQrWk

Cliffs: 0.3% death rate conservative estimate. One fifth had no symptoms. It could be endemic. Immunity may be similar to the other coronaviruses ie. 2 years at most

There may never be a vaccine. There isn't one for any coronavirus, such as those that cause the common cold.
It doesn't seem to infect other family members when a person in it, unlike other common diseases. Large gatherings are super spreaders.

My prediction: We will lift restrictions, have social distancing. Never lockdown again for this virus. Clubs, concerts, are donesville. A vaccine will be developed in 2.5 years. People will have forgotten how to party.

That's a somewhat different point. Yes the overwhelming majority of mutations are irrelevant but now the issue is:

1) is there a significant risk of successful mutations
2) in the short term are deadlier mutations at a disdvantage

The answer to 1) is yes. The answer to 2) is, as before, probably not apart from human intervention.


Taking solace from the successful mutations so far seems a bit odd to me. I'd go with the hope that vaccines under development might be able to cope with a wide range of mutations and/or, once working, be easily adapted to new strains.

Basically go science!

Humans just need to mutate faster than the virus. And personally - Being more mutant than most others has a certain panache.

The consensus seems to be we will survive and thrive. The joke continues........

I said, viruses tend to become milder as they evolve. I can't find an example of an already existing virus that infects humans naturally becoming more deadly by mutation. I can find examples of viruses that have become milder e.g HIV or viruses that remain as fatal e.g. the winter flu, common cold viruses such as the four coronaviruses, rhinoviruses and others most don't worry about.

The concern is new viruses, not mutations in humans.
The spanish flu was believed to have come about when a human with the flu and a bird with the flu met a pig. And that new strain then was able to infect humans.

Similarly, this **** is believed to have happened by a coronavirus in a bat jumping to a pangoloin or fish or snake and then to yours truly.

We rarely get much info on short term mutation of new viruses and over time they definitely become milder. Although there's suggestions covid has already mutated to become worse and some suggestion that the 'Spanish' Flu mutated to become a lot deadlier before becoming a lot milder.

I'm a bit less worried about new viruses because they're in a losing race in time against our ability to squash them. But yes we need to fade a few more years. In this respect covid is helping as it's given anti-viral science a big boost. Also we know about this virus - it's too late for a deadlier mutation of it to spread before we notice.

Yes the animal bit is true of course but it doesn't change the evolutionary points about fitness.

Existential threats are generally overblown. Biggest risks are the batteries running out or the coming of the final parentheses.

...or the final footnote*.


*BTM would enjoy that**.

** Sort of like all of Subsequent philosophy is just a footnote to Plato.

Which entry in the universe encyclopedia would you read: Civilization #666 extinction by internecine global war; or civilization # 777 Extinction by virus. The latter is just plain pathetic. The former is worth pouring yourself a scotch and getting comfy on the couch for a sumptuous read.

Nuff said.

Very interesting video. To be more precise, the death rate he estimates is 0.37%. However, that's based on 7 deaths in an infected population of about 1900. One or two deaths more or less would make a huge difference in that estimated death rate. So the statistical information is really saying there's a high variance probability distribution for the true death rate (for this demographic) around 0.37%.

He makes a really interesting key point I haven't heard before. He hypothesizes that the severity of sickness you get from infection tends to depend on how large a viral load you are infected by. He says this is true for many viruses so we might expect it to be true for Sars-Cov2. This would explain why most of the symptomatic people who got infected in his study got infected at the super-spreading events for the population. Both in closed environments. One at the carnival where people were close, singing, and kissing everyone. The other a bar where everyone was dancing and close to each other. Suprisingly, there was only a 15% infection rate within a household with one infected person.

The implication of his hypothesis is that if we practice "good hygiene" so that when people get infected they receive only a small dose of the virus then we might build a population with partial immunity without serious sickness from the virus. Or, considering the fact there's never been a working vaccine for any corona virus, we might just volunteer to be infected with small doses of Sars-Cov2. He doesn't suggest this but others might. Maybe Trump could show some leadership via personal example.


PairTheBoard