'A Few Mutations Away': The Threat of a Vaccine-Proof Variant (infect, versus)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two opposing dynamics which are impacted by nature and natural selection going on and those two characteristics are infectivity and pathogenicity.
In general the nature of the host parasite relationship favors a high transmissibility agent with low pathogenicity potential that both the host and parasite can thrive on. That is what driving force that can make both successful in a commensal relationship.
In general when a highly pathogenic organisms infects a host with an inadequate immunity the viral load will be in direct proportion to the host damage. The greater the host damage the greater the disease severity and the greater the viral load can be seen. The outcome is death and a poor commensal relationship. The pathogenicity of the organism also impacts its ability to transmit itself. The greater the pathogenicity the window period between infection and symptoms is decreased and the time one is sick is increased or one succumbs to the infection limits the exposures in its ability to transmit.
When one hears that an organism is more infectious because of increasing viral loads in both asymptomatic states and in disease states compared to the previous virus then one assumes that there is attenuation of pathogenicity going on.
Any future variants that would be more pathogenic would be more deadly and less transmissible because of its deadliness and because of the innate viral pathogenicity causing tissue tissue resulting in symptoms with a shortened incubation period. That's what we mean when we say something is more virulent. Something more virulent is easier to control such as with SARS. Something less virulent but highly contagious is much less easier to control.
I would not panic but one also has to do as much as we can do to prevent morbidity and mortality of a virus of which we can develop vaccines for.
Do the unvaccinated viral hosts survive more than the unvaccinated hosts do? No, not according to what we are told. We are being told we are much more likely to SURVIVE an infection if we are vaccinated.
Therefore, if we are looking at who is more likely to be the host who causes the virus to both persist AND survive, leading to higher transmission; we are looking at the vaccinated population as our "mutation factory".
We are not just told. It is a fact at this point in time.
One out of 6 people who get covid who are unvaccinated get serious complications. The vaccine stops that from happening in most cases. I had covid and had serious complications. Further proof is that 97% of the people in hospitals are not vaccinated. You can't just pick and choose "facts" that fit your own ideology.
I think your logic if flawed regarding vaccinated being the mutation factory. But I don't care. I got the vaccine for my self interests in avoiding serious illness from covid. People say not to the vaccine because they believe its in their personal self interest. If me getting vaccinated means more mutations. So what? I believe the bigger issue for more mutations is simply more spread. Not sure what can be done at this point if vaccinated people are spreading it too.
Seems to me may be as transmissible means what that says. I believe that is based on a party in the NE where lots of vaccinated people came down with covid and gave it to each other. Clearly there have been situations where covid has spread quickly from vaccinated people in this case to other vaccinated people. But if there are other factors for it to occur who knows.
Right, there was a July 4th outbreak in Cape Cod and rapid transmission among vaccinated people. Prior to this, the data suggested that the vaccines stopped transmission so mask and distancing guidelines were dropped in May for vaccinated people. This new data prompted the CDC to reverse those guidelines a couple of days ago. Walensky said that another driver for the reversal was the discovery that viral load in the vaccinated people was similar to viral load in unvaccinated people.
With naturally occurring viruses, mutations often result in less transmissible (and less deadly) offspring.
Delta may be an exception to the rule.
Or, it may be further proof that this virus was engineered in the Wuhan Virology Institute.
Or is still being engineered. Do we have proof that the variant developed in the wild?
Except that those viruses (natural or otherwise) that persist and survive are the ones that are most successful at transmission. As long as we have a substantial population of unvaccinated people we can expect that mutation factory to produce more variants and the more infectious of those to spread.
Why would a virus be driven to improve it's mechanisms if it's current mechanisms are working well? Which means the vulnerable unvaccinated would not be driving the variants. We didn't hear too much about variants until the vaccinations began.
The rate of vaccination has been notably high in Chile. A recent study conducted in Chile has shown that around 60% of the population have received at least a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Recently, during the spring of 2021, a rapid surge in COVID-19 cases was observed in Chile. This is because the Lambda variant is capable of escaping the immune responses induced via vaccination.
Chile was using Sinovac, the Chinese vaccine and it was only 25-40% effective in the first place.
Yes, but the same data also says that even though vaccinated people in Singapore make up 75% of the people infected, few fall ill. The point of the vaccine was never to eradicate illness entirely, but to keep people who got sick from falling violently ill and dying/having long-term side effects.
You know what matters to me? Hospitalization rates and death rates. "Transmission" rates of an illness that is mild nearly all the time doesn't faze me that much one way or the other. I mean, I don't want to be a super spreader but I am simply not going to live in fear of being asymptomatic or mildly sick for a few days (the only positive cases I've known for the record). I'll follow mandates, regulations, etc. and keep my own immune system healthy and, well, so far so good. (I'm also vaccinated- since March - and so far so good on that front too.)
Sorry my report isn't very exciting. Meanwhile, I'm meeting some friends at a wine bar this evening - should be fun.
Interesting - that's basically what I heard. What I took away before I was vaccinated in March was that the vaccine does not prevent all illness or all transmission but it provides some additional protection.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
