Epidemiologist Drastically Reduces COVID-19 Estimates

[Sparko]

There you go again - off with the paranoid conspiracy Thing. Again, we know its origin both genetically and geographically.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0317175442.htm

From your article:

In the other proposed scenario, a non-pathogenic version of the virus jumped from an animal host into humans and then evolved to its current pathogenic state within the human population. ...

Then the other distinct spike protein characteristic of SARS-CoV-2, the cleavage site, could have evolved within a human host, possibly via limited undetected circulation in the human population prior to the beginning of the epidemic.

[rogue06]

A New York Times columnist blames this whole situation on Christians, because supposedly science and religion are antithetical.

https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2020...irus-pandemic/

Simplico will undoubtedly be gleefully posting those accusations soon.

[rogue06]

From your article:

In the other proposed scenario, a non-pathogenic version of the virus jumped from an animal host into humans and then evolved to its current pathogenic state within the human population. ...

Then the other distinct spike protein characteristic of SARS-CoV-2, the cleavage site, could have evolved within a human host, possibly via limited undetected circulation in the human population prior to the beginning of the epidemic.

I kinda suspect by "population" they meant locally and not half way around the world.

[oxmixmudd]

From your article:

In the other proposed scenario, a non-pathogenic version of the virus jumped from an animal host into humans and then evolved to its current pathogenic state within the human population. ...

Then the other distinct spike protein characteristic of SARS-CoV-2, the cleavage site, could have evolved within a human host, possibly via limited undetected circulation in the human population prior to the beginning of the epidemic.

Indeed. Keeping in mind that is one of two scenarios offered, and not necessarily the most likely scenario.

But to be undetected, it would be asymptomatic or nearly so - not something with a 1% kill rate. That element of it evolved in a specific area and spread from there in both proposed scenarios.

Keep in mind that is one possible scenario of two offered. The other does not allow for pre wuhan spread of the virus in the human population.

Further, there is no evidence of spread outside china of anything like some asymptomatic predecessor in the human population prior to Wuhan.

[rogue06]

It makes you wonder, if President Trump is really as bad as liberals say he is, then why do to they have to keep telling lies in an attempt to make him look bad?

I've noted previously and on other subjects than those about Trump that when you find it necessary to support your position by fabricating and spreading falsehoods you are tacitly admitting that your position is unfounded or has little merit.

[oxmixmudd]

I've noted previously and on other subjects than those about Trump that when you find it necessary to support your position by fabricating and spreading falsehoods you are tacitly admitting that your position is unfounded or has little merit.

Do you realize you just said 95% of Trump's positions are unfounded and have little merit.

[Mountain Man]

Do you realize you just said 95% of Trump's positions are unfounded and have little merit.

Reading comprehension fail.

[Juvenal]

And yet incontrovertibly true.

This isn't helpful, either.

Even if it were true.

[One Bad Pig]

Reading comprehension fail.

Actually, no. He's insinuating that Trump "find[s] it necessary to support [his] position by fabricating and spreading falsehoods." Just more of his usual schtick.

[rogue06]

This isn't helpful, either.

Even if it were true.

So in your view truth isn't helpful?

[demi-conservative]

R0 and fatality rates are not biological constants

It's clear that risk of death increases with certain preexisting conditions. This means that fatality rates are not constant, they are going to be different for different countries, and could explain why outcomes are different in different countries, eg some countries have more diabetes cases, some have more heart problems, etc.

[NorrinRadd]

If it was the coronavirus last fall or winter, then how much the Chinese covered up since late December didn't matter much. If the mild cases are so mistakable for flu, it would have spread to half the countries before the Chinese noticed that something was significantly different and decided to figure it out.

We already know there are at least two strains extant -- "S" and "L" -- with one (I forget which) apparently being more virulent. Do we know with any certainty which came first? Are we sure the relatively milder one was not already in circulation in Nov. or Dec. and mistaken for "common" flu?

[NorrinRadd]

...
So yeah, this is good news if we can achieve and maintain suppression until there's a vaccine.

If "suppression" means "shutdown" for several months, let alone the 18 months needed to achieve a vaccine, it's not possible.

[simplicio]

We already know there are at least two strains extant -- "S" and "L" -- with one (I forget which) apparently being more virulent. Do we know with any certainty which came first? Are we sure the relatively milder one was not already in circulation in Nov. or Dec. and mistaken for "common" flu?

Actually, there are eight strains, and no strain seems to be less dangerous than others. One thing identifying those strains has allowed us is to determine where in the world the various outbreaks came from, which set of travelers brought them in.

If "suppression" means "shutdown" for several months, let alone the 18 months needed to achieve a vaccine, it's not possible.

Suppression does not mean shutdown.

We are faced with the shutdown because of the lack of testing, countries with testing capability are able to tailor the response to the changing conditions of the epidemic.

[Juvenal]

Do you have a source for this? I'd love to look at it.

Thanks!

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...eport-March-16