4 ms·

Those all involve the virus reaching the host. The virus can't "evolve" its way around not reaching the host very well. Evolution isn't magic. The virus can't

by jerf 6y ago

Those all involve the virus reaching the host. The virus can't "evolve" its way around not reaching the host very well. Evolution isn't magic. The virus can't "evolve" teleportation or an immunity to high-energy electromagnetic radiation just because it would be really useful to it if it could. It can't just "evolve" its way around masks very well. As I said, bacteria have at least more options, though they face the same physical constraints everything else in the universe does. Viruses don't really have many options. They are very simple.

dehrmann 6y ago
> The virus can't "evolve" its way around not reaching the host very well. That's what "becoming more contagious" is. Obviously, no one in a submarine is getting it until it docks, but when you're dealing with 95% effective masks, tests that have a 20% false negative rate, and surfaces not being an effective vector, there are still plenty of opportunities to reach the host, and we're selecting for viruses that were able to. Someone else mentioned measles; sars-cov2 is nowhere near that contagious, but it means there's room for it to get worse.
- lazide 6y ago
  Most of the masks people are wearing are also nowhere near 95% effective - cloth masks are more like 70%. Helpful, yes! Solid protection? Far from it. COVID-19 had a measured replication rate before measures were taken in NYC of ~ 6. Measles is ~ 11 (and the most infectious known airborne virus). New variants are supposed to be between 50-70% more infectious than 'baseline' COVID, though it isn't clear how solid that data is, or how exactly it is being computed. That could put it at a 'with no social changes/baseline behaviour in manhattan' at a replication rate of ~9 to ~10. Which is damn close to measles. Lockdowns, social distancing, face masks will reduce this quite a bit in reality (and have - the measured R value is in the 1.1-1.2ish range in most areas now) - but increases in infectivity will require stepping up countermeasures to contain it, or a massive rollout in vaccines to stamp it out before a variant that the vaccine doesn't prevent against exists.

by jerf 6y ago

dehrmann 6y ago

> The virus can't "evolve" its way around not reaching the host very well. That's what "becoming more contagious" is. Obviously, no one in a submarine is getting it until it docks, but when you're dealing with 95% effective masks, tests that have a 20% false negative rate, and surfaces not being an effective vector, there are still plenty of opportunities to reach the host, and we're selecting for viruses that were able to. Someone else mentioned measles; sars-cov2 is nowhere near that contagious, but it means there's room for it to get worse.

lazide 6y ago
Most of the masks people are wearing are also nowhere near 95% effective - cloth masks are more like 70%. Helpful, yes! Solid protection? Far from it. COVID-19 had a measured replication rate before measures were taken in NYC of ~ 6. Measles is ~ 11 (and the most infectious known airborne virus). New variants are supposed to be between 50-70% more infectious than 'baseline' COVID, though it isn't clear how solid that data is, or how exactly it is being computed. That could put it at a 'with no social changes/baseline behaviour in manhattan' at a replication rate of ~9 to ~10. Which is damn close to measles. Lockdowns, social distancing, face masks will reduce this quite a bit in reality (and have - the measured R value is in the 1.1-1.2ish range in most areas now) - but increases in infectivity will require stepping up countermeasures to contain it, or a massive rollout in vaccines to stamp it out before a variant that the vaccine doesn't prevent against exists.