7 ms·

These kind of pandemic tend to end themselves after about 20-30 months. We’re about half way there anyway.

by thepangolino 6y ago

loloquwowndueo 6y ago
Citation needed.
- 2-tpg 6y ago
  Maybe China can help with a cite. They did have a 5-6 month head start and first encountered: brain-blood barrier pass, blood cloths and brain/lung aneurisms, reinfection, patient 0, airborne COVID, effect of mask wearing, pets getting infected, and more. Too bad they don't allow the WHO full access to investigate, nor share critical information with the rest of the world, now suffering thousands of deaths. Most likely is a lab leak accident (Israel, UK, and US all said as much!). But unfortunately, the "China Virus" has become a political issue, and you won't find cites in the popular media anymore. Just articles about xenophobic conspiracy theories, and to listen to health experts when they tell you masks are not protective, go eat at China Town to show your support, don't worry about losing weight, and that vitamin D deficiency is a hoax.
  - loloquwowndueo 6y ago
    Well no, sorry - all your allegations here have zero to do with the initial “it’ll Peter out in 20-30 months” claim.
hannob 6y ago
Which other pandemic do you think is even remotely comparable to Covid-19? (All pandemics with a comparable transmission rate happened in times that simply aren't comparable to the modern world in terms of mobility, which obviously affects the way this goes.)
- ArkanExplorer 6y ago
  COVID is different because it is occurring against a backdrop of extremely aged and obese populations, in a year (2020) which followed a weak flu season (2019), and in an election year in the USA (2020) where all health decision were heavily politicised. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v... "In Sweden, the observed increase in all-cause mortality during Covid-19 was partly due to a lower than expected mortality preceding the epidemic and the observed excess mortality, was followed by a lower than expected mortality after the first Covid-19 wave. This may suggest mortality displacement." Sweden had about the same mortality spike in 2009 from Swine flu: https://swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/sweden-monthly-deaths-1851.jpg https://swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/sweden-monthly-...
  - retrac 6y ago
    Despite their hands-off measures legally, Swedes still socially distanced aggressively. The government has been encouraging people there to take active measures in a manner unlike during swine flu. So we are still comparing the spread, and damage from spread, of a virus where significant behavioural change/mitigation efforts were made, against a virus with significantly less efforts to mitigate it.
    - tinus_hn 6y ago
      Except when discussing poor results in Sweden, then its because they congregated, held events and allowed the virus to spread. I’m not buying either of these no true swedesman arguments.
      - retrac 6y ago
        There's nothing to buy. Data exists for this. Go check out Google's data on people's movements. It went down in Sweden significantly. Maybe less than elsewhere, and that's a rabbit hole you can get lost in. But I think the point stands that it is not a one to one comparison.
spicybright 6y ago
How?
- qbasic_forever 6y ago
  If we're lucky the virus mutates into a very transmissible but not very symptomatic or damaging to humans variant. It's speculated that's how the 1918 flu pandemic eventually ended.
  - simonh 6y ago
    That’s true, but before that happened it appears to have mutated into a considerably more virulent and deadly form that dominated in the second wave. COVID probably would eventually burn itself out into a less lethal form, but there’s no telling how long or rocky the road to that could be.
stormbrew 6y ago
The last pandemic with a death toll anything like (actually much worse than) COVID-19 is the still-ongoing HIV pandemic. It's entering its 40th year.
- Trasmatta 6y ago
  It's crazy to think about how HIV has killed some ~32 million people, and yet we rarely hear about it anymore. COVID probably won't even hit 4 million deaths (barring some much deadlier variant that we can't easily produce a new vaccine for).
  - monoideism 6y ago
    Yeah, but that's > 3 million over 12 months vs 32 million over 40 years, the majority before 2010. AIDS was a huge deal back when there was no treatment for it.
    - Trasmatta 6y ago
      Right, I don't mean to downplay the severity of COVID at all. It's just interesting that we generally don't hear a lot about HIV/AIDS anymore, even though there were still 690,000 deaths associated with it in 2019. I also realize that probably depends largely on where you live.
      - retsibsi 6y ago
        > I also realize that probably depends largely on where you live. Yeah, I think this can largely be explained by the usual tendency to focus on our own backyards. Google says 'nearly 13,000 people with AIDS in the United States die each year', and I assume the rate is similar in other wealthy countries. Even if we assume the full total is causally attributable to AIDS, that's significantly less than the usual toll from flu, which we also tend to treat rather casually (which isn't to say that we should).
      - jfengel 6y ago
        The treatments for HIV are incredibly effective, if you can afford them. It can even reduce your viral load to undetectable. There is a campaign that Undetectable=Untransmittable, to reduce the stigma associated with it. I have to admit I don't know if I'm comfortable with having unprotected sex with someone who had the virus, but the data says it's safe. There is also pre exposure prophylaxis, which isn't a vaccine but does dramatically reduce the risk. Between the two, the disease just isn't the problem it used to be -- assuming you can afford it. In poor counties it's still a problem.
2-tpg 6y ago
You are correct. The pandemic may end after about 20-30 months, but this novel coronavirus will stick around. It is going to be a community virus, such as the Spanish flu turned into seasonal influenza. People pushed back hard against the experts when they started talking about preparing for herd immunity and 70%+ infected. So, this messaging has become more careful. A few months later the debate will turn to this being leaky vaccines (vaccinated still shed virus, but may not get really sick). Officially, this is also: We just don't know, we are monitoring it. But all the monkeys showed shedding. Trial participants showed shedding. This is a leaky vaccine. What happened to the targeted disease, when we used a leaky vaccine in life stock can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease Edit: I'd like a single expert predicting that our current vaccines will eradicate novel coronavirus. That would prove the downvoted post wrong. You'll find many experts agreeing that novel coronavirus is going to mutate and live among humans for a long long time after the crisis is over. Facts, people.
- 1996 6y ago
  I can't believe you are getting downvoted! This is a real risk! Relevant quote: > Under normal conditions, highly virulent strains of the virus are not selected. A highly virulent strain would kill the host before the virus would have an opportunity to transmit to other potential hosts and replicate. Thus, less virulent strains are selected. These strains are virulent enough to induce symptoms but not enough to kill the host, allowing further transmission. However, the leaky vaccine changes this evolutionary pressure and permits the evolution of highly virulent strains.[12] The vaccine's inability to prevent infection and transmission allows the spread of highly virulent strains among vaccinated chickens. The fitness of the more virulent strains are increased by the vaccine. (...) > Highly virulent strains have been selected to the point that any chicken that is unvaccinated will die if infected. Other leaky vaccines are commonly used in agriculture. One vaccine in particular is the vaccine for avian influenza. Leaky vaccine use for avian influenza can select for virulent strains which could potentially be transmitted to humans.[13]
  - alkonaut 6y ago
    > This is a real risk! I never heard this discussed as a big "risk". As far as I know this was always more or less known to be the endgame and not even a dangerous outcome but the "good" scenario. Once it's an established coronavirus, it can be like the other known human coronaviruses we already have. The reason you don't die from OC43 at age 75 now is because you probably cought it a few times before that. It's not necessarily because OC43 doesn't have a high IFR at high ages. We don't know that because we don't have a large sample of it. For all we know, one or more of the existing HCOVs may have been quite a deadly disease back when it entered the population. We aren't going to exterminate SARS-COV2. Especially obvious since it's not limited to humans (present in mink, cats, primates, ...). And that's not going to be a big problem.

These kind of pandemic tend to end themselves after about 20-30 months. We’re about half way there anyway.

loloquwowndueo 6y ago

Citation needed.

2-tpg 6y ago
Maybe China can help with a cite. They did have a 5-6 month head start and first encountered: brain-blood barrier pass, blood cloths and brain/lung aneurisms, reinfection, patient 0, airborne COVID, effect of mask wearing, pets getting infected, and more. Too bad they don't allow the WHO full access to investigate, nor share critical information with the rest of the world, now suffering thousands of deaths. Most likely is a lab leak accident (Israel, UK, and US all said as much!). But unfortunately, the "China Virus" has become a political issue, and you won't find cites in the popular media anymore. Just articles about xenophobic conspiracy theories, and to listen to health experts when they tell you masks are not protective, go eat at China Town to show your support, don't worry about losing weight, and that vitamin D deficiency is a hoax.
- loloquwowndueo 6y ago
  Well no, sorry - all your allegations here have zero to do with the initial “it’ll Peter out in 20-30 months” claim.

hannob 6y ago

Which other pandemic do you think is even remotely comparable to Covid-19? (All pandemics with a comparable transmission rate happened in times that simply aren't comparable to the modern world in terms of mobility, which obviously affects the way this goes.)

ArkanExplorer 6y ago
COVID is different because it is occurring against a backdrop of extremely aged and obese populations, in a year (2020) which followed a weak flu season (2019), and in an election year in the USA (2020) where all health decision were heavily politicised. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v... "In Sweden, the observed increase in all-cause mortality during Covid-19 was partly due to a lower than expected mortality preceding the epidemic and the observed excess mortality, was followed by a lower than expected mortality after the first Covid-19 wave. This may suggest mortality displacement." Sweden had about the same mortality spike in 2009 from Swine flu: https://swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/sweden-monthly-deaths-1851.jpg https://swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/sweden-monthly-...
- retrac 6y ago
  Despite their hands-off measures legally, Swedes still socially distanced aggressively. The government has been encouraging people there to take active measures in a manner unlike during swine flu. So we are still comparing the spread, and damage from spread, of a virus where significant behavioural change/mitigation efforts were made, against a virus with significantly less efforts to mitigate it.
  - tinus_hn 6y ago
    Except when discussing poor results in Sweden, then its because they congregated, held events and allowed the virus to spread. I’m not buying either of these no true swedesman arguments.
    - retrac 6y ago
      There's nothing to buy. Data exists for this. Go check out Google's data on people's movements. It went down in Sweden significantly. Maybe less than elsewhere, and that's a rabbit hole you can get lost in. But I think the point stands that it is not a one to one comparison.

spicybright 6y ago

How?

qbasic_forever 6y ago
If we're lucky the virus mutates into a very transmissible but not very symptomatic or damaging to humans variant. It's speculated that's how the 1918 flu pandemic eventually ended.
- simonh 6y ago
  That’s true, but before that happened it appears to have mutated into a considerably more virulent and deadly form that dominated in the second wave. COVID probably would eventually burn itself out into a less lethal form, but there’s no telling how long or rocky the road to that could be.

stormbrew 6y ago

The last pandemic with a death toll anything like (actually much worse than) COVID-19 is the still-ongoing HIV pandemic. It's entering its 40th year.

Trasmatta 6y ago
It's crazy to think about how HIV has killed some ~32 million people, and yet we rarely hear about it anymore. COVID probably won't even hit 4 million deaths (barring some much deadlier variant that we can't easily produce a new vaccine for).
- monoideism 6y ago
  Yeah, but that's > 3 million over 12 months vs 32 million over 40 years, the majority before 2010. AIDS was a huge deal back when there was no treatment for it.
  - Trasmatta 6y ago
    Right, I don't mean to downplay the severity of COVID at all. It's just interesting that we generally don't hear a lot about HIV/AIDS anymore, even though there were still 690,000 deaths associated with it in 2019. I also realize that probably depends largely on where you live.
    - retsibsi 6y ago
      > I also realize that probably depends largely on where you live. Yeah, I think this can largely be explained by the usual tendency to focus on our own backyards. Google says 'nearly 13,000 people with AIDS in the United States die each year', and I assume the rate is similar in other wealthy countries. Even if we assume the full total is causally attributable to AIDS, that's significantly less than the usual toll from flu, which we also tend to treat rather casually (which isn't to say that we should).
    - jfengel 6y ago
      The treatments for HIV are incredibly effective, if you can afford them. It can even reduce your viral load to undetectable. There is a campaign that Undetectable=Untransmittable, to reduce the stigma associated with it. I have to admit I don't know if I'm comfortable with having unprotected sex with someone who had the virus, but the data says it's safe. There is also pre exposure prophylaxis, which isn't a vaccine but does dramatically reduce the risk. Between the two, the disease just isn't the problem it used to be -- assuming you can afford it. In poor counties it's still a problem.

2-tpg 6y ago

You are correct. The pandemic may end after about 20-30 months, but this novel coronavirus will stick around. It is going to be a community virus, such as the Spanish flu turned into seasonal influenza. People pushed back hard against the experts when they started talking about preparing for herd immunity and 70%+ infected. So, this messaging has become more careful. A few months later the debate will turn to this being leaky vaccines (vaccinated still shed virus, but may not get really sick). Officially, this is also: We just don't know, we are monitoring it. But all the monkeys showed shedding. Trial participants showed shedding. This is a leaky vaccine. What happened to the targeted disease, when we used a leaky vaccine in life stock can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease Edit: I'd like a single expert predicting that our current vaccines will eradicate novel coronavirus. That would prove the downvoted post wrong. You'll find many experts agreeing that novel coronavirus is going to mutate and live among humans for a long long time after the crisis is over. Facts, people.

1996 6y ago
I can't believe you are getting downvoted! This is a real risk! Relevant quote: > Under normal conditions, highly virulent strains of the virus are not selected. A highly virulent strain would kill the host before the virus would have an opportunity to transmit to other potential hosts and replicate. Thus, less virulent strains are selected. These strains are virulent enough to induce symptoms but not enough to kill the host, allowing further transmission. However, the leaky vaccine changes this evolutionary pressure and permits the evolution of highly virulent strains.[12] The vaccine's inability to prevent infection and transmission allows the spread of highly virulent strains among vaccinated chickens. The fitness of the more virulent strains are increased by the vaccine. (...) > Highly virulent strains have been selected to the point that any chicken that is unvaccinated will die if infected. Other leaky vaccines are commonly used in agriculture. One vaccine in particular is the vaccine for avian influenza. Leaky vaccine use for avian influenza can select for virulent strains which could potentially be transmitted to humans.[13]
- alkonaut 6y ago
  > This is a real risk! I never heard this discussed as a big "risk". As far as I know this was always more or less known to be the endgame and not even a dangerous outcome but the "good" scenario. Once it's an established coronavirus, it can be like the other known human coronaviruses we already have. The reason you don't die from OC43 at age 75 now is because you probably cought it a few times before that. It's not necessarily because OC43 doesn't have a high IFR at high ages. We don't know that because we don't have a large sample of it. For all we know, one or more of the existing HCOVs may have been quite a deadly disease back when it entered the population. We aren't going to exterminate SARS-COV2. Especially obvious since it's not limited to humans (present in mink, cats, primates, ...). And that's not going to be a big problem.