11 ms·

Re: #3, so if you go all the way back to the original strain: Potentially animal > human > animal > omicron in humans. Like, a continuous mixing and mashing fe

Re: #3, so if you go all the way back to the original strain: Potentially animal > human > animal > omicron in humans. Like, a continuous mixing and mashing feedback loop. If nothing else, the variants occurring in real time right before our very eyes should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp.

tw04 5y ago
>If nothing else, the variants occurring in real time right before our very eyes should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp. I don't think the issue of evolution has ever been a question of people grasping the science. The issue has and continues to be the resolution of its conflict with their faith. Some have found a way through that mental obstacle course, but most have not.
- xaduha 5y ago
  Scary number of people, not even of religious sort, think that it's perfectly fine to pick and choose which parts of scientific achievement they accept and which they don't. It's more on the scale of what they like or don't like. They might like their smartphones and other gadgets, not so much vaccines, fluoride, GMO, all that which isn't 'natural' or 'organic'. So yes, it is a question of people grasping the science, not of this specifically, but as a whole. They are not on-board, they never fully confront any contradictions that they encounter or spew. Logic is not their friend, they are not inquisitive, getting to the bottom of something is not in their nature. You might think that in general people are reasonable, but margins are not that high and informed-ness is very surface-level.
  - gmac 5y ago
    There’s certainly some deeply unscientific thinking out there … but I don’t think your examples are good ones. It’s reasonable to dislike GMOs (or some subset of them) because of who’s selling them and why, unrelated to the science. It’s reasonable to argue against fluoridated water even while accepting it’s good for dental health, because you disagree with mass medication. It’s reasonable to buy organic food if you know it to be free of certain chemicals which, knowing their scientific characteristics, you would rather avoid.
    - xaduha 5y ago
      Problem is that people I'm talking about can't divorce not liking something from accepting something as a thing. They would look for 'evidence' that it doesn't exist, harmful or a product of a conspiracy. They don't use scientific method, they are not looking for facts, they are looking for confirmation of their preconceived notions using biased search engine queries or by hanging around in their bubbles. People like that don't have a habit of changing their opinions, that's who I'm talking about.
      - gmac 5y ago
        > People like that don't have a habit of changing their opinions, that's who I'm talking about. I think this is a pithy description of human beings. :) Of course, it's a habit we'd all do well to do out best to develop.
  - jackTheMan 5y ago
    It is absolutely scientifically ok to reject GMO, since they decrease variety and after x years of abundance in a year a superbug can destroy it all. In case of GMO it is a play with the unknown (health, stability), it is a risk against a somewhat cheaper food. In case of vaccine it is still a play with unknown, but there the risk is against another risk not just money. If the virus would be less deadly much less people would have taken it. And the other way around as well, would be more deadly people would queue up instantly. It is not as black and white as you describe. stupid vs smart people as you say it. And by the way, this is called common smartness. Everybody is susceptible for different thing everybody is resistant to different things so the whole word is hard to take on.
- hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
  > The issue has and continues to be the resolution of its conflict with their faith. Some have found a way through that mental obstacle course, but most have not. This baffles me. I believe most Christian religions(definitely Catholics and most Protestants) embraced the evolution decades ago. So who is debating it and why?
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    Not sure if they constitute "most protestants" but the majority of so called evangelical christians are quite hostile to the scientific reality of evolution.
    - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
      Ah now I see. It looks like the Fundamentalist–Modernist controversy is an US thing - it's unusual to find Protestants in Europe that would reject the evolution.
mrkstu 5y ago
Which is pretty much how we end up w/new flu variants out of China ever year, correct?
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  That’s not how it works. We basically guess what the US flu will be by what is “popular” in Asia or Southern Hemisphere, we figure in about 6 months or so it’ll be in the US. I have no idea how Europe or Rest Of World makes flu vaccine guesses. Guess what though? They do the same. What is “popular” in the west MAY be popular in Asia in a few months. The flu game is constantly a best guess of what others saw months ago.
  - lukevdp 5y ago
    The flu is seasonal, so the northern hemisphere looks at what flu is in the Southern Hemisphere during their flu season and vice versa.
  - dnautics 5y ago
    We seem to have been increasingly getting bad at that guessing game... Thankfully coronavirus put the kaibosh on the flu at least in the short term, so if it was the flu pangenome making a meta-evolutionary play, we may have reset that clock.
    - nradov 5y ago
      False. The seasonal influenza vaccine creators haven't been increasingly getting bad at that guessing game. Vaccine effectiveness estimates have fluctuated up and down randomly with no clear trend. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/past-seasons-estimates.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/past-seasons-estimates...
      - dnautics 5y ago
        are we looking at the same data? It's hovering around 40% with at least two duds, when it used to be in the high fifties, even 60%. Plus, this is a table of strictly "seasonal" flus. There is no clear definition of what constitutes a "seasonal" flu; If I'm not mistaken, "non-seasonal" is just a catch-all for flus that weren't part of the vaccine package.
Toxygene 5y ago
> should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp Only if the members of those communities are receptive to re-evaluating their ideas and changing their minds.
- decremental 5y ago
  A rare quality for members of any community.
rp1 5y ago
Evolution has always occurred before our eyes, e.g. antibiotic resistant bacteria. I doubt the evolution of Covid changes anyone’s opinion on evolution.
- true_religion 5y ago
  People disbelieve macro evolution. Micro evolution on the other hand is hard to disbelieve because the experiments about it can be performed in real time.
  - mikeyouse 5y ago
    I worked with a clinical pharmacist who was an ardent young-earth creationist & anti-evolution proponent who during his day job spent his time adjusting medications and dosages for patients as part of our antimicrobial resistance stewardship team. Could never quite make that click for him.
    - kirse 5y ago
      OTOH as engineers who spend a large percentage of life pouring blood and sweat into creating things, it's not a giant leap of inference to ponder that there may be a Creator for the engineering marvel we live in. I struggle with the speciation aspect of Evolution. Not hard to empirically verify in-species adaptations, but I'm still waiting to see coronavirus turn into influenza (etc)
      - cogman10 5y ago
        Where do you think covid came from in the first place? Covid won't change into the flu, that's like assuming a chicken might evolve into it's ancestors species or humans will evolve into apes. Evolution goes forward, not (or rarely) backwards. It's a completely new species that, up until 2019, did not exist in the human population. This sort of evolution happens frequently when people are in close contact with animals. Hence the reason European disease wiped out native populations but not the reverse. Also, a direct example of human evolution.
teawrecks 5y ago
Never underestimate a human's mental gymnastic ability. This is where evolution deniers draw a distinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution, arguing that "of course micro evolution happens, you can see it!" and "of course macro evolution doesn't happen, you can't see it!"
heavyset_go 5y ago
> If nothing else, the variants occurring in real time right before our very eyes should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp. I've heard people say that hurricanes and natural disasters were God punishing us, I can easily see the same logic applied to COVID. No need to rely on science for answers when a vengeful god suffices.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  Like a high order polynomial that can be fit to any historical data, but which has next to no predictive power.

tw04 5y ago

>If nothing else, the variants occurring in real time right before our very eyes should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp. I don't think the issue of evolution has ever been a question of people grasping the science. The issue has and continues to be the resolution of its conflict with their faith. Some have found a way through that mental obstacle course, but most have not.

xaduha 5y ago
Scary number of people, not even of religious sort, think that it's perfectly fine to pick and choose which parts of scientific achievement they accept and which they don't. It's more on the scale of what they like or don't like. They might like their smartphones and other gadgets, not so much vaccines, fluoride, GMO, all that which isn't 'natural' or 'organic'. So yes, it is a question of people grasping the science, not of this specifically, but as a whole. They are not on-board, they never fully confront any contradictions that they encounter or spew. Logic is not their friend, they are not inquisitive, getting to the bottom of something is not in their nature. You might think that in general people are reasonable, but margins are not that high and informed-ness is very surface-level.
- gmac 5y ago
  There’s certainly some deeply unscientific thinking out there … but I don’t think your examples are good ones. It’s reasonable to dislike GMOs (or some subset of them) because of who’s selling them and why, unrelated to the science. It’s reasonable to argue against fluoridated water even while accepting it’s good for dental health, because you disagree with mass medication. It’s reasonable to buy organic food if you know it to be free of certain chemicals which, knowing their scientific characteristics, you would rather avoid.
  - xaduha 5y ago
    Problem is that people I'm talking about can't divorce not liking something from accepting something as a thing. They would look for 'evidence' that it doesn't exist, harmful or a product of a conspiracy. They don't use scientific method, they are not looking for facts, they are looking for confirmation of their preconceived notions using biased search engine queries or by hanging around in their bubbles. People like that don't have a habit of changing their opinions, that's who I'm talking about.
    - gmac 5y ago
      > People like that don't have a habit of changing their opinions, that's who I'm talking about. I think this is a pithy description of human beings. :) Of course, it's a habit we'd all do well to do out best to develop.
- jackTheMan 5y ago
  It is absolutely scientifically ok to reject GMO, since they decrease variety and after x years of abundance in a year a superbug can destroy it all. In case of GMO it is a play with the unknown (health, stability), it is a risk against a somewhat cheaper food. In case of vaccine it is still a play with unknown, but there the risk is against another risk not just money. If the virus would be less deadly much less people would have taken it. And the other way around as well, would be more deadly people would queue up instantly. It is not as black and white as you describe. stupid vs smart people as you say it. And by the way, this is called common smartness. Everybody is susceptible for different thing everybody is resistant to different things so the whole word is hard to take on.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
> The issue has and continues to be the resolution of its conflict with their faith. Some have found a way through that mental obstacle course, but most have not. This baffles me. I believe most Christian religions(definitely Catholics and most Protestants) embraced the evolution decades ago. So who is debating it and why?
- jjeaff 5y ago
  Not sure if they constitute "most protestants" but the majority of so called evangelical christians are quite hostile to the scientific reality of evolution.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    Ah now I see. It looks like the Fundamentalist–Modernist controversy is an US thing - it's unusual to find Protestants in Europe that would reject the evolution.

mrkstu 5y ago

Which is pretty much how we end up w/new flu variants out of China ever year, correct?

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
That’s not how it works. We basically guess what the US flu will be by what is “popular” in Asia or Southern Hemisphere, we figure in about 6 months or so it’ll be in the US. I have no idea how Europe or Rest Of World makes flu vaccine guesses. Guess what though? They do the same. What is “popular” in the west MAY be popular in Asia in a few months. The flu game is constantly a best guess of what others saw months ago.
- lukevdp 5y ago
  The flu is seasonal, so the northern hemisphere looks at what flu is in the Southern Hemisphere during their flu season and vice versa.
- dnautics 5y ago
  We seem to have been increasingly getting bad at that guessing game... Thankfully coronavirus put the kaibosh on the flu at least in the short term, so if it was the flu pangenome making a meta-evolutionary play, we may have reset that clock.
  - nradov 5y ago
    False. The seasonal influenza vaccine creators haven't been increasingly getting bad at that guessing game. Vaccine effectiveness estimates have fluctuated up and down randomly with no clear trend. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/past-seasons-estimates.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/past-seasons-estimates...
    - dnautics 5y ago
      are we looking at the same data? It's hovering around 40% with at least two duds, when it used to be in the high fifties, even 60%. Plus, this is a table of strictly "seasonal" flus. There is no clear definition of what constitutes a "seasonal" flu; If I'm not mistaken, "non-seasonal" is just a catch-all for flus that weren't part of the vaccine package.

Toxygene 5y ago

> should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp Only if the members of those communities are receptive to re-evaluating their ideas and changing their minds.

decremental 5y ago
A rare quality for members of any community.

rp1 5y ago

Evolution has always occurred before our eyes, e.g. antibiotic resistant bacteria. I doubt the evolution of Covid changes anyone’s opinion on evolution.

true_religion 5y ago
People disbelieve macro evolution. Micro evolution on the other hand is hard to disbelieve because the experiments about it can be performed in real time.
- mikeyouse 5y ago
  I worked with a clinical pharmacist who was an ardent young-earth creationist & anti-evolution proponent who during his day job spent his time adjusting medications and dosages for patients as part of our antimicrobial resistance stewardship team. Could never quite make that click for him.
  - kirse 5y ago
    OTOH as engineers who spend a large percentage of life pouring blood and sweat into creating things, it's not a giant leap of inference to ponder that there may be a Creator for the engineering marvel we live in. I struggle with the speciation aspect of Evolution. Not hard to empirically verify in-species adaptations, but I'm still waiting to see coronavirus turn into influenza (etc)
    - cogman10 5y ago
      Where do you think covid came from in the first place? Covid won't change into the flu, that's like assuming a chicken might evolve into it's ancestors species or humans will evolve into apes. Evolution goes forward, not (or rarely) backwards. It's a completely new species that, up until 2019, did not exist in the human population. This sort of evolution happens frequently when people are in close contact with animals. Hence the reason European disease wiped out native populations but not the reverse. Also, a direct example of human evolution.

teawrecks 5y ago

Never underestimate a human's mental gymnastic ability. This is where evolution deniers draw a distinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution, arguing that "of course micro evolution happens, you can see it!" and "of course macro evolution doesn't happen, you can't see it!"

heavyset_go 5y ago

> If nothing else, the variants occurring in real time right before our very eyes should make the idea of evolution a lot easier for some in various communities to finally grasp. I've heard people say that hurricanes and natural disasters were God punishing us, I can easily see the same logic applied to COVID. No need to rely on science for answers when a vengeful god suffices.

mr_toad 5y ago
Like a high order polynomial that can be fit to any historical data, but which has next to no predictive power.