9 ms·

How Bad Is Omicron?

46 points by digital55 5y ago

okareaman 5y ago
They buried the lead somewhat > Omicron can infect 3 to 6 times as many people as Delta, over the same time period That's ominous if true
- bigyellow 5y ago
  According to "Tom Wenseleers, an evolutionary biologist at KU-Leuven in Belgium [who like all people is trying to make a name and reputation for themselves, and reluctantly recognizes the competitive nature of academia and the need for using hyperbole to stay competitive in that marketplace of ideas]" (Emphasis mine). Bring on the downvotes, folks. I know we all want to take part in the "sky is falling narrative" but hopefully this will help you wake up, especially if what I said has you triggered.
- tasogare 5y ago
  Following that German minister's line of thinking that stated "by the end of this winter pretty much everyone in Germany will be vaccinated, recovered or dead" it's a really good news to expend quickly the second category. The sooner everyone will have antibodies, be it from natural immunity or paid one, the sooner society can stop revolving around saving a few months of life of a bunch of elderly at the expense of everything else.
  - tehjoker 5y ago
    The more infections there are the more variants and more fit variants there are. Only a zero COVID policy with global technology sharing will realistically end this.
    - tasogare 5y ago
      No. Also it's kinda over already, save for the media fearmongering. It's ridiculous to expect 0 death worldwide for any disease. We have to accept a few people will die of it from times to times, just like it is with the flu (which is targeting the same population anyway so nothing really changed).
      - tehjoker 5y ago
        Assuming you live in the US, that is the kind of thing a person living in the country with the most deaths in the world would say.
        chrononaut 5y ago
        > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. > Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
        tehjoker 5y ago
        Tone policing someone protesting a call for millions of deaths is really something.
      - Klinky 5y ago
        There's still more than "a few" people dying "from time to time", so even by your metric, it is not over, or anywhere near over.
        AtlasBarfed 5y ago
        Yes, about 300,000 americans (taking us over 1 million deaths) will probably die in the next four-five months given the current numbers. Definitely not a few. We were on the downslide of the third big bump of COVID deaths per worldometers, but let's face it, there's going to be a big fourth even without Omicron from the infections from far less restrained Xmas/Thanksgiving get togethers. I hope I'm wrong...
        rswail 5y ago
        A large chunk of those deaths is due to the lack of urgency to get people vaccinated, as well as, somehow, your political allegiance deciding whether you get vaccinated, stop spreading disease by mask usage etc. The US is one of the worst examples of COVID response, both during Trump's era and the post-Trump/QAnon/Fox/OAN/etc spread of bullshit propaganda. It's not Xmas/Thanksgiving that's the issue, it's the lack of following logical safety and vaccination measures, somehow tied to "freedom" without considering the "general welfare".
    - creato 5y ago
      Plenty of pandemics have come and gone, this one will pass too, and global technology sharing or not will probably have a negligible impact on that timeline. How many times have we seen a region or country held up as a model for success for whatever reason (lockdowns, vaccines, etc.) only to be a hotspot months later? Just get vaccinated, avoid crowded poorly ventilated places, stop trying to herd 7 billion cats, and move on with your life.
      - BbzzbB 5y ago
        >Plenty of pandemics have come and gone Honest question, how does this one go away on the timescale of a few years to a decade (or, worst case in what truly interests us, a generation)? Couldn't seem to find an answer on pubmed or scholar when I looked, I'm jabbed and have been mindful this whole time but my logic tells me that is not happening. We'd have to get it's R0 low enough that it disappears before mutating a variant that escapes immunity (if that is even necessary given the likelihood of impermanent immunity, at least partial). Is that possible barring a new type of vaccine that entirely prevents infection and reinfection for which we'd have to get full planetary coverage of in time?
        nradov 5y ago
        SARS-CoV-2 will never disappear. While the vaccines are pretty good at preventing deaths they don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. Even if we had more effective vaccines, the virus stll spreads and mutates in other animal species. There is no real risk that a new variant will completely evade immunity from previous infections. Nothing is 100%. Over the long run it will probably play out similar to the previous coronavirus pandemic. Fortunately this time we have vaccines and other treatments which can prevent most deaths. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/
      - didibus 5y ago
        > Plenty of pandemics have come and gone, this one will pass too A lot of them lasted for centuries. People would get it and play the lottery, maybe 3 in 10 would die, the rest develop immunity for example. Most pandemics either end because too many people die, and you're only left with the immune survivors, like the plague. Or they end because of improvement to public health and sanitary practices. Vaccines ended smallpox, condoms and awareness reduced AIDS impact, better water sanitization ended cholera, even the plague ended with help by quarantine and lockdowns. I'm not sure how this one will end, but they almost never "just end" magically. Either some level of herd immunity is achieved, for example by having everyone have it very quickly, and being left with only immune survivors, or the spread is contained through public measures, or immunity is achieved through vaccination, or a drug to cure it is found.
    - nradov 5y ago
      A zero COVID policy is impossible. While the vaccines a pretty good at preventing deaths they don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. The virus is also spread by animals.
  - zuminator 5y ago
    Maybe you missed the news that naturally acquired antibodies aren't necessarily effective against further variants.[0] I wouldn't be so glib about hoping that millions get infected. If it turns out that Omicron is decidedly less deadly than the prior mutations, that of itself will shape policy decisions toward fewer restrictions. But if it's as deadly or more deadly, our best option is for a slow spread so we have time to revise our treatments as needed without unnecessary loss of life. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/world/africa/virus-omicron-variant-reinfection.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/world/africa/virus-omicro...
    - unmole 5y ago
      Prior Infection Is Little Defense Against Virus Variant, Scientists Say claims the NYT based on a study that found thet 2.7% of subjects might have been reinfected.
    - peteradio 5y ago
      From where does NYT derive that conclusion?
    - sliken 5y ago
      I follow medcram on youtube, he's a doctor and dives into COVID related topics. He gives his opinion, and provides sources on the papers he references. Generally the research presented made a case that getting COVID provided better protection than the vaccines, until Delta. Similarly Omicron seems to have a higher breakthrough rate for vaccinated folks than the previous variants.
  - benjaminwootton 5y ago
    Predictable downvotes, but you are right that the sooner we lose the unwinnable war the better.
    - wesleywt 5y ago
      Predictable uninformed comment.
- r721 5y ago
  I think this was meant as "Omicron can infect 3 to 6 times as many people as Delta [considering that a lot of people already have immunity to Delta]", this chart was enlightening for me: >Under a scenario of 90% population immunity against previous variants, we get the following picture where Omicron could lie anywhere along the dashed line ranging from an intrinsic R0 of 3 and 83% immune escape to an intrinsic R0 of 9 and 20% immune escape. https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1466076797670363140 https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1466076797670363140
- playcache 5y ago
  Is it really though, if it's less lethal? With covid we need to move beyond infection rates and just focus on deaths and really start getting ready for the long haul as its not going anywhere and we will never beat covid. Every year will see a new variant, as much the same as every flu virus before it.
  - johnchristopher 5y ago
    If you want to have the same ratio of deaths then it has to be much much milder. But furin cleavage and all that. Not happening apparently. And then you have long debilitating covid. If it's not gone - unlikely - then it's most likely worse. Warning, I just follow some Twitter accounts. But some scientists who have a good track record with their comments on covid since it started are very much concerned.
- phist_mcgee 5y ago
  *lede
bigyellow 5y ago
The short answer: as bad as Pfizer–BioNtech say it is.
taurath 5y ago
Cliff note: wait and see. Transmissibility and/or ability to punch through immunity may be higher. Severity may be lower. We don’t know by how much overall. We should all be hoping that severity takes a hit.
- notacoward 5y ago
  I've seen the theory that the only real endgame for COVID in the face of variants, hesitancy, etc. is a variant that outcompetes others but causes only mild symptoms. This would follow the pattern of the 1918 ("Spanish" but should really be "Kansas") flu. I don't want to downplay it, but it almost seems like omicron is a step in that direction. Keeping my fingers crossed, for sure.
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    Do they know how many years from 1918 it took before it got to be the normal (still quite lethal for compromised immune systems) flu?
    - notacoward 5y ago
      The main part of the pandemic included three waves over almost exactly two years, starting in April 1917. There were "aftershocks" in 1920-21 but those were clearly less virulent strains. OTOH, similar/related H1N1 strains continue to reach concerning levels every few years even today.
      - Jansen312 5y ago
        We are now slightly over 2 years (if counted with spread starting in Wuhan since early Oct 2019 - or possibily as early as Sep).
  - nradov 5y ago
    Influenza mutates in ways quite different from coronaviruses so there's no reason to expect that the current pandemic will proceed like the 1918 "Spanish" flu. A better analogy would probably be the 1889 pandemic which is now suspected to have been caused by another coronavirus HCoV-OC43. It probably killed millions worldwide and then the survivors had natural immunity which mostly protected them. Today HCoV-OC43 is still endemic. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ Fortunately we now have vaccines and other treatments which can significantly reduce the death toll.
GenerocUsername 5y ago
Travelers. Do not click. They have no answers and are baiting with fear.
- codevark 5y ago
  Thank you, father. The stars are right. Let us proceed to the reef tonight.
- diveanon 5y ago
  Thanks, postponed some travel plans to SEAsia today because I don't want to get stuck there again amid lockdowns / travel bans.
acwan93 5y ago
Wasn't there news about how as a virus mutates over time it becomes less severe, but more transmissible? Something about where the virus just wants its host to live long enough to transmit the virus to someone else so it can continue passing its genetic data over. It seems like Omicron could be following this pattern. If you have too severe of a virus, then all its hosts are killed and it can't live on. Too weak of a virus and the host's immune systems will kill it before it has a chance to transmit.
- senectus1 5y ago
  >If you have too severe of a virus, then all its hosts are killed and it can't live on. Ever played "Plague Inc" ? Its a fascicle way to show how this model is unlikely to play itself out in todays hyper mobile population.
- gonehome 5y ago
  With delta and asymptomatic transmission this wasn’t totally the case iirc. Increased viral load in the asymptomatic phase increased virality, but also increased deadliness once the symptoms started. At least that’s what I recall reading. Normally you’re correct, but it doesn’t necessarily need to be that way. Hopefully we’re lucky and it’s both way more transmissible and way less deadly, but no one knows yet.
  - tunesmith 5y ago
    Delta was more severe than the original strain, but there was some evidence indicating it was slightly less severe than Alpha (and much more transmissible than Alpha).
- irjustin 5y ago
  This is true (and hopefully so w/ Omicron) when looked at a long enough time scale. The real concern is if we're currently in the "still getting worse before it gets better" part of the timeline. We're all waiting to see how many severe hospitalizations occur w/ a large enough population.
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
pupppet 5y ago
Is COVID going to continuously mutate worse and worse forever? What’s our end-game here?
- xwdv 5y ago
  Judging by how long other viruses have been around, we will not see the end game within our lifetimes assuming no dramatic advances in life extension occur. So don’t worry about it, this is our life now.
- cheesecake_luvr 5y ago
  Lockdowns (and masks?) have shown that the spread of COVID and the 'flu can be slowed down. If governments can implement lockdowns and not cause too much harm to the population, I reckon we can beat these diseases. Edit: add masks
  - BbzzbB 5y ago
    Lockdowns by definition harm the population psychologically and economically. For merely slowing it down when it won't stop it from circulating or mutating, I don't see what the point would be by now unless we get a variant that is dramatically more dangerous than Delta and renders vaccines utterly useless which doesn't seem to be the case with this one (and even then it's a last recourse that isn't to be taken lightly).
- yosito 5y ago
  > What’s our end-game here? Get to >90% population immunity. For now, it seems that's around the level that hospitalizations and deaths are manageable.
- vbezhenar 5y ago
  It'll mutate to be better. Virus does not want to kill its host. Virus wants its host to be alive and well and just sneeze all the time, spreading virus around. That's the long time game, though, of course in the short time there could be worse kinds. Omicron seems like a step in right direction.
NicoJuicy 5y ago
A doctor mentioned to me that it's not known in the history of viruses, that a virus mutates this much and stays as deadly. So let's hope!
- ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
  Historically speaking, it isn't really deadly. Never before has a virus had a host population composed of so many people who are living despite old age, immunocompromising medical conditions, and diabetes. Even the present death rate for the untreated (at ~3%) would historically be quite weak for an epidemic. I'm not sure it would even make history books (as a "bad flu") pre-enlightenment.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    People die, it's deadly. The statement remains.
    - nkellenicki 5y ago
      "deadly" is not the same statement as "as deadly".
      - NicoJuicy 5y ago
        I'm not replying on my own comment. I'm replying on his definition of deadly. The statement used as deadly and indeed wasn't affected by it. Statement remains valid ;)
    - tinus_hn 5y ago
      By that measure, the flu is deadly.
- yosito 5y ago
  A doctor that hasn't heard of the flu?

46 points by digital55 5y ago

They buried the lead somewhat > Omicron can infect 3 to 6 times as many people as Delta, over the same time period That's ominous if true

bigyellow 5y ago
According to "Tom Wenseleers, an evolutionary biologist at KU-Leuven in Belgium [who like all people is trying to make a name and reputation for themselves, and reluctantly recognizes the competitive nature of academia and the need for using hyperbole to stay competitive in that marketplace of ideas]" (Emphasis mine). Bring on the downvotes, folks. I know we all want to take part in the "sky is falling narrative" but hopefully this will help you wake up, especially if what I said has you triggered.
tasogare 5y ago
Following that German minister's line of thinking that stated "by the end of this winter pretty much everyone in Germany will be vaccinated, recovered or dead" it's a really good news to expend quickly the second category. The sooner everyone will have antibodies, be it from natural immunity or paid one, the sooner society can stop revolving around saving a few months of life of a bunch of elderly at the expense of everything else.
- tehjoker 5y ago
  The more infections there are the more variants and more fit variants there are. Only a zero COVID policy with global technology sharing will realistically end this.
  - tasogare 5y ago
    No. Also it's kinda over already, save for the media fearmongering. It's ridiculous to expect 0 death worldwide for any disease. We have to accept a few people will die of it from times to times, just like it is with the flu (which is targeting the same population anyway so nothing really changed).
    - tehjoker 5y ago
      Assuming you live in the US, that is the kind of thing a person living in the country with the most deaths in the world would say.
      - chrononaut 5y ago
        > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. > Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
        tehjoker 5y ago
        Tone policing someone protesting a call for millions of deaths is really something.
    - Klinky 5y ago
      There's still more than "a few" people dying "from time to time", so even by your metric, it is not over, or anywhere near over.
      - AtlasBarfed 5y ago
        Yes, about 300,000 americans (taking us over 1 million deaths) will probably die in the next four-five months given the current numbers. Definitely not a few. We were on the downslide of the third big bump of COVID deaths per worldometers, but let's face it, there's going to be a big fourth even without Omicron from the infections from far less restrained Xmas/Thanksgiving get togethers. I hope I'm wrong...
        rswail 5y ago
        A large chunk of those deaths is due to the lack of urgency to get people vaccinated, as well as, somehow, your political allegiance deciding whether you get vaccinated, stop spreading disease by mask usage etc. The US is one of the worst examples of COVID response, both during Trump's era and the post-Trump/QAnon/Fox/OAN/etc spread of bullshit propaganda. It's not Xmas/Thanksgiving that's the issue, it's the lack of following logical safety and vaccination measures, somehow tied to "freedom" without considering the "general welfare".
  - creato 5y ago
    Plenty of pandemics have come and gone, this one will pass too, and global technology sharing or not will probably have a negligible impact on that timeline. How many times have we seen a region or country held up as a model for success for whatever reason (lockdowns, vaccines, etc.) only to be a hotspot months later? Just get vaccinated, avoid crowded poorly ventilated places, stop trying to herd 7 billion cats, and move on with your life.
    - BbzzbB 5y ago
      >Plenty of pandemics have come and gone Honest question, how does this one go away on the timescale of a few years to a decade (or, worst case in what truly interests us, a generation)? Couldn't seem to find an answer on pubmed or scholar when I looked, I'm jabbed and have been mindful this whole time but my logic tells me that is not happening. We'd have to get it's R0 low enough that it disappears before mutating a variant that escapes immunity (if that is even necessary given the likelihood of impermanent immunity, at least partial). Is that possible barring a new type of vaccine that entirely prevents infection and reinfection for which we'd have to get full planetary coverage of in time?
      - nradov 5y ago
        SARS-CoV-2 will never disappear. While the vaccines are pretty good at preventing deaths they don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. Even if we had more effective vaccines, the virus stll spreads and mutates in other animal species. There is no real risk that a new variant will completely evade immunity from previous infections. Nothing is 100%. Over the long run it will probably play out similar to the previous coronavirus pandemic. Fortunately this time we have vaccines and other treatments which can prevent most deaths. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/
    - didibus 5y ago
      > Plenty of pandemics have come and gone, this one will pass too A lot of them lasted for centuries. People would get it and play the lottery, maybe 3 in 10 would die, the rest develop immunity for example. Most pandemics either end because too many people die, and you're only left with the immune survivors, like the plague. Or they end because of improvement to public health and sanitary practices. Vaccines ended smallpox, condoms and awareness reduced AIDS impact, better water sanitization ended cholera, even the plague ended with help by quarantine and lockdowns. I'm not sure how this one will end, but they almost never "just end" magically. Either some level of herd immunity is achieved, for example by having everyone have it very quickly, and being left with only immune survivors, or the spread is contained through public measures, or immunity is achieved through vaccination, or a drug to cure it is found.
  - nradov 5y ago
    A zero COVID policy is impossible. While the vaccines a pretty good at preventing deaths they don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. The virus is also spread by animals.
- zuminator 5y ago
  Maybe you missed the news that naturally acquired antibodies aren't necessarily effective against further variants.[0] I wouldn't be so glib about hoping that millions get infected. If it turns out that Omicron is decidedly less deadly than the prior mutations, that of itself will shape policy decisions toward fewer restrictions. But if it's as deadly or more deadly, our best option is for a slow spread so we have time to revise our treatments as needed without unnecessary loss of life. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/world/africa/virus-omicron-variant-reinfection.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/world/africa/virus-omicro...
  - unmole 5y ago
    Prior Infection Is Little Defense Against Virus Variant, Scientists Say claims the NYT based on a study that found thet 2.7% of subjects might have been reinfected.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    From where does NYT derive that conclusion?
  - sliken 5y ago
    I follow medcram on youtube, he's a doctor and dives into COVID related topics. He gives his opinion, and provides sources on the papers he references. Generally the research presented made a case that getting COVID provided better protection than the vaccines, until Delta. Similarly Omicron seems to have a higher breakthrough rate for vaccinated folks than the previous variants.
- benjaminwootton 5y ago
  Predictable downvotes, but you are right that the sooner we lose the unwinnable war the better.
  - wesleywt 5y ago
    Predictable uninformed comment.
r721 5y ago
I think this was meant as "Omicron can infect 3 to 6 times as many people as Delta [considering that a lot of people already have immunity to Delta]", this chart was enlightening for me: >Under a scenario of 90% population immunity against previous variants, we get the following picture where Omicron could lie anywhere along the dashed line ranging from an intrinsic R0 of 3 and 83% immune escape to an intrinsic R0 of 9 and 20% immune escape. https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1466076797670363140 https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1466076797670363140
playcache 5y ago
Is it really though, if it's less lethal? With covid we need to move beyond infection rates and just focus on deaths and really start getting ready for the long haul as its not going anywhere and we will never beat covid. Every year will see a new variant, as much the same as every flu virus before it.
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  If you want to have the same ratio of deaths then it has to be much much milder. But furin cleavage and all that. Not happening apparently. And then you have long debilitating covid. If it's not gone - unlikely - then it's most likely worse. Warning, I just follow some Twitter accounts. But some scientists who have a good track record with their comments on covid since it started are very much concerned.
phist_mcgee 5y ago
*lede

bigyellow 5y ago

The short answer: as bad as Pfizer–BioNtech say it is.

taurath 5y ago

Cliff note: wait and see. Transmissibility and/or ability to punch through immunity may be higher. Severity may be lower. We don’t know by how much overall. We should all be hoping that severity takes a hit.

notacoward 5y ago
I've seen the theory that the only real endgame for COVID in the face of variants, hesitancy, etc. is a variant that outcompetes others but causes only mild symptoms. This would follow the pattern of the 1918 ("Spanish" but should really be "Kansas") flu. I don't want to downplay it, but it almost seems like omicron is a step in that direction. Keeping my fingers crossed, for sure.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  Do they know how many years from 1918 it took before it got to be the normal (still quite lethal for compromised immune systems) flu?
  - notacoward 5y ago
    The main part of the pandemic included three waves over almost exactly two years, starting in April 1917. There were "aftershocks" in 1920-21 but those were clearly less virulent strains. OTOH, similar/related H1N1 strains continue to reach concerning levels every few years even today.
    - Jansen312 5y ago
      We are now slightly over 2 years (if counted with spread starting in Wuhan since early Oct 2019 - or possibily as early as Sep).
- nradov 5y ago
  Influenza mutates in ways quite different from coronaviruses so there's no reason to expect that the current pandemic will proceed like the 1918 "Spanish" flu. A better analogy would probably be the 1889 pandemic which is now suspected to have been caused by another coronavirus HCoV-OC43. It probably killed millions worldwide and then the survivors had natural immunity which mostly protected them. Today HCoV-OC43 is still endemic. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/ Fortunately we now have vaccines and other treatments which can significantly reduce the death toll.

GenerocUsername 5y ago

Travelers. Do not click. They have no answers and are baiting with fear.

codevark 5y ago
Thank you, father. The stars are right. Let us proceed to the reef tonight.
diveanon 5y ago
Thanks, postponed some travel plans to SEAsia today because I don't want to get stuck there again amid lockdowns / travel bans.

acwan93 5y ago

Wasn't there news about how as a virus mutates over time it becomes less severe, but more transmissible? Something about where the virus just wants its host to live long enough to transmit the virus to someone else so it can continue passing its genetic data over. It seems like Omicron could be following this pattern. If you have too severe of a virus, then all its hosts are killed and it can't live on. Too weak of a virus and the host's immune systems will kill it before it has a chance to transmit.

senectus1 5y ago
>If you have too severe of a virus, then all its hosts are killed and it can't live on. Ever played "Plague Inc" ? Its a fascicle way to show how this model is unlikely to play itself out in todays hyper mobile population.
gonehome 5y ago
With delta and asymptomatic transmission this wasn’t totally the case iirc. Increased viral load in the asymptomatic phase increased virality, but also increased deadliness once the symptoms started. At least that’s what I recall reading. Normally you’re correct, but it doesn’t necessarily need to be that way. Hopefully we’re lucky and it’s both way more transmissible and way less deadly, but no one knows yet.
- tunesmith 5y ago
  Delta was more severe than the original strain, but there was some evidence indicating it was slightly less severe than Alpha (and much more transmissible than Alpha).
irjustin 5y ago
This is true (and hopefully so w/ Omicron) when looked at a long enough time scale. The real concern is if we're currently in the "still getting worse before it gets better" part of the timeline. We're all waiting to see how many severe hospitalizations occur w/ a large enough population.
UncleOxidant 5y ago

pupppet 5y ago

Is COVID going to continuously mutate worse and worse forever? What’s our end-game here?

xwdv 5y ago
Judging by how long other viruses have been around, we will not see the end game within our lifetimes assuming no dramatic advances in life extension occur. So don’t worry about it, this is our life now.
cheesecake_luvr 5y ago
Lockdowns (and masks?) have shown that the spread of COVID and the 'flu can be slowed down. If governments can implement lockdowns and not cause too much harm to the population, I reckon we can beat these diseases. Edit: add masks
- BbzzbB 5y ago
  Lockdowns by definition harm the population psychologically and economically. For merely slowing it down when it won't stop it from circulating or mutating, I don't see what the point would be by now unless we get a variant that is dramatically more dangerous than Delta and renders vaccines utterly useless which doesn't seem to be the case with this one (and even then it's a last recourse that isn't to be taken lightly).
yosito 5y ago
> What’s our end-game here? Get to >90% population immunity. For now, it seems that's around the level that hospitalizations and deaths are manageable.
vbezhenar 5y ago
It'll mutate to be better. Virus does not want to kill its host. Virus wants its host to be alive and well and just sneeze all the time, spreading virus around. That's the long time game, though, of course in the short time there could be worse kinds. Omicron seems like a step in right direction.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

A doctor mentioned to me that it's not known in the history of viruses, that a virus mutates this much and stays as deadly. So let's hope!

ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
Historically speaking, it isn't really deadly. Never before has a virus had a host population composed of so many people who are living despite old age, immunocompromising medical conditions, and diabetes. Even the present death rate for the untreated (at ~3%) would historically be quite weak for an epidemic. I'm not sure it would even make history books (as a "bad flu") pre-enlightenment.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  People die, it's deadly. The statement remains.
  - nkellenicki 5y ago
    "deadly" is not the same statement as "as deadly".
    - NicoJuicy 5y ago
      I'm not replying on my own comment. I'm replying on his definition of deadly. The statement used as deadly and indeed wasn't affected by it. Statement remains valid ;)
  - tinus_hn 5y ago
    By that measure, the flu is deadly.
yosito 5y ago
A doctor that hasn't heard of the flu?