Coronavirus Thread V: A Shot in the Arm (READ OP)

[Salandriagado]

Official case numbers at that point had no relationship to actual case numbers. They were functionally just a graph of how much testing was happening.

Ironic you shoudl say that, since America has tested tens of millions of people, much higher than the people tested in the nations with the same rate of testing per thousand on this website https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing .

I don't know what point you think that supports, but it doesn't.

[Salandriagado]

We have tested more people, but our testing rate is lower because those nations are much smaller than ours.

America hasn't done nearly enough testing. That's why over 10,000 people caught covid in one day in Florida and 216 died.

If you look at the map I was referring to in the link, you would find America was doing as much testing as Russia, Canada, and Australia. That means the rate of testing is the same, and the cases are higher for us because of tens of millions of people being tested, not a few hundred thousand.

Nope. Your cases are proportionally higher too.

[Salandriagado]

That was the initial surge that began before the lockdown. The lockdowns helped to decrease cases but unfortunately the president wants things reopened.

Things are worse now than they even were in April..

Casually ignore that nearly every state sky-rocketed in cases. And when were those sky-rockets? In the middle of lock down. So is all of the initial surge translating to mass outbreaks in May?

No, that "skyrocket" happened when they finally got testing up to something vaguely resembling acceptable levels. The actual peak of infections was likely about a week into lockdown (due to lag effects).

[Salandriagado]

So advisors to the UK government are saying those who've contracted the virus and recovered should be exempt from any quarantine rules in order to allow the economy to open up. It'd be an ok idea if we didn't live in a world where hordes of people would rush out to get infected so they can gain exemption.

Basically it's punishing people for being responsible.

I mean, I believe people have been reinfected so that just means that they will get sick again right?

There have been no confirmed reinfections. There are a handful of possible reinfections, but it very much seems that, at the very least, the chance of infection (or at least, infections which become symptomatic) is orders of magnitude lower for those who have been infected once (or at least, those that became symptomatic the first time) than those that have not, at least on a timescale of several months.

[Salandriagado]

I think smallpox immunity is lifelong?

I thought so, but I remember getting one and I certainly don't remember anything from before I was 3. So I must have had it twice?

I got taken on lots of foreign holidays as a child. The only bad thing about that: shots every time. One time, quinine pills yuck!

There are a few smallpox vaccines. If you were vaccinated before 2007 and after 1970 in the US, it was probably with NYCBH/Dryvax, which is generally a single-dose vaccine. It's no longer part of the standard childhood vaccine package in the US, though (it's mostly only given to people who'll be working in CDC labs), so whenever you received it is unlikely to be before the age of 3.

[Salandriagado]

I did a blood test recently and according to my report, my Hep A antibodies have more or less vanished. I had to get re-vaccinated and plan to get my booster shot a couple months from now.

I thought smallpox was eradicated in the wild way back in the '70s?

It is eradicated from the wild. All it would take would be for some idiot to make an error with vile and it's reintroduced to the world

Since the last time this nearly happened, we are really very careful about this sort of thing: smallpox exists only in exactly two labs in the world, both of which keep it in the highest level of biocontainment facility that exists, and both of which vaccinate everybody who goes anywhere near there.

[CoraSpia]

https://www.amny.com/news/80-of-nyc-res ... nt-survey/

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I thought so, but I remember getting one and I certainly don't remember anything from before I was 3. So I must have had it twice?

I got taken on lots of foreign holidays as a child. The only bad thing about that: shots every time. One time, quinine pills yuck!

There are a few smallpox vaccines. If you were vaccinated before 2007 and after 1970 in the US, it was probably with NYCBH/Dryvax, which is generally a single-dose vaccine. It's no longer part of the standard childhood vaccine package in the US, though (it's mostly only given to people who'll be working in CDC labs), so whenever you received it is unlikely to be before the age of 3.

I was born in 1964. Perhaps I got the old vaccine as a baby, then the better one when it was available.

I got a lot of shots I probably didn't need. I might be a good counter-example of thimerosal not causing autism!

[-Astoria-]

I was born in 1964. Perhaps I got the old vaccine as a baby, then the better one when it was available.

I got a lot of shots I probably didn't need. I might be a good counter-example of thimerosal not causing autism!

TIL an NSG poster is the same age as my dad.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I was born in 1964. Perhaps I got the old vaccine as a baby, then the better one when it was available.

I got a lot of shots I probably didn't need. I might be a good counter-example of thimerosal not causing autism!

TIL an NSG poster is the same age as my dad.

Let me tell you sonny, when you ... um ... something. I forget.

[Australian rePublic]

It is eradicated from the wild. All it would take would be for some idiot to make an error with vile and it's reintroduced to the world

Since the last time this nearly happened, we are really very careful about this sort of thing: smallpox exists only in exactly two labs in the world, both of which keep it in the highest level of biocontainment facility that exists, and both of which vaccinate everybody who goes anywhere near there.

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

[Ifreann]

Since the last time this nearly happened, we are really very careful about this sort of thing: smallpox exists only in exactly two labs in the world, both of which keep it in the highest level of biocontainment facility that exists, and both of which vaccinate everybody who goes anywhere near there.

I don't understand why they still keep it around,

As a potential bioweapon and for research.

and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

Because making huge amounts of the vaccine for a disease that doesn't infect anyone is not a very good use of resources.

[Valrifell]

Since the last time this nearly happened, we are really very careful about this sort of thing: smallpox exists only in exactly two labs in the world, both of which keep it in the highest level of biocontainment facility that exists, and both of which vaccinate everybody who goes anywhere near there.

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

It's fun to do science.

[San Lumen]

Since the last time this nearly happened, we are really very careful about this sort of thing: smallpox exists only in exactly two labs in the world, both of which keep it in the highest level of biocontainment facility that exists, and both of which vaccinate everybody who goes anywhere near there.

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

[-Astoria-]

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

Getting all Plague Inc, eh?

[San Lumen]

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

Getting all Plague Inc, eh?

huh?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I don't understand why they still keep it around,

1. As a potential bioweapon and for research.

and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

2. Because making huge amounts of the vaccine for a disease that doesn't infect anyone is not a very good use of resources.

1. "Research" is questionable. They have an effective vaccine for the strain they're keeping. If a new strain emerges in the wild, either the existing vaccine works on it, in which case they don't need the samples. Or the new strain is sufficiently different that they will need to make a new vaccine. And they don't need the samples, they need a new sample from the new strain.

2. That I guess. But also vaccines have side effects (like fever), and in very rare cases the side-effects can be really bad. Firstly do no harm, right?

[San Lumen]

1. As a potential bioweapon and for research.

2. Because making huge amounts of the vaccine for a disease that doesn't infect anyone is not a very good use of resources.

1. "Research" is questionable. They have an effective vaccine for the strain they're keeping. If a new strain emerges in the wild, either the existing vaccine works on it, in which case they don't need the samples. Or the new strain is sufficiently different that they will need to make a new vaccine. And they don't need the samples, they need a new sample from the new strain.

2. That I guess. But also vaccines have side effects (like fever), and in very rare cases the side-effects can be really bad. Firstly do no harm, right?

A smallpox return is highly unlikely

[Post War America]

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

Researching the virus, and how it works is still useful, as is keeping it around in the event of a related virus beginning to spread. It'd likely be much easier to synthesize a vaccine that way. Otherwise, what's happening now, cakewalk compared to a smallpox relative spreading around the globe.

[Australian rePublic]

1. As a potential bioweapon and for research.

2. Because making huge amounts of the vaccine for a disease that doesn't infect anyone is not a very good use of resources.

1. "Research" is questionable. They have an effective vaccine for the strain they're keeping. If a new strain emerges in the wild, either the existing vaccine works on it, in which case they don't need the samples. Or the new strain is sufficiently different that they will need to make a new vaccine. And they don't need the samples, they need a new sample from the new strain.

2. That I guess. But also vaccines have side effects (like fever), and in very rare cases the side-effects can be really bad. Firstly do no harm, right?

Where would a new strain come from? The odds of a similar virus evolving again are astronomical

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I don't understand why they still keep it around, and why they don't vaccinate everyone for it

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

I think so too. But I guess there's a long history of scientists destroying evidence they thought they had learned everything useful from ... then later scientists with better tools and knowledge, wanting to have another go at the same evidence.

I guess if the genome of smallpox has been completely sequenced, the samples could be destroyed. Anything more that future scientists want to know could be done with a simulation. Or even reconstructing the virus atom by atom.

[San Lumen]

There is no reason to vaccinate for it anymore. They should destroy the vials

Researching the virus, and how it works is still useful, as is keeping it around in the event of a related virus beginning to spread. It'd likely be much easier to synthesize a vaccine that way. Otherwise, what's happening now, cakewalk compared to a smallpox relative spreading around the globe.

Highly unlikely a new strain would emerge after decades of no transmission

[Post War America]

Researching the virus, and how it works is still useful, as is keeping it around in the event of a related virus beginning to spread. It'd likely be much easier to synthesize a vaccine that way. Otherwise, what's happening now, cakewalk compared to a smallpox relative spreading around the globe.

Highly unlikely

Indeed it is, still it'd be better to prepare for a highly unlikely disastrous event than just assume it won't happen and destroy what little left you have to prepare for it with.

This line of "a disaster won't happen here, so why don't we just step down our emergency preparedness measures" thinking is exactly how Coronavirus became such a mess, the pandemic spread of something like smallpox would make you wish we just had Coronavirus to worry about.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

1. "Research" is questionable. They have an effective vaccine for the strain they're keeping. If a new strain emerges in the wild, either the existing vaccine works on it, in which case they don't need the samples. Or the new strain is sufficiently different that they will need to make a new vaccine. And they don't need the samples, they need a new sample from the new strain.

2. That I guess. But also vaccines have side effects (like fever), and in very rare cases the side-effects can be really bad. Firstly do no harm, right?

Where would a new strain come from? The odds of a similar virus evolving again are astronomical

The world is big, and on the scale of viruses the possible places for it to exist are ... astronomical.

It is incredibly unlikely that smallpox would infect a person or persons and, before being diagnosed, mutate significantly. But in point 1 I was saying that even in that incredibly unlikely event ... it still wouldn't be any help to still have samples of classic smallpox.

[San Lumen]

Highly unlikely

Indeed it is, still it'd be better to prepare for a highly unlikely disastrous event than just assume it won't happen and destroy what little left you have to prepare for it with.

This line of "a disaster won't happen here, so why don't we just step down our emergency preparedness measures" thinking is exactly how Coronavirus became such a mess, the pandemic spread of something like smallpox would make you wish we just had Coronavirus to worry about.

Yellowstone could erupt tomorrow too. It would be the end of the world as we know it. Corona would be nothing if that happened.

We likely have no plan for that either.