Covid-19 and the madness of crowds

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 lazland wrote:

 SteveG wrote:

 lazland wrote:

 SteveG wrote:

I recall watching a TV program on infections and viruses some years ago that stated that mutations were the results of efforts to contain the virus or infection actually being successful. Viruses need to survive and as long as they prosper, there is no need for them to mutate. Now, how much of this is undisputed fact I can't say, but perhaps it proves that the lockdowns were effective.

Absolutely, it does perhaps show the lockdowns to have been effective, but, in my opinion, in the long run, causing more harm than good in terms of the virus as well as the economic, social, and mental costs.

If the virus had not needed to mutate in this way, then it would not have done so, and alternative strategies to deal with lurgy when it was a plodding, rather than super as it is now, spreader might have been better. To be fair, I have consistently argued for this, so it is not merely the benefit of hindsight.
 But it seems like a case of 6 of 1 or a half dozen of the other. The virus was a super spreader before mutating. If left alone it would have had the same bad outcome and hence, no need to mutate.

And that is where we diverge somewhat. A more effective virus means more people get infected, and at a faster rate, and it is clearly becoming better at spreading despite restrictions and lockdowns.

Beforehand, it did not appear to be that viral, excuse the pun. I quoted Qatar’s extensive testing regime before, and that suggested only 11% of the population had caught the thing, and that does not strike me as being atypical.

The thing is Laz, is that the original virus is as viral as viral can be in the States. We are into the projected second wave with the original virus here and are bracing for it's mutant offspring. There is no lesser virus here, original or extra crispy.

Edited by SteveG - December 30 2020 at 12:55