D&D and the rising pandemic

[Dannyalcatraz]

Part of why the flu shot is only 67% effective is its tendency to mutate rapidly. Thankfully, that’s not a trick Covid-19 has learned.

 

[Umbran]

Part of why the flu shot is only 67% effective is its tendency to mutate rapidly. Thankfully, that’s not a trick Covid-19 has learned.

The other part of why the flu shot is only 67% effective is because the yearly shot is a guess as to which strains are going to spread worldwide.

Comparisons of SARS-CoV-2 to influenza fall down because influenza behaves very differently from coronaviruses. Please, folks, learn this, and stop making that comparison. It is misleading.

 

[Zardnaar]

Part of why the flu shot is only 67% effective is its tendency to mutate rapidly. Thankfully, that’s not a trick Covid-19 has learned.

True but it does mutate. Any vaccine isn't going to be 100% effective.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It isn't like deadly disease is new to the human race, folks. Smallpox, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, tuberculosis, black plague, influenza, malaria, HIV... the list goes on and on.

It 100% isn't the first deadly disease, but there are things that set Covid-19 apart from all those other diseases. The black plague was a bacteria, which are much less contagious and much more treatable. Malaria has killed just about half of all humans that have ever lived, but is easier to treat as it cannot normally spread human-to-human. Ebola was very deadly but wasn't contagious for a long period of time, and wasn't easily spread.
There are many things that sets Covid-19 apart from all those other diseases. First, it is a coronavirus. There has never been a vaccine made for a coronavirus before that has worked. Second, it is easily spread person-to-person. Third, it is very contagious through the air. Fourth, it has never been exposed to humans before, so no one is naturally immune. Fifth and finally, it attacks the lungs and heart. They are 2 of the most important parts of the body.

In fact, the only two diseases we have ever successfully eradicated have been smallpox and rinderpest (a disease of cattle, not people). So, no, this will not end, insofar as this hasn't ended for pretty much any other disease. But somehow, we manage.

Yes, it is very hard to eradicate diseases. Measles was practically eradicated in the United States, but has reemerged when antivaxxers became common. We did eventually develop a vaccine for smallpox. (Also, did you know that both the US and Russian governments have frozen smallpox in storage?) It isn't easy to eradicate diseases, and often they do mutate to become less effective and deadly on humans, but we can't speculate on this. Back when smallpox was a problem, people understood how vaccines could save lives and happily got them when available. Unfortunately, 20% of Americans won't get a Covid-19 vaccine if given the opportunity.

To be honest, so far there's no specific indication that, long term, SARS-CoV-2 is going to be a particularly intractable beast. Maybe folks are basing expectations on media, where a disease shows up and poof! by the end of the episode there's a complete cure, and we despair if something magic doesn't happen in the commercial break. But, folks, do remember - this disease was first noted only about six months ago! It was noted as a new coronavirus in the first week of January, for cryin' out loud! The fact that no miracle cure has appeared in a mere half-year is no indication at all that there will never be something that does the trick.

Yes, I'm sure a lot of people think that we'll just be able to miracle up a cure for coronavirus and save lives instantly. The disease has only been around for 6 months, but in that time period we've not found any treatments for it. A lot of people got their hopes up for Hydroxichloroquine, as the POTUS got anxious for a miracle-cure. I'm not saying that we won't get rid of or find a treatment for Coronavirus, but it will take awhile and there'll be stumbles on the path.

Have a bit of patience, folks, before you throw in the towel.

Patience is the key to beating the virus. Patience while quarantining in your homes. Patience to find a cure and not rushing drugs that can kill you. Patience to find a vaccine that works. Patience to making more testing kits that actually work. We should be patient, but we should also plan ahead for future problems, which the government (at least the US government) is failing to do. They're failing to address current problems, and also causing more people to die. If we plan for the antivaxxers, we can possibly beat this.

 

[Umbran]

True but it does mutate. Any vaccine isn't going to be 100% effective.

You are correct, no vaccine will be 100% effective. But mutation is only the reason for that in the case of fast-mutating pathogens, which SARS-CoV-2 is not.

So, let us keep this basic for the moment: Humans vary. Some people are taller than others. Some are lactose intolerant, others not. There's a variety of facial features in humans. There's also a variety of immune responses. Some people's immune systems vastly overreact to a vaccine - they are allergic. Most people react just enough to get protection, but not so much that they hurt their own bodies. And some people's bodies under-react, and they are not fully protected by a vaccine.

But that's okay. This is where herd immunity finally does become relevant. Herd immunity is not "the herd is 100% immune". Herd immunity is "enough of the herd is immune that even if a pathogen does infect one member, the chances are that it will not run into another member it can infect before it finishes it's course in its host." If enough of the herd is immune to bring the pathogen's R0 below 1, then there may be an isolated case now and again, massive breakouts will not be an issue, and we can largely go about our lives.

 

[Umbran]

There has never been a vaccine made for a coronavirus before that has worked.

Stop right there. This is factually incorrect. The veterinary world has vaccines to protect against coronaviruses that infect bovines, felines, and canines.

And, over at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, they've had successful phase 1 human trials of a vaccine for MERS-CoV last year.

Coronaviruses are not some weirdly invulnerable beast. The fact is that, before SARS and MERS, there was not much call to develop vaccines for coronaviruses that infect humans, as the worst they usually do to us is produce the common cold. And SARS and MERS, which are deadly, largely stopped being a concern before vaccine research could finish.

Simply put, we haven't really tried all that hard.

 

[Istbor]

Yes, it is very hard to eradicate diseases. Measles was practically eradicated in the United States, but has reemerged when antivaxxers became common. We did eventually develop a vaccine for smallpox. (Also, did you know that both the US and Russian governments have frozen smallpox in storage?) It isn't easy to eradicate diseases, and often they do mutate to become less effective and deadly on humans, but we can't speculate on this. Back when smallpox was a problem, people understood how vaccines could save lives and happily got them when available. Unfortunately, 20% of Americans won't get a Covid-19 vaccine if given the opportunity.

Whoa, I wouldn't say antivaxxers are common. They are most certainly loud. Common though? No.

We don't know what will happen if/when a vaccine for this comes out. We know some people aren't sure now. Maybe that is due to fear of it rolling out too quickly, or it being too costly on an injured economy or they think that this whole thing still isn't a big deal, and that even if they get it, it will be like a cold or flu. There is still a lot of misinformation, and just hypothesis out there. As things become more clear or certain, we may see a change in that 20%.

 

[Umbran]

Whoa, I wouldn't say antivaxxers are common. They are most certainly loud. Common though? No.

They are common enough to give us local measles outbreaks again

 

[Istbor]

They are common enough to give us local measles outbreaks again

I guess we can agree to disagree on what we individually consider common in a population of 320 million.

 

[Umbran]

I guess we can agree to disagree on what we individually consider common in a population of 320 million.

With respect, I said "common enough to have a particular effect". Do you disagree that this effect is happening? If not, then we are not in disagreement.

Maybe you are assuming that "common enough to have this impact" also means "very common in general"? Because I didn't say that.