Mutated strain of Covid-19 Found in London.

[Jason Flare]

I’m not worried about this virus because if it were really serious smart people wouldn’t be arguing about what to name it.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by grantmc

The Spanish flu did not 'develop' (whatever that means) in Spain in WWI.
The Spanish media were free to report the disease as Spain was neutral. Both Central and Allied Powers thought that reporting the flu would be bad for morale.

Here's the comprehensive back story.

You are correct. I did not however, say it developed in Spain. I said it was identified there.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by FabioC

What is truly worrisome about this mutation is that it involves the very mechanism/receptor on which the RNA vaccines are based; thus, there is a legitimate scientific concern on whether this mutation may be resistant to the vaccine. At this time, there is no way to tell either way, considerably more testing and research is needed.
A scenario where the vaccines were shown to be ineffective against this mutation, which is also much more transmissible than the "original" virus, would be a major set back. By now, many countries in the world have amply demonstrated that they are incapable of containing this pandemic without an effective vaccine.

You raise some excellent points. There are a number of questions about a vaccine. What happens as the virus mutates is a pretty important question.

Other questions to think about include:
If the vaccine is effective, can we distribute it quickly enough to prevent future transmissions and mutations?
Is the vaccine effective? They are testing subjects in the real world, but is it really effective if everyone is in a lock down?
If the vaccine is not 100% effective, will it only stop the mild versions and allow more deadly version to spread?
If it is only effective against mild versions, will having it reduce the severity of a stronger version of the virus?

Time and testing will tell!

[alansmith]

The mutagenic properties of this virus is typical of coronavirus. You can expect this virus to be no different, mutagenically speaking, from common colds or flu. Therein lies the dilemma for the silver bullet approach. Yes, Moderna and Pfizer came up with a new approach to create a whiz bang vaccine. But will it wipe out all genetic variants? I lay my wager that it won’t. Remember Jurassic Park? The scientist says, “ life finds a way.”

The world has shifted to a new societal norm. We will be dealing with this for many years to come. It is my fear. The best scientists in the world have never been able to wipe out the flu due to its mutagenic properties. Why should we feel we can wipe out the ‘new mother’ on the block?

[Capn Jimbo]

From the Public Health perspective:


1. The rates you see (eg 95%) are Efficacy Rates. These refer to the trials (phase 1, 2 and 3).

2. In the trials this means that people received either nothing (a placebo) or the vaccine, and were then followed. Subsequently, of every 100 people who later contracted Covid within the trial, only 5 or 5% had received the vaccine, while 95 or 95% received the placebo/nothing.

3. So “efficacy” refers only to the trials. Now that the vaccines will actually be widely used, we will learn how “effective” they are in actual public use. It would not be unexpected that the real life “effectiveness” turns out to be lower than the trial’s “efficacy” rate -BUT – it could also be higher.

4. Nonetheless, these efficacy rates are impressive. For comparison, a good 10 year meta-study of efficacy rates for the flu trials averaged around 59%, with actual real life effectiveness of about 48%.

Summary: The 95% efficacy rate of the two released vaccines is remarkable, and promises to be significantly more effective than our annual flu shots. Still, while you can greatly improve your own survival, it will be up to a year before enough vaccinations are done to drive down the spread.


*************

We ignore the 2nd and 3rd world countries at our own peril and lasting damage to our common humanity. Allowing the virus to spread to these areas will surely allow new and more dangerous mutations.

CJ
Public Health, 30 years

[DIJ]

Mass PCR testing on asymptomatic people as evidence of rising case counts is suspicious.

Suspicious why? As viruses mutate, and mutations were expected, looking for mutations in random samples would be expected whether of asymptomatic or symptomatic individuals - why would it need to be ´mass’ testing anyway to observe an increase in proportion of variants in the samples?

[DIJ]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

From the Public Health perspective:


1. The rates you see (eg 95%) are Efficacy Rates. These refer to the trials (phase 1, 2 and 3).

2. In the trials this means that people received either nothing (a placebo) or the vaccine, and were then followed. Subsequently, of every 100 people who later contracted Covid within the trial, only 5 or 5% had received the vaccine, while 95 or 95% received the placebo/nothing.

3. So “efficacy” refers only to the trials. Now that the vaccines will actually be widely used, we will learn how “effective” they are in actual public use. It would not be unexpected that the real life “effectiveness” turns out to be lower than the trial’s “efficacy” rate -BUT – it could also be higher.

4. Nonetheless, these efficacy rates are impressive. For comparison, a good 10 year meta-study of efficacy rates for the flu trials averaged around 59%, with actual real life effectiveness of about 48%.

Summary: The 95% efficacy rate of the two released vaccines is remarkable, and promises to be significantly more effective than our annual flu shots. Still, while you can greatly improve your own survival, it will be up to a year before enough vaccinations are done to drive down the spread.


*************

We ignore the 2nd and 3rd world countries at our own peril and lasting damage to our common humanity. Allowing the virus to spread to these areas will surely allow new and more dangerous mutations.

CJ
Public Health, 30 years

Here here

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by alansmith

The mutagenic properties of this virus is typical of coronavirus. You can expect this virus to be no different, mutagenically speaking, from common colds or flu. Therein lies the dilemma for the silver bullet approach. Yes, Moderna and Pfizer came up with a new approach to create a whiz bang vaccine. But will it wipe out all genetic variants? I lay my wager that it won’t. Remember Jurassic Park? The scientist says, “ life finds a way.”

The world has shifted to a new societal norm. We will be dealing with this for many years to come. It is my fear. The best scientists in the world have never been able to wipe out the flu due to its mutagenic properties. Why should we feel we can wipe out the ‘new mother’ on the block?

Seems like we have learned to cope with the flu, and I expect that once COVID is no longer 'novel', we may be able to just add it to the list of viruses in the annual flu jab. And it might continue to mutate to a more infectious but less deadly illness.

I also think that the new mRNA vaccines may prove to be more flexible than the older 'dead virus' types.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by DIJ

Suspicious why? As viruses mutate, and mutations were expected, looking for mutations in random samples would be expected whether of asymptomatic or symptomatic individuals - why would it need to be ´mass’ testing anyway to observe an increase in proportion of variants in the samples?

Because many the tests are over sensitive and most don't give a quantitative analysis.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7239624/
Yet we have been using these numbers to justify mass-hysteria. When they instituted this mass testing the case numbers went sky high even as death reports were falling. They have been using a test that can supposedly differentiate between two strains, not looking for mutations in random samples. They already knew about the mutation. It was designed into the tests that they are now using to justify more lockdowns. The timing of it is something I find most interesting. (just about time for the second Pfizer shot in the UK right?) Where is the info on the percentage of these special tests being used over time (in the UK). This is partly why I think it is spin. They haven't provided it.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

2. In the trials this means that people received either nothing (a placebo) or the vaccine, and were then followed. Subsequently, of every 100 people who later contracted Covid within the trial, only 5 or 5% had received the vaccine, while 95 or 95% received the placebo/nothing.

This is incorrect.
The Pfizer trial did not analyse how many people contracted COVID-19 at all.
They only examined the trial participants who reported COVID-19 symptoms during the four weeks that Phases 2 & 3 of the trial were conducted (Phase 3 of trials finished one week after the second dose).

There were 43538 participants, half received a placebo. During the 4th week (the week following the second dose of vaccine or placebo) “170 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were evaluated, with 162 observed in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group.”

Pfizer have no idea how many trial participants actually contracted COVID-19 during the trial. This is why all the usual measures are still recommended even if you have received the vaccine ie social distancing, mask wearing etc. You may be transmitting the virus while asymptomatic.

A very brief press release from Pfizer regarding this:
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-re...vid-19-vaccine

[Tillikum]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

The history of the Spanish flu is pretty interesting. Kansas has been listed as the location of the first known case, however analysis of it suggests that it began much earlier and likely around 1915. There were reports of the flu in European army camps and surrounding areas in 1916 and 1917. Currently, some scientists at the Pasteur Institute feel it originated in China.

The reason for the name Spanish Flu is that the virus was first publicly identified in Spain, as they were not being censored due to the Great War.

[Link inserted - not in original post]


China and the Chinese are no more to blame for the "Spanish Flu" than the Venetians are for Bubonic Plague. Before our scientists learned to manipulate such things, any "blame" lies entirely with nature.

[DIJ]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

Because many the tests are over sensitive and most don't give a quantitative analysis.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7239624/
Yet we have been using these numbers to justify mass-hysteria. When they instituted this mass testing the case numbers went sky high even as death reports were falling. They have been using a test that can supposedly differentiate between two strains, not looking for mutations in random samples. They already knew about the mutation. It was designed into the tests that they are now using to justify more lockdowns. The timing of it is something I find most interesting. (just about time for the second Pfizer shot in the UK right?) Where is the info on the percentage of these special tests being used over time (in the UK). This is partly why I think it is spin. They haven't provided it.

A non-hysterical viewpoint on this has been described elsewhere in this thread so I will leave you to your conspiracies and ´interesting timings’.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Tillikum

[Link inserted - not in original post]


China and the Chinese are no more to blame for the "Spanish Flu" than the Venetians are for Bubonic Plague. Before our scientists learned to manipulate such things, any "blame" lies entirely with nature.

There is a highly suppressed theory that an experimental meningitis vaccine was the spanish flu culprit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...88/pdf/449.pdf

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

There is a highly suppressed theory that an experimental meningitis vaccine was the spanish flu culprit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...88/pdf/449.pdf

It's apparently not suppressed well enough.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-res...918-virus.html

[DIJ]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

There is a highly suppressed theory that an experimental meningitis vaccine was the spanish flu culprit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...88/pdf/449.pdf

Whether that theory and its ´suppression’ holds water is one thing but the article you quote suggests nothing of the sort, not even a mention.