Corona thread. No politics please

Status
Not open for further replies.
we're on a collective emotional roller coaster for the time being. It's valuable to provide empathy where we can, regardless of our personal situations and opinions. Like Nate said, we all gotta be really careful about how we perceive information and where we get our information, understanding there are many sources whose agenda is really far away from the common good
 
Lorien said:
we're on a collective emotional roller coaster for the time being. It's valuable to provide empathy where we can, regardless of our personal situations and opinions. Like Nate said, we all gotta be really careful about how we perceive information and where we get our information, understanding there are many sources whose agenda is really far away from the common good
Click to expand...
It's also worthwhile to consider this:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity".

It can help alter one's perspective and resultant emotional reaction.

To me, there's a difference between someone deliberately misleading others by pushing something that they know is less than truthful, whether it's deliberately untruthful, or obfuscation by omission (intentional actions that arouse anger)

vs

Someone who's just an easily led/misguided/clueless idiot, who repeats stuff that supports their bias because they don't know any better (where I tend to feel frustration, or occasionally ludicrous amusement/amazement).

Granted, both can induce similarly negative results/behaviors, but at least to me, intent is an important factor.
 
bluemax_1 said:
It's also worthwhile to consider this:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity".

It can help alter one's perspective and resultant emotional reaction.

To me, there's a difference between someone deliberately misleading others by pushing something that they know is less than truthful, whether it's deliberately untruthful, or obfuscation by omission (intentional actions that arouse anger)

vs

Someone who's just an easily led/misguided/clueless idiot, who repeats stuff that supports their bias because they don't know any better (where I tend to feel frustration, or occasionally ludicrous amusement/amazement).

Granted, both can induce similarly negative results/behaviors, but at least to me, intent is an important factor.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Liars and the Dupes. The Liars are Wicked, and the Dupes are Weak.
 
Weekend-Afternoon-Randomness-Hotness-Humor-Humanity-DAR-WAR-6-3.jpg
 
We need to be careful this discussion doesn't devolve into personal attacks. Wrong sub for that.

There are some people who view this thread in order to have a non-political low drama place to talk about this virus. But if people get worked up with one another and it deteriorates into personal attacks I won't have a choice but to close it.
 
A small glimmer of light in the darkness:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...vid-19-patients-bode-well-long-term-immunity#

One of the things mentioned in the article is potential cross-immunity from prior infection with one of the common hCoVs (human-Coronaviruses).

Back in early-mid February, it was one of the possible explanations I'd wondered about, as to why young children in Wuhan/Hubei seemed largely unaffected by this (as there hadn't really been widespread infection outside China at the time).

hCoV-OC43 (also a beta-Coronavirus like SARS-CoV-2) has hit Wuhan every season for the past few years, especially circulating amongst younger children. Although the antibodies produced from infection with one of the common hCoVs typically only last 1-2 years, regular/repeated exposure seems to maintain a level of antibodies, and maintained immunity.

Eg. After getting sick due to OC43 the first time, with yearly exposure, the same child is still fairly immune/resistant to it 3-4 years later, or experiences a much milder cold vs a child who got sick from it 3-4 years ago and has had no exposure to it in the interim period, and gets it again 3-4 years later when the immunity/resistance is gone.

I'd wondered about the feasibility of intentional infection with OC43 to provide some cross-immunity for SARS-CoV-2. Even if it doesn't completely prevent infection, but can lessen the severity, it's potentially worth pursuing.
 
Last edited:
A little more light.

In vitro human testing of another SARS-CoV-2 vaccine showing very promising results:

https://investors.modernatx.com/new...ositive-interim-phase-1-data-its-mrna-vaccine

Summary: minimal side effects, and the recipients developed antibody levels similar to convalescent patients. ***Convalescent serum therapy has shown positive results in testing, but it's simply too difficult to harvest enough of it from recovered Covid-19 patients, for widespread treatment. This vaccine is producing binding antibody levels in the trial subjects similar to the levels seen in recovered Covid-19 patients.
 
bluemax_1 said:
A small glimmer of light in the darkness:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...vid-19-patients-bode-well-long-term-immunity#

One of the things mentioned in the article is potential cross-immunity from prior infection with one of the common hCoVs (human-Coronaviruses).

Back in early-mid February, it was one of the possible explanations I'd wondered about, as to why young children in Wuhan/Hubei seemed largely unaffected by this (as there hadn't really been widespread infection outside China at the time).

hCoV-OC43 (also a beta-Coronavirus like SARS-CoV-2) has hit Wuhan every season for the past few years, especially circulating amongst younger children. Although the antibodies produced from infection with one of the common hCoVs typically only last 1-2 years, regular/repeated exposure seems to maintain a level of antibodies, and maintained immunity.

Eg. After getting sick due to OC43 the first time, with yearly exposure, the same child is still fairly immune/resistant to it 3-4 years later, or experiences a much milder cold vs a child who got sick from it 3-4 years ago and has had no exposure to it in the interim period, and gets it again 3-4 years later when the immunity/resistance is gone.

I'd wondered about the feasibility of intentional infection with OC43 to provide some cross-immunity for SARS-CoV-2. Even if it doesn't completely prevent infection, but can lessen the severity, it's potentially worth pursuing.
Click to expand...
Another article that would seem to explain why some people infected with the COVID-19 virus have few if any noticeable symptoms (due to possible cross-immunity):
https://www.foxnews.com/health/does-previous-common-cold-offer-coronavirus-protection-researchers-find-possible-evidence

Thank you for your informative posts! :thumbsup:
 
More encouraging news:
A paper from South Korea from testing patients who re-tested positive, indicates that the re-positive tests are most likely from viral fragments the body is still shedding. They didn't find evidence that these cases who retested positive, could infect the people that they'd been in contact with.

https://www.cdc.go.kr/board/board.es?mid=a30402000000&bid=0030

Also, early on, there was speculation that people who are on ACE inhibitors and ARBs, might potentially be more susceptible/vulnerable to Covid-19, as being on those medications increases ACE2 expression in cells (which the SARS-CoV-2 virus attaches to. Higher ACE2 expression potentially = higher ability for the virus to attach and initiate replication). Some folks I'd spoken to on ACE inhibitors and ARBs (Angiotensin Receptor Blockers) even wondered if it might be a good idea to stop taking those medications (never a good idea to stop taking medications without consulting the physician who prescribed them). The general advice was simply that the increased ACE2 expression from being on these medications doesn't decrease in any appreciable amount of time that would offset the greater risks from cessation. The other consideration was the potential pros vs con ratio of being on ACE inhibitors or ARBs that can alter the body's ACE2 expression when exposed to a virus that targets ACE2 glycoproteins vs the action of the medications.

A recent studied found a ~40% decrease in risk of hospitalization for seniors on ACE inhibitors who'd caught Covid-19.

https://apnews.com/f89158f71eb04e538c4d8705384fc509

There are other things that can cause elevated ACE2 expression, like smoking. Former smokers seem to be at increased risk for Covid-19. Interestingly enough, current smokers are statistically underrepresented in Covid-19 cases (a good thing). This led to the hypotheses that nicotine may actually have benefits against Covid-19.
https://reason.org/commentary/scientists-studying-nicotines-potential-to-treat-covid-19/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7192087/

This is not to say that non-smokers should begin smoking or using nicotine product, but perhaps, to ease the minds of regular users of nicotine products, that such usage may not be increasing your risks respective to Covid-19.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top