South African Covid-19 News and Discussions 3

[MiW]

That's interesting SA data? Higher than I would have guessed, but back to my point NICD have the data.

SA data, but it can not be confirmed, as in every case would've need to be sequenced to prove it was not the same infection lingering, so it won't get published.

 

[flytek]

What do you mean by this? How does a virus burn itself out? Are you're assuming the drop in infection rate is due to immunity developing in people, rather than the effect of the lockdown and alcohol ban? This may not be the case. Are you also assuming that once infected, a person is immune far into the future? Again, this may not be the case.

I mean burned themselves out as in like a dead fire they no longer appear alive in a sense that they can kill people in significant numbers. They have done what they could and have disappeared into the mists from where they came.
The recent lockdown and alcohol bans in the Western Cape happened after the second wave had already peaked and appear to have had absolutely no effect at all except to keep a few extra trauma patients out of the hospitals. The barn door was shut after the horse had already bolted. SA style lockdowns really don't do much in my opinion.

Yes I believe the waves rise when there are enough susceptible people to infect with a particular strain and then subside when too many are resistant to it and the virus can no longer easily find sufficient hosts.

It may be that people can be reinfected in significant numbers by the same or similar strain but to cause a proper wave like we have seen these last two times seems to imply that too small a percentage of the population had any significant immunity.

I feel that the second wave was caused by a more capable strain finding hosts where the weaker strains were unable to. A third wave is therefor only likely if an even more powerful strain emerges and then only if there are really any people who can be infected. Our current two waves have probably given a certain amount of immunity to a larger than expected percentage of the population.
It seems to me that only a really powerful new strain could infect a significant portion of the remaining population that have not already had one of the first strains.

 

[C4Cat]

I mean burned themselves out as in like a dead fire they no longer appear alive in a sense that they can kill people in significant numbers. They have done what they could and have disappeared into the mists from where they came.

Ah! Like magic you mean, just disappeared...

Anyway, let's revisit this around June, around when the 3rd wave is predicted. I hope you are right

 

[Geoff.D]

I mean burned themselves out as in like a dead fire they no longer appear alive in a sense that they can kill people in significant numbers. They have done what they could and have disappeared into the mists from where they came.
The recent lockdown and alcohol bans in the Western Cape happened after the second wave had already peaked and appear to have had absolutely no effect at all except to keep a few extra trauma patients out of the hospitals. The barn door was shut after the horse had already bolted. SA style lockdowns really don't do much in my opinion.

Yes I believe the waves rise when there are enough susceptible people to infect with a particular strain and then subside when too many are resistant to it and the virus can no longer easily find sufficient hosts.

It may be that people can be reinfected in significant numbers by the same or similar strain but to cause a proper wave like we have seen these last two times seems to imply that too small a percentage of the population had any significant immunity.

I feel that the second wave was caused by a more capable strain finding hosts where the weaker strains were unable to. A third wave is therefor only likely if an even more powerful strain emerges and then only if there are really any people who can be infected. Our current two waves have probably given a certain amount of immunity to a larger than expected percentage of the population.
It seems to me that only a really powerful new strain could infect a significant portion of the remaining population that have not already had one of the first strains.

And the real danger is that our creepy crawly approach to vaccinations can easily trigger another major mutation.
Our LDs triggered the first mutation. Another wave is going to be triggered by this daft jab rollout plan.
That is the way I see it.

 

[flytek]

Ah! Like magic you mean, just disappeared...

Anyway, let's revisit this around June, around when the 3rd wave is predicted. I hope you are right

I can't imagine why anyone is predicting how covid is going to mutate and when. In my opinion it will take a more infectious mutation or some other form of mutation that can infect those who have already been infected to create a third wave.
I don't find either particularly likely.

If this behaves like a normal coronavirus then no vaccine will be found and long term immunity will be unlikely but the herd will deal with it just like it does colds and flu...the weak and genetically susceptible will die out and we will continue on as we have done up till now with yet another new coronavirus to add to the existing ones.

Edit: My main concern is that I doubt anything besides exceptionally strict lockdowns will prevent 'our' infectious strain from going global and doing massive damage like the first ones did...
Exceptionally strict lockdowns are very unlikely at this time so 2021 is going to be a repeat of 2020.
Even if the vaccines do work they won't get to the billions necessary to stop this strain in time...

 

[Sinbad]

Wtf lol "lockdown triggered mutation"

Mutations are random events - errors in gene replication. If a mutation happens to result in a more effective pathogen then that new mutation will spread faster than the older one. If it results in a less effective pathogen then it will fade away.

The virus doesn't mutate in response to conditions. It's not sentient.

 

[C4Cat]

Wtf lol "lockdown triggered mutation"

Mutations are random events - errors in gene replication. If a mutation happens to result in a more effective pathogen then that new mutation will spread faster than the older one. If it results in a less effective pathogen then it will fade away.

The virus doesn't mutate in response to conditions. It's not sentient.

I think maybe he means that because lockdown slows the spread of the virus, without stopping it, that there is more time for mutations to replicate into more effective pathogens. Not sure...

 

[Geoff.D]

Wtf lol "lockdown triggered mutation"

Mutations are random events - errors in gene replication. If a mutation happens to result in a more effective pathogen then that new mutation will spread faster than the older one. If it results in a less effective pathogen then it will fade away.

The virus doesn't mutate in response to conditions. It's not sentient.

Simple. Look at the figures for WC and EC. The LD strategy had no effect in the densely populated areas in the 1st wave. The virus ran through the pop. The other areas hid away with far fewer getting infected. The virus mutated. Then it ran away in those areas predominantly.
Someone with access to the detail needs to do in depth analysis to prove my hypothesis.
If true, then the LD triggered the mutation.

 

[Geoff.D]

Wtf lol "lockdown triggered mutation"

Mutations are random events - errors in gene replication. If a mutation happens to result in a more effective pathogen then that new mutation will spread faster than the older one. If it results in a less effective pathogen then it will fade away.

The virus doesn't mutate in response to conditions. It's not sentient.

Read more about mutations and how some survive and some don't.
Mutations are random. The ones that survive are the ones that find the environment conducive to survival. It does not require viruses to be sentient.

 

[Sinbad]

Read more about mutations and how some survive and some don't.
Mutations are random. The ones that survive are the ones that find the environment conducive to survival. It does not require viruses to be sentient.

That's exactly what I said.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

Simple. Look at the figures for WC and EC. The LD strategy had no effect in the densely populated areas in the 1st wave. The virus ran through the pop. The other areas hid away with far fewer getting infected. The virus mutated. Then it ran away in those areas predominantly.
Someone with access to the detail needs to do in depth analysis to prove my hypothesis.
If true, then the LD triggered the mutation.

Yes you can see it here on the graphs posted a few pages back. Look at Khayelitsha v Southern/Western (broadly but not exclusively the "rich" areas. There are townships included in the Western and Southern districts) districts in 2nd wave.

 

[Geoff.D]

The LDs were not observed equally in all areas. Therefore indirectly, some areas created a better environment for a mutation to survive in than other areas.
Why have no major unique mutations popped up in NZ or Australia? Because LDs were pretty uniformally observed.

 

[Paulsie]

I would love to hear the explanation of why there are more people admitted with Covid, than actual active cases in GP.

View attachment 1021930

Maybe they're pcr testing empty beds?

 

[Paulsie]

What do you mean by this? How does a virus burn itself out? Are you're assuming the drop in infection rate is due to immunity developing in people, rather than the effect of the lockdown and alcohol ban? This may not be the case. Are you also assuming that once infected, a person is immune far into the future? Again, this may not be the case.

It may though /wink

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

First vaccinations to be televised at 12 PM at Khayelitsha District Hospital with Mkhize and Cyril.

 

[Gordon_R]

First vaccinations to be televised at 12 PM at Khayelitsha District Hospital with Mkhize and Cyril.

For the record: Half of the thousands of people in clinical trials received the vaccine months ago...

 

[Geoff.D]

First vaccinations to be televised at 12 PM at Khayelitsha District Hospital with Mkhize and Cyril.

There you go! As I predicted, Honorary Health Workers first!

 

[Paulsie]

That's exactly what I said.

You're talking about more or less effective pathogen mutation, he's talking about the environment conducive for mutation itself. Different things.

There's been research done into the mutation of H1N1and it was found that high urban density contributed to the rise in the rate of mutation.

So @flytek was correct. Lockdowns do have an affect on mutation rate, it just looks like it's the other way round.

 

[quovadis]

The LDs were not observed equally in all areas. Therefore indirectly, some areas created a better environment for a mutation to survive in than other areas.
Why have no major unique mutations popped up in NZ or Australia? Because LDs were pretty uniformally observed.

Mutations (both good for the virus or equally bad) can occur at any time and it's not limited to whether or not LD was observed. The only reason why we discover mutation is due to some statistical anomaly which results in someone doing the work and sequencing it to find an explanation. Furthermore, where a mutation is discovered is not necessarily where the mutation occurred in the first place and it very well could be that the ZA-discovered variant may be an import too. There very well may be Aus or NZ variants but statistically less likely to be found due to the minimal infection rate compared to the rest of the world.

 

[quovadis]

You're talking about more or less effective pathogen mutation, he's talking about the environment conducive for mutation itself. Different things.

There's been research done into the mutation of H1N1and it was found that high urban density contributed to the rise in the rate of mutation.

So @flytek was correct. Lockdowns do have an affect on mutation rate, it just looks like it's the other way round.

I'm not sure why people see a mutation as something which should be prevented in the first place.