On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:15:22 AM UTC-5,
mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
It is heading towards immune escape, due to mass vaccination, and I don't see any other outcome than mass death. And there is nothing much to be done about it, except to soften it with generic antivirals. To which Lawyer Dagget responded, that they
will "closely watch" for immune escape. Not a lot of good that will do, closely watching people dying.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36580913/
It is obviously bad judgment to risk the possiblity of mass death by inviting immune escape through mass vaccination against covid. And then to have "closely watching" for immune escape as your way to deal with it. They do not even mention antivirals
as a way to deal with it, a little bit.
People, it is just the truth, that marginalizing and mangling the concept of subjectivity, leads to people making bad judgments.
In the last decades there has been a tremendous increase in education, and this has led to the mind of people to become conditioned towards objectivity and fact, and subjectivity and opinion has become marginalized and forgotten about. Leading to bad
judgments, mental disease, weird ideology.
And the status of the concept of subjectivity has always been fragile, due to people having enormous psychological pressure to conceive of choosing in terms of figuring out the best option. Leading to corrupt the correct definition of choosing in terms
of spontaneity, which is neccessary for the concept of subjectivity.
From the perspective of anyone who knows what the underlying logic in a subjective statement is, it is totally obvious that this is what is happening.
Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept, and fact and opinion should be a part of basic education. It is of critical importance that creationism is taught in school.
You suggest that vaccination is driving immune escape. This is partially true. But
it isn't driving mass death.
Immune escape is a catch phrase to describe how a virus will evolve to evade prevailing immune defenses. This process does happen. It is inevitable. It
is simply natural selection. Viruses mutate. Viral infections can and do occur despite an existing immune defense. This is true whether or not the immune defense was developed because of vaccination or a prior infection.
In breakthrough infections, mutations that provide a reproductive advantage to a viral lineage obviously mean that particular viral lineage produces more copies
of itself. Generation times with viral replication are fast. Mutation rates are high.
But there's more to the math.
Without vaccination, everyone would get an initial infection. Over billions of people, that's a lot of diversity being generated, meaning lots of mutation. Some of those will produce less effective viruses. Some people will become infected with less efficient viruses. They won't get as sick. It works in a way analogous to vaccination. They produce a background of "immune" people.
But such immunity is not perfect. Some of them get re-infected. They will
be reservoirs for 'immune evasion' or evolution of viral lineages that have adapted to avoid aspects of the human immune response.
In an unchecked pandemic among billions of people, this can happen quickly. Many new lineages of the virus will arise. Some will arise to avoid certain common
epitopes that the human immune response targets, others will arise to alter others.
Where it gets nasty is when someone is infected with multiple lineages at
once and recombination occurs. Recombination is known to occur in RNA
viruses including coronaviruses and has been observed in SARS-CoV-2.
The above represents a dangerous scenario for relatively large populations during a pandemic of a highly infectious virus.
What happens if you add vaccination to the mix? It isn't trivial.
On the good side, a good vaccine will prevent many infections before
they really get started, and for others it will shut down nascent
infection quickly. So unlike in an uncheck pandemic, much less virus
replicates in the first place. Further, vaccinated people are much
less likely to spread an infection meaning that any viral evolution
that did occur in nascent infection is a dead end.
The first effect of a good vaccine is thus to reduce the initial wave
of evolution of the virus, as compared to an uncheck pandemic.
Vaccination thus initially reduces immune escape.
However, reality is that not everyone will get vaccinated, there will still
be breakthrough infections, and over billions of people some
lineages will arise that produce enough breakthrough infections that
immune evasion will take place, albeit at a much slower rate than
in an unchecked pandemic (where there was no vaccination).
In a case like the mRNA vaccines against the spike protein in
SARS-CoV-2, where large portions of the population have been
vaccinated, the evolution of the virus will be dominated by lineages
that have optimized their ability to evade the immune responses
developed against that specific vaccine.
That's a good thing. Why? Because it permits development of a
version 2 vaccine to produce an immune response that the vaccine
has not been evolving to avoid. An analogy would be using one
antibiotic but having a second one to come back with if resistance
develops to the first.
Regardless, vaccination turns out to be better than just letting
a viral pandemic rage unchecked. A criticism of vaccination
that ignores that contrast is dishonest.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)