• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Takeover News/Rumours - Part 42

Status
Not open for further replies.

KNGHTHOOD said:
Aye an even stronger variant has hit the UK. None of the other 200 countries in the world, just the UK.
Click to expand...
It ain't just the UK---we report the research, while these viruses all mutate a lot in every country. Think about it and don't worry any more than we have to :)
 
KNGHTHOOD said:
Aye an even stronger variant has hit the UK. None of the other 200 countries in the world, just the UK.
Click to expand...

Virus's mutate all the time and from what is being said, it's not "stronger", it's just more contagious. Apparently, it's quite likely that it will actually have weaker effects, just more people catching it more quickly. Which is surely a good thing?
 
qixman said:
Lost mine a few months back and this made me well up.
Click to expand...
has anyone read the poem about your dog waiting for you, FFS that did me right in.
Ghandi Floss said:
You too, mate.

From the things I’ve heard (not just the things the club want us to hear), I’m feeling relatively positive about it.
I just wanna get back supporting The Lads home and away.
Click to expand...
This boy will change us forever he IS the real deal.
 
Last edited:
Gobuchul said:
Virus's mutate all the time and from what is being said, it's not "stronger", it's just more contagious. Apparently, it's quite likely that it will actually have weaker effects, just more people catching it more quickly. Which is surely a good thing?
Click to expand...

Which is what frequently happens. A virus that kills too many of its hosts is a bad virus in terms of its own long-term survival, because people take steps to eliminate it. The most successful viruses are nuisances, not killers.
 
Gobuchul said:
Virus's mutate all the time and from what is being said, it's not "stronger", it's just more contagious. Apparently, it's quite likely that it will actually have weaker effects, just more people catching it more quickly. Which is surely a good thing?
Click to expand...

No it's a very bad thing. Very bad indeed, in fact just about the worst thing.

It's only a good thing if you accept that everyone who is going to catch it, should catch it and therefore everyone who will die from it, should die from it and we may as well get on with it - which is a position, I guess. But also a scenario which the whole point of policies like lockdown, social distancing, vaccinations, treatment and indeed the entire NHS itself, if you think about it, was designed to stop.

Pandemics are dangerous because they are infections, not because they have a high death rate. It may sound like a good trade-off - lower proportion of kills for wider spread, but that actually means the virus has adapted to increase its total kill rate.

It's an absolute kick in the teeth this mutation has come along at just the point where we can see the finish line, with the vaccinations, but what it means is that the virus is going to go out with a bang: we are now entering easily the worst period, much worse than March - April, where lots of people will die. By Easter it'll all be over - very bitter to take for families that lose loved ones that they'd only have to have dodged it for six weeks or more.
Grumpy Old Man said:
Which is what frequently happens. A virus that kills too many of its hosts is a bad virus in terms of its own long-term survival, because people take steps to eliminate it. The most successful viruses are nuisances, not killers.
Click to expand...

But they also rack up more kills this way. From a maximising kills point of view, this is much more dangerous - more people who catch it will be untroubled, but being able to reach more vulnerable people = more kills. It's why flu is hands down the most effective killer of human beings in the history of civilisation - infectiveness outcompetes deadliness and flu is the winner (one reason why I f***ing hated the "just flu" comments - there's no need for the just, a new super-adapted flu strain like we got in 1918 would be f***ing horrific).
 
Last edited:
Comeback_Kenwyne said:
No it's a very bad thing. Very bad indeed, in fact just about the worst thing.

It's only a good thing if you accept that everyone who is going to catch it, should catch it and therefore everyone who will die from it, should die from it and we may as well get on with it - which is a position, I guess. But also a scenario which the whole point of policies like lockdown, social distancing, vaccinations, treatment and indeed the entire NHS itself, if you think about it, was designed to stop.

Pandemics are dangerous because they are infections, not because they have a high death rate. It may sound like a good trade-off - lower proportion of kills for wider spread, but that actually means the virus has adapted to increase its total kill rate.

It's an absolute kick in the teeth this mutation has come along at just the point where we can see the finish line, with the vaccinations, but what it means is that the virus is going to go out with a bang: we are now entering easily the worst period, much worse than March - April, where lots of people will die. By Easter it'll all be over - very bitter to take for families that lose loved ones that they'd only have to have dodged it for six weeks or more.


But they also rack up more kills this way. From a maximising kills point of view, this is much more dangerous - more people who catch it will be untroubled, but being able to reach more vulnerable people = more kills. It's why flu is hands down the most effective killer of human beings in the history of civilisation - infectiveness outcompetes deadliness and flu is the winner (one reason why I f***ing hated the "just flu" comments - there's no need for the just, a new super-adapted flu strain like we got in 1918 would be f***ing horrific).
Click to expand...
Malaria kills more than flu most years globally. Combined they kill up to approximately one million people annually. Covid will probably be approximately 2m over 12 months globally so unless the mutation becomes similarly as benign to the common cold improvements in transmission are definitely a bad thing overall.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top