stickdog99 » 23 Jan 2022 09:37 wrote:Joe Hillshoist » 22 Jan 2022 23:20 wrote:But lets leave the data aside foir a minute.
What mechanism are you proposing that enables Omicron to infect the vaccinated more easily than the unvaccinate?
How is this happening?
It makes no sense to me?
Please explain.
LOL. So suddenly you can't trust any official data and everything is unknowable? So why doesn't the same apply to any supposed benefit that you still believe these vaccines confer?
Well obviously.
Reasons? These are them:
1. At no point before have I known 10 people test positive to covid who were unvaccinated and there be no official record of it.
2. Since the huge outbreak of cases PCR station testing capacity has completely failed. It can't keep up. So for the first time data collection is inadequate. This is reflected in the changes between test numbers and positive cases. The higher ratio of cases to tests means there are more cases in the community than there were at the lower ratios.
3. Further home use rapid antigen testing is also failing. There aren't enough supplies to keep up with demand. This is yet another failure of capitalist medicine but that's for another day.
So for the first time its obvious the testing system in NSW is unable to provide accurate results. it may have been the case before but it wasn't obvious to me.
Therefore "suddenly" I no longer trust the data.
Its because circumstances have changed. IMO even with poitential inbuilt errors in the system before Omicron at least its trends were reliable. Now they aren't.
Yeah obviously. Everyone knows the spike protein on the vaccine has mutated in such a way that the S1 and S2 proteins the mRNA vaccines generate are significantly different than they were. So antibodies will struggle to recognise them now with Omicron. Hence vaccine evasion happens.
This raises reasonable criticisms with the way they were developed, specifically targeted such a limited number of proteins compared to the number the virus (or even other vaccines) present to the immune system. There are answers to these criticisms and before Omicron they looked reasonable. Whether they still will afterward is another question.
Original antigenic sin is what happens when the immune system gets trained in such a way that it fails to recognize and react to new threats. Geert Vanden Bossche and several other scientists have warned this might happen as a result of mass-vaccination against Covid-19.
Until now, this has remained a hypothesis. But this new research, published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters seems to confirm this is in fact what is happening now around the world.
Didn't data from South Africa show that people who got Omicron and recovered ran the gauntlet from unvaccinated to fully (two dose and "boosted" (lol)) dosed and previously infected with strong immunity? There are no indications that vaccinated or previously infected people suffered longer or more severe illness and there don't appear to be any of these indications coming from anywhere. If anything all people infected with Omicron have better immune responses across the board than with previous strains of COVID.
So how does OAS even come into it?
Yesterday, I published a piece on a recent and disturbing development in Covid infections in Iceland, where we’ve seen a surge in infections per 100 thousand among the vaccinated, whereby they are overtaking the unvaccinated at an unprecedented rate. I have wondered why this may be happening. Possibly the answer lies here.
In
the authors’ own words:
“Here, we demonstrate that vaccine-breakthrough or antibody-resistant mutations provide a new mechanism of viral evolution. Specifically, vaccine-resistant mutation Y449S in the spike (S) protein receptor-binding domain, which occurred in co-mutations Y449S and N501Y, has reduced infectivity compared to that of the original SARS-CoV-2 but can disrupt existing antibodies that neutralize the virus. By tracking the evolutionary trajectories of vaccine-resistant mutations in more than 2.2 million SARS-CoV-2 genomes, we reveal that the occurrence and frequency of vaccine-resistant mutations correlate strongly with the vaccination rates in Europe and America.”
...
This is the rest of what he wrote.
If this is the case, we may expect more dangerous variants emerging, from which current vaccines offer no protection, attacking the very part of the population we have aimed to protect. The cause, then, is our fixation on mass-vaccination instead of a more focused effort to protect those in actual danger.
Which is obviously garbage.
I mean ... the moon may turn purple and vomit cheese upon the earth. Its not completely impossible in an infinite and infinitely chaotic universe. And its at least as meaningful as that sentence.
Why may we expect that?
It hasn't happened yet, if anything the opposite has.
The Omicron variant, assuming it isn't a lab product, came from vaccinated populations. It was brought to Africa by diplomats who had been in Europe. Its less dangerous.
Even that author's own words, which do loosely describe/mirror the changes with Omicron, show the mutations have
reduced infectivity compared to that of the original SARS-CoV-2 but can disrupt existing antibodies that neutralize the virus. Exact quote.
There is obviously a relationship between how the spike protein behaves and its infectivity and another one between how the spike protein behaves and its potential dangerousness. This is what I meant by "it has evolved" when I posted recently actually.
Omicron evades previous neutralising antibodies. It also has trouble infecting lung cells but finds infecting bronchial cells to be alot easier compared to previous variants. That is because previous antibodies that target the spike protein no longer fit as well as they did. But at the same time these changes to the spike protein mean it can't bind to lung cells as easily and more importantly it doesn't cleave the lung cells and create those lumps of cellular refuse that trigger cytokine storms in people.
Its become less dangerous and its mutation (if it isn't a lab based one) is exactly the sort you'd expect if the selection pressure on the virus now included spike protein only vaccines (tho I don't see why natural infection wouldn't have exactly the same effect.)
So the fella who made that blog is passing on misinformation, technically. In the way he or she or whatever frames what they are describing.
By suggesting this can only be dangerous he implies its a bad thing. When the main real world evidence we have - Omicron - suggests otherwise.
Historically viruses are sposed to evolve to be less dangerous and more infectious, this probably happened as vertebrates on land evolved upper and lower respitratory tracts that were distinctly different. The upper one provides a barrier territory between the atmosphere where viruses are found and the place where the atmosphere is processed and O2 introduced to the blood stream and our survival systems.
The upper respiratory tract is a place where its easier to spread infection from if you're an airbourne pathogen.
So if we evolved separate, slightly different surfaces on our lower respiratory tract along the epic journey to humanity then we've created a selection pressure for a respiratory virus to evolve to be less dangerous and eventually infect the upper respiratory tract by preference.
Creating vaccines that mirror the most dangerous part of the virus will create a selection pressure but its one that historically and biologically leads to less dangerous iterations of coronaviruses, not more dangerous ones as mutations to the spike protein will need to be less damaging not more damaging to increase their chance of spreading and get a genetic advantage.
How is that blog post
not fear porn?