there are no vacciness or antiviral drugs for coronaviruses...so why the optimism?

[abelard]

ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?


--
www.abelard.org

[mro...@btopenworld.com]

On Sunday, 1 March 2020 12:47:40 UTC, abelard wrote:
> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?

none of these. This land of ours has, over the centuries suffered no end of general afflictions. I suppose the most serious of these was the Black death that killed 60% of the population of Europe.

It's extremely unlikely that we shall see anything as serious as that!

The coronavirus will peter out as the sun rises in the sky and the intensity of the UV increases killing off the viruses. That's what happens to winter colds. Some viruses are of course very dangerous indeed but these are exceptions to the rule.

In addition the virus is in many ways the virus is its own worst enemy in that it's very good at triggering the body's defences against itself. It's rare for the same virus to affect the same body. According to the BBC this afternoon 4/5 sufferers from the virus will suffer nothing worse than a shallow cough.

That means, in other words, 4/5 infections are self destructive and the sufferer will not be re-infected. This is because the term 'Coronavirus' more accurately describes a group of similar organisms (if any virus can be described as an organism) It is similar to the common cold or flu in this respect It is the size of these groups that grants them their tremendous capacity to mutate. Most mutations however, are benign and will cause no symptoms in humans. Again there is the odd exception amongst many.

So there is every ground for optimism that the disease will eventually peter out all by itself just as the plagues that have afflicted us throughout history and we are still here.

This time next year we will not even be talking about it.

[abelard]

and we may be hit by an asteroid driven by aliens...

we don't develop immunity to the common cold


--
www.abelard.org

[A. Filip]

abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?

It is (statistically) lethal enough to make good selling news.
It is not lethal enough to end "the world as we know it".

--
A. Filip
| Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important
| stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)
| (Linus Torvalds, about his failing hard drive on linux.cs.helsinki.fi)

[abelard]

On Sun, 01 Mar 2020 20:07:35 +0000 (GMT), "A. Filip" <an...@wp.eu>
wrote:

>abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?
>
>It is (statistically) lethal enough to make good selling news.
>It is not lethal enough to end "the world as we know it".

true...ya think that's an advantage...at least to the reptiles

what about the capitalists and pols?

--
www.abelard.org

[Keema's Nan]

On 1 Mar 2020, abelard wrote
(in article<p84o5fli4fk2ep9up...@4ax.com>):

Apparently Betelgeuse might be on the verge of a supernova. In fact it may
have happened already, given that the star is 600 light years away. If that
happens the whole world will be full of wailing crones forecasting the end of
life as we know it.

No one will care about a poxy virus then.

We’re doomed I tell ye.

[mro...@btopenworld.com]

That's because there is no such *single* virus as the common cold. When we are infected with what we loosely call 'a cold' we are suffering from the effects of just one of a large number of a group of viruses a number of which will cause the familiar symptoms. Similarly there will be others that produce much milder symptoms or no symptoms at all.

For further explanation look up the work of Jenner. who noted that smallpox was rare amongst agricultural workers who worked with cattle. the explanation is that cattle do not contract smallpox but do contract a similar virus known as cowpox. Cowpox produces a scale on bovine skin at around the hairline level. It is inevitable that through regular interaction with cattle this scale would be introduced to their bodies through cuts scratches cuts, abrasions and so on. It's this scale which contains the cowpox virus. This virus has about the same effect on a human as it does on a cow. At worst a mild rash. However, because it is closely related to the more dangerous smallpox virus at the same time, the immunity it confers against cowpox is transferred to a human host. Perhaps this virus endemic in cows, is the reason cows never contract cowpox.

How else could one explain why, when a particular cold is 'doing the rounds' some people catch it whilst others don't?

[abelard]

On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 13:13:09 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"

<mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, 1 March 2020 19:49:57 UTC, abelard wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 11:27:59 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"
>> <mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sunday, 1 March 2020 12:47:40 UTC, abelard wrote:
>> >> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?
>> >
>> >none of these. This land of ours has, over the centuries suffered no end of general afflictions. I suppose the most serious of these was the Black death that killed 60% of the population of Europe.
>> >
>> >It's extremely unlikely that we shall see anything as serious as that!
>> >
>> >The coronavirus will peter out as the sun rises in the sky and the intensity of the UV increases killing off the viruses. That's what happens to winter colds. Some viruses are of course very dangerous indeed but these are exceptions to the rule.
>> >
>> >In addition the virus is in many ways the virus is its own worst enemy in that it's very good at triggering the body's defences against itself. It's rare for the same virus to affect the same body. According to the BBC this afternoon 4/5 sufferers from the virus will suffer nothing worse than a shallow cough.
>> >
>> >That means, in other words, 4/5 infections are self destructive and the sufferer will not be re-infected. This is because the term 'Coronavirus' more accurately describes a group of similar organisms (if any virus can be described as an organism) It is similar to the common cold or flu in this respect It is the size of these groups that grants them their tremendous capacity to mutate. Most mutations however, are benign and will cause no symptoms in humans. Again there is the odd exception amongst many.
>> >
>> >So there is every ground for optimism that the disease will eventually peter out all by itself just as the plagues that have afflicted us throughout history and we are still here.
>> >
>> >This time next year we will not even be talking about it.
>>
>> and we may be hit by an asteroid driven by aliens...
>>
>> we don't develop immunity to the common cold
>
>That's because there is no such *single* virus as the common cold. When we are infected with what we loosely call 'a cold' we are suffering from the effects of just one of a large number of a group of viruses a number of which will cause the familiar symptoms. Similarly there will be others that produce much milder symptoms or no symptoms at all.

the common cold does not trigger the human immune system

>For further explanation look up the work of Jenner. who noted that smallpox was rare amongst agricultural workers who worked with cattle. the explanation is that cattle do not contract smallpox but do contract a similar virus known as cowpox. Cowpox produces a scale on bovine skin at around the hairline level. It is inevitable that through regular interaction with cattle this scale would be introduced to their bodies through cuts scratches cuts, abrasions and so on. It's this scale which contains the cowpox virus. This virus has about the same effect on a human as it does on a cow. At worst a mild rash. However, because it is closely related to the more dangerous smallpox virus at the same time, the immunity it confers against cowpox is transferred to a human host. Perhaps this virus endemic in cows, is the reason cows never contract cowpox.
>
>How else could one explain why, when a particular cold is 'doing the rounds' some people catch it whilst others don't?

the human cold virus is also very mutation prone

this is the coronavirus family...allegedly
very little is know about how it will behave

sars transfers via contact...
so does mers and it also may transfer via vector

this one transfers via the air and maybe other means

it also may mutate quickly a and get worse...or better

coronaviruses are very complex

--
www.abelard.org

[mro...@btopenworld.com]

On Sunday, 1 March 2020 21:47:50 UTC, abelard wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 13:13:09 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"

> the common cold does not trigger the human immune system

It most certainly does!

Were it otherwise you would be dead in days. Just as soon as you cuaaught you first snuffle.

You have heard of Aids? Well you cannot of course contract Aids via a common cold. However, Aids represents a complete breakdown of the immune system. which usually manifests itself as pneumonia.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160205062000/http://www.cdc.gov/features/rhinoviruses/

relevant text:

"Many different viruses can cause the common cold, but rhinoviruses are the most common. Viruses that cause colds can spread from infected people to others through the air and close personal contact. You can also get infected through contact with stool or respiratory secretions from an infected person. This can happen when you shake hands with someone who has a cold, or touch a doorknob that has viruses on it, then touch your eyes, mouth, or nose."

[Incubus]

Actually, we do. It's just that it mutates...

[Incubus]

On 2020-03-01, mro...@btopenworld.com <mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 1 March 2020 19:49:57 UTC, abelard wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 11:27:59 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"
>> <mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sunday, 1 March 2020 12:47:40 UTC, abelard wrote:
>> >> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?
>> >
>> >none of these. This land of ours has, over the centuries suffered no end of general afflictions. I suppose the most serious of these was the Black death that killed 60% of the population of Europe.
>> >
>> >It's extremely unlikely that we shall see anything as serious as that!
>> >
>> >The coronavirus will peter out as the sun rises in the sky and the intensity of the UV increases killing off the viruses. That's what happens to winter colds. Some viruses are of course very dangerous indeed but these are exceptions to the rule.
>> >
>> >In addition the virus is in many ways the virus is its own worst enemy in that it's very good at triggering the body's defences against itself. It's rare for the same virus to affect the same body. According to the BBC this afternoon 4/5 sufferers from the virus will suffer nothing worse than a shallow cough.
>> >
>> >That means, in other words, 4/5 infections are self destructive and the sufferer will not be re-infected. This is because the term 'Coronavirus' more accurately describes a group of similar organisms (if any virus can be described as an organism) It is similar to the common cold or flu in this respect It is the size of these groups that grants them their tremendous capacity to mutate. Most mutations however, are benign and will cause no symptoms in humans. Again there is the odd exception amongst many.
>> >
>> >So there is every ground for optimism that the disease will eventually peter out all by itself just as the plagues that have afflicted us throughout history and we are still here.
>> >
>> >This time next year we will not even be talking about it.
>>
>> and we may be hit by an asteroid driven by aliens...
>>
>> we don't develop immunity to the common cold
>
> That's because there is no such *single* virus as the common cold. When we are infected with what we loosely call 'a cold' we are suffering from the effects of just one of a large number of a group of viruses a number of which will cause the familiar symptoms. Similarly there will be others that produce much milder symptoms or no symptoms at all.

It's possible that people can be infected with more than one strain at the same
time.

[Incubus]

On 2020-03-01, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 13:13:09 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"
><mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sunday, 1 March 2020 19:49:57 UTC, abelard wrote:
>>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 11:27:59 -0800 (PST), "mro...@btopenworld.com"
>>> <mro...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Sunday, 1 March 2020 12:47:40 UTC, abelard wrote:
>>> >> ignorance? acute malignant optimism? or fake news?
>>> >
>>> >none of these. This land of ours has, over the centuries suffered no end of general afflictions. I suppose the most serious of these was the Black death that killed 60% of the population of Europe.
>>> >
>>> >It's extremely unlikely that we shall see anything as serious as that!
>>> >
>>> >The coronavirus will peter out as the sun rises in the sky and the intensity of the UV increases killing off the viruses. That's what happens to winter colds. Some viruses are of course very dangerous indeed but these are exceptions to the rule.
>>> >
>>> >In addition the virus is in many ways the virus is its own worst enemy in that it's very good at triggering the body's defences against itself. It's rare for the same virus to affect the same body. According to the BBC this afternoon 4/5 sufferers from the virus will suffer nothing worse than a shallow cough.
>>> >
>>> >That means, in other words, 4/5 infections are self destructive and the sufferer will not be re-infected. This is because the term 'Coronavirus' more accurately describes a group of similar organisms (if any virus can be described as an organism) It is similar to the common cold or flu in this respect It is the size of these groups that grants them their tremendous capacity to mutate. Most mutations however, are benign and will cause no symptoms in humans. Again there is the odd exception amongst many.
>>> >
>>> >So there is every ground for optimism that the disease will eventually peter out all by itself just as the plagues that have afflicted us throughout history and we are still here.
>>> >
>>> >This time next year we will not even be talking about it.
>>>
>>> and we may be hit by an asteroid driven by aliens...
>>>
>>> we don't develop immunity to the common cold
>>
>>That's because there is no such *single* virus as the common cold. When we are infected with what we loosely call 'a cold' we are suffering from the effects of just one of a large number of a group of viruses a number of which will cause the familiar symptoms. Similarly there will be others that produce much milder symptoms or no symptoms at all.
>
> the common cold does not trigger the human immune system

Of course it does. The immune response is responsible for some of the
symptoms, particularly raised temperature. If there was no immune response,
people would never get over the common cold.

[abelard]

i was referring primarily to rhinoviruses...
the 'common cold' is too generalised...it is really
a symptom not a disease

the immune system is also more complex than my post
suggests....there is an innate system and an adaptive system...

being more precise, the rhinovirus does not evoke the adaptive
system

the rhino virus 'surrenders' to the innate system(eg interferon,
and thus does not tend) to evoke the adaptive system
thus allowing the virus to reinfect you(over and over)

the coronavirus is much more complex

i was being sloppy rather than boring...apology if i misled you

this 'new' problem/virus is about the coronavirus

the hiv('aids') virus is different again...it 'bypasses' the
(adaptive) immune system leaving the immune system
helpless(or 'worn out') after time...

but i did want to keep this to the coronavirus!

for a simple primer read eg 'how pathogenic viruses work'
by sompayrac...

my knowledge in this area is general rather than detailed
and as previously stated, my memory is not what it was
i do and will continue to concentrate on psycho-logic or
in this case, the civil implications of this corona virus


--
www.abelard.org

[abelard]

see previous response

--
www.abelard.org

[abelard]

see previous response

we don't become immune to the cold causing rhinovirus

--
www.abelard.org

[Keema's Nan]

On 2 Mar 2020, abelard wrote
(in article<ksop5f1q5tc7cl29v...@4ax.com>):

Oh dear, you have been to Wikipedia again.

[abelard]

no wikipedia involved...i just got my book off the shelf
to remind me of the details

>> being more precise, the rhinovirus does not evoke the adaptive
>> system
>>
>> the rhino virus 'surrenders' to the innate system(eg interferon,
>> and thus does not tend) to evoke the adaptive system
>> thus allowing the virus to reinfect you(over and over)
>>
>> the coronavirus is much more complex
>>
>> i was being sloppy rather than boring...apology if i misled you
>>
>> this 'new' problem/virus is about the coronavirus
>>
>> the hiv('aids') virus is different again...it 'bypasses' the
>> (adaptive) immune system leaving the immune system
>> helpless(or 'worn out') after time...
>>
>> but i did want to keep this to the coronavirus!
>>
>> for a simple primer read eg 'how pathogenic viruses work'
>> by sompayrac...
>>
>> my knowledge in this area is general rather than detailed
>> and as previously stated, my memory is not what it was
>> i do and will continue to concentrate on psycho-logic or
>> in this case, the civil implications of this corona virus
>

--
www.abelard.org

[Incubus]

We become immune to the strain with which we were infected. We aren't immune
to its analogue strains.

[abelard]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:07:29 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

that is not so...

> We aren't immune
>to its analogue strains.

--
www.abelard.org

[Incubus]

I'd like to see your source for that claim.

[Keema's Nan]

On 2 Mar 2020, Incubus wrote
(in article <r3it5g$q67$2...@dont-email.me>):

Please no. It will be just another link to his 1990s dayglo website.

[abelard]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:11:28 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

i've already quoted it...

you innate immune system deals with it as far as that happens...
the rhinovirus 'gives up' in 3 or 4 days...

you adaptive immune system is the 'part' the learns...that takes
about a week to activate...


--
www.abelard.org

[abelard]

when you can't understand something...you are better
asking or studying...
not in panicking

do calm down

--
www.abelard.org

[Roger]

LOL!

[Incubus]

I have my RayBans with me.

[Pancho]

On 02/03/2020 14:04, Incubus wrote:

>> Please no. It will be just another link to his 1990s dayglo website.
>
> I have my RayBans with me.
>

80's sunglasses for a 90's website, cool.

[Incubus]

Your memory? That's not necessarily a reliable source.

> you innate immune system deals with it as far as that happens...
> the rhinovirus 'gives up' in 3 or 4 days...
>
> you adaptive immune system is the 'part' the learns...that takes
> about a week to activate...

Many "colds" last longer than a week.

Here's a reference:

"The 100 serotypes of human rhinoviruses are not cross protective and the
result is that we are subject to many rhinovirus colds during our lifetimes.
Young children, not having been exposed to rhinoviruses and other viruses that
cause colds, contract many colds a year. Adults, having become immune to many
of these viruses through hard experience, have fewer colds per year, usually
only about one. However, the extent and duration of immunity to a particular
rhinovirus induced by infection are not well established."

James H. Strauss, Ellen G. Strauss, "Viruses and Human Disease (Second
Edition)", 2008

[Incubus]

They are still manufactured and predate the '80s originally. They are made in
Italy these days.

[abelard]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 14:13:30 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

true, but i've checked since

>> you innate immune system deals with it as far as that happens...
>> the rhinovirus 'gives up' in 3 or 4 days...
>>
>> you adaptive immune system is the 'part' the learns...that takes
>> about a week to activate...
>
>Many "colds" last longer than a week.

as said elsewhere, 'a cold' is 'symptom not cause

eg secondary infections are common

>Here's a reference:
>
> "The 100 serotypes of human rhinoviruses are not cross protective and the
>result is that we are subject to many rhinovirus colds during our lifetimes.
>Young children, not having been exposed to rhinoviruses and other viruses that
>cause colds, contract many colds a year. Adults, having become immune to many
>of these viruses through hard experience, have fewer colds per year, usually
>only about one. However, the extent and duration of immunity to a particular
>rhinovirus induced by infection are not well established."

i guess that's because the adaptive immune system may gain some memory

nothing in the world is on/off

and you will note the author did not refer to rhinoviruses alone
for 'colds'

one virus may or may not give some immunity or partial immunity
to another(other viruses) and 'not well established'

>James H. Strauss, Ellen G. Strauss, "Viruses and Human Disease (Second
>Edition)", 2008

--
www.abelard.org

[Incubus]

They used the word "rhinovirus" four times in the above paragraph.

> one virus may or may not give some immunity or partial immunity
> to another(other viruses) and 'not well established'

Indeed, one becomes immune to a particular strain as I previously said.

[abelard]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 16:31:23 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

you did say that...

--
www.abelard.org