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