Shanghai Disneyland will close in effort to contain coronavirus

Becoming more transmissible and less lethal are absolutely what’s best for the pathogen. The reality is that “it’s not always possible” OR the deaths and time it takes to get to “harmless” aren’t acceptable to the masses.

The “Law of Declining Virulence” has always been a wonderful scientific ethics debate. How long you willing to wait?

Last I checked norovirus still kills “tens of thousands” of children worldwide. Way more than Covid ever will. The point being…that norovirus has plenty of hosts and is taking its “own sweet time” evolving to “harmless.”

I'm not sure what term(s) I am misusing. A parasitic relationship is a symbiotic relationship between a parasite and a host. Symbiotic does not mean "win-win", is just means symbiosis.

A virus does not "want" to mutate, expand, or grow. A virus does not have goals. It does not think, it does not "care" if it is successful or not. It does not know if it is doing itself harm or not. It literally just is. It adapts to its environment and replicates because that's what a virus does, and all it does, but it doesn't think about best practices or the impact of those practices because it isn't even alive. It doesn't know if it's killing the host or throwing the host a bachelor party because it doesn't even know it's in a host.

We keep personifying the virus as if it gives a ****.

I thought symbiosis implied mutually beneficial.

Regardless of whether the virus or the mold or bacteria or microbe or shark thinks and cares, how does that change the notion that killing things you need to survive is a bad idea in the long term if you want to multiply and expand?

Does it boil down to what causes the mutation? Is it a glitch that just happens to the virus or is it an evolutionary step that occurs?

I mean, it can be a win-win, and that's how The Phantom Menace describes it.

But it can also be a win-lose.

ApolloAndy said:

Regardless of whether the virus or the mold or bacteria or microbe or shark thinks and cares, how does that change the notion that killing things you need to survive is a bad idea in the long term if you want to multiply and expand?

The virus does not want to multiply and expand. It doesn't want anything. Regardless of whether the virus kills its host or not, it's still mutating because it's replicating. The sooner the host dies, the quicker it stops mutating.

Mr. Vaughan, what we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, er... an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all.

Okay, fine. "Want" isn't the right word, but I think you're picking at semantics. The point is that supposedly regardless of the organism/virus, changes in genetics and behavior which improve the the long term replication and expansion of that organism/virus will favor not killing the thing it needs in order to survive. That part makes perfect sense to me. And yet we see lots and lots of parasites and predators do exactly that.

I think the distance between our perspectives (maybe) has to do with how we individually view viruses, and to what degree we (and others) consider them as being "alive" (however one defines that).

This is a somewhat older (but still relevant) read from 2004 that gets into that topic. Maybe we see it that same way?

And maybe biology has shifted its view to a more distinct answer since 2004 (in fact, I would assume it has in some manner).

I don't think it matters if viruses are alive. And I think Andy is right in terms of it being semantics in terms of personifying viruses.

If you have 2 viruses. One kills 100% of the people with it within 24 hours. The second one only kills some of the people who get it but it takes several weeks for that to happen and after getting the virus, many people have little/no symptoms and feel well enough to live daily lives, interacting with other people, etc. You would expect that virus 1 will not become a pandemic because it won't transmitted because people with it die very quickly. Likely won't see many cases of virus 1 after some short period of time. Virus 2 may well become a pandemic.

One of the big issues with Covid is its very much like Virus 2. Many people who have it have minor/no symptoms. Are able to go about their daily lives (even participate in debates ;)). Spreading it to other people in the process. But for other people, Covid is deadly/causes significant health problems/issues. Its also relatively easily transmissible. A deadly virus that is hard to transmit/catch is less of a concern.

Plus, in my opinion, he’s more politician than scientist anyhow…

So a man who’s been doing the same job for decades and who is accepted as one of the top authorities on the field he works in is a politician now because…

I realize you’re very politically conservative, but I thought you were smarter.

I showed a somewhat older (2010) PBS documentary, The Vaccine War, concerning the autism/vaccine nonsense spurred by Jenny McCarthy to a class a few weeks ago, and who happened to appear? Good ol' Fauci (with more hair). Most of them thought he was someone Trump appointed, and had no idea how long he has been around and the work he has done. I felt like I performed some kind of civic duty. Of course some would view me a radical libtard attempting to indoctrinate my students.

Apollo Andy said:

That part makes perfect sense to me. And yet we see lots and lots of parasites and predators do exactly that.

I think the prey would be much quicker to adapt than a predator, as it's their survival that is at greater risk. Think of all the amazing adaptations that creatures have made to avoid becoming dinner. What pressure from the environment does a predator feel? I mean, just look at humans.

In this regard, maybe a virus is more analogous to a prey. Meaning, once inside a body it is attacked by an immune system and in others an immune system boosted by a vaccine. After all, it's not "hunting", just doin' what proteins do. And I totally get what GoBucks (above) is saying; it stands to reason that the longer it can squat inside a body and silently replicate, the greater chance it has to mutate and spread.

I also admit I have not taken a biology class since 1998.

It's particularly comical to watch Don Jr. rant about how Fauci will lock everything down "again," when he never did and never had the authority in the first place.

Check out the Fauci doc on Disney+ if you can. It basically follows the parallels in his role during the start of the AIDS epidemic and then the Covid pandemic. This guy is a career public servant. Had he instead gone the way of private practice or something, he would have retired wealthy a long time ago. Instead he's served for decades through plenty of changes in Washington. That's not a shill for anyone.

A “career public servant” seems like a reasonable description of Fauci. That’s somewhere between politician and scientist. I’d say you have to be astute in politics to serve as many different administrations as he has.

I sat and watched him lie/obfuscate in real time about how his NIH never funded “gain of function” research. Lies are what politicians are known for… Fauci was good at it.

I doubt most could name a single contribution he’s made to scientific knowledge. But quite a few know about his political fights with Rand Paul, Cruz, et al.

I realize that many of the ad hominem crowd have great affinity for Dr. Fauci. I surmise that has more to do with those POLITICAL figures Fauci fights with, than respect for his scientific mind/contributions…

It might not even be his fault (I think it is)…

Anyhow, that’s the reason I opine he’s more politician than scientist THESE days.

It doesn’t bother me a bit if someone disagrees with my opinion of Fauci. I’d love to see a list of his accomplishments I might be unaware of… Maybe I’d change my mind…

I had promised myself it wasn’t worth posting anything further here.

I had promised myself I would no longer argue with ignorant people that choose to ignore facts.

But just as Michael Corleone once taught me, “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!”

Tony Fauci is one of the most respected medical scientists of our generation. He was at the forefront of the fight in the AIDS epidemic 40 years ago. Those of us in the medical community were aware and respectful of him long before COVID came along.

A 20 second google search finds a simple summary of his lifelong accomplishments.

”He serves on the editorial boards of many scientific journals, as an editor of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, and as an author, coauthor, or editor of more than 1,000 scientific publications, including several textbooks.”

Harrison’s is THE major medical textbook, of which he has been a senior editor for multiple editions.

If you don’t want to familiarize yourself with his many accomplishments, it’s because you choose to be ignorant.

I will now once again try to avoid arguing with ignorant people.

”You broke my heart, Fredo.”

As opposed to your dislike of him for your purely political reasons lol.

I didn’t know who he was prior to covid and I don’t ‘follow’ him Now. I couldn’t care less about what politicians he fights with.

As for gain of function, I’ve read a few actual non partisan articles about this and it’s not cut and dry like you’re saying.

To be honest, I don’t even believe your background at this point because all I (have) ever see(n) out of you isn’t anything that makes me feel like you don’t just talk out of your anus to back up your claims. Over the years I’ve seen you spout back outright propaganda.

Not that I expect you to care what I think of you, you shouldn’t, we don’t know each other. But I don’t believe you and I see you as merely someone who likes to troll and will say anything to try and sound as if you’re an authority, thinking everyone you’re talking to isn’t smart enough to see through your absolute bull crap.

sws said:

A 20 second google search finds a simple summary of his lifelong accomplishments.

”He serves on the editorial boards of many scientific journals, as an editor of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, and as an author, coauthor, or editor of more than 1,000 scientific publications, including several textbooks.”

Harrison’s is THE major medical textbook, of which he has been a senior editor for multiple editions.

Which is why I believe They are a complete fraud and a troll. It’s not hard to cite sources nor is it hard to do a quick google search. But They want to spout propaganda without facts and then claim everyone else isn’t smart enough to be educated therefore must be acting from a place of partisanship as They are.

Aamilj said:

A “career public servant” seems like a reasonable description of Fauci. That’s somewhere between politician and scientist.

I don't think you understand what words mean.

...or that they mean specific things.

Jeff said:

Aamilj said:

A “career public servant” seems like a reasonable description of Fauci. That’s somewhere between politician and scientist.

I don't think you understand what words mean.

I disagree. I think They know exactly what words mean. Don’t mistake Ignorance for Agenda.

I had promised myself I would no longer argue with ignorant people that choose to ignore facts.

Just so we’re clear here…

Tony Fauci is one of the most respected medical scientists of our generation. He was at the forefront of the fight in the AIDS epidemic 40 years ago. Those of us in the medical community were aware and respectful of him long before COVID came along…

This is your OPINION...Not fact.

If you don’t want to familiarize yourself with his many accomplishments, it’s because you choose to be ignorant.

I respect his many accomplishments. I also criticize his faults. I noticed you left out all the “negatives” about Fauci. Does that mean you CHOSE to be ignorant about the man’s record? I would never say that about your omissions...but there are differing debate/decorum tactics for all...

A 20 second google search finds a simple summary of his lifelong accomplishments.

It indeed will. It will also illuminate how “complex”(controversial) a figure he has been clear back to those days he was “at the forefront of the fight in the AIDS epidemIc...”

I will now once again try to avoid arguing with ignorant people..

At least I got “the ad hominem crowd” right.

I sincerely am sorry that my opinion that “he’s more politician than scientist anyhow” has led you out of retirement to call names.