Looks like I was right

[John_Kunkel]

Is there a possibility this coronavirus was overhyped, and even given empirical current data, continues to be so?  


THE MODELS WERE WRONG. DOES ANYONE CARE?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/the-models-were-wrong-does-anyone-care.php  

Once again, check the credentials of the author:

John H. Hinderaker is a conservative American lawyer. Just like your initial offering authored by John Daniel Davidson, a known conservative with a bias to agree with your preconceived notions. This doesn't prove you "right" in the sense of correct but it does prove you're "right" in a political sense and proves you will parrot the party line.

[John_Kunkel]

Also, just for the sake of comparison....Hit Google and type in "American Inventors". The people on the front of the list almost all come up as Black people.

Here's where you gotta use your head; as pointed out earlier, Google is merely a search engine to find content authored by somebody other than Google. Sure, their search algorithm probably is biased, but that doesn't mean all the content is. Try reading past the first couple of pages for a variety of content.

Then you can cherry-pick and post the content that agrees with your prejudice but, to be fair to yourself, check out other opinions and listen to them. An open mind helps when searching for the truth.

[Kern Dog]

I can agree to that.
It is probably a safe assumption that many of us do search out news that confirms our thoughts rather than confronts them.

[XH29N0G]

c00nhunter,  

Good question about how can we develop a vaccine if the virus is already mutating.  My understanding is that there are different types of mutations.  Some mutations allow for the virus to be tracked using its RNA (sort of like the crime scene investigator TV shows).  My impression is that those are the mutations we are hearing about.  Other mutations cause a change that might make a vaccine ineffective.   My understanding is that those are much bigger and would require a lot more.

The vaccines target various big steps in the cycle the virus uses to reproduce.  

What I understand is that this class of viruses all use the same basic steps

• attaching to the cell, invading the cytoplasm, some sort of unfolding or activation, making enzymes that do things the virus wants, some immune suppression/activation stuff, and expelling the virus out of the cell.  
  
• invading the cytoplasm,  
•  some sort of unfolding or activation,  
• making enzymes that do things the virus wants,  
•  some immune suppression/activation stuff, and  
• expelling the virus out of the cell.  

The goal of the vaccine is to interrupt one of these.  Different vaccines are targeting different parts of the system.  I am guessing that your concern is a possibility, but slim and that the scientists working on this think they will succeed.  It may be that the vaccine needs to be remade after a certain amount of time, but I do not know the answer to that.

I think the important thing is that there are a lot of different efforts to tackle this in the US and outside.

[XH29N0G]

I am going to add something in defense of KD's point related to machine learning.  Google and other engines have used information about our clicks, our location, and other people's clicks to sort the information and customize the content we get. This is one way that bias is introduced. I found that I had to disable some customizing search features to keep my news balanced.  I click on stories I like (in my comfort zone and safe place  ), but I like to see the other headlines, and I check the fringe news by reading some of those news sources (right and left......I am after all center ). 

[Mytur Binsdirti]

Is there a possibility this coronavirus was overhyped, and even given empirical current data, continues to be so?  


THE MODELS WERE WRONG. DOES ANYONE CARE?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/the-models-were-wrong-does-anyone-care.php  

Once again, check the credentials of the author:

John H. Hinderaker is a conservative American lawyer. Just like your initial offering authored by John Daniel Davidson, a known conservative with a bias to agree with your preconceived notions. This doesn't prove you "right" in the sense of correct but it does prove you're "right" in a political sense and proves you will parrot the party line.

I get it. Pundits who have conservative views are always wrong, which must mean that pundits with a more progressive view are always right.

[mel t]

Correct, now get in line with the rest of the minions.

[Kern Dog]

I get it. Pundits who have conservative views are always wrong, which must mean that pundits with a more progressive view are always right.

There is a great point in there:
Just because an idea or article is written by a person with a clear bias, it does not automatically mean that it is wrong.
I have so much more respect for a person with an opposing view if they are reasonable and rational. Those that are will sometimes admit that their side isn't always right and that their opponents might have a valid point sometimes.
When I have tried to reason with a lefty by admitting that one of their policies has some merit, instead of reciprocating, they take it as a sign of weakness and think that they are succeeding in converting me.
No, you're not.
I try to be fair and listen but to those hardliners that are too bull headed to see it, too bad, man. You'll have a hard time winning people over with a stubborn sales pitch.
I think that many will agree that most Politicians are not servants for the people but instead, greedy to enrich themselves. I certainly feel that way towards most of them.
Regarding the virus...
Yeah, the "Leaders" and the media have completely blown this out of proportion. Outside of New York and New Jersey, the rest of the country has not seen the doomsday scenarios that the Government had predicted. Many knew this going in or at least were very suspicious of it all.
Remember, just because a theory sounds crazy, doesn't mean that it is impossible.

[c00nhunterjoe]

c00nhunter,  

Good question about how can we develop a vaccine if the virus is already mutating.  My understanding is that there are different types of mutations.  Some mutations allow for the virus to be tracked using its RNA (sort of like the crime scene investigator TV shows).  My impression is that those are the mutations we are hearing about.  Other mutations cause a change that might make a vaccine ineffective.   My understanding is that those are much bigger and would require a lot more.

The vaccines target various big steps in the cycle the virus uses to reproduce.  

What I understand is that this class of viruses all use the same basic steps

• attaching to the cell, invading the cytoplasm, some sort of unfolding or activation, making enzymes that do things the virus wants, some immune suppression/activation stuff, and expelling the virus out of the cell.  
  
• invading the cytoplasm,  
•  some sort of unfolding or activation,  
• making enzymes that do things the virus wants,  
•  some immune suppression/activation stuff, and  
• expelling the virus out of the cell.  

The goal of the vaccine is to interrupt one of these.  Different vaccines are targeting different parts of the system.  I am guessing that your concern is a possibility, but slim and that the scientists working on this think they will succeed.  It may be that the vaccine needs to be remade after a certain amount of time, but I do not know the answer to that.

I think the important thing is that there are a lot of different efforts to tackle this in the US and outside.

If it were that easy, we would have had a coronavirus vaccine by now. Its been around since the 50s i beleive..... this is just the latest strain. We still dont have a sars drug, a h1n1 drug, or even a basic flu drug that is foolproof.

[XH29N0G]

coonhunter,

I think what you say makes sense and will explain more about my understanding.  

I am reporting what I saw from that materials I saw from the national academies.  I think this is up to dat information and about as good as we can get.  Why we don't have a vaccine for the common cold is something I have wondered about too.  My guess is that the common cold didn't have high priority for a vaccine because it is an annoyance rather than a life and death situation, and maybe because some of the things that were needed for it have only recently been worked out.  Much of what I saw about the cycle of this virus looked 10-15 years old.  

It is also clear with the flu that we need a vaccine that is given more regularly and my understanding is that relates to mutations like you described earlier.  I do not know the details of how (or if) the vaccine changes from year to year.  I know there are different flu strains and different vaccines for those strains. I do not know what the status will be if one is found for COVID-19.

I think we are just going to need to see if the urgency and interest in addressing the present situation leads to a vaccine, and if it is one that needs to be modified each year.  

A lot of this is hope on my part, but I believe I am accurate in describing the thinking behind the idea of a vaccine.

[stripedelete]

I agree.  Don't hang your hat in a vaccine. Therapeutics are our salvation.  Just ask Magic Johnson.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

  Just ask Magic Johnson.

Speaking of Magic Johnson, with all the women he banged, his name could be considered X-rated. How can he still have that name in this "Me Too" era?

[Q5XX29]

I agree.  Don't hang your hat in a vaccine. Therapeutics are our salvation.  Just ask Magic Johnson.

Correct, fortunately or unfortunately. Coronavirus of any subtype is exceedingly difficult to develop any sort of vaccine that is effective, safe, and durable. For sure, there will be market swings based on little more than rumors of vaccine development hopes and disappointments, but in the end- I'll believe it when I see it. Take it from this physician, for whatever that's worth.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

I get it. Pundits who have conservative views are always wrong, which must mean that pundits with a more progressive view are always right.

There is a great point in there:
Just because an idea or article is written by a person with a clear bias, it does not automatically mean that it is wrong.
I have so much more respect for a person with an opposing view if they are reasonable and rational. Those that are will sometimes admit that their side isn't always right and that their opponents might have a valid point sometimes.
When I have tried to reason with a lefty by admitting that one of their policies has some merit, instead of reciprocating, they take it as a sign of weakness and think that they are succeeding in converting me.
No, you're not.
I try to be fair and listen but to those hardliners that are too bull headed to see it, too bad, man. You'll have a hard time winning people over with a stubborn sales pitch.
I think that many will agree that most Politicians are not servants for the people but instead, greedy to enrich themselves. I certainly feel that way towards most of them.
Regarding the virus...
Yeah, the "Leaders" and the media have completely blown this out of proportion. Outside of New York and New Jersey, the rest of the country has not seen the doomsday scenarios that the Government had predicted. Many knew this going in or at least were very suspicious of it all.
Remember, just because a theory sounds crazy, doesn't mean that it is impossible.

[odcics2]

Some good points above.

Politicians are crooks.  Public servants??   
No... SELF SERVING!! 

Not sure about the virus being overblown, though.

I had it in late January. Lasted 3 weeks, was flat on my ass tired.
Had a long time friend die in March.
My brother lost a buddy. His wife had it.
Recently found out that some neighbors had it: one in late December and one in mid January.
(of course - they weren't tested - no tests existed. But the same M.O.)

Also revising my guesstimates up...   With so many showing no symptoms, approximately 60%, I think 50 million have been infected across the entire US. That number brings the death rate down to the "regular" flu area.  This would include people that already had it.

There will be no way to test everyone in the US.
Darwin is at work. He's never unemployed.