That’s the issue. If we’d been able to cut down on its spread better earlier on, then it’s less likely so many new variants would be appearing. Doesn’t mean it wouldn’t happen at all, but chances go down the less the virus is copied and makes it to another host.
When this is finally over, that will need to be part of the estimation for how many people might have survived or avoided serious long-term illness if we could have just cut down on spread better until the vaccines arrived. Hopefully people will deal with the next pandemic better than this one based on what we’ve learned.
From what I have read, COVID mutates about 4x slower than the flu. On top that, COVID undergoes an antigenic drift and the flu undergoes an antigenic shift. Two different mutations. That is why the flu requires a yearly shot.
That’s the real fear moving forward. Lots of variants that are constantly evolving. Not enough vaccinated to stop it. Many think annual shots may be needed for a while just like flu.
Gotta be careful with the word flu these days. Influenza shifts and drifts depending on the type.
Studies to date estimate that the novel coronavirus mutates at a rate approximately four times slower than the influenza virus, also known as the seasonal flu virus. Although SARS-CoV-2 is mutating, thus far, it does not seem to be drifting antigenically.
If you are having 12-17 year olds vaccinated for a virus they literally have about 0% chance of dying from I don’t know what to say. What, beyond irrational fear, could possibly posses someone to do this. It’s not science.
I have avoided getting into the science discussions on this, because I don’t care that much, and I am one of the sheeple just doing what I am told. However, I think I heard on the news a few days ago that one of the variants out there is hitting kids fairly hard. I guess vaccinating them could be in response to actual recent findings, or an effort to get ahead of future mutations. Again, science. I feel like to some degree we can let Darwinism sort this out.
Again, there have been plenty of studies showing that kids less than 18 are not major factors in the spread of COVID 19. Not even minor factors. So they don’t spread it and they don’t die from it. But let’s vaccinate them. In reality if we vaccinate the rest of the population what’s the need beyond theatrics.
In the U.S., resurgent Covid-19 epidemics in 2020 were driven by adults ages 20-49. Even after schools reopened in October, that age group accounted for almost three-quarters of SARS-CoV-2 infections, whereas less than 5% originated from children ages 0-9 and less than 10% from those ages 10-19, a study published in the journal Science found.
Our country fails miserable when we have to deal with issues that are for the “greater good”. If it does not benefit us we are not very interested. So sad.
The question is why they may not have been factors to this point. It’s possible that the kids don’t spread the virus much, but it’s also possible that all the precautions people have taken with kids in the schools and extracurricular activities (the primary areas of socializing for kids) are actually helping prevent spread via kids. Or it may be both. I am reading that kids may at least be capable of spreading the virus, but it would be difficult to tell.
For example:
The key graph is here:
Are kids any more or less likely than adults to spread coronavirus?
Most children who become infected with the COVID-19 virus have no symptoms, or they have milder symptoms such as low-grade fever, fatigue, and cough. Early studies suggested that children do not contribute much to the spread of coronavirus. But more recent studies raise concerns that children could be capable of spreading the infection.
Though the recent studies varied in their methods, their findings were similar: infected children had as much, or more, coronavirus in their upper respiratory tracts as infected adults.
The amount of virus found in children — their viral load — was not correlated with the severity of their symptoms. In other words, more virus did not mean more severe symptoms.
Finding high amounts of viral genetic material — these studies measured viral RNA, not live virus — in kids does not prove that children are infectious. However, the presence of high viral loads in infected children does increase the concern that children, even those without symptoms, could readily spread the infection to others.
I think it makes sense to vaccinate kids given this, particularly if we want to start allowing everyone to lower defenses like physical distancing and mask wearing.
To me it would make sense to vaccinate the people most susceptible to COVID. If you vaccinate all of those people then there is no one to spread it to that would make a difference.
Again, it doesn’t affect kids below 18 and they aren’t spreaders to any extent. So vaccinate everyone else and move on. Not sure how that doesn’t make sense.
I think in regards to the precautions we take with kids, it’s just the opposite of your possibility. I’ve found that the older populations to be the most cautious. I ran into a sr citizen in Subway just a couple of days ago who said this was literally the first time she had been out in public in a year. I’ve found with kids it would be near impossible to keep them shut-in for a year.
Now your suggestion of simply not knowing whether kids spread it because they’re typically asymptomatic seems plausible.
There are some very cautious adults. However, I’ve known and read about a lot of adults, particularly in the 20-49 age group that Mullinsmaniac’s article noted as the highest rates of spread, that are not cautious. Believe it or not, there are still people going out and socializing in bars and restaurants with few precautions in a lot of places, as well as other people that are working in situations where they are likely to spread it even with some precautions.
My observation is that the kids in schools have been pretty good at adjusting to the mask and distancing requirements for the most part (with the help of teachers), better at least than I thought they would. Not everyone of course, there’s always exceptions.
By older I meant 60+. My point about kids was that presumably the adults who are taking the precautions with the kids are also practicing the same precautions with themselves, yet they appear to be spreading it at a much higher rate.
It would interesting to see the percentage of the 20-49 spreader group that do not have kids.
I see, I do agree that 60+ folks are generally being more cautious than 20-49. I’m not sure the adults are necessarily being as cautious, since the kids are mandated to take precautions in the schools.