health

Why scientists think UK variant could be more deadly

11 Comments
By Kelly MacNAMARA

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

11 Comments
Login to comment

Key word here..."scientists THINK..." meaning unsure with no proof.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

It’s a new variant, it’s impossible to have all the information and answers yet. It’s a learning process for everyone. Scientists have open minds, work on a possible hypothesis and adjust it if research and studies indicate the original hypothesis was not correct. They use evidence, and adapt when new evidence becomes available. That’s how the world works, there are very few absolutes in life. Being risk averse and inflexible always leads to chaos and disaster in the long term.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I hope they also announce it's less deadly too if they find that

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Key word here..."scientists THINK..." meaning unsure with no proof.

At least some people are "THINKING". Wish the same could be said for the government.

Thinking is kinda how science works. Form a hypothesis based on information at hand, and then attempt to prove or disprove with further study.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

How can a virus be more transmissible?

What is it being compared to?

It doesn’t make sense to scare people by making these generalizations without clarification

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

How can a virus be more transmissible?

From the article that you are commenting on, just a few inches above.

"One mutation in particular increases the virus' ability to latch on more strongly to human cells and NERVTAG head Peter Horby, an emerging infectious disease professor at Oxford University, said evidence suggests this means it could make it easier to become infected."

What is it being compared to?

Previous strains of the virus, as detailed in the article that you are commenting on, just a few inches above.

It doesn’t make sense to scare people by making these generalizations without clarification

Clarification is detailed in the article that you are commenting on, just a few inches above etc.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Wish the same could be said for the government.

I agree, but I also wish the media would stop focusing on the scare possibilities when they clearly know very little.

could = may not

may = may not

possibly = don't know

more deadly (in a headline) = more clicks

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Horby said overall improvements in therapies and treatments -- including things like better strategies for hospital respiratory support -- have brought down case fatality rates since the first wave and could even "offset any difference with this new variant".

Yes, surprising they mention this. Early on in the Western experience with Covid19, there were numerous reports from pulmonologists that the 'standard' intubation protocols were killing more patients than saving because, initially, the infected lungs more closely resembled AMS (acute mountain sickness) rather than SARS and the standard protocols were known to be highly damaging to AMS affected lungs. In fact, the initial peak of deaths in most countries may be largely attributable to iatrogenic error, a result very familiar to Americans with our current industrialized healthcare system. And remember this: A HUGE MISTAKE, and all we get as knowledge of it is "...including things like better strategies for hospital respiratory support..." This is a good example of how they lie to us...or we would rightfully be terrified of our physicians

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@albaleo

There is a difference between scare mongering and informing. I thought this article was well balanced, covering key questions many people have and making the point clear that "we just don't know yet". I think most people who read past the headline would not consider this scare mongering.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I agree, but I also wish the media would stop focusing on the scare possibilities when they clearly know very little.

Taking proper care of higher risks is important. then people will not need to be scared, just prepared, what would be the point on not reporting things everybody should be careful about? that would only end up with everybody being ill informed and surprised when the possible negative consequences appear without warning.

and remember this: A HUGE MISTAKE, and all we get as knowledge of it is "...including things like better strategies for hospital respiratory support..." This is a good example of how they lie to us...or we would rightfully be terrified of our physicians

That is an invalid judgement. A huge mistake would be to treat in one way even when another is already demonstrated as much better, what you are talking about is doctors trying to find out which is the treatment that actually helped more AND adopting that modality as soon as the evidence was clear about its advantages.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but unless you have a time machine to lend you cannot blame people for not knowing what would end up being better from the beginning.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

On Jan 22, however, the government said the new variant could also be 30-40 percent more deadly, although it stressed the assessment relied on sparse data.

Where is the significant proof that it is?

If UK viral transmissions were increasing more rapidly due to ‘new strains’ then I could credence to the article but then why are cases in the UK falling?

Fear mongering...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites