2553

Same virus.

2554

Well, you called it. :rofl:

2555

Because he wants to continue the “It doesn’t matter what we do” narrative is the only thing I can guess.

But I am beyond caring now…he can have the last word.

2 Likes
2556

That’s what I exposure means … low virus load … insufficient to cause infection. The immune system routinely does that with most pathogens. If it didn’t, our species would have died off eons ago.

2557

That’s not my narrative at all, you built that one all by yourself.

No need to guess, just ask.

Yes, I’m a horrible person.

2558

Correction … doesn’t want to debate remotely. If they hadn’t changed the rules at the 11th hour, there would be a debate.

2559

They are not the same. They literally mapped the genome/RNA of the 1918 flu using formalin preserved lung tissue of 3 individuals who died of it. A/Brevig Mission/1/18, A/South Carolina/1/18 and A/New York/1/18. They have the genome/RNA of virtually all more modern H1N1 strains. These are not the same viruses. I understand the whole sunk cost thing, but I’m not sure why there is even a discussion about this.

4 Likes
2560

The Spanish Flu virus mutated at least twice between 1918 and 1920. Was it still the same virus?

2561

They are the same virus.

2562

I understand that it’s scary.

2563

The very definition of the word mutate means that the virus changed into different viruses during that time period.

2564

No, it doesn’t. It is and always has been the same virus. Arguing “strains” is a rationalization of the failure of high modernism.

Interesting fact, in the 1918 A(H1N1) pandemic the virus was lethal when it first invaded a region. Very rapidly, the mortality rate dropped.

And when the King of Spain caught it, there were already cases in the US, France and China.

2565

So does that mean that the people who died during the pandemic in 1919 and 1920 did not die of the so-called Spanish Flu? If that is true, why do health agencies count them among the casualties of that pandemic?

2566

To the best of my understanding, it is because people are invested in the “there’s nothing we can do about COVID. We are all going to be exposed” narrative and believe misunderstanding viruses are the way to uphold that narrative.

2 Likes
2567

But yet, when the virus reached the interior of Alaska in the spring of 1920, it killed up to 30% of its victims in some communities.

2568

Incorrect. We are all going to be exposed. That’s reality.

It doesn’t mean we’re all going to die or even get sick.

Another construction on your part.

1 Like
2569

Sure, over what period of time? Was it as lethal in 1921?

2570

Probably, but by then the virus pretty well ran out of unexposed victims. Isolated communities, such as those in interior Alaska were the last places with sufficient density to maintain person to person transmission.

2571

If that is your belief, you’re welcome to it.

Maybe you could send a quick message to the CDC, WHO and vaccine manufacturers telling them to stop wasting their time. Since there’s only one H1N1 virus, just cover one strain and they’re done. Oh wait. In 2009, the seasonal vaccine included H1N1, too bad it was antigenically distinct from the pandemic strain and offered no protection.

The pandemic virus is antigenically distinct from seasonal influenza A (H1N1) viruses targeted by seasonal influenza vaccines. Results from recent serologic studies have suggested that seasonal influenza vaccines are unlikely to provide substantial cross-protection against infection with the pandemic H1N1 virus.

Wonder how that happened since all H1N1’s are the same virus?

3 Likes
2572

It is science.