Talk:COVID-19 pandemic

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon bioDNA.svg

This Biology related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Archives for this talk page: , (new)

Covid and the Spanish flu[edit]

Given that Spanish Flu faded into the background 'of its own account' after two years, when will Covid-19 start doing so? (Making allowance for greater communication networks now etc.) Does the virus responsible for Spanish flu exist now, in 2021 as part of the 'general flu viruses people are normally vaccinated against'? Anna Livia (talk) 19:09, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I think it's still unknown what the time frames may turn out to be like for this coronavirus. There's also been mentions of a difference between the types of virus: flu viruses can mutate more dramatically than the more stable coronaviruses (one part of why coronaviruses are easier to make vaccines for).
The first half of 2020, there were mentions in the media of expert opinions that this coronavirus may eventually mutate the way the Spanish flu virus did (infecting more easily and damaging less), indeed eventually becoming just another common virus like the Spanish flu did. So far since then, though, more easily infecting variations (first beta, then delta) also do more damage instead of less. However, I think that pattern could still later change at some point (if there's a tipping point in the evolutionary situation/challenge facing the virus).
Anyway, this coronavirus seems to be here to stay. It spreads too well, including crucially across different host species, for it to go extinct even if humans became fully immune. In case of immunity, it's just a matter of time before mutation leads to a comeback. After vaccination improves life with the virus as much as is possible in the short term, hopefully the virus will become nicer in a fairly short time. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
I was also wondering "what happened" to the Spanish flu. It seems that all currently circulating flu viruses are direct or indirect descendants of the 1918 virus. So, in a sense, it's still here.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:38, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
I was paraphrasing various articles countering the 'permanent lockdown argument.' (Various other large-scale to pandemic outbreaks followed the same decline.) Anna Livia (talk) 17:16, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Alphabet soup[edit]

The delta variant was in the news and we are now on omicron: I understand some letters were skipped because they sounded too similar - but what about the other letters between? Anna Livia (talk) 18:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

This has no place in anything trying to be an Encyclopedia[edit]

"Indeed, the common idea that the spread of the disease isn't that serious since only some people are likely to die is incredibly callous, and often brutally ableist against those with chronic conditions or ageist against the elderly."

Almost all disease disproportionally affects the elderly. That is not 'ageist' or 'ableist', it's nature. Fehmgericht (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Good job we aren't trying to be an encyclopaedia then. Scream!! (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)


It's kind of ironic that this article fails nearly all of the "anti-science" traits listed on this site. I really don't understand the purpose of it other than someone's angsty rant about reality not conforming to their pseudoreligious beliefs 2A00:23C4:BA8F:7301:B0B4:F29F:D09B:97B0 (talk) 00:49, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

can you explain how this is "pseudoreligious" and falls into anti-science? — Unsigned, by: / talk 15:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
What a lovely worship of scientism from branch covidians this article was. -- (talk) 11:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
calling something/someone "scientism" and "branch covidians" makes you sound dumb — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs
I'm half expecting a rant now about how Anthony FauciWikipedia is a "branch covidian" and real science lies with supplements from Natural News.
'Tis okay. Pretty soon, no medical professional will want to work with this lot, and they will flee to saner pastures, like what's happening in the Idaho. BobJohnson (talk) 14:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Just skimming this article reminded me of the old favorite: "5G causes Covid". I wonder if that's still a thing? Perhaps out IP editor could tell us?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 07:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, seems like someone got triggered, did I happen to offend one of your messiahs, mea culpa, just keep worshipping. And don't worry, I don't care about 5G or supplements or whatever you prefer, like mandatory injections maybe? How dare people start questioning everything praised by believers of "The Science", right? Rumor has it real scientists have no issues with being challenged and questioned instead of being muzzled. However, the mindset of branch covidians resembles the rise (and fall) of a global cult movement. Congrats for keeping it alive. Reality beats satire big time... -- (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Most people who have used the phrase "branch covidians" are pure hacks, like Fox News figures like the Laura Ingraham (who privately probably is vaccinated according to their workplace policy and are spewing shit to appeal to the rubes), or the Elon Musk (who was pissed that pandemic measures upset his karoshi culture dream). Which "messiah" are you parroting, I wonder? BobJohnson (talk) 12:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

One of the weirdest COVID origin hypothesis.[edit]

I've mentioned the Ethical Skeptic before, and would wonder what anyone's thoughts on it is. Patty Pat 13:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

My thought is I wonder how it compares to the theory that COVID came from outer space on a meteor, as I recall a few scholars astoundingly endorsed. Chillpilled (talk) 14:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
It's a Gish Gallop. Right off the bat in the executive summary: "virus contained an inactivated biowarfare peptide (proline-weakened staphylococcal enterotoxin BWikipedia – or ‘SEB’) in its RNAWikipedia" -- what kind of technobabble is this? (It seems to be a misreading of doi:10.1073/pnas.2010722117, which is not untypical of these things). I assume there are other errors of this sort.
The part of that Gish Gallop that definitely is true, though, is how China's authoritarian, secretive government really made finding the root cause of COVID-19 difficult. As far as I am aware, the preponderance of evidence suggests a zoonosis origin for COVID-19 still. However, as long as China remains uncooperative, the lab leak theory (in particular, the accidental leak one, the bio-weapon angle only being taken seriously by conspiracy theorists) will continue to have "legs". BobJohnson (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
This as all so much hot air. There are two hypothesis.
First hypothesis: - the virus evolved naturally and then turned up somewhere in China (probably Wuhan market) and spread around the world.
Second hypothesis: the virus evolved naturally, was taken to Wuhan lab for study, escaped from there into Wuhan market and spread around the world.
(There is actually a third hypothesis that both things happened, but nobody really suggests this.)
In any case the Chinese government tried to keep the lid on things before telling the world what was going on and has done little to clarify which route was most probable.
But so what? How much real difference does it make?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 15:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Open secret that hypothesis two is pushed by certain people (originally via a flood of uncertainty tactic) who want to use it as innuendo to get laypeople to believe it was an engineered bioweapon. It makes a lot of difference because this shifted the blame onto a particular government, which has geopolitical benefits for somebody, while in actuality zoonotic spillover is in large part stemming from a situation of environmental encroachment. Something which neither the US or China would like to acknowledge (since they are both complicit in that), and the Chinese government has their own conspiracy theories about the virus being engineered in some American military base. I believe there was some analysis (possibly multiple, post-2021) conducted on early COVID infections that indicated the wet market. Chillpilled (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Ok, but we don't know which one it was and we probably never will. But (apart from the spin) it really makes no difference. It came from bats and, by one route or another, it ended up in the human population. Everything else is speculation, spin and innuendo.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)