All borders to reopen.
Originally Posted by KRviator
I'm going to absolutely pi$$ myself when it gets into WA. Even if I'm off work for another 6 months, it'll be worth it...
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 70
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by SOPS
West Australians have until midnight Wednesday to get home. After that, it’s too late. And I’m guessing it will be until a least the end of the year, but I hope I’m wrong.
There are no surprises here.
It'll be pretty hard for someone to claim that they "got caught"
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Most locked down city in the world
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WingNut60
The warning has been in the winds for several days now.
There are no surprises here.
It'll be pretty hard for someone to claim that they "got caught"
There are no surprises here.
It'll be pretty hard for someone to claim that they "got caught"
Originally Posted by KRviator
I'm going to absolutely pi$$ myself when it gets into WA. Even if I'm off work for another 6 months, it'll be worth it...
Originally Posted by Turnleft080
I have been trying to find info (maybe someone can) on the sudden disappearance of the Wuhan, Alpha, Beta, Gamma variants. On most graphs they are down to < 2%. Vaccines pretty march started at the beginning of the year so it wasn't the vaccines that kicked them out. Did the Delta variant just push them aside. ...
The coronavirus has the potential to throw up a mutation every time it infects a cell and produces more of itself (ie. each 'generation'). Some of the mutations yield nothing in particular but every once in a while a mutation that changes the spike protein will make that variant more infectious. If that new variant is significantly more infectious and occurs in a relatively uninfected population, it's off to the races. Typically the more infectious variant outperforms its forebear and becomes the new dominant strain, initially in that population. The wonder of international air travel tends to be what connects a new variant to broader populations.
Thus when the 'original' Wuhan reached the UK that relatively uninfected population become the feedstock for the alpha-variant, about 50 percent more contagious than the original. In South Africa the original variant threw up the beta-variant, again about 50 percent more contagious than the original. Gamma probably first developed in South America but manifested itself in Japan. Delta appears to be one of the first variants on a variant, in that it almost certainly mutated from a non-original strain, likely alpha-variant, in the Indian population. It is estimated to be 60 percent more infectious than alpha and thus quickly dominated the previous dominant variant.
There's also been a raft of other variants - epsilon, zeta, eta, theta, etc - recorded that have bobbed in a specific sub-populations but that have either been not significantly more infectious than their forbear or emerged too late such that they couldn't achieve dominance.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Most locked down city in the world
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MickG0105
It's straightforward evolution, survival of the fittest, where fitness is measured in infectiousness.
The coronavirus has the potential to throw up a mutation every time it infects a cell and produces more of itself (ie. each 'generation'). Some of the mutations yield nothing in particular but every once in a while a mutation that changes the spike protein will make that variant more infectious. If that new variant is significantly more infectious and occurs in a relatively uninfected population, it's off to the races. Typically the more infectious variant outperforms its forebear and becomes the new dominant strain, initially in that population. The wonder of international air travel tends to be what connects a new variant to broader populations.
Thus when the 'original' Wuhan reached the UK that relatively uninfected population become the feedstock for the alpha-variant, about 50 percent more contagious than the original. In South Africa the original variant threw up the beta-variant, again about 50 percent more contagious than the original. Gamma probably first developed in South America but manifested itself in Japan. Delta appears to be one of the first variants on a variant, in that it almost certainly mutated from a non-original strain, likely alpha-variant, in the Indian population. It is estimated to be 60 percent more infectious than alpha and thus quickly dominated the previous dominant variant.
There's also been a raft of other variants - epsilon, zeta, eta, theta, etc - recorded that have bobbed in a specific sub-populations but that have either been not significantly more infectious than their forbear or emerged too late such that they couldn't achieve dominance.
The coronavirus has the potential to throw up a mutation every time it infects a cell and produces more of itself (ie. each 'generation'). Some of the mutations yield nothing in particular but every once in a while a mutation that changes the spike protein will make that variant more infectious. If that new variant is significantly more infectious and occurs in a relatively uninfected population, it's off to the races. Typically the more infectious variant outperforms its forebear and becomes the new dominant strain, initially in that population. The wonder of international air travel tends to be what connects a new variant to broader populations.
Thus when the 'original' Wuhan reached the UK that relatively uninfected population become the feedstock for the alpha-variant, about 50 percent more contagious than the original. In South Africa the original variant threw up the beta-variant, again about 50 percent more contagious than the original. Gamma probably first developed in South America but manifested itself in Japan. Delta appears to be one of the first variants on a variant, in that it almost certainly mutated from a non-original strain, likely alpha-variant, in the Indian population. It is estimated to be 60 percent more infectious than alpha and thus quickly dominated the previous dominant variant.
There's also been a raft of other variants - epsilon, zeta, eta, theta, etc - recorded that have bobbed in a specific sub-populations but that have either been not significantly more infectious than their forbear or emerged too late such that they couldn't achieve dominance.
Originally Posted by Turnleft080
Thanks for that MickG0105. Makes you wonder, the longer you lockdown the more time their is to generate a new variant.
And yes and no on the latter. Each infected person is an incubator for a potential new variant. If you keep the number of infected down, you reduce the likelihood of a new, significantly more infectious variant emerging. Further, if you have measures in place to limit spread you can prevent a new variant from gaining a foothold. That's why the way out of this is likely to be multifaceted - at the very least a combination of vaccination and some infection control measures.
That's why the Omega strain is going to be 'interesting'. We need to hope against hope that the 'light at the end of the tunnel' isn't the glow of the Omega or some other strain that's mutated to luminescence.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 70
Posts: 1,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m still curious as to one thing - if ‘technically’ they don’t know/can’t prove how or what caused the virus, or what causes it to mutate, then how can the Government actually know what the real solution for eradicating it is? Are lockdowns, masks and the current vaccines really going to work long term? Where does root cause come into this - it’s pretty difficult to resolve this pandemic if you don’t even know what the root cause is in the first place? For Melbourne to go into lockdown 6 times it shows that the current measures are not effective because the virus does keep coming back and spreading.
TBH, I don’t need a lecture in the theories of mask wearing and lockdowns to minimise the spread, I get it. I’m looking at the prospect of this - if you don’t know what causes the problem how can you truly fix it? Because with these variants it looks like we could be doing this tango for years, and that is not only unsustainable, it is not addressing the root cause, and without a root cause how can they create a workable ‘fix’?
TBH, I don’t need a lecture in the theories of mask wearing and lockdowns to minimise the spread, I get it. I’m looking at the prospect of this - if you don’t know what causes the problem how can you truly fix it? Because with these variants it looks like we could be doing this tango for years, and that is not only unsustainable, it is not addressing the root cause, and without a root cause how can they create a workable ‘fix’?
Originally Posted by Paragraph377
I’m still curious as to one thing - if ‘technically’ they don’t know/can’t prove how or what caused the virus, or what causes it to mutate, then how can the Government actually know what the real solution for eradicating it is? Are lockdowns, masks and the current vaccines really going to work long term? Where does root cause come into this - it’s pretty difficult to resolve this pandemic if you don’t even know what the root cause is in the first place? For Melbourne to go into lockdown 6 times it shows that the current measures are not effective because the virus does keep coming back and spreading.
TBH, I don’t need a lecture in the theories of mask wearing and lockdowns to minimise the spread, I get it. I’m looking at the prospect of this - if you don’t know what causes the problem how can you truly fix it? Because with these variants it looks like we could be doing this tango for years, and that is not only unsustainable, it is not addressing the root cause, and without a root cause how can they create a workable ‘fix’?
TBH, I don’t need a lecture in the theories of mask wearing and lockdowns to minimise the spread, I get it. I’m looking at the prospect of this - if you don’t know what causes the problem how can you truly fix it? Because with these variants it looks like we could be doing this tango for years, and that is not only unsustainable, it is not addressing the root cause, and without a root cause how can they create a workable ‘fix’?
Originally Posted by Paragraph377
I’m still curious as to one thing - if ‘technically’ they don’t know/can’t prove how or what caused the virus, or what causes it to mutate ...
And you don't need to know how or what "caused" the original coronavirus to emerge, once you have mapped it genetically then you're on your way to dealing with it.
Last edited by MickG0105; 20th Aug 2021 at 12:20. Reason: Tidy up
Originally Posted by PoppaJo
I know the rest of the year is going to be tough down south but sweet Jesus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_kenn...63173716987909
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_kenn...63173716987909
Originally Posted by MickG0105
The mechanism by which coronaviruses replicate and mutate is very well understood - the RNA replication process that occurs after a coronavirus infects a cell is markedly less accurate than DNA replication. Each time a replication occurs the RNA creates a protein sequence and that protein sequence is then used to create a new strand of RNA - the protein sequence is a bit like a negative in photography or a mould in casting. Because of the inherent weakness in RNA replication there is a very small chance that the protein sequence could change slightly so you end up with a very, very slightly flawed negative or mould. Those changes result in the resulting next generation of RNA changing every so slightly. When you have many, many replications occurring many, many times as you would get in a large infected population, basic probability favors that the virus will adjust. It is straightforward evolution but on a very, very condensed timeline because of a) the relatively very short inter-generarional cycle time and b) the relatively poor accuracy of the replication process. Most of the time the small 'misprints' or 'miscasts' (mutations) that arise have no effect whatsoever on how the coronavirus interacts with its target hosts but every once in a while they do.
And you don't need to know how or what "caused" the original coronavirus to emerge, once you have mapped it genetically then you're on your way to dealing with it.
And you don't need to know how or what "caused" the original coronavirus to emerge, once you have mapped it genetically then you're on your way to dealing with it.
Originally Posted by PoppaJo
I know the rest of the year is going to be tough down south but sweet Jesus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_kenn...63173716987909
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_kenn...63173716987909
I think it’s just Kennett suffering relevancy deprivation syndrome, trying to attract clicks for his “Dictator Dan must go!” column in the Herald Sun today, or a distraction from his stuff ups at the Hawks.
Originally Posted by Chronic Snoozer
So stopping the spread is also the key to stopping mutations which spread faster, so stopping the spread is also key to stopping mutations which spread faster, so..................?
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
For Melbourne to go into lockdown 6 times it shows that the current measures are not effective because the virus does keep coming back and spreading.
The measures most likely would be effective against this latest variant if EVERYONE took personal responsibility to stop the spread.
