A Return To The Land Of Covidia

Willis, you live a dangerous life!
Beware TNI

Australia’s border controls and lockdowns were highly effective at keeping Covid at bay until the population were vaccinated and the omicron variant went viral after mobility restrictions were removed:
https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countries&highlight=Australia&show=highlight-only&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right#countries

Australia’s excess deaths were lower in 2020 and 2021 than the average of 2015 to 2019. Possibly due to reduction in elective surgery to ease hospital loads.

Total covid deaths 4,200; the vast majority “with” covid.

There are indications that long covid is taking its toll in countries that had high case numbers when the earlier variants went viral.

Maybe they will find out some truth

The Florida Department of Health recently reported the top 30 Causes of Death for 2020 which included a new column for COVID-19. They report COVID-19 deaths for the State at 19,157. A sum of the Respiratory Disease categories, which includes pneumonia, influenza and chronic lower respiratory disease, shows an increase of 19,414 deaths in 2020 over 2019 so the COVID number seems valid. Data are available on the DoH website or search for “Top 30 Causes of Death in Florida”.

I have followed the course of this Pandemic in certain Florida Counties, and other locations, for nearly two years using standard Field Biology analytical techniques and following is a portion of the latest report. I apologize that I could not get the Charts to insert into this comment which show the Wave Structure of the Pandemic. Also, bear in mind, the following is from Report #199, so much more to the report series.

And, a final apology: I’m not able to get on WUWT as much these days so do not be insulted if I don’t respond quickly to any questions.

“The RIOS has covered a broad range of pandemic-related information and some has changed over the course of nearly two years as more data have become available. So, let’s review some previous thoughts. First our Rules (Tendencies) for Pandemics from Report #186 with additions to the original text in BLUE: 

The Rules (or Tendencies) of Pandemics:
Rule #1: If a virus acquires pandemic characteristics, it will go pandemic once “in the wild”. We saw SARS-CoV-2 become pandemic despite modern tools to combat viral disease and the fastest vaccine production in history.  We’ve seen increased acceptance of this rule with reports, such as the recent Johns Hopkins report that lockdowns had little effect on reducing mortality and the studies about masking, at least with cloth, that indicate little efficacy. Also, despite various mandates and other actions, the COVID-19 pandemic has proceeded as multiple sequential Waves, which support Rule #4 that Waves are the result of mutated variants.

Rule #2: A virus travels like we do. We saw that as the virus moved from China to other parts of the world, as well as, various variants as they spread from their points of origin. We also saw a travel pattern along I-10 and we could suspect that Duval County, FL precedes Escambia County, FL because of similar demographic/geographic characteristics and higher traffic flow along I-75 compared to I-10 that is associated with tourism.  This rule remains unchanged.  

Rule #3: Assuming a similar incubation period, Mortality from a pandemic virus is inversely proportional to Transmission Rate. This rule satisfies Logic and Common Sense as a virus that kills its host has a more difficult time spreading and we saw this with variants such as Alpha, Delta and Omicron which became less lethal and spread faster. Which brings us to:

Rule #4: Viruses mutate, and these variants likely extend the timeline of a pandemic and help create the multiple sequential Growth Curves of Total Cases and the “Waves” in a New Case Curve. Consequently, pandemics typically last 2-3 years.  Our data combined with genomic analyses by others certainly support the first part of this Rule. We must wait for validation of the timeline as we enter the third year.

Rule #5:  The term “Mitigation” requires clarification and should be divided into two categories: short-term for more immediate effect such as isolation (such as travel restrictions and quarantine), masking and and treatment; and, long-term mitigation such as vaccination programs. Short-term and long-term mitigation can be subdivided into personal effect and population-wide effect.  Population-wide short-term mitigation is best applied during the initial Lag Phase to give more time to produce treatments and vaccines. Once the virus reaches a Log or Accelerated Growth Phase, control of disease becomes much more difficult, particularly for a virus producing variants; and, governments then are faced with the difficult choice of allowing the virus/disease to take a natural course or institute extreme control measures with unknown and unintended consequences.  Short-term and long-term mitigation at the personal level can be applied anytime to protect the more vulnerable and, bear in mind, the definition of vulnerable sub-populations can change over time. Long-term mitigation at the population level should start as soon as practicable. Questions: Will mitigation change the overall course (growth and spread) of the Pandemic? Our experience with SARS-CoV-2 suggests, “No” (reference Rule #1). Will mitigation change the seriousness of disease and Mortality Rate? Again, our experience with SARS-CoV-2 suggests, “Yes”.  How long can mitigation extend the Lag Phase? Currently, we do not have good data to formulate an answer but we could speculate that the delay would be on the order of a few months, at most. That speculation is based on tenuous data indicating that the Summer 2021 Wave Peak was delayed by about one to three months compared to other Wave Peak intervals at different locations. The vaccination program was about six months old. Again, we will emphasize “tenuous speculation” as the following Winter 2021-22 Wave Peak followed the previous Summer Peak more quickly. 

Rule #6: Pandemics, and micro-organism/virion induced disease is a Predator-Prey relationship with each producing countermeasures to get their genes to the next generation.  We employ technological innovation and the virus responds with mutations. Note: this Rule is much more complex than presented, here.
New Rule Rule #7: We have alluded to this rule in several previous reports but we will codify it now as: models will have difficulty predicting the future pattern of a multi-wave pandemic because models cannot predict mutation. A model may be able to generate a Growth Curve of a single Wave once some data are available but, even then, that Growth Curve assumes that a new variant has not begun to mix in with the previous variant. 

So, those are the Rules. Now, let’s review Pandemic Virus Characteristics, again, with additions to the original text in BLUE:

1. Incubation Time: the time between initial infection and the onset of symptoms or the onset of infectiousness. Incubation Time is a worrying characteristic as a short incubation time can increase the Transmission Rate and a long Incubation Time coupled with a short Time to Infectiousness can do the same; and, if virulent, can increase the Mortality Rate.
2. Transmission Rate: the number of people typically infected by a single individual. Usually, and particularly as a virus matures, the Transmission Rate has an inverse relationship with Mortality Rate. Why? Because a quick kill reduces the chances for transmission. A high Transmission Rate with a low Mortality Rate promotes the rapid spread of a virus
3. Mortality Rate: the percent of infected individuals that die from the disease. Note that “infected individuals” is usually “known infected individuals” as we can’t know the true number of infected individuals unless we test everyone frequently. As noted previously, the Mortality Rate usually has an inverse relationship with Transmission Rate.
4. Mutation Rate: the propensity of the virus to genetically mutate. Mutation Rate is a wildcard characteristic as it can change the nature of a virus and create what is called a variant. A variant may be closely related to the original virus (or preceding variant) or be substantially different and capable of causing new or worse symptoms or evading a vaccine. Typically, a variant is responsible for succeeding “Waves’ of New Cases and extends the timeline of a pandemic before it becomes endemic (resides in a population with substantial immunity and causes some disease but not “Waves” of Cases).
5. Broad Genetic Target: Our experience with COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 suggests that the “Waves” of New Cases (particularly serious illness or death) are associated with a genetic target for each variant. A complete “Wave” encompasses the rise of a variant that attacks a specific genetic combination and then recedes as immunity within that genetic population increases. The sum of repeated “Waves” is a broader genetic feast for the virus to fulfill its prime directive: get genes to the next generation.  We should add that some speculation is embedded in this characteristic. Data have been reported about blood type, genes in lung epithelial cells and age-related characteristics such as variable expression of the ACE-2 receptor in children as opposed to adults but we lack data on how specific gene combinations relate to infection and death.
6. Replication Rate: the number of replications per unit of time. For infectious agents, it is all about numbers produced quickly before the host organism can respond to the infection and rid itself of the invaders. 
7. Environmental Tolerance: resistance to environmental factors such as temperature, UV, desiccation and chemicals.
8. Animal Reservoirs: these are other animals that a virus can infect. Animal Reservoirs are important because they increase the possibility that a virus can mutate or acquire genetic material from other infectious agents residing in these other animals.
9. The current times dictate that we add another characteristic: “Natural” or “Engineered” virus. The typical progression of a “Natural” virus is that it changes over time to become less lethal as it attempts to get its genes to the next generation. It must become less lethal to accomplish that goal as killing the host inhibits spread. Now, we are being anthropomorphic (ascribing human characteristics to a nonhuman subject) as the progression is actually the random chance genetic change that enables the maximum survival and replication of the organism (virion). We really don’t know the full implications of the release of an “Engineered” virus designed for foul purposes because we don’t know if such has occurred. Has a foul “Engineered” virus been released in the past that did not survive or that did not succeed in its purpose? Good question but maybe impossible to know. So far, “engineered” viruses altered for altruistic purposes (medical, for instance) have not caused a catastrophe. Note that “designer organisms” are fraught with worry.  This category will be receiving ever increased scrutiny. The circumstantial evidence is building that SARS-CoV-2 has been genetically manipulated but to what extent is unknown. (Note: circumstantial evidence is not proof.) Another question is, if manipulated, is that manipulation beyond the capability of natual mutation? A separate question: was the release intentional? Logic and Common Sense would suggest that if the virus came from the Wuhan Lab in China, the release was accidental as an intentional release within China two years before the Beijing Olympics would be incredibly ill-advised. Regardless, this Pandemic has provided a wealth of information to good and bad alike about Pandemic dynamics.

Next, let’s review the status of the questions that we asked in Report #62, dated 6/5/2020, again with additions to the original text in BLUE:

1. Exactly how did this virus emerge? Currently (in June 2020 at the time), two major stories are circulating, one with a sub-story. First, the emergence was a natural event involving a Wuhan, China wet market where a virus was able to “jump” from one host to another (us) just like numerous other viruses have done historically in many parts of the world. Or, second, the virus escaped from a lab by accident and it happened to have the characteristics necessary to cause, not just an epidemic, but a pandemic. The sub-story is that the release was intentional and may have been engineered. We may not have the whole story regarding emergence because of, shall we say, questionable transparency issues, but over time we will piece together bits and pieces of information to get some of the truth. Conclusion: not absolutely certain, so for now, we will go on to Question #2.  The conclusion remains “not absolutely certain” but the evidence to date gives at least equal weight (maybe more) to the lab theory. More in #2:  
2. Does evidence exist to prove any of the possibilities? Scientifically, “prove” is a very high bar and I’m not sure that we have the needed data and confidence necessary to “prove” anything, yet (reference Question #1) other than a new virus has emerged. We are fairly certain that SARS-CoV-2 did emerge in China and we have genomic information to indicate a “natural” virus (with even more reservations, see Question #3). Conclusion: circumstantial evidence, based mostly on human intelligence, is building for a “natural” virus released from a laboratory but its likely that “proof” must await the ability of the CDC to get into the area and investigate. Regardless, we move on to Question #3. Well, not yet. Let’s emphasize the next question, and note, again, that the circumstantial evidence is building for a manipulated virus, otherwise known as Gain of Function.
3. Is SARS-CoV-2 engineered?  Let’s add a distinction, here, is it engineered or just manipulated? Engineered suggests a massive re-ordering of the genome; whereas, manipulated suggests minor alteration of the genome. Obviously, these definitions are somewhat subjective. Early genomic sequencing, originally from the Chinese (and now under suspicion), indicated that the virus was “natural”. (Initial) subsequent US analyses seem to support a “natural” virus but that assumes adequate knowledge about the ability of others to camouflage manipulation of the genome. Although virologists/epidemiologists are quite smart and know viral manipulation leaves certain markers which can be identified, that doesn’t mean a new genomic technique (and previously unknown to others) hasn’t been discovered which can mask those markers. Conclusion: probably “natural” but further confirmation needed. So, on to Question #4. Let’s update: Much information has come to light regarding Gain of Function research at the Wuhan lab, some of which involved coronaviruses and some of which received US funding. We also have some unusual genomic results not known to occur naturally and then we have a mutation pattern that has generated repeatable Waves for two years. At the least, the possibility must be acknowledged that SARS-CoV-2 could have been manipulated/engineered and originated in a lab.
4. Did China intentionally delay notifying the rest of the world about SARS-CoV-2 to facilitate viral spread or were they overwhelmed by a new virus with high Transmission Rate? Now, this question is really a sleeper because of the upcoming Question #5 and goes to motive and when that motive was realized. Certainly, the virus, a pandemic virus, is capable of overwhelming a health system, particularly if its potential is underestimated early on in the growth curve. So, that is a possibility. For the more suspicious, delaying notification to the world could ensure that the virus does go pandemic and offer the chance to study growth and spread dynamics for whatever reason. Conclusion: delayed notification likely but the reason is yet to be determined. Question #5. Not yet to #5. Remember, we have mentioned that an intentional release in a country two years before that country’s Olympics seems counterproductive. But, after the release, could a country decide to exploit that release to gather as much information as possible? Seems farfetched but let’s go “fetching farther” with #5. 
5. As we’ve noted, the release of SARS-CoV-2 could be accidental. But, could SARS-CoV-2 be a test as a prelude to a more lethal pandemic and is China involved? Now we are getting down to the nuts and bolts, are we not? This answer can be argued both ways. Answer #1: No, China would not be smart to intentionally release, as an experiment, a new virus within their borders that has the capability to go pandemic and do so before their Olympics. Logically, the risk to China would be great and possibly result in disaster. And, of course, China doesn’t have to release the virus within their borders for a test as it is relatively easy to infect any part of the world but, if “caught” the loss of face for China would be extreme. And, perhaps, another nation state would like to implicate China by releasing their virus in China, although, again, virologists/epidemiologists are pretty intelligent sleuths and would eventually figure out where the virus originated. Answer #2: Yes, China calculated that the virus would go pandemic but the effects would be controlled because of the acceptable combination of Transmission Rate, Incubation Time and Lethality which would produce useful information on the spread, mortality and mutation rate of the anticipated new virus. These data would be incorporated into the design of the next virus which would require a previously developed vaccine to protect the home population. The test and next virions could not be too lethal as that could lead to a preemptive attack as a response from the target population and high lethality tends to limit the spread if the host dies quickly anyway. Now, Answer #2 has a lot of moving parts and requires a bunch of assumptions (and is an Act of War). Also, China must figure that a vaccine and therapies of some kind would be developed so that the data from virus #1 may not apply to the next virus as it would need to be different to negate the vaccine and accompanying therapies. As I said, a lot of moving parts. Note that a pandemic is not like a smart bomb with a controlled blast radius and a pandemic comes with a high probability of unintended consequences. Conclusion: seems unlikely but really unknown and we should note that test or not, a great deal of data were generated (using modern tools) concerning the nature of a pandemic and those data are available to most everyone. So, the next logical Question #6:
6. What would the next virus look like?  The answer from June 2020 has been shortened to the biggest worry is the emergence of a Pandemic Virus that attacks our food supply.  Last, Question #7:
7. Why all of the hubbub and intense study of this pandemic? First, pandemics are rare. The 20th Century had three and we’ve had only four in the last 100 years (approximately). Forty years elapsed between the Spanish Flu and the Asian Flu; 10 years elapsed between the Asian Flu and Hong Kong Flu; and, 50 years elapsed between the Hong Kong Flu and COVID-19. Second, SARS-CoV-2 is considered a “new” virus and can offer insight into viral biology. Third, we have better tools to study a pandemic which helps us learn more about viral spread and infection (and, recall Question #6). And, fourth, the lessons learned and this new information should enable better planning for the next event, which could occur in 10-50 years (?) based on relatively recent history. And, the next pandemic could be much worse.  And this answer remains unchanged.

A man was shot dead in Auckland New Zealand a while back. His death was attributed to COVID-19. I am not joking.

“Most curious. “Natural” deaths are up in those from 15 to 45 years or so, but are flat or even down in older people. I fear I have no explanation for that. “

The obvious answer, is that the vaccine saves more deaths than it causes, for over 50’s.
However it causes more deaths than it saves for under 50’s.
This has been known about for some time, yet for some reason it hasn’t prevented governments for enforcing it on those who don’t need it. Particularly the young, fit and healthy.