Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

I did not vote for Governor Whitman, but like her moves in these times. Note her plan requires sufficient immunity to fully reopen. Meaning lots of us have to get sick. This isn't sebby, or less or trump. It's that "woman from Michigan."

https://www.newsbreak.com/news/0Ozw4...n-for-michigan

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I did not vote for Governor Whitman, but like her moves in these times. Note her plan requires sufficient immunity to fully reopen. Meaning lots of us have to get sick. This isn't sebby, or less or trump. It's that "woman from Michigan."

https://www.newsbreak.com/news/0Ozw4...n-for-michigan

You voted for a republican. How are you still not ashamed?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

You voted for a republican. How are you still not ashamed?

I almost never vote for someone. Her campaign was stupid so I voted for the other guy. I will vote to reelect her, except she might be Veep by then?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I remember you had no clue what an HSA was, so I doubt you are actively working in health care, but do you have a medical degree you just aren't using?

Do the Picasso thing again. That's always funny.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Icky, the Pentagon isn't letting anyone who's had Covid-19 enlist, which makes more worry again about the lasting health effects.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

"Based on our study, we think variation in HLA genes is part of the explanation for the huge differences in infection severity in many COVID-19 patients. These differences in the HLA genes are probably not the only genetic factor that affects severity of COVID-19, but they may be a significant piece of the puzzle. It is important to further study how HLA types can clinically affect COVID-19 severity and to test these predictions using real cases. Understanding how variation in HLA types may affect the clinical course of COVID-19 could help identify individuals at higher risk from the disease."
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/yo...ter-2020-05-05

People who have a rare gene mutation, CCR5, are immune to HIV. The virus simply cannot enter their cells. Covid is a uniquely contagious disease and yet we know there are tons of people who have been exposed and are walking around with no symptoms. This means either the virus could not infect them because of some genetic advantage, or the virus infected them but did not do much to them because of some other genetic advantage.

Women also carry two Xs, and therefore have double the gene TLR7, which detects viruses and aids in mobilizing defense to them.

There are also tons of stories about how variations in ACE1 and ACE2 genes are important. If you have fewer ACE2 genes, you have fewer receptors to which Covid can attach. The amount of ACE1 and ACE2 genes varies from population to population.



I think I've just fixed that. But don't take my word for it. There are endless articles about the work being done by geneticists around the world to figure out the differences in genes that impact susceptibility to both acquisition of the virus and severity of symptoms.



Totally agree. It appears that you can have every genetic advantage possible, but if you are repeatedly hit with the virus, it will overwhelm your defenses.

But if you control for those variables, you will find there is a genetic difference. I think the most fascinating data will come from comparison of people in roughly identical situations who have wildly different outcomes. We have a lot of data sets for this. There are tons of instances in which, within families, the disease spares a handful of people and kills one. I just heard of one yesterday involving a friend of my father. Family got sick at vacation house. Athlete, in his 70s, no co-morbidities. Wife did fine, son and daughter did fine, grandkids fine, and he's dead. It could be bad luck, it could unknown co-morbidities, but it could also be the fact that he's the only person in the house who didn't have a lucky genetic background that his wife enjoyed and passed along to the kids.



Agreed. But as with HIV, we will find a genetic component that confers advantage, or unique disadvantage.

I am certainly not going to argue that genetics can have some impact, but it's a long way from there to saying that it explains everything.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I am certainly not going to argue that genetics can have some impact, but it's a long way from there to saying that it explains everything.

Yeah, and with epigenetics it is really hard to pinpoint which is genetic and what is environmental/developmental.

[Hank Chinaski]

Just got the antibody test. Will know sometime this week.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Icky, the Pentagon isn't letting anyone who's had Covid-19 enlist, which makes more worry again about the lasting health effects.

Wondering if 1. they don't know the lasting health effects or 2. They don't know there aren't lasting health effects.

Maybe I am on the cutting edge here but as I mentioned the glassy opacities seem to resolve. Don't know whether there's later vascular coagulopathy, micro thrombosis or something else.

Dunno but maybe if someone had it they could wrangle it into a full-blown disability or workers comp claim (if they got it from a mouthbreather cougher at work).

[Hank Chinaski]

https://rt.live/

48 states are below 1.0 retransmission rate.

P.S. Adder, WTF?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I am certainly not going to argue that genetics can have some impact, but it's a long way from there to saying that it explains everything.

If you find someone who said it explains everything, you should tell him that.

But I’d frame it this way to him, for clarity:

Sone people can do better or worse with this based on their genetics. Scientifically, that’s simply factual. And irrefutable. But people don’t exist in vacuums, where genetics are the sole variable, so consideration of genetic advantage or disadvantage should not be overstated. It should be considered alongside other causes with which it interacts.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Yeah, and with epigenetics it is really hard to pinpoint which is genetic and what is environmental/developmental.

The ACE1 and ACE2 thing is pretty clear. In one instance, Covid has an easier time entering a cell. In another, it does not.

So yes, it’s hard to pinpoint which factor is most at work, but clinically, observing cells and the virus in a lab, there are genetic profiles which are better at preventing infection.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The ACE1 and ACE2 thing is pretty clear. In one instance, Covid has an easier time entering a cell. In another, it does not.

So yes, it’s hard to pinpoint which factor is most at work, but clinically, observing cells and the virus in a lab, there are genetic profiles which are better at preventing infection.

Right, but how ACE1 and ACE2 receptors are expressed is probably through epigenetics.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

If you find someone who said it explains everything, you should tell him that.

But I’d frame it this way to him, for clarity:

Sone people can do better or worse with this based on their genetics. Scientifically, that’s simply factual. And irrefutable. But people don’t exist in vacuums, where genetics are the sole variable, so consideration of genetic advantage or disadvantage should not be overstated. It should be considered alongside other causes with which it interacts.

Some of your earlier posts on this board made it sound like you were saying something kinda different. If you ever get together with yourself to talk about what you're posting here, maybe you want to kick that one around.

[Icky Thump]

Then maybe . . .