Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

js1138-2 t1_j0jik9g wrote

3

MUCHO2000 t1_j0jrjpo wrote

I am not arguing it has become less deadly. Maybe reply to the guy I am disagreeing with

2

js1138-2 t1_j0js1wr wrote

It’s not intended as a rhetorical question. I thought you might have an answer, or at least know why there isn’t one.

4

MUCHO2000 t1_j0jv8gp wrote

−4

js1138-2 t1_j0jx1is wrote

Maybe my reading comprehension is deficient, but it looks to me like the article implies omicron is less deadly because it doesn’t attack the lungs as severely. This is counter to the headline.

Also, the article was written shortly after omicron appeared, and we now have a year of experience with it.

The death rate around the world for the last six months has been the lowest for any six month period, and doesn’t seem to be rising with winter.

The question remains, is this because the disease has changed, or because people have adapted. Perhaps after a non-fatal infection, the immune system no longer goes into storm mode.

Or perhaps the most vulnerable people have already died.

6

Forsaken_Rooster_365 t1_j0moqd5 wrote

I thought that when Omicron went into places with limited vaccination and limited experience with prior covid-exposure, they had similar to WT mortality? Like, it may have been less deadly than some of the other mutants (like Beta and Delta), but I don't think it was much different from WT. Been a long time since I've heard anything though.

0

js1138-2 t1_j0n4ugs wrote

That’s hard to study, because the most vulnerable people are also the most vaccinated. But, when omicron had its first enormous peak, most of the people hospitalized were unvaccinated.

Now it’s hard to find anyone who is neither vaccinated nor a survivor.

1