Ellsworth
07-02-2024, 04:12 PM
Last weekend I came across information about a new strain of Mpox that seems to have some potential for a negative global impact.
The 2022 outbreak was Clade IIb, this new one is Clade Ib.
Clade Ib has a higher mortality rate (10% children and around 4.5% in adults).
Clade Ib is apparently more readily spread by touch and remains infectious on surfaces that have been touched.
And is possibly passed more readily via airborne means.
It appears to be unknown if the current Mpox vaccines work against this new version.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(23)00059-9/fulltext
https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2024/06/26/dangerous-new-mpox-virus-sparks-global-outbreak-fears/
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7319a3.htm
https://www.dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/health-advisory-mpox-caused-human-human-transmission-monkeypox-virus-clade-i-geographic
Just an FYI. By reading those links you know exactly as much as I do about it.
Edited to add:
https://www.cdc.gov/forecast-outbreak-analytics/about/mpox-risk-assessment.html
"Overall risk: We assess the overall risk to the general U.S. population as very low, with moderate confidence. Overall risk is assessed by considering the likelihood and impact of infection across the population (see Methods section). This assessment may change as new evidence becomes available."
No abundance of caution. If I had been stressed, now I'm relieved.
The Canadian version is here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/emergency-preparedness-response/rapid-risk-assessments-public-health-professionals/clade-1-mpox-virus-outbreak-democratic-republic-congo.html
Edited to add:
Why do most of the Youtube sources that address this new Mpox seem low-budget?
Deepfakes and AI have me looking skeptically at the kind of sources talking about this on Youtube.
There are quite a few recent sources on google that talk about it.
For an outbreak that seems approximately a year old, why the recent buzz?
Pride month? The election? Implication being, is this hype for effect?
Edited to add:
One of those younger than me, and more articulate than me, political commentators might ask...
"Is this a deliberate introduction of a wedge issue into the political landscape, when the issue itself doesn't warrant it based upon the potential/realistic risk?"
That's not a political question by nature. That's a personal health question (I'd argue).
With respect for the victims of Mpox Clade I.
Edited to add:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adg8116
I can imagine asking AI, "Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I once knew what it meant but have completely forgotten, and now need to explain it to myself."
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I never had knowledge about the field, and in the fashion I'd use to explain it to myself if I already had the knowledge."
Versus
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I never had knowledge about the field, and in the fashion I'd use to explain it to someone else [insert specific characteristics of listener] if I already had the knowledge."
Versus
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective of character A is describing the article to character B, where character A is [X] and character B is [Y]." (replace X and Y with names of public figures, living or deceased)
Edited to add:
The mortality rate of Mpox Clade Ib is approximately equivalent to that of COVID 19.
The age of the most vulnerable cohort is inverted, COVID 19 was more deadly for the very old, Mpox I is more deadly for the very young.
What are the possible implications of that?
* I have seen it referred to as Clade I and as Clade Ib. One is surely more exact.
The 2022 outbreak was Clade IIb, this new one is Clade Ib.
Clade Ib has a higher mortality rate (10% children and around 4.5% in adults).
Clade Ib is apparently more readily spread by touch and remains infectious on surfaces that have been touched.
And is possibly passed more readily via airborne means.
It appears to be unknown if the current Mpox vaccines work against this new version.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(23)00059-9/fulltext
https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2024/06/26/dangerous-new-mpox-virus-sparks-global-outbreak-fears/
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7319a3.htm
https://www.dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/health-advisory-mpox-caused-human-human-transmission-monkeypox-virus-clade-i-geographic
Just an FYI. By reading those links you know exactly as much as I do about it.
Edited to add:
https://www.cdc.gov/forecast-outbreak-analytics/about/mpox-risk-assessment.html
"Overall risk: We assess the overall risk to the general U.S. population as very low, with moderate confidence. Overall risk is assessed by considering the likelihood and impact of infection across the population (see Methods section). This assessment may change as new evidence becomes available."
No abundance of caution. If I had been stressed, now I'm relieved.
The Canadian version is here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/emergency-preparedness-response/rapid-risk-assessments-public-health-professionals/clade-1-mpox-virus-outbreak-democratic-republic-congo.html
Edited to add:
Why do most of the Youtube sources that address this new Mpox seem low-budget?
Deepfakes and AI have me looking skeptically at the kind of sources talking about this on Youtube.
There are quite a few recent sources on google that talk about it.
For an outbreak that seems approximately a year old, why the recent buzz?
Pride month? The election? Implication being, is this hype for effect?
Edited to add:
One of those younger than me, and more articulate than me, political commentators might ask...
"Is this a deliberate introduction of a wedge issue into the political landscape, when the issue itself doesn't warrant it based upon the potential/realistic risk?"
That's not a political question by nature. That's a personal health question (I'd argue).
With respect for the victims of Mpox Clade I.
Edited to add:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adg8116
I can imagine asking AI, "Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I once knew what it meant but have completely forgotten, and now need to explain it to myself."
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I never had knowledge about the field, and in the fashion I'd use to explain it to myself if I already had the knowledge."
Versus
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective that I never had knowledge about the field, and in the fashion I'd use to explain it to someone else [insert specific characteristics of listener] if I already had the knowledge."
Versus
"Please explain that article to me in a way that I'll understand it, from the perspective of character A is describing the article to character B, where character A is [X] and character B is [Y]." (replace X and Y with names of public figures, living or deceased)
Edited to add:
The mortality rate of Mpox Clade Ib is approximately equivalent to that of COVID 19.
The age of the most vulnerable cohort is inverted, COVID 19 was more deadly for the very old, Mpox I is more deadly for the very young.
What are the possible implications of that?
* I have seen it referred to as Clade I and as Clade Ib. One is surely more exact.