Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:04.040] I'm Dave Champion, there's been a lot of talk in the media over the last handful of [00:04.040 --> 00:15.920] weeks about SARS-CoV-2 variants, but do we really know what a virus variant is or what [00:15.920 --> 00:17.400] it means? [00:17.400 --> 00:23.040] And frankly, the media isn't just talking about variants, there's a lot of hype going [00:23.040 --> 00:30.920] on. [00:30.920 --> 00:37.400] As we get going, I think it's really important to state at the outset that when the SARS-CoV-2 [00:37.400 --> 00:45.500] virus mutates, creates a variant, it remains the SARS-CoV-2 virus. [00:45.500 --> 00:49.440] It doesn't become some other Frankenstein kind of thing. [00:49.440 --> 00:53.200] So how many viruses mutate? [00:53.200 --> 00:56.360] One hundred percent of them. [00:56.360 --> 00:59.640] It's essentially what viruses do. [00:59.640 --> 01:02.240] How frequently do they mutate? [01:02.240 --> 01:03.240] Frequently! [01:03.240 --> 01:10.840] DNA genome viruses, they mutate less often than RNA genome viruses, which gets into the [01:10.840 --> 01:13.600] whole replication thing, I'm not going to get into that. [01:13.600 --> 01:23.040] The SARS-CoV-2 virus is an RNA genome virus, so it tends to mutate more than would a DNA [01:23.040 --> 01:24.840] genome-based virus. [01:24.840 --> 01:33.540] Whether we're speaking of a new strain, a variant, lineage, these are all the product [01:33.540 --> 01:37.840] of the broad category or fall under the umbrella of mutation. [01:38.800 --> 01:48.520] Okay, so when a virus mutates, it can create a new strain, which has the exact same meaning [01:48.520 --> 01:56.960] as a variant, or it could alter the lineage, which that mutation does not rise to the level [01:56.960 --> 01:59.800] of a new strain or variant. [01:59.800 --> 02:06.080] I said the words new strain and the word variant have the exact same meaning, and that's true. [02:06.080 --> 02:11.840] And for most of this SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, the media was using the word strain. [02:11.840 --> 02:17.080] A new strain here, a new strain there, which is completely normal and to be expected. [02:17.080 --> 02:18.680] It's not like, ah! [02:18.680 --> 02:21.240] As the media would like you to believe. [02:21.240 --> 02:28.640] Why suddenly, just in the last maybe six to eight weeks, have government and media changed [02:28.640 --> 02:33.040] to using variant rather than a strain? [02:34.040 --> 02:42.000] A new strain didn't cause the public to be filled with anxiety and panic and fear. [02:42.000 --> 02:45.160] So since strain didn't get that job done, they've changed now and they're using the [02:45.160 --> 02:49.520] word variant, which seems to be more effective in achieving that goal. [02:49.520 --> 02:56.240] People seem to be much more concerned about a new variant than they are a new strain, [02:56.240 --> 02:58.680] despite the fact they mean the exact same thing. [02:59.200 --> 03:04.400] A moment ago, I mentioned that you can have a mutation that creates a change in lineage [03:04.400 --> 03:08.600] without rising to the level of being a new strain slash variant. [03:08.600 --> 03:11.000] I'm kind of a research geek, so I found this really fascinating. [03:11.000 --> 03:17.480] I want you to take a look at this chart, which shows how the various lineage of the SARS-CoV-2 [03:17.480 --> 03:19.520] viruses traveled across the world. [03:19.520 --> 03:23.920] Yeah, meaningless to the general public, but I find it intriguing. [03:23.920 --> 03:28.720] Every day, you breathe in millions of viruses. [03:28.720 --> 03:30.680] I don't think most people are aware of that. [03:30.680 --> 03:34.160] They think virus, bad. [03:34.160 --> 03:39.480] When the vast majority, I mean it would be hard to even put this into a statistical equation [03:39.480 --> 03:46.160] for you, the vast majority of viruses are completely meaningless to human beings. [03:46.160 --> 03:50.360] We literally breathe in millions of viruses a day. [03:50.360 --> 03:54.400] Every once in a while, some becomes pathogenic to humans. [03:54.400 --> 03:56.800] It causes some sort of illness. [03:56.800 --> 04:03.400] When that happens, we have basically two kinds of mutations, those that have no functional [04:03.400 --> 04:06.440] practicality to the actual virus. [04:06.440 --> 04:10.040] The virus mutates, but there is no functional distinction. [04:10.040 --> 04:11.400] It doesn't change much of anything. [04:11.400 --> 04:13.300] It might change something. [04:13.300 --> 04:15.880] If the virus had a brain, it might perceive a change. [04:15.880 --> 04:19.580] We as human beings, there's no functional difference. [04:19.580 --> 04:23.620] That is referred to as a silent mutation. [04:23.620 --> 04:27.540] Silent because from the perspective of human beings, it's a pathogen, it's in the body, [04:27.540 --> 04:31.380] it has a mutation that does absolutely nothing, no functional distinction. [04:31.380 --> 04:34.700] As humans, we call that a silent mutation. [04:34.700 --> 04:41.220] Then there are mutations that do have a functional difference that human beings care about. [04:41.220 --> 04:46.060] Of course, we only care about viruses that are pathogenic to us. [04:46.060 --> 04:49.460] If they don't cause illness in us, we don't care how they mutate. [04:50.020 --> 04:54.480] We start with the fact that of these billions and billions and billions of viruses, we only [04:54.480 --> 05:00.660] care about the handful at any given time that are actually causing problems for human beings. [05:00.660 --> 05:04.780] Then when that handful of viruses, in this case, we're going to narrow that down to [05:04.780 --> 05:10.220] one virus, the SARS-CoV-2 virus, when that virus mutates in such a way that there is [05:10.220 --> 05:16.100] a functional difference, we still don't care about it unless the functional difference [05:16.100 --> 05:20.860] adversely or positively perhaps affects us. [05:20.860 --> 05:24.700] The mutation of a virus can affect us in one of three ways. [05:24.700 --> 05:27.340] Number one, transmissibility. [05:27.340 --> 05:29.500] Number two, immunogenicity. [05:29.500 --> 05:31.940] And number three, virulence. [05:31.940 --> 05:39.540] So those are the only three things that can be the consequence of a mutation that we care [05:39.540 --> 05:40.540] about. [05:40.540 --> 05:42.420] Let's take a brief look at each of those three. [05:42.420 --> 05:44.300] We'll start with transmissibility. [05:44.300 --> 05:52.060] So when a virus mutates, as far as transmissibility is concerned, it can be more greatly transmissible, [05:52.060 --> 05:57.460] more easily transmissible from person to person, or the mutation might cause it to be less [05:57.460 --> 05:58.460] transmissible. [05:58.460 --> 06:01.660] Now, here's an interesting equation. [06:01.660 --> 06:07.100] If you have a virus that, let's say, for every 10 people the virus comes in contact with, [06:07.100 --> 06:09.220] it infects one person. [06:09.220 --> 06:14.560] If there is a mutation and now, out of every 10 people the virus comes in contact with, [06:14.560 --> 06:19.740] it infects five people, that's a pretty significant jump in transmissibility, yes? [06:19.740 --> 06:24.500] However, if you have a virus that's very transmissible, let's say out of every 10 people it comes [06:24.500 --> 06:30.340] in contact with, it infects nine of them, if it suddenly goes from nine to nine and [06:30.340 --> 06:36.740] a half, yeah, that's nowhere near as significant an increase in transmissibility. [06:36.740 --> 06:41.540] I bring that up because SARS-CoV-2 made a jump in transmissibility back in June, at [06:41.540 --> 06:43.780] least according to the Scripps Institute. [06:43.780 --> 06:47.200] So it became highly transmissible. [06:47.200 --> 06:54.740] So as we're sitting here talking about this in January, almost February of 2021, the transmissibility, [06:54.740 --> 07:01.340] the jump that a mutation could cause in transmissibility would, in its very nature, since it's already [07:01.340 --> 07:08.340] highly transmissible, any jump that it would take in transmissibility would be fairly irrelevant. [07:08.340 --> 07:11.780] That's not what you're hearing from the media, is it? [07:11.780 --> 07:17.980] Proving the transmissibility of a virus has increased or decreased, I know that people [07:17.980 --> 07:23.620] love to think that when epidemiologists or biostatisticians say something or the media [07:23.620 --> 07:28.060] report something, it simply is because that guy said so. [07:28.060 --> 07:34.380] But the truth is, it's virtually impossible to tell whether a virus mutation has caused [07:34.380 --> 07:39.780] the virus to increase its transmissibility or decrease its transmissibility or perhaps [07:39.780 --> 07:41.020] stay the same. [07:41.020 --> 07:42.740] Here's why. [07:42.740 --> 07:48.540] In order to prove that, you would have to say, for instance, Mary Jane, you would have [07:48.540 --> 07:56.700] to say that if she was exposed to the original version, she would not have gotten infected. [07:56.700 --> 08:02.540] But having been exposed to the newer version, yeah, she suddenly got infected. [08:02.540 --> 08:04.940] So how would you know? [08:04.940 --> 08:06.020] How would you compare this? [08:06.020 --> 08:08.720] You would have to literally lock her up in a very sterile environment. [08:08.720 --> 08:13.100] You would have to intentionally expose her to the original version of the virus. [08:13.100 --> 08:16.580] You would, after say 10 or 15 or 20 days, depending on the virus, you would then have [08:16.580 --> 08:24.820] to introduce the new variant that you presume perhaps has a greater transmissibility rate. [08:24.860 --> 08:32.660] You would have to expose her to that and see if she became infected with that newer version. [08:32.660 --> 08:37.200] And then there's all sorts of variables that you would have to control for that you can't. [08:37.200 --> 08:41.600] And then, of course, the fact that that happened, say, let's say Mary Jane did become infected [08:41.600 --> 08:45.320] with the newer variant, so you say, aha, it's more infectious. [08:45.320 --> 08:50.860] So what happens if you then take Billy Bob, you do the same thing with Billy Bob, he doesn't [08:50.860 --> 08:52.220] become infected with either one. [08:52.980 --> 08:54.900] You see the problem, right? [08:54.900 --> 08:59.260] It is virtually impossible. [08:59.260 --> 09:03.940] It is numerical hypothetical guesswork on the part of epidemiologists when they say, [09:03.940 --> 09:10.460] oh, yeah, that's less transmissible, or now it's more transmissible. [09:10.460 --> 09:12.780] Always take that with a grain of salt. [09:12.780 --> 09:18.780] Immunogenicity, all right, so a fancy word meaning that the antibodies that protected [09:18.820 --> 09:25.820] against the original version of the virus may not or will not protect you against the [09:25.820 --> 09:31.060] subsequent or newer variant strain of the virus. [09:31.060 --> 09:33.020] So can that happen? [09:33.020 --> 09:34.180] Yes, it can. [09:34.180 --> 09:38.700] But statistically, it's incredibly rare. [09:38.700 --> 09:42.580] And of course, that's one of the things that the media is just really playing on right [09:42.580 --> 09:43.580] now. [09:43.580 --> 09:44.580] Oh, my God, the new variant. [09:44.580 --> 09:46.780] Oh, we might not have immunity to the new variant. [09:46.780 --> 09:47.780] Oh, my God. [09:48.780 --> 09:54.660] So statistically, it virtually never happens. [09:54.660 --> 09:59.820] The reason for that is the human body's immune process is pretty sophisticated. [09:59.820 --> 10:07.740] I don't know if you remember, going back to perhaps June, researchers were trying to [10:07.740 --> 10:15.420] explain why school-aged children seem virtually unaffected by SARS-CoV-2. [10:15.780 --> 10:21.260] The hypothesis they came up with is a lot of the common colds that go around are coronavirus. [10:21.260 --> 10:25.380] So they said since children, they're in that communal environment of the classroom and [10:25.380 --> 10:30.460] then they're out on the play yard and they're screwing around, that because the common cold [10:30.460 --> 10:37.300] caused by various coronaviruses, the family of coronavirus has circulated within all these [10:37.300 --> 10:38.300] children. [10:38.300 --> 10:43.940] Therefore, when SARS-CoV-2, another coronavirus or another virus within the family of coronaviruses, [10:44.020 --> 10:48.980] came along, the children's immune system were like, OK, that's a coronavirus. [10:48.980 --> 10:49.980] We know that. [10:49.980 --> 10:50.980] We're done with that. [10:50.980 --> 10:54.020] And they would immediately defeat it and it would not get in them. [10:54.020 --> 10:55.300] It would not make them sick. [10:55.300 --> 11:01.660] OK, so that was the hypothesis put out by researchers that children had a fair degree [11:01.660 --> 11:10.380] of natural immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus because they had antibodies pertaining to [11:10.380 --> 11:12.380] the family of coronaviruses. [11:12.820 --> 11:18.740] So you see what researchers are saying then is we've got this broad family of coronaviruses [11:18.740 --> 11:20.220] that these kids have had. [11:20.220 --> 11:25.060] So all the antibodies for this broad spectrum of coronavirus, yeah, it can work against [11:25.060 --> 11:27.380] this one called SARS-CoV-2. [11:27.380 --> 11:33.540] So suddenly now, here we are in January, Cusp of February of 2021. [11:33.540 --> 11:39.020] Suddenly the argument is, well, it's still a coronavirus, but if it mutates just a little [11:39.020 --> 11:42.300] tiny bit, oh my God, then your antibodies won't stop it anymore. [11:43.220 --> 11:50.660] So this is fear mongering, the idea that because the SARS-CoV-2 virus has a tiny, tiny shift [11:50.660 --> 11:57.420] of mutation in its amino acid profile that suddenly the human body that saw the original [11:57.420 --> 12:01.860] version and created antibodies, now it's got this little tweak in the amino acid profile. [12:01.860 --> 12:04.140] Now your body is not going to be able to fight it off yet. [12:04.140 --> 12:11.860] So the odds of that are about as close to zero as we can statistically say. [12:12.420 --> 12:17.860] There's a phrase in statistician work and that is statistically insignificant and the [12:17.860 --> 12:23.660] odds that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, that the amino acid profile of one of these little mutations [12:23.660 --> 12:27.900] could shift enough that if you had it and developed antibodies that you cannot fight [12:27.900 --> 12:31.940] it off again is statistically insignificant. [12:31.940 --> 12:33.980] It is incredibly tiny. [12:33.980 --> 12:38.180] All right, so we've covered transmissibility and immunogenicity. [12:38.180 --> 12:40.460] Now let's move on to virulence. [12:40.460 --> 12:49.740] This is how sick a person becomes when that virus causes whatever disease it is, a particular [12:49.740 --> 12:51.820] pathogen causes within them. [12:51.820 --> 12:56.700] In this case with SARS-CoV-2, if it develops into disease, that disease is referred to [12:56.700 --> 12:57.700] as COVID-19. [12:57.700 --> 13:07.100] So in that context, virulence means how severe the COVID-19 would be and within the broad [13:07.100 --> 13:09.540] umbrella of COVID-19 we have various symptoms. [13:09.540 --> 13:15.860] Would you have fewer symptoms, more symptoms, different symptoms, more intense symptoms? [13:15.860 --> 13:23.700] So that's what virulence means and clearly no one ever wants a pathogenic virus that [13:23.700 --> 13:29.700] causes disease in humans to mutate in such a way that it is more virulent. [13:29.700 --> 13:38.640] The good news is that again, statistically, virtually never ever happens. [13:38.640 --> 13:39.640] Does it happen? [13:39.640 --> 13:40.640] Sure. [13:40.640 --> 13:43.800] But the odds are infinitesimally small. [13:43.800 --> 13:46.900] It virtually almost never happens. [13:46.900 --> 13:50.580] Now I know you've got people like Anthony Fauci out there, you know, and he always does [13:50.580 --> 13:51.580] this stuff. [13:51.580 --> 13:55.580] He never says, this is so, that is so, this is so. [13:55.580 --> 13:59.340] What he says is, I have great concerns about the fact that it's going to be more virulent, [13:59.340 --> 14:02.780] and it's going to kill more people and make more, I have great concerns about. [14:02.780 --> 14:03.780] Okay. [14:03.780 --> 14:07.600] So I think it's really important to note a couple of things. [14:07.600 --> 14:14.540] There is no hard evidence, going back to transmissibility for a moment, that any of the new variants [14:14.540 --> 14:21.980] are any more transmissible, have any greater transmissibility factor than earlier versions. [14:21.980 --> 14:29.580] And more importantly, when it comes to virulence, there is, and I cannot stress this enough, [14:29.580 --> 14:37.620] there is absolutely zero evidence that any of the variants that have propped up around [14:37.620 --> 14:45.540] the world is any more virulent, makes the COVID-19 worse, than the earlier variants. [14:45.540 --> 14:51.940] There is concern, scientists are looking at it, researchers are examining it. [14:51.940 --> 14:55.220] Okay, that's fine, that's cool, that's what you would want to do in the middle of a viral [14:55.220 --> 14:57.740] outbreak, you would want to examine these things. [14:57.740 --> 15:01.740] So as I'm sitting here talking to you at the very end of January, beginning of February [15:01.740 --> 15:07.540] 2021, how much evidence is there that any of these variants is more deadly than the [15:07.540 --> 15:08.940] earlier versions? [15:08.940 --> 15:09.940] Zero. [15:09.940 --> 15:10.940] Okay. [15:10.940 --> 15:15.540] So when you see this in the media, them reporting that, oh my God, Anthony Fauci said, or whatever [15:15.540 --> 15:20.660] the narrative is, I want you to be, I want to be clear with you that there is absolutely [15:20.660 --> 15:25.340] no evidence that any of that is true. [15:25.340 --> 15:27.020] Let's recap. [15:27.020 --> 15:35.380] On transmissibility, there is no evidence that any recent strain variant has changed [15:35.380 --> 15:37.980] the transmissibility factor of SARS-CoV-2. [15:37.980 --> 15:44.500] Again, back in June, there was a claim that a variant then caused dramatically higher [15:44.500 --> 15:46.280] infection rates. [15:46.280 --> 15:49.780] But if we want to stick to the last couple of months, there is absolutely no evidence [15:49.900 --> 15:53.740] that any of the new variants that they're talking about, the South African variant, [15:53.740 --> 16:01.540] the South American variant, the UK variant, there's no evidence, evidence different from [16:01.540 --> 16:03.020] a false narrative. [16:03.020 --> 16:07.180] There is no evidence that the transmissibility is any different. [16:07.180 --> 16:08.260] Immunogenicity. [16:08.260 --> 16:14.140] There is again, no evidence that any of the new strains or variants, this goes all the [16:14.140 --> 16:19.580] way back from day one, if we consider March of 2020 to be day one, I think it was actually [16:20.380 --> 16:25.260] But if we just draw an arbitrary line and say March of 2020, there is absolutely zero [16:25.260 --> 16:31.380] evidence that any of the strains or mutations or variants that have occurred with SARS-CoV-2 [16:31.380 --> 16:38.420] have resulted in a situation where if you had it, defeated it, you have antibodies, [16:38.420 --> 16:42.540] you now have immunity, there is no evidence that that has changed by any of the strains [16:42.540 --> 16:45.940] or variants that we've seen in the last couple of months. [16:45.940 --> 16:46.940] And virulence. [16:47.300 --> 16:51.100] The big one, because this is the one that the media and the government and people like [16:51.100 --> 16:56.660] Fauci want to terrify the public with, that this mutation or the one we're expecting [16:56.660 --> 17:01.180] next week, yeah, it's going to make things much worse. [17:01.180 --> 17:03.540] It's going to kill a lot more people. [17:03.540 --> 17:09.380] Again, statistically, the odds are infinitesimally small that that would happen. [17:09.380 --> 17:15.260] And as far as evidence, it hasn't happened as of this time. [17:15.300 --> 17:22.900] So I think it's really important when the media and government is using these factors [17:22.900 --> 17:30.260] to try and scare the public, that the public actually is aware of what the data says and [17:30.260 --> 17:34.660] whether or not there is evidence to support any of this fear-mongering.