There may some comparison there, although I suspect it's still too early to make that comparison reliably.
Right now it should also be noted that the highest case numbers are still in countries with high uptake of COVID inoculations. Depending on the degree of damage done to a patient's immune system by the inoculations, we cannot yet rule out a possibility that monkeypox is spreading in Europe because people there are less able to fight off the infection than people in Africa.
There's not enough data to make that claim with authority; right now it's still speculation. However, the disparity between Europe and Africa in inoculation rates is real and is real noticeable.
Not sure how to read the description of an apparently more subtle disease. Could be much of what is being seen now in Europe, etc. goes completely undetected where endemic? Could have been brewing in Europe for a long time, not seen but secretly spread in covid lockdown years?
At least does not look like an unconstrained exponential in terms of growth. Maybe even rolling over already in some countries
While certain data points such as the 47 nucleotide substitutions are discrete and measurable facts, much about the presentation of Monkeypox in Europe is still a bit fuzzy. Of particular note is the apparent lessening of the typical rash that has long been the hallmark of the orthopox viruses.
Based on what is being reported, monkeypox cases in Europe present with a much smaller rash, or even not a rash per se but merely a few lesions, principally in the genital and perineal regions.. This is a pronounced difference from the traditional presentation of the disease.
Whether this smaller physical manifestation of the disease plays a role in the much greater human-to-human transmission of the disease or whether it is a coincidental artifact of whatever viral shift has produced greater transmissibility is not something we can derive from the current information.
But no, there is not exponential spread of the disease. This tends to confirm the assertion by the WHO and the CDC that monkeypox, while it potentially can aeroslize, still requires close contact for transmission. This is a good thing: exponential spread would indicate patterns of spread typically associated with infectious respiratory disease, where the virus can spread through casual and even incidental contact, not just close contact.
The 47 nucleotide substitutions are a very strong signal that there has been sustained human-to-human transmission somewhere. The linkage to the "exported" cases from the 2017-2019 Nigerian outbreak indicates that sustained transmission has been occurring for no more than 3 to 5 years. Given the typical estimates of 1-2 nucleotide substitutions per year commonly ascribed to orthopox viruses, even the longest possible time frame which fits the extant data does not, at historic rates of substitution, get us to 47 substitutions. It doesn't even get us close--at the very low end we are looking at 4 times the number of substitutions, and a more likely read is 6-7 times the number of substitutions we should expect to see.
If the decreased presentation of rash and lesions occurred fairly early during this period of "hidden" transmission, it potentially becomes plausible that many cases were just written off by the individual patients as an outbreak of herpes, or possibly syphilis, and then ignored, left to resolve on their own. If the patients do not go to the doctor to get tested for orthopox viruses specifically the disease is not going to be noticed by public health officials--that much is certain.
But this is also why the WHO's focus on not "stigmatizing" Africans regarding the virus is absurd. Not only has that stigmatizing not been happening, but by even arguing that it has, the WHO has raised a barrier to effective comparative analysis of monkeypox in Europe and monkeypox in Africa. Such a comparison is essential, because if the virus is shifting, if the disease is shifting, the scientific thinking on the disease has to shift with it.
Historically, monkeypox has been endemic only in West and Central Africa. The global outbreak, however, has few direct ties to that region and shows multiple signs of now being endemic in Europe as well, and possibly North America.
For the WHO and the CDC to continue to present monkeypox as monolithically zoonotic and monolithically endemic to West and Central Africa is not only not stigmatizing, it is also not an accurate recounting of the extant data. Right now monkeypox is neither monolithically zoonotic nor monolithically endemic to West and Central Africa. Acknowledging and studying that shift is going to be an essential feature of effective research on the virus going forward--and the WHO is standing in the way of that.
I’m gonna guess… stigmatizing Africa has never been an issue. Stigmatizing Europeans of a particular orientation is driving that. Africa, is as it was for omicron, always being thrown under the bus of course. By making a big deal about the name they are allowing the blame shift to the comfortable source (for Europe).
Good guess. Africa is not getting stigmatized by monkeypox in Europe.
While there's a certain air of condescension in the media reporting of the fact that most of the extant cases are gay or bisexual men, outside of the usual social media flamethrowers there's not even much in the way of a subtext of monkeypox as a "gay disease". THAT is more of a media and institutional overreaction to the reporting of the fact that most monkeypox cases in Europe and North America are among gay and bisexual men.
It seems the moment sexuality or sexual orientation becomes a significant correlate to anything, there is that portion of the media and the chattering class that immediately goes into an extended version of Seinfeld's "not that there's anything wrong with that." Which of course immediately shuts down any discussion of why the disease outbreak is occurring among that demographic (hint: it probably has nothing to do with the virus itself).
This geographic variation sounds a bit like the variation found with AIDS
There may some comparison there, although I suspect it's still too early to make that comparison reliably.
Right now it should also be noted that the highest case numbers are still in countries with high uptake of COVID inoculations. Depending on the degree of damage done to a patient's immune system by the inoculations, we cannot yet rule out a possibility that monkeypox is spreading in Europe because people there are less able to fight off the infection than people in Africa.
There's not enough data to make that claim with authority; right now it's still speculation. However, the disparity between Europe and Africa in inoculation rates is real and is real noticeable.
Not sure how to read the description of an apparently more subtle disease. Could be much of what is being seen now in Europe, etc. goes completely undetected where endemic? Could have been brewing in Europe for a long time, not seen but secretly spread in covid lockdown years?
At least does not look like an unconstrained exponential in terms of growth. Maybe even rolling over already in some countries
While certain data points such as the 47 nucleotide substitutions are discrete and measurable facts, much about the presentation of Monkeypox in Europe is still a bit fuzzy. Of particular note is the apparent lessening of the typical rash that has long been the hallmark of the orthopox viruses.
Based on what is being reported, monkeypox cases in Europe present with a much smaller rash, or even not a rash per se but merely a few lesions, principally in the genital and perineal regions.. This is a pronounced difference from the traditional presentation of the disease.
Whether this smaller physical manifestation of the disease plays a role in the much greater human-to-human transmission of the disease or whether it is a coincidental artifact of whatever viral shift has produced greater transmissibility is not something we can derive from the current information.
But no, there is not exponential spread of the disease. This tends to confirm the assertion by the WHO and the CDC that monkeypox, while it potentially can aeroslize, still requires close contact for transmission. This is a good thing: exponential spread would indicate patterns of spread typically associated with infectious respiratory disease, where the virus can spread through casual and even incidental contact, not just close contact.
The 47 nucleotide substitutions are a very strong signal that there has been sustained human-to-human transmission somewhere. The linkage to the "exported" cases from the 2017-2019 Nigerian outbreak indicates that sustained transmission has been occurring for no more than 3 to 5 years. Given the typical estimates of 1-2 nucleotide substitutions per year commonly ascribed to orthopox viruses, even the longest possible time frame which fits the extant data does not, at historic rates of substitution, get us to 47 substitutions. It doesn't even get us close--at the very low end we are looking at 4 times the number of substitutions, and a more likely read is 6-7 times the number of substitutions we should expect to see.
If the decreased presentation of rash and lesions occurred fairly early during this period of "hidden" transmission, it potentially becomes plausible that many cases were just written off by the individual patients as an outbreak of herpes, or possibly syphilis, and then ignored, left to resolve on their own. If the patients do not go to the doctor to get tested for orthopox viruses specifically the disease is not going to be noticed by public health officials--that much is certain.
But this is also why the WHO's focus on not "stigmatizing" Africans regarding the virus is absurd. Not only has that stigmatizing not been happening, but by even arguing that it has, the WHO has raised a barrier to effective comparative analysis of monkeypox in Europe and monkeypox in Africa. Such a comparison is essential, because if the virus is shifting, if the disease is shifting, the scientific thinking on the disease has to shift with it.
Historically, monkeypox has been endemic only in West and Central Africa. The global outbreak, however, has few direct ties to that region and shows multiple signs of now being endemic in Europe as well, and possibly North America.
For the WHO and the CDC to continue to present monkeypox as monolithically zoonotic and monolithically endemic to West and Central Africa is not only not stigmatizing, it is also not an accurate recounting of the extant data. Right now monkeypox is neither monolithically zoonotic nor monolithically endemic to West and Central Africa. Acknowledging and studying that shift is going to be an essential feature of effective research on the virus going forward--and the WHO is standing in the way of that.
I’m gonna guess… stigmatizing Africa has never been an issue. Stigmatizing Europeans of a particular orientation is driving that. Africa, is as it was for omicron, always being thrown under the bus of course. By making a big deal about the name they are allowing the blame shift to the comfortable source (for Europe).
Good guess. Africa is not getting stigmatized by monkeypox in Europe.
While there's a certain air of condescension in the media reporting of the fact that most of the extant cases are gay or bisexual men, outside of the usual social media flamethrowers there's not even much in the way of a subtext of monkeypox as a "gay disease". THAT is more of a media and institutional overreaction to the reporting of the fact that most monkeypox cases in Europe and North America are among gay and bisexual men.
It seems the moment sexuality or sexual orientation becomes a significant correlate to anything, there is that portion of the media and the chattering class that immediately goes into an extended version of Seinfeld's "not that there's anything wrong with that." Which of course immediately shuts down any discussion of why the disease outbreak is occurring among that demographic (hint: it probably has nothing to do with the virus itself).
Don't "monkey it up."
--Ron DeSantis
Too late.
DOUBLE BRAVO
Monkey see, Monkey WHO.....
🤦🏻
99% der erkrankten sind Schwule Männer, soll man sie doch Schwulenpocken nennen!!!
Assuming the veracity of Google Translate:
99% of those infected are gay men, shouldn't they be called gaypox!!!
Or analpox, fecalpox, well, that's far enough.
The translation is accurate. The statistic is not.
Please keep it respectful and civil.