You may not appreciate that genomic sequencing is relatively new. Well not that new, and I guess that kinda makes me feel old... but it wasn't until we began sequencing, cataloguing differences, and then doing the exhaustive work of tracking these sequential differences to functional ones that we began making a case for further categorial differences in viruses. There was a debate over whether those variants as we now recognize them were worthy of categorical distinction or not ... but neither now nor then did that mean those differences didn't exist or weren't real.
At first there was just infection
Then we recognized differences between bacterial and viral, and classification got more complicated
Then we noted morphological differences that tracked with different symptomatic sicknesses and the classifications broadened further
Then we noted some of those same morphologies were enveloped while others weren't
And of those, some had RNA for genomic material, while others were DNA
And of those, some were positive sense and others negative sense.
And know we recognize of those, there is enough variation that is viable that we can classify by 'variants' as well.
It's an ongoing process of recognizing and then categorizing the complexitiy of life
Flu was 'just flu' much the same way that once an infection was 'just an infection'.
Seems to me that right around the time flu "vaccinations" started to wane, SARS-CoV/2 was released.
It's worth noting that one of the reasons we're so sure covid-19 is human engineered, is how unnatural it appears. And the reason we can say that is because we have 'natural' variants like in flu to compare against. Were flu likewise engineered, it would either be just as unnatural looking, or covid-19 would be capable of engineering without the hand of man being so obvious behind it's creation.
You may not appreciate that genomic sequencing is relatively new. Well not that new, and I guess that kinda makes me feel old... but it wasn't until we began sequencing, cataloguing differences, and then doing the exhaustive work of tracking these sequential differences to functional ones that we began making a case for further categorial differences in viruses. There was a debate over whether those variants as we now recognize them were worthy of categorical distinction or not ... but neither now nor then did that mean those differences didn't exist or weren't real.
At first there was just infection
Then we recognized differences between bacterial and viral, and classification got more complicated
Then we noted morphological differences that tracked with different symptomatic sicknesses and the classifications broadened further
Then we noted some of those same morphologies were enveloped while others weren't
And of those, some had RNA for genomic material, while others were DNA
And of those, some were positive sense and others negative sense.
And know we recognize of those, there is enough variation that is viable that we can classify by 'variants' as well.
It's an ongoing process of recognizing and then categorizing the complexitiy of life
Flu was 'just flu' much the same way that once an infection was 'just an infection'.
You may not appreciate that genomic sequencing is relatively new. Well not that new, and I guess that kinda makes me feel old... but it wasn't until we began sequencing, cataloguing differences, and then doing the exhaustive work of tracking these sequential differences to functional ones that we began making a case for further categorial differences in viruses. There was a debate over whether those variants as we now recognize them were worthy of categorical distinction or not ... but neither now nor then did that mean those differences didn't exist or weren't real.
At first there was just infection
Then we recognized differences between bacterial and viral, and classification got more complicated
Then we noted morphological differences that tracked with different symptomatic sicknesses and the classifications broadened further
Then we noted some of those same morphologies were enveloped while others weren't
And of those, some had RNA for genomic material, while others were DNA
And of those, some were positive sense and others negative sense.
And know we recognize of those, there is enough variation that is viable that we can classify by 'variants' as well.
It's an ongoing process of recognizing and then categorizing the complexitiy of life
Flu was just flu much the same way that once an infection was just an infection.
You may not appreciate that genomic sequencing is relatively new. Well not that new, and I guess that kinda makes me feel old... but it wasn't until we began sequencing, cataloguing differences, and then doing the exhaustive work of tracking these sequential differences to functional ones that we began making a case for further categorial differences in viruses. There was a debate over whether those variants as we now recognize them were worthy of categorical distinction or not ... but neither now nor then did that mean those differences didn't exist or weren't real.
At first there was just infection
Then we recognized differences between bacterial and viral, and classification got more complicated
Then we noted morphological differences that tracked with different symptomatic sicknesses and the classifications broadened further
Then we noted some of those same morphologies were enveloped while others weren't
And of those, some had RNA for genomic material, while others were DNA
And of those, some were positive sense and others negative sense.
And know we recognize of those, there is enough variation that is viable that we can classify by 'variants' as well.
It's an ongoing process of recognizing and then categorizing the complexitiy of life
Flu was just flu much the same way that once an infection was just an infection.