• ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    In a longer term sense. If all the viable hosts die day one the virus stops having anyplace to go.

    The plague also largely died out after killing a massive portion of the population, if they hadn’t been killed it could have gone on for far longer.

    Killing the host isn’t beneficial for the parasite using it for resources. Not that there’s an active effort to be choose the traits, but something that happens to evolve to be less lethal and more easily transmitted will tend to exist longer.

    • Starya67@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      The plague was one of the most fatal pandemics ever. “It’s alright, if it’s too deadly it can’t spread much” is nonsense. THAT’S what people are saying.

      • ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        At what point did I say anything about it being too deadly that it can’t spread? It’s entirely feasible that something could be very deadly and very contagious at the same time.

        However, with that combination unless the host reproduces at a crazy high rate the virus won’t last long because it’ll run out of hosts to infect quickly.

        In epidemiology, an infection is said to be endemic in a specific population or populated place when that infection is constantly present, or maintained at a baseline level.

        For an infection to persist for a long time it needs to have somewhere to live, if everyone dies it can’t become an endemic condition.