A strange guide line to create new vaccins against the new Corona-virus Flue

I was discussing yesterday with a friend, a biologist, about the real risk of coronavirus pandemic flue, when i realized that the arising problem of not only the healing but of prevention and vaccination had to be fitted in a larger panorama.

1. Attenuation of viruses.
2. Was this pandemic flue so strong in Wuhan food markets habitues too?
3. Why this very dangerous flue is not producing so many deaths as we could expect by it in China?

Confronting with all those  dilemmas at a certain point I realized that almost for sure in the living food market in Wuhan where this coronavirus seems to have started its career, there were its predecessors too or better the sibling strains of its brothers and cousins that for at least a 80% should share parts of its genome and capsid; consequently a large part of the people working in those markets have got immunity for the same reason cowpox was used to eradicate the smallpox: one is known to be related to the other one!

So a good idea to proceed is to find brothers and cousins of that virus to use as vaccination, flatily, at least to easily and fast increase the chance to put under a sort of provisional high rate of protection those (or the world at a whole) that are near the risk of infection, having a natural vax.

So:

• track the history of the virus
• Track back the strains of brothers and cousins
• Vaccinate with it as many people as it's possible using those cousins
• Make a statistical research afterward to check for the results.

It is maybe out of the standard of the traditional procedures vax companies do, but if the danger is really so high maybe a temporary solution offered by a common sense can increase meanwhile the chance of reducing the risk of a general pandemic by this corona-virus.

© Luca COLELUPPI - Verona, Italy

Social Performers

I would like to introduce a new definition in the Social Media Panorama.

Social Performer©: is a person or organization devoted to increase its own follower fellowship instead of acting a bona fide social action.

The Social performer exploits reptilian emotional reactions like:

• indignation
• Revenge
• what I call "defrauded syndrome"© (people who think literally "they received from the life less than they are entitled to" and therefore they complain for their status and never offer anything to others and mostly inside the organizations they belong to)
• social-media's generosity: a lot of bla bla, using money and energies belonging to Others (something like "NIMBY"; in this case WUMA (Without Using My Account)
• the good guy's party: we are the good guys indeed we think the right things, just because are the things good guys think!
•  

and so on.

Social Performers are less than what were sophists in Athens in the past, they are not able to juggle with subtle syllogisms, they are really rude because they deliberately cancel the part of the truth they know matters to their rise.

Doesn't matter what they are destroying or what monsters they are rising, it is instead the rising of their pedestal in front of an audience of self-lamenters, who want someone at stake.



Copyright notes!
"Social performer" and "defrauded syndrome" are Luca's ideas and the right of use them are under CC BY-NC license

Solutions Vs Objectives

I've seen the Short's short video "FLY1" (Alan Short is the author name also).


One of my friends commented that there is non limit to human stupidity and I objected that this is not the case. What pushed the first two characters (the fly is the third one) to act this way was another big problem of human mind: the sudden setting of the seems-to-be main goal.

The true problem for the two characters in the video is the choice of the goal they would pursue to solve their problem; the same happens inside teams too when they are looking for a good solution the a rising problem.

Strange: the goal and the solution of a problem sometime seem so tied together that just one amongst many possible different solving actions is transformed immediately into a goal and the person/teams struggle to pursue this objective instead of let evolving actions for the solution of the problem.

So, starting with the first instinctive response, the two allied opponents have set their goal and immediately forgotten the problem they had to face: Problem/Solution indeed belong to a higher abstraction level compared with goals, but Goal is easier to be maintained.

Just when many attempts to achieve the same goal (not to speak about the many repeating actions peoples normally do to achieve the same wrong goal!), peoples normally accept to discuss their original goal. Indeed just the not human player found the right solution in the movie!

So to have a solution to a problem, local goals must be frequently reshaped on the fly (!)

 

Moreover, in this particular case there is another important factor the main attacking players would not take into account: John Nash's Equilibrium Theory. Using that, they could get the right response to the disturbing flying object! And again: just a not human player gave the answer.

 

I have no idea how well prepared was Alan Short about human mind and John Nash's theory, but sometime artists are able to recognize things that scientists reach after a long while!

Corollary to Lawrence Peter's law

Following a discussion about system inaction here, I can enunciate my Postulate to Peter's law extended to Systems (Human organizations): every observable and manageable system is full of peoples who tend to avoid any decision until they are obliged to do that! Every system (human structure) tends to attract peoples that feel themselves protected in similar structures. Every position is occupied by persons that do not bother higher levels taking not foreseen actions. A person is promoted to a higher level until he does not produce problems. When they reach a position that starts to create problems at that time the person is paralyzed! The functional area the person occupies is then blocked. Sooner or later all the position in an organization are occupied by paralyzed peoples All functional areas are then blocked. Every system doesn't react till is obliged to do it. At that time it starts to eject peoples in the areas involved, creating innovation for a short time.

Meta complexity of Complexity analyzers introduce a higher level of complexity

Exploring and exploiting complexity introduce a higher level of complexity creating an escalation toward the complexity itself

As complexity rises, as more complexity hunters work to prevent it and to catch the right moment in the complexity to get the best.
As they use tools to prevent the complexity to produce damages or to gain money, their tools are tuned on a particular wavelength of the phenomena they are checking.

The tuning of the different tools are used, is never the same for all the tools or for all the complexity explorers because they are taking into account of different factors; so, when the controlling systems working on different phenomena aspects and not perfectly tuned each other create a reaction on the system itself they participate in full to phenomenon creation then to the wavelength formation of the phenomenon itself.

So having different wavelength they produce a kind continuous and flat noise in the general system because perturbation they create is not tuned with others so they can leave the background noise apparently flat and gain information each one for the aspects thay are taking into account.

Yet they have a wavelength in their process formation and they are tuned on a particular frequency they produce and use; sooner o later the tools all together will produce a tuned peek that creates strong turbulences in the environment they are analyzing and exploiting.
So complexity analysis can create a higher degree of complexity introducing a sort of Meta complexity.
A kind of lower order Fourier transform wave.

We can say that this case is a quantic system, the observer influences the system!

(after a discussion with a friend back to 2006, during a Microsoft seminar)

The N-Dimensional Real World

A brief theory about what is the opposite of a stupid assertion.


I was discussing with my mother about intelligence, geniality and stupidity when I asked my mother about what was the opposite assertion of a stupid assertion. My mother (85 yo) answered to me: "It is obvious: it is an intelligent assertion!". I was so sorry, but I had to confute this assertion as a naive assertion - I could not obviously say: "it is a stupid assertion" to my mother! When we discuss about philosophical matter I have great respect for her! -. I said her that we are never sure that the OPPOSITE OF A STUPID ASSERTION is not another stupid assertion. The opposite of a stupid assertion can be another stupid assertion! And that is not so trivial!

WE ARE LIVING IN THE REALITY!
Indeed we are living in the Reality and our discussion was thought into that.
The Reality, when it is analyzed, has a particularity: it has a so huge number of facets that we cannot take into account of everything discussing of it.
Better: Reality has a multidimensional model and every time we argue on Reality, we are able to take into account of a limited amount of variables.

MANICHEISM
When colloquially we - my mother and me - were using the term "the opposite" I was deliberately permitting us to use a typical approach like that in disputes are currently set in Italy: "is it either fault to Corporation or to Trade-Unions?" or maybe "Is it either fault to Government or to General Economical situation?".
Typical Italian approach is to set the two things onto two opposite ends of a line just to split Good Guys Vs Bad Guys; so, apparently, Co and Trade-Unions, Government and General Economical situation appear to be on the same line as opponents: we, Italians, are all Manicheans, we love to put ourselves amongst good guys. So we absolutely need Bad Guys somewhere in front of us!
Avoiding and refusing for a while my breed's instincts, I guess that the correct approach to it, is to place the two concepts on independent dimensions instead, having, this way, two independent responsibilities impacting the Reality. This way we avoid a pretended opposition of good and bad guys that belongs to policy and not to a serious approach to the Reality.
Indeed, when we speak about Reality every person has his own approach: which one is the best one? I guess that higher is the number of variables we are able to gather about the problem and more the model is precise (or less erratic/random is its behavior).

QUANTUM THEORY OR ZENO'S PARADOX?
Collecting all those variables is not a simple task. We can find them in a small amount if we simply are focusing on the problem (without disturbing New-Age theories about Quantum physics on "everything is resonating" which is a charming though impossible to use theory).
Yet, when we assume as a base of our theories a limited number of variables, we are normally able to easily cope with them.
We can artificialy and suitably reduce the number of, so we can demonstrate almost everything (Zeno's Paradox of "Achilles and tortoise" is one of the most famous), but our goal here should be a better perception of the Reality and its rules, to have a better forecasts.

INVESTIGATING PERTURBATIONS IS STILL THE BEST WAY?

To gather more variables we have to investigate on anything is a perturbation of the standard process carried on with the known variables: the way was used in Quantum theory. Differences between expected behavior and resulting behavior give us evidence of unknown perturbing variables. In this way we can maybe find new informations but we spoil a lot of time and efforts also.

An help can come from perception of different persons working together (brainstorming is one of the most famous activities to gather variables): that yields a better harvest. Every person, indeed, focuses on his own particular facets of a problem and more person cover a wider range of facets.
But the tricky thing (or think?) is to find them in a more effective or maybe predictable way.

EMPIRISM or PREDICTABLE FINDINGS?

A problem can be considered complete when the distance between expected and resulting variables narrows sufficiently. There is no guarantee that a sufficient number of persons find the necessary amount of variables when they act in a freewheeling way. There are other means to discover them in a more predictable way: using different exploring ways for Problems, Mind and Thinking: a true methodic wandering in the problem.

Ask me for it

Escherichia Colii plague

This is an hypothesis about the main reason why the Escherichia Colii (E.C.), presently infecting Germany, has so strong effect and how to reduce the immediate risk for it to be so lethal.
Anche in Italiano

Infection

It's going to be transformed into a true psychosis: I speak about Escherichia Colii disease that is apparently spreading in North and Central Europe.

There are many cases in Germany and some around the north of Europe.

That disease spreading has a strange behavior: I guess that Germans clean sufficiently well their vegetables before they consume them (they did it for sure before the last happenings about E.C. as well) to normally have no risk from bacteria of any kind to reach an amount to become critical and dangerous for human health. Normally the risk for enteritis to be so lethal is water contamination and consequent ingestion of a huge amount of bacteria. Here it seems this is not the case: not an eavy contamination in term of ingested bacteria at once.

The disease spread

Yet the disease seems to spread around and seems to flood off.

E. Colii. is not a contaminant with a carrier person-to-person, like it was in the past plague, nor brought from birds or introduced with contaminating meat neither. It must be ingested and it must reach a remarkable amount before it becomes dangerous.

It is simply declared brought by vegetables: it means that only few, or seemingly single, bacteria are contaminating vegetables then infecting hosts, eating contaminated vegetables.

So there are few important factor were not taken enough in care of during present times: 

1. Any disease comes from an agent, in this case bacteria (this is accoounted!)
2. Every infection in present case comes from a  clean carrier, like vegetables (for sure they were washed enough by their users);
3. they cannot be so contaminated to consider them as the main reason of infection in term of mass, critical for that infection to be dangerous.
3. Strong extemporaneous (not resident) infections are normally very weak microorganisms that can survive only in particular environments, well selected and well protected, like particular Ph or in total lack of any competitor.
4. Evolution never foster lethal microorganisms like the presently considered: it has to struggle for surviving.
5. infections can be lethal if they can develop into a favorable environment  inside the host and for a sufficient time.
6. The spare cases seam to be more related to a weakness of the host organism than to a true pandemic risk, like it was in the past for plagues or in the recent years for bird flue.

So those aspects signalize that the reason why that particular microorganism can produce so lethal result seams to be the chance for it to develop undisturbed and invade the intestine without competitors inside the host organism.

Natural Ceases

When I worked in dairy industry I've spoken some times about the presence of E.C. in ceases and capacity for  biologic flora of natural ceases to coerce it (avoid development of E. C. up to a critical point, critical for host organism). Some particular natural ceases have this kind of well balanced natural flora, capable of coercing and thus limiting E. C. and other dangerous microorganisms to an amount that is far from being critical.

Today, many persons for wellness purpose or thinking to improve their health tend to assume single or mixed specialized intestinal flora.

Does this habit be a risk with a presence of dangerous microorganisms?

They are not and they have no natural competitors to E. Colii and they maybe permit a strong vulnerability when a completely unexpected microorganism appears in the environment.

Conclusion

I remind that when I traveled in foreign countries the first times I moved outside Italy in my life: I suffered for intestinal troubles for some days then, travel after travel after travel, they were reduced  to a zero reaction. After that, I feed myself with raw sea foods bought in small food stores on the road or on the shores in China and Thailand without problems: my flora got long experience of surviving.

This last example support my doubt: I strongly believe that it is important to assume natural flora like the one you can find in cured natural ceases like Italian Taleggio, Gorgonzola or French Roquefort or Roblochon, or other ceases you can find in Spain, Greece, Germany and all over the world too.

Intestinal Flora is a System with its own equilibrium, not a single bacterium factory: better to keep it well balanced, instead of asking it particular performance!

I suggest: just natural/traditional ceases till that danger finishes!