The direction of the evolution is biased towards variants that spare the host,

Not always. There are examples from various diseases where they become more deadly.

Certainly artificial selection is a real thing. But no mechanism of action is given to suggest lockdown gives artificial selection towards more severe covid19. It's codswallop, read the ridley article, it make no sense.

1. The BBC lacks credibility on politicised issues like Covid or Global Warming.
2. As you say, we don't know. That's the point. Therefore "First do no harm" has even greater therapeutic utility than usual.

9markshaw1

Completely agree 'thelightcavalry'. I quoted Socrates (in my last post on vaccinations):
'A wise man understands that he knows nothing.'

Mark Shaw

I
One major factor is age. SARs2 targets age more than anything else Africa has a very young population. India average age 26, Africa 20. UK 40 for example.

I think you may be on to something about evolution Splatt, Here is what you were on to:

As ever with matters concerning Darwinism, there may be something subtle at play with what Matt Ridley wrote, but if there is Matt has failed to explain it. Let's explain what's going on in India, by first looking at a much smaller place called Summerisle.

In doing so, I will propose a solution to the World's CORONA VIRUS crisis. Gird your loins for a lot of plain logic. You can skip the next 500 lines if you want to see the solution.

From an epidemiological point of view, successfully locked down people are the same as missing people. They neither get nor transmit the virus, they are dead to processes of evolution while they are missing. Assuming the virus still circulates within those unsuccessfully locked down, I'd expect the dynamics to be equivalent to having a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently.

Let's assume we have an island country, let us call it Summerisle, with a population of 60m where a viral disease of a certain lethality is circulating. The natural evolution pressures would be for the disease to trend toward greater transmissibility and lower lethality. This is because lower transmissibility is not a successful direction for growth, and neither is greater lethality since it would have fewer hosts and hence is also not a successful direction for growth. If any mutation is to survive, nature would favour change in a successful direction. Having established that, we are now in a position to ask Matt's question, then answer it.

If we suddenly sent half the people of Summerisle to (say) Winterisle, what changes happen to the virus' evolution in Summerisle, where would it go?

With a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently, the virus will still need to transmit, so the pressure for greater transmissibility is unchanged. What about lethality? We have a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently, and the virus will still need to permit survival to thrive, the direction of evolutionary pressure is unchanged.

But wait! There is one more thing. Evolution needs change, and change generally occurs, in nature, in cell division, when the virus is replicating in an animal's body, by mistakes while it is making copies of itself.The consequence of a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently means half the total cells are in play, hence half as much division, which means half as many mistakes, meaning evolution goes at half speed, directed as before at higher transmissibility, lower lethality. It's actually less than half speed, since they meet less frequently and further apart as well. It evolves much more slowly to be less lethal and easier to transmit.

So now we can finally say what is happening in India, Let us say, instead of sending half the people of Summerisle to Winterisle, let us increase the population of Summerisle by a factor of 20. What will happen. The direction of evolutionary pressure are still towards greater transmissibility, lower lethality,But there is 20 times more cell division, 20 times as many mistakes so evolution goes 20 times more quickly, it's actually much more than 20 times, since they are closer together and they meet more frequently. I'd guess it's a hundred times faster.

So at evolutionary warp speed, you very quickly reach optimal low lethality, optimal transmissibility. The reason evolution reaches an optimal point is because at its core Darwinism drives the evolution of an organism to a point where no further improvements to an organism's survival prospects are possible.

And the solution to the World's CORONAVIRUS crisis… wait for it DADA!
Intentionally infect the whole world with India's Coronavirus strain, since it has optimal transmissibility and low lethality. You can call it a vaccine if it helps.

As ever with matters concerning Darwinism, there may be something subtle at play with what Matt Ridley wrote, but if there is Matt has failed to explain it. Let's explain what's going on in India, by first looking at a much smaller place called Summerisle.

In doing so, I will propose a solution to the World's CORONAVIRUS crisis. Gird your loins for a lot of plain logic. You can skip the next 500 lines if you want to see the solution.

From an epidemiological point of view, successfully locked down people are the same as missing people. They neither get nor transmit the virus, they are dead to processes of evolution while they are missing. Assuming the virus still circulates within those unsuccessfully locked down, I'd expect the dynamics to be equivalent to having a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently.

Let's assume we have an island country, let us call it Summerisle, with a population of 60m where a viral disease of a certain lethality is circulating. The natural evolution pressures would be for the disease to trend toward greater transmissibility and lower lethality. This is because lower transmissibility is not a successful direction for growth, and neither is greater lethality since it would have fewer hosts and hence is also not a successful direction for growth. If any mutation is to survive, nature would favour change in a successful direction. Having established that, we are now in a position to ask Matt's question, then answer it.

If we suddenly sent half the people of Summerisle to (say) Winterisle, what changes happen to the virus' evolution in Summerisle, where would it go?

With a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently, the virus will still need to transmit, so the pressure for greater transmissibility is unchanged. What about lethality? We have a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently, and the virus will still need to permit survival to thrive, the direction of evolutionary pressure is unchanged.

But wait! There is one more thing. Evolution needs change, and change generally occurs, in nature, in cell division, when the virus is replicating in an animal's body, by mistakes while it is making copies of itself.The consequence of a smaller population further apart who meet less frequently means half the total cells are in play, hence half as much division, which means half as many mistakes, meaning evolution goes at half speed, directed as before at higher transmissibility, lower lethality. It's actually less than half speed, since they meet less frequently and further apart as well. It evolves much more slowly to be less lethal and easier to transmit.

So now we can finally say what is happening in India, Let us say, instead of sending half the people of Summerisle to Winterisle, let us increase the population of Summerisle by a factor of 20. What will happen. The direction of evolutionary pressure are still towards greater transmissibility, lower lethality,But there is 20 times more cell division, 20 times as many mistakes so evolution goes 20 times more quickly, it's actually much more than 20 times, since they are closer together and they meet more frequently. I'd guess it's a hundred times faster.

So at evolutionary warp speed, you very quickly reach optimal low lethality, optimal transmissibility. The reason evolution reaches an optimal point is because at its core Darwinism drives the evolution of an organism to a point where no further improvements to an organism's survival prospects are possible.

And the solution to the World's CORONAVIRUS crisis… wait for it DADA!
Intentionally infect the whole world with India's Coronavirus strain, since it has optimal transmissibility and low lethality. You can call it a vaccine if it helps.

But yes, lockdowns are naturally selecting for forms that are more infectious. Thats how it works.

Natural selection drives evolution to optimal points in two directions 1) highest transmissibility 2) lowest lethality.

If lockdown (effectively ) randomly reduces population, the effect is still to drive at highest transmissibility lowest lethality, but it proceeds more slowly, less cell division in smaller population.

This is why India and China with huge populations now have virus variants with highest transmissibility and lowest lethality. The have reached optimally evolved corona virus quickly because they have so many cell divisions, hence copy errors, in their huge populations.

Best solution for Britain, open borders to let Indian variant in.