True Left

And again:

https://www-firstpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.firstpost.com/health/france-detects-new-covid-19-variant-ihu-more-infectious-than-omicron-all-we-know-about-it-10256521.html/

France detects new COVID-19 variant 'IHU', more infectious than Omicron: All we know about it
The new variant — B.1.640.2 — which has been detected in 12 patients near Marseille, contains 46 mutations, making it more resistant to vaccines and infectious

How many times do we have to repeat this cycle before people get it? As long as transmissions keep happening (even if asymptomatically), the virus will keep evolving until it can get past the vaccine. So you have take a booster shot. And then the virus will keep evolving until it can get past that as well. So then you take another booster shot. And so on. As long as transmissions are allowed to keep happening, nothing is fundamentally improving. But when I try to explain this, people say: "Well, if it makes no sense, why is it so widely accepted?" And I say: "Borrowing money at interest makes no sense either."

The real answer is that this entire problem-solving approach will continue to be accepted in all domains so long as its philosophical foundations are not dismantled.

Immunity approach = "We will evolve to be immune to you, and if you keep evolving in response, we will just keep evolving faster!"

Lockdown approach = "We will (by preventing transmissions) prevent you from evolving, so that we don't need to evolve either!"

The immunity approach is, at its core, a manifestation of progressivism (and hence equating the acquiring of more and more immunity with strengthening). The lockdown approach is a manifestation of regressivism (and hence equating the acquiring of more and more immunity with adulteration).

Regressivism must defeat progressivism if we are to break the cycle.

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftists-against-progressivism/