Assuming you mean viral load referring to mucuses or blood of the infected. Given that the human influenza virus' entry requires the viral surface proteins (hemagglutinin (HA)) to bind to acids present on respiratory epithelial cells along with cleavage of HA by host cell proteases (enzymes that breakdown proteins) to facilitate membrane fusion. These trypsin-like proteases are mainly expressed in airway tissues, restricting influenza viral tissue response to the respiratory tract. I would say it would be highly unlikely for influenza viral replication existing in an environment lacking this crucial interaction let alone a low-pH environment like the GI tract

[–] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What a long-winded, asinine answer. Using scientific jargon doesn't help communicate your meaning to the layman when you do not bother to actually explain the meaning of the jargon you use.

Put the effort in to explain the science properly. If you can't, then you don't know the subject well enough. If you won't, then you shouldn't be communicating science.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The pot said to the kettle. Your reply to this thread is much better presented, you how to communicate science. I think you need to think a bit more about your audience. Lemmy isn't an academic institution, it's removed posts all the way down.

[–] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure there's some hypocrisy in my replies, but that's not going to stop me from doing the same again. I've worked with scientists for a long time and the way most of them communicate is a pet peeve of mine.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

I've thought about this for a while to be sure I'm not just being reactive. I wouldn't ask you to stop, in fact I encourage you to post more. I can't find the time to write such well written replies. Your post is the type of content I like to see and I'm sure others do too.

I'm giving you an unsolicited critique of your comments. If you intend to communicate with laymen about scientific concepts from my experience you're going to have a lot more success approaching it as if you're a supportive teacher rather than trying to prove someone wrong. If you try to be more like Ms. Frizzle than Sheldon Cooper you might reach more people, which is the ultimate goal of communicating science to laymen.

You are actually very good at it, and I encourage you to practice and find what works and what doesn't. Proving someone wrong just makes them defensive, teaching someone or communicating with the public shouldn't make them feel the need to be defensive.

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

That's a fascinating question. I'd love to hear from an actual epidemiologist.