Preliminary analysis indicates that the UK variant strain that was increasingly prevalent was detected in over 50% of the PCR-confirmed symptomatic cases (32 UK variant, 24 non-variant, 6 unknown). Based on PCR performed on strains from 56 of the 62 cases, efficacy by strain was calculated to be 95.6% against the original COVID-19 strain and 85.6% against the UK variant strain. . . .
In the South Africa Phase 2b clinical trial, 60% efficacy (95% CI: 19.9 – 80.1) for the prevention of mild, moderate and severe COVID-19 disease was observed in the 94% of the study population that was HIV-negative. Twenty-nine cases were observed in the placebo group and 15 in the vaccine group. One severe case occurred in the placebo group and all other cases were mild or moderate.
NVX-CoV2373 contains a full-length, prefusion spike protein made using Novavax’ recombinant nanoparticle technology and the company’s proprietary saponin-based Matrix-M™ adjuvant. The purified protein is encoded by the genetic sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein and is produced in insect cells. It can neither cause COVID-19 nor can it replicate, is stable at 2°C to 8°C (refrigerated) and is shipped in a ready-to-use liquid formulation that permits distribution using existing vaccine supply chain channels.
As lagniappe...
And as lagniappe for me, I've learned a completely new word!
...beignets...
... U.K. and South Africa variants...
Apropos words... ain’t it funny how nobody blinks at calling it British or U.K. or South African virus, but God forbid someone says Chinese virus?
Apropos words... ain’t it funny how nobody blinks at calling it British or U.K. or South African virus, but God forbid someone says Chinese virus?
Vaccine Candidate 72% Effective in the US and 66% Effective Overall at Preventing Moderate to Severe COVID-19, 28 Days after Vaccination
85% Effective Overall in Preventing Severe Disease and Demonstrated Complete Protection Against COVID-19 related Hospitalization and Death as of Day 28
Protection Against Severe Disease Across Geographies, Ages, and Multiple Virus Variants, including the SARS-CoV-2 Variant from the B.1.351 Lineage . . . Observed in South Africa
Interesting...According to that chart, the U.S. has not vaccinated anybody yet. Not true! I got my first Pfizer shot yesterday, and the second is scheduled for three weeks from today.
Slobodan is being somewhat selective in the data he has chosen to show, removing a few countries with higher vaccination rates from the display. It's an interesting site, though, and (if accurate) worth playing with. It's here (https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations).
The same, unfortunately, also applies to beignets.
:(
Slobodan is being somewhat selective in the data he has chosen to show, removing a few countries with higher vaccination rates from the display...
No. Really?
What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying I have a habit of posting doctored information?
Nope. I don't think you doctor information. I think that you frequently present very selective information, and that is worthwhile to look beyond it.
If I do so, that is because I tend to present information from another angle, different from the mainstream (or the one prevailing here, on this forum). So, by definition, it must be selective.
I disagree that posting informative from another angle by definition means that it must be selective. For example, what is "from another angle" or "different from the mainstream" about posting vaccination rates per 100 population by country? That's a pretty standard way to do it. It did, however, show information from only the countries you selected. So it was selective information presented in a standard way.
Once again, I did not select the countries in the chart. The chart popped up in my Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn feed...
That explains a lot. If you are just posting stuff from Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn, I'll just disregard it as unreliable and move on.
Oh, for fuck's sake!!!
Why does it matter if it was posted on those platforms??? Being posted there does not make something unreliable automatically. The chart clearly indicates the original source, and as Jeremy demonstrated, there is a link to it, so that you can go there and check it for yourself.
The UK, which approved its first COVID-19 vaccine on December 2, nearly three weeks before the EU, is racing ahead with immunising its people.
Latest data shows the country has vaccinated more people (7.6 million) - more than Germany, Italy, France and Spain combined. London began earlier than other EU countries but has also approved more vaccines than the 27-member bloc.
Who has made the best progress, relatively speaking?
The UK has administered the most vaccines overall, but it also leads the table of per capita immunisations. Malta is second in the table of vaccinations per 100,000 people and is the only EU country in the top four. Iceland is third and Serbia is fourth. Then comes four EU countries, Denmark, Slovenia, Ireland and Spain.
About this data:
The data is pulled together from official government sources and media reports. There is no central collection of vaccine figures and not all countries publish figures at this early stage.
Here is yet another source of data by Euronews listing vaccinations by country.Vaccinations by country can also be described as degree of panic.
What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying I have a habit of posting doctored information?
Let's just call it selective.
I am still waiting for Jeremy to tell us which countries with higher vaccination rates were not selected.
On a 7-day rolling average to 26th January, which is the snapshot you quoted, Israel and the United Arab Emirates. You'll see also that the USA lies next behind the UK.
Jeremy
Anyway...
The very high UK placement in those charts... first benefit of Brexit?
It is, as you say, interesting to see that Serbia has high vaccination rates - never mentioned in the news. Which vaccine is being used?
Pfizer, Sputnik V and Sinopharm
The very high UK placement in those charts... first benefit of Brexit?
Pfizer, Sputnik V and Sinopharm
And Moderna.not to forget Slivovitza
not to forget Slivovitza
... It is, as you say, interesting to see that Serbia has high vaccination rates - never mentioned in the news...
The number of people suffering from flu has plunged by 95% to levels not seen in more than 130 years.
Influenza has been “almost completely wiped out”, said Simon de Lusignan, professor of primary care at the University of Oxford and director of the Royal College of GPs research and surveillance centre, which focuses on flu. In the second week of January, usually the peak of the season, the number of influenza-like illnesses reported to GPs was 1.1 per 100,000 people, compared to a five-year average rate of 27. Out of four million patients at 392 GP surgeries in England, 42 had influenza-like illness, or about 0.001%.
Flu has also disappeared in Wales, at 1.0 cases per 100,000 people, and vanished in Scotland, with 0.5. In the second week of January, health analysts did a double take when they saw the flu positivity rate — a standard metric of community flu activity — was 0.0%. Not one of 1,894 samples tested positive and the number of hospital admissions in England for flu was zero.
There is a snag to the success, though. Scientists developing a vaccine for next year’s flu season are struggling because there are so few samples to work on. The drastically reduced flu numbers may also mean more of us are susceptible to it in future, having not acquired immunity this year. “It’s a nightmare to work out what comes next,” said McCauley. “If you have flu away for a year, then immunity will have waned. It could come back worse.”
Good news that we have more vaccines in the future.
As for "rankings", it is important to consider two aspects:
1. Number of people vaccinated in a particular country: necessary to distinguish between people who already got the two doses, or only the first dose. For the vaccines that require two doses to complete immunity.
2. A number of countries is increasing the recommended interval between the two doses from 21 days (Pfizer) to up to ~80 days. This is being done in the UK, I think. In this way, they use their initial batches of vaccines to vaccinate more people with the first dose. Pfizer already stated that their trials have used 21 days interval, and there is no guarantee that a period longer than that will have similar positive results.
The rapid spread of cases here and the potential overwhelming of the health service made the benefit of more people being kept out of hospital in the short run bigger than more completely protecting a smaller number of people. We'll see if that was the correct decision in the long run. Data on long term effects of the various vaccines is (obviously ) pretty sparse so it's not clear how big of a trade off it is.
The only data we know is from the trials: the effectiveness from Pfizer is >90% when two doses are separated by 21 days.
The rationale is that a scarce resource should be used to greatest overall effect in the population, and those that claim to understand these things are, in the main, of the opinion that the greatest overall level of immunity will be achieved by giving more first doses and fewer second until either there is a greater supply of vaccine or the balance swings towards giving second doses. . . .
... The UK had the chance to enrol in the EU's vaccine procurement programme last year but declined, to the expressed dismay of many politicians and commentators who viewed it as a triumph of Brexit over health; few, if any, of them have yet chosen as publicly to eat their words. It's not clear whether or not that option would have been open to the UK had we not left the EU by that stage...
...which meets the WHO’s 50 per cent efficacy threshold.
Couple of interesting developments - 1) Sputnik vaccine reported to have high level of efficacy, and 2) AZ vaccine reported to be having good effect on reducing transmission.
And there's considerable interest and excitement about the possibly improved results of giving one as a first dose and the other as a second. Interesting times.
Jeremy
More interesting still is that since the first and the second dosis are exactly the same, you can use the second as first and the first as second.
In other words, one should wait with the first shot until he gets the second?
Yes. I got my second shot a couple of weeks ago, and I'll get my first shot soon... 8)
No, I do not think you doctor information. I think that you frequently present very selective information, and that is worthwhile to look beyond it.
The main issue is that these data, even if true, mean nothing important. Or maybe nothing at all. Just putting something in a pretty chart is, in itself, meaningless.
;D ;D ;D
Your desire to shoot the messenger is getting the better of you.
For almost a year you (collective) have been arguing the shots are going to save the world, "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes," blah, blah... and now it is not important at all how fast the vaccine is distributed!?
For almost a year you (collective) have been arguing the shots are going to save the world, "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes," blah, blah... and now it is not important at all how fast the vaccine is distributed!?
I did read the article in the link which contained other interesting facts not shown in the chart. The two that struck me were that, at the current rate, it will take 11 months to vaccinate 75% of the US population, and for the world 7 years. I do not believe those statements take into consideration, for example, increasing vaccine production, increasing vaccine administration, one dose vaccines, or the effect of virus variants. So those appear to be "for what it's worth" kind of statements, at least to me.
... I don't recall anyone (except maybe Alan) arguing "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes"....
... Most economies have been open since last April or May with some restrictions which differ from location to location and from time to time....
The ban on "unnecessary walking" in LA County is actually a ban on unnecessary travel by any means. Exceptions include going to church and going to protests. It also exempts what are commonly known as essential businesses. For the sports minded, it also exempts golf, tennis, and pickleball. It is part of what is generally referred to as a stay at home order, not unlike the restrictions imposed at the onset of the pandemic. Of course, a snappy title like "LA Mayor Bans Unnecessary Walking..." sells papers and catches peoples' eyes on social media. My feeling is that if you can still play pickleball, my use of the term "some restrictions" is appropriate.
In my book, going to church or to a street protest happening are the most blatant examples of non-essential activities.
Got my second shot (Moderna Vaccine) at 9:30 CST this morning and so far, a lot of sore arm stiffness, a touch of nausea and a little fatigue. Hope this is as bad as it gets.How do you feel today, Chris? My wife and I are due for our second shots Feb 19th.
South Africa halted use of the AstraZeneca-Oxford coronavirus vaccine on Sunday after evidence emerged that the vaccine did not protect clinical-trial participants from mild or moderate illness caused by the more contagious virus variant that was first seen there.
Source: NYT
In my book, going to church or to a street protest happening are the most blatant examples of non-essential activities.The First Amendment to our Consitution protectss free speech and religious expression, not shoe repair stores.
On the other hand, a small shoe repair store with a handful of customers or a store with spare car items can police how many customers enter their stores and should be allowed to stay open.
I'm fine today other than the sore arm but I had a sore arm for about three days after the first shot, too. It's a rather large needle and it goes in intramuscular. My wife, though, is experiencing some chills, general malaise and her arm also hurts like the dickens.Hope she feels better soon, you too.
My 88 year old mother received her second Moderna shot Thursday. Only symptom was extremely tired Friday and today with improving this afternoon. Appears that she had an immune response. I have read that one is not supposed to take any nsaids after the shot but Tylenol is ok. Something about them interfering with the immune response.Hope your mom is doing better. Where does she live? We live in New Jersey and they've run out of vaccine for everyone looking to get it.
Had my first shot today (Pfizer) No side effects so far except a strange compulsion to buy Microsoft products ... :-(Good luck. we got our second Moderna Friday. Again our arms hurt like the first shot.. But for my wife, she developed a little fever and chills but is Ok today.
When Could the United States Reach Herd Immunity? It’s Complicated.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/02/20/us/us-herd-immunity-covid.html
Herd immunity, also known as “population immunity,” refers to the situation when enough members of a population, or “herd,” develop immunity to a pathogen to prevent further outbreaks. But not all infectious diseases can be controlled through herd immunity. Success depends on two factors:
- The percentage of the population that must develop immunity before the disease is controlled
- How long immunity lasts
Not so much complicated, as false. That myth has been dispelled a long time ago.
https://intermountainhealthcare.org/blogs/topics/covid-19/2020/11/debunking-the-myth-of-non-vaccine-herd-immunity-in-covid-19/
Not so much complicated, as false. That myth has been dispelled a long time ago.The article you referenced addresses the issue from the standpoint of natural herd immunity. It doesn't address adding vaccinations to hardly any degree. At the time it was published, in Nov 2020, vaccines were not even out yet and they looked at it from a non-vaccination standpoint.
https://intermountainhealthcare.org/blogs/topics/covid-19/2020/11/debunking-the-myth-of-non-vaccine-herd-immunity-in-covid-19/
As one epidemilogist explained it:That's exactly what's happening with COvid. However, we're also vaccinating the population. Also, medical procedures save people today and the disease is not as deadly as the plague.
Herd theory is simply the theory which states that if you do nothing during a pandemic, the people who don't die have immunity. For example, the Plague. Eventually, the pandemic ran it's course, and what followed was the Renaissance. Whose against the Renaissance?
The article you referenced addresses the issue from the standpoint of natural herd immunity. It doesn't address adding vaccinations to hardly any degree. At the time it was published, in Nov 2020, vaccines were not even out yet and they looked at it from a non-vaccination standpoint.
"
"In America, there have already been over 60 million vaccinations or roughly 18% of the general population, higher if you eliminate children in the population who don;t appear to spread the disease or get infected to a large degree. Some have estimated we may have 33% infected already naturally, so we're at 50% when you add the vaccinations to date.
The fact is the spread is down to about half of what it was just a couple of months ago. We're running out of people to get infected as well. Finally, herd immunity is a well-established medical understanding. The writers of that article need to update their predictions. They're wrong.""
The article you referenced addresses the issue from the standpoint of natural herd immunity. It doesn't address adding vaccinations to hardly any degree. At the time it was published, in Nov 2020, vaccines were not even out yet and they looked at it from a non-vaccination standpoint.
In America, there have already been over 60 million vaccinations or roughly 18% of the general population, higher if you eliminate children in the population who don;t appear to spread the disease or get infected to a large degree. Some have estimated we may have 33% infected already naturally, so we're at 50% when you add the vaccinations to date.
The fact is the spread is down to about half of what it was just a couple of months ago. We're running out of people to get infected as well. Finally, herd immunity is a well-established medical understanding. The writers of that article need to update their predictions. They're wrong.
Until a vaccine is widely available, we must suppress transmission by limiting contact with non-household members, and wearing masks and distancing when contact with others is unavoidable. These measures work and will limit unnecessary deaths and economic impact while we wait for an effective vaccine.[/i]
Israeli data shows Pfizer vaccine nearly 99 percent effective at preventing COVID-19 death 2 weeks after 2nd dose
The early results on lab-confirmed infections are important because they show the vaccine may also prevent asymptomatic carriers from spreading the virus that causes Covid-19, something that hadn’t been clear so far. Stopping transmission in this way is a key factor as countries seek to lift contact restrictions and re-open economies.
https://news.yahoo.com/israeli-data-shows-pfizer-vaccine-185500893.html
Correct, the number of infected people is estimated at 33% of the total US population and the latest infection and death numbers are about half from a couple months of ago. The steep spike in those numbers was caused primarily by the reckless and absolutely non essential Trump rallies, BLM street protests and riots, and also by the mass travels and get-togethers during Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays. The current covid numbers are still more than twice as high as in July. Low points in June - 21K cases, in September 35K and in February 69K.Herd immunity didn't fail. It has to reach a certain percentage for it to work. Once you do, then the rest of the people are safe without the vaccine.
The covid fiasco is not confined only to US. In Sweden, the herd immunity attempt failed also miserably.
https://news.yahoo.com/sweden-plays-down-immunity-hopes-151842673.html
Could be due also to mandatory mask wearing.
I won't repeat what I think of mandatory mask wearing (I am already dangerously near to being banned)...
But I can photographically illustrate non-mandatory masked romance:
I won't repeat what I think of mandatory mask wearing (I am already dangerously near to being banned)...How do you flirt when you wear a mask?
But I can photographically illustrate non-mandatory masked romance:
I won't repeat what I think of mandatory mask wearing (I am already dangerously near to being banned)...
But I can photographically illustrate non-mandatory masked romance:
That's exactly what's happening with COvid.It's not, because:
we're also vaccinating the population.
Herd immunity didn't fail. It has to reach a certain percentage for it to work. Once you do, then the rest of the people are safe without the vaccine.
But that percentage is very high. If you rely on it happening naturally you will get huge numbers of dead people.I never advocated not using vaccines. Anything that gets us up to herd immunity faster is better.
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n394
"Covid-19: Is Manaus the final nail in the coffin for natural herd immunity?"
In case anyone is interested in learning about the virus and how vaccines can help, this seems to be a good article . . .
What might the end of the pandemic look like? There are two main possibilities. The first, and most likely, is that Sars-CoV-2 becomes an endemic coronavirus that gives rise to large numbers of infections in winter. Vaccinated or previously infected people may get infected again, but because they have some measure of immunity their infections will be mild, much as with the four seasonal coronaviruses we have lived with for decades. Unvaccinated people and an unlucky few whose immunity isn’t protective may become seriously ill. . . .
The second, more desirable outcome is that we treat Sars-CoV-2 a bit like measles, and try to stamp it out as completely as we can. . . . With better vaccine technology we might be able to direct a very strong antibody response to the bits of Spike that the virus can’t do without; alternatively, there might be a vaccine that covers a wide range of different Spike variants – so wide that there is no way for the virus to evolve to escape them all.
In either case, we should push for a global effort to reduce the spread of the virus and ensure that vaccines are available and administered in resource-poor settings as well as highly developed economies. . . .
Thanks for posting the link. Among other things, the article contains the first clear explanation I've read for the mutant nomenclature, which previously seemed completely opaque to me.
The conclusion is both interesting and somewhat alarming since it implies that this virus is likely to be with us indefinitely absent the development of new vaccine technology and a coordinated effort to distribute both current and future vaccines worldwide:
I hate to use a flu comparison, because of the poor uses to which such comparisons have been made in the past, but I think covid in the future may be like bad cases of the flu. You'll go in to Walgreens every September and get your covid shot, and your arm will be sore for a couple of days, and in October you'll go in for your flu shot.I could see that happening.
Mobility data from Google, serving as a proxy for economic activity, measured the percent change in two categories: daily visits to retail and recreation locations, and to workplaces. If there were a predictable tradeoff between public health and economic activity, then mobility would be higher in countries with higher death rates, because lockdowns or other restrictions were less aggressive, allowing more activity. Mobility would be lower in places with lower death rates, where shutdowns were more stringent.
Some countries with high death rates had the biggest declines in mobility, meaning they fared the worst economically. Other countries with lower death rates had smaller declines in mobility, meaning those economies didn’t contract as much.
The United States had one of the highest death rates, but it fared worse than average economically. The average death rate for all countries was 1.13 deaths per million people per day. The U.S. rate was 2.97 deaths per million, or 163% higher. Mobility, on average, declined 18.5% among all countries. In the U.S., it declined 22.7%. There was no economic payoff for tolerating a higher death rate than elsewhere.
Thanks to Operation Warp Speed:
Herd immunity threshold is likely months away
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that more than 83 million people in the United States had Covid-19 by the end of 2020, putting the nation about a third of the way to herd immunity, the point at which enough people are protected against a disease so that it cannot spread through the population. If the pace of vaccinations continues at the current rate, the country could approach herd immunity through a combination of natural immunity and vaccination around June.
More than 66 million shots have been administered, according to the latest federal data, with nearly 8% of the US population fully vaccinated. Promises from manufacturers indicate that the US should have enough vaccine supply to cover everyone by June. More than a quarter of the population may already have natural immunity after previous infection -- and that number may be much higher than official counts show.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/26/health/herd-immunity-united-states/index.html
Thanks to Operation Warp Speed:
Herd immunity threshold is likely months away
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that more than 83 million people in the United States had Covid-19 by the end of 2020, putting the nation about a third of the way to herd immunity, the point at which enough people are protected against a disease so that it cannot spread through the population. If the pace of vaccinations continues at the current rate, the country could approach herd immunity through a combination of natural immunity and vaccination around June.
More than 66 million shots have been administered, according to the latest federal data, with nearly 8% of the US population fully vaccinated. Promises from manufacturers indicate that the US should have enough vaccine supply to cover everyone by June. More than a quarter of the population may already have natural immunity after previous infection -- and that number may be much higher than official counts show.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/26/health/herd-immunity-united-states/index.html
You're correct in crediting Operation Warp Speed in bringing us closer to herd immunity. It did this by allowing millions of Americans to unnecessarily become infected through attacks on the wearing of masks and social distancing, and more than a half million to die. I don't think Operation Warp Speed deliberately crippled vaccine distribution, but it might as well have, as incompetent as it was before Biden took office. But, that's the way you achieve herd immunity, by encouraging infection either deliberately or through neglect. And, if more than 500,000 people die, and more every day, well, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.Here we go again. The governors controlled opening venues in their states, not the federal government. Gov Murphy controlled it all here in my state of New Jersey. Cuomo in NY. Newsom in CA. etc. Beyond that, blaming one man and not even the Chinese shows political bias. Arguing that distribution was incompetent before Biden took office is a non-starter. It was mainly set up before. Were adjustments needed after it started? Of course. Every program requires modifications along the way and Trump would have done those as well if he was re-elected. When you plan a photoshoot, does it go exactly as you planned it? The fact is 20 million were vaccinated by Jan 20th when Trump left office. A month later it is 70 million. All of this was in the pipeline pre-planned in Operation Warp Speed, including nearly all the ordering for the shots.
Here we go again.
"Percentage of tests that are positive" is only somewhat informative, as it depends on several variables: size and structure of the testing populations, type of tests, accuracy of tests used (some tests are more prone to false positive - antigen tests, for instance), and last, but not least, being tested positive may not necessarily mean much, as a good portion of those may not have any symptoms. Numbers of hospitalized, and deaths are better, though not 100% accurate (e.g., died from covid vs. died with covid). Also, Florida has the oldest population of any US state, i.e., more likely to be tested, infected, hospitalized and dead.
... the current number deaths in the US due to COVID stands at 520,980....
In other words, we now have 120,980 deaths thanks exclusively to the Comrade-In-Chief Biden, in just five weeks! What an accomplishment! From "I'll shut down the virus" before elected, to "There is nothing I can do about it" after.
An 88-year-old man from Alsace, France drove into a speed trap at 191 kilometers per hour. As the police in the Bas-Rhin department announced, the incident occurred on Thursday around noon. When the officials stopped him near the town of Bischoffsheim, the man justified the massive speeding violation with a corona vaccination appointment, which he would otherwise be late for.
Actually, there has been a remarkable decrease of covid cases in USA since Biden assumed the office. That's quite an accomplishment, indeed
Actually, there has been a remarkable decrease of covid cases in USA since Biden assumed the office...
Actually, if you really look at the graph, you'd see the remarkably low level of cases under Trump, up until the election time, when Democrats ramped up the panic porn to win the election.
It's purely physics and logic.
The virus didn't know and care about the election timeline, it was governed only by the transmission conditions. The dramatic increase in December and early January was due more to the Thanksgiving and Christmas travel and get-togethers, as well as to the reckless pre-election Trump's rallies and street protest crowds.
;D ;D ;DHe's using the same people who counted the votes for Trump.
Due to which measure of his?
... therefore, the drop after the holidays is NOT Biden's accomplishment. Pure logic, my friend. You can't have it both ways.
Sorry, I should have said - physics, logic and incubation time. Incubation and manifestation time for the covid virus is 5-14 days.Who do we blame for 35000 approx annual flu deaths every year, year after year? This whole blame game for natural diseases is just political. If a Covid variant hits us later this year, are we going to blame Biden for that? Maybe we should stay locked down just in case? After all, we wouldn't want him to get blamed. At what point do we set aside risk and potential fatalities, consider harm to the economy, and get on with our lives?
It is true that in March 2020 the covid cases and deaths were very low. But under Trump's leadership they ramped up consistently and significantly. The 3 peaks on the supplied chart fall on Nov 24, Dec. 17 and Jan 8 (the highest peak) - all prior to Biden's takeover. It is obvious that, even the Covid didn't like Trump. Miraculously (like Trump would say), the chart falls like a stone 5 days after the Inauguration day.
Who do we blame for 35000 approx annual flu deaths every year, year after year? This whole blame game for natural diseases is just political. If a Covid variant hits us later this year, are we going to blame Biden for that? Maybe we should stay locked down just in case? After all, we wouldn't want him to get blamed. At what point do we set aside risk and potential fatalities, consider harm to the economy, and get on with our lives?
Trump didn't cause the virus. But due to his ignorance, incompetency and procrastination he greatly contributed to the exceedingly large number of deaths in USA, and invariably even to some export of it to Canada. No wonder Trudeau can't stand him.Canada has a huge Chinese population and loads of them visit Canada. Blaming America and Trump for Covid transmission to Canada is way off. Trudeau could have shut down travel from the US like Trump shut down Chinese travel to the US. Also, why is Canada so low in numbers of vaccinations? Is that Trump's fault too? This reminds me of American Democrat governors blaming Republican Trump when they are the ones making decisions about opening venues and how many people can assemble. Just exactly what is Canada, Canadians, and Trudeau responsible for, if anything?
Canada has a huge Chinese population and loads of them visit Canada. Blaming America and Trump for Covid transmission to Canada is way off. Trudeau could have shut down travel from the US like Trump shut down Chinese travel to the US. Also, why is Canada so low in numbers of vaccinations? Is that Trump's fault too? This reminds me of American Democrat governors blaming Republican Trump when they are the ones making decisions about opening venues and how many people can assemble. Just exactly what is Canada, Canadians, and Trudeau responsible for, if anything?
Alan, as you may have noticed, I seldom use those silly yellow circles, since I address my posts to smart people, who can usually tell how it was meant. Just to clarify, the sentence abut Trudeau not liking Trump and covid export across the border was said as a joke. Both, Canada and US have had for some time now quite strict rules about crossing the border. Otherwise, I would be swimming in the warm ocean now instead of shoveling snow from my driveway.Little yellow faces sometimes help me. Glad it was all in jest. For a moment, I thought we'd be responsible for your hockey teams. :)
Canada is indeed still quite low in numbers of vaccinations, but fortunately also much lower than USA in number of covid cases and deaths.
To answer your last sentence, Canada is partially responsible for Ted Cruz, who was born here. On the other hand, Jim Carrey who can't stand Trump nor Cruz was also born here.
Trump didn't cause the virus. But due to his ignorance, incompetency and procrastination he greatly contributed to the exceedingly large number of deaths in USA, and invariably even to some export of it to Canada. No wonder Trudeau can't stand him.
Trump didn't cause the virus. But due to his ignorance, incompetency and procrastination he greatly contributed to the exceedingly large number of deaths in USA, and invariably even to some export of it to Canada. No wonder Trudeau can't stand him.
Sorry, I should have said - physics, logic and incubation time. Incubation and manifestation time for the covid virus is 5-14 days.
It is true that in March 2020 the covid cases and deaths were very low. But under Trump's leadership they ramped up consistently and significantly. The 3 peaks on the supplied chart fall on Nov 24, Dec. 17 and Jan 8 (the highest peak) - all prior to Biden's takeover. It is obvious that, even the Covid didn't like Trump. Miraculously (like Trump would say), the chart falls like a stone 5 days after the Inauguration day.
That is just pure unwillingness to accept even simple reasoning, parroting the party line instead. Is he also responsible for deaths in other counties? On a per capita basis, the US is somewhere in the middle.I'm not parroting any party line. That was a rather nicely flowing sentence I made myself up (after I toned it down somewhat).
You keep bouncing between “it was the holidays” and “it is Trump’s fault.” Make your mind and stick to it.I didn't say holidays OR Trump's fault. I said holidays AND Trump's reckless rallies. Perfect example of rule of compounding in action.
... BTW, are you posting from free Florida or from Serbia?
Why isn't anyone blaming China?
Why isn't anyone blaming China? That's where it started and that's where it was deliberately hidden from the rest of the world. Why is everyone blaming the victims? We're trying to do the best we can under a horrendous situation where you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Interestingly, they stopped reporting new cases and deaths. Did they reach herd immunity or how do you explain that?Well they reported 6 new cases today. No idea how accurate their reports are.
Nearly a year after the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the Czech Republic has the highest per capita rate of new Covid-19 cases in the EU, with 107,777 cases per million inhabitants, the Czech News Agency reported on Sunday.
Globally, it is the most affected country by coronavirus, after Andorra and Montenegro. The Czech Republic also places third in the EU and fourth in the world in terms of per capita number of Covid-19 deaths, with just under 1,800 deaths per million inhabitants.
Over 1.1 million cases of the virus have been confirmed in the country since the virus was first registered in the country on March 1, 2020. To date, 19,214 people infected with coronavirus have died in the Czech Republic.
Savage! 😂
Why isn't anyone blaming China? That's where it started and that's where it was deliberately hidden from the rest of the world. Why is everyone blaming the victims? We're trying to do the best we can under a horrendous situation where you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Do you mean for not closing down its "wet markets?" Western governments and non-governmental organizations have been urging that for many years, but it's not just China: the markets where live animals cohabit exist in many Asian countries. It's difficult to change ingrained cultural traditions and the only practical response to venues which breed interspecies propagation of pathogens in a global travel environment may be better preventative and therapeutic medical technology.No, that's dismissing all their deliberate malfeasance, possibly criminal. It appears it was released from the lab coincidentally located in Wuhan, the center of the disease. So they are responsible for negligence at a minimum. Worse, they allowed infected Chinese to travel to the rest of the world while quarantining their own country shutting down intra-country travel from Wuhan. They knew the dangers otherwise they would not have quarantined Wuhan. Then they lied about the whole danger of the disease for weeks when the world could have gotten a jump on it.
Most definitely, China is the culprit. But they don't want to argue.They're a police state. They even lock sick people in their homes and beat them up if they don't comply with rules and regulations. Would you accept that in Canada?
Interestingly, they stopped reporting new cases and deaths. Did they reach herd immunity or how do you explain that?
Czech Republic has initially controlled covid spread very effectively, but in the last 5 months the virus got out of control, and now the country has six times as many cases as USA (per capita). There are no tourists in the country and Old Town in Prague is eerily empty, ideal for photographing empty streets and squares.They should invite the Chinese Army in to straighten them out and set them right.
Everyone knows and agrees on China's role - what's to discuss? The victims are the 500k dead Americans, the 120K dead Britons etc etc most of whom died needlessly due to the incompetence of their leaders.What did Britain do that was negligent? I'm not familiar with the situation there. Were they listening to Trump? In any case, I have read their vaccination program is better than anyone else's. So there's that.
What did Britain do that was negligent? I'm not familiar with the situation there. Were they listening to Trump? In any case, I have read their vaccination program is better than anyone else's. So there's that.
They're a police state. They even lock sick people in their homes and beat them up if they don't comply with rules and regulations. Would you accept that in Canada?
So many things - too slow to lock down even when they had the example of Italy to see what would happen, didn't close borders, didn't have an effective tracing system, didn't support people to stay at home and isolate with covid, opened up too soon, allowed too much travel over Christmas. Much the same as Trump I suppose. They got it right with ordering a lot of vaccine and in giving it to the NHS to distribute instead of their cronies who got a lot of the other big contracts.Maybe the government was doing pretty much what the people wanted. Also, they were caught between a rock and a hard place. Britain was already dealing with Brexit and its economic problems. The last thing you needed was Covid to make it worse. So you try to balance maintaining economic conditions so people can feed themselves vs. risking the spreading of disease. Also, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback the game after it's over. We should have done this. We should have done that. Stop "should-ing" on yourself. At least you did some things better, such as the vaccinations. You should be happy and proud of that.
... It appears it was released from the lab coincidentally located in Wuhan, the center of the disease. So they are responsible for negligence at a minimum. ...
Is this a true fact or a made-up fact?International incidents don't get tried in a court of law. We all make decisions based on available information and logic. The lab was in Wuhan working on this virus. That's where the disease started. The Chinese want you to believe it started in a food market. You could believe whatever you want.
Is this a true fact or a made-up fact?
It's an Alan fact.What's your fact? That Trump killed half a million people?
We all make decisions based on available information and logic.
You could believe whatever you want.
Good news if you've been vaccinated. Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way. I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, said in a press conference Monday that if you — and all your guests — are vaccinated, a dinner gathering should be relatively safe.
“Small gatherings in the home, I think you can clearly feel the relative risk is so low you wouldn’t have to wear the mask,” Fauci said. “You could have a good social gathering in the home.”
But Fauci went on to clarify that a small get-together in one’s home is quite different from attending a large social gathering.
“The setting in a home of a small group of people having dinner together, all of whom are vaccinated, is very different when you step out the door and go into a society that has 70,000 new cases a day,” he said.
https://fox8.com/news/fauci-answers-can-you-have-a-dinner-party-if-youre-vaccinated/
... That or Fauci has gotten too use to his new fame and realizes as soon as this is over, he'll be forgotten like a bad joke...
Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way.
But Fauci went on to clarify that a small get-together in one’s home is quite different from attending a large social gathering.
“The setting in a home of a small group of people having dinner together, all of whom are vaccinated, is very different when you step out the door and go into a society that has 70,000 new cases a day,” he said.
He explains the difference right in the text that you quoted.Fauci did not explain why someone who's been vaccinated has to worry about getting Covid in public since they have antibodies protecting them. He only stated the venue where it would be an issue. I assume it's because of the effectiveness of the vaccine. So with let's say Moderna, you have a 95% protection rate. . Also if true, then Johnson and Johnsons is less effective. But that's my assumption. He never stated that.
Fauci did not explain why someone who's been vaccinated has to worry about getting Covid in public since they have antibodies protecting them. He only stated the venue where it would be an issue. I assume it's because of the effectiveness of the vaccine. So with let's say Moderna, you have a 95% protection rate. . Also if true, then Johnson and Johnsons is less effective. But that's my assumption. He never stated that.
...but who cares about others, right?...
There's this bug going round, Alan - it's been in the news, an' everything. The vaccine prevents you from getting sick or dying (mostly). It doesn't necessarily protect you from carrying the virus and passing it on to other people. It potentially doesn't work so effectively on new variants that emerge in areas where there is a lot of infection. So if you have selfish oafs in a place like Texas where only 7% of people have been vaccinated, even if they themsleves have had their shots, they are running around giving the virus to others (but who cares about others, right?) and contributing to a big pool of infection where new variants will pop up and where tracking them down will be more difficult. In a state where city dwellers dress up as cowboys, looking stupid wearing a mask shouldn't be that big of an issue.
There's this bug going round, Alan - it's been in the news, an' everything. The vaccine prevents you from getting sick or dying (mostly). It doesn't necessarily protect you from carrying the virus and passing it on to other people. It potentially doesn't work so effectively on new variants that emerge in areas where there is a lot of infection. So if you have selfish oafs in a place like Texas where only 7% of people have been vaccinated, even if they themsleves have had their shots, they are running around giving the virus to others (but who cares about others, right?) and contributing to a big pool of infection where new variants will pop up and where tracking them down will be more difficult. In a state where city dwellers dress up as cowboys, looking stupid wearing a mask shouldn't be that big of an issue.How did you go from me asking what Fauci meant to me killing people in Texas? By the way, do you speak for Fauci? Are you an expert on virology? Don't you think he should explain himself?
40% of adults (56% of young adults) are now reporting symptoms of depression, up from 10% about a year ago. 13% are reporting new substance abuse issues and 11% of all adults are considering suicide.
As of 20 February, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recorded just 1,499 positive flu cases since September. Around the same time last year, the CDC had already logged 174,037 positive cases of influenza.
"This is the lowest flu season we've had on record," the CDC's Lynnette Brammer told the Associated Press. This was based on the 25-year surveillance the agency has done for each flu season.
In normal years, a flu season could cause 500,000 to 600,000 hospitalisations and 50,000 to 60,000 deaths, depending on the severity of the virus that year. But the United States was seeing nowhere near the infections, hospitalisations, and deaths from influenza this current season.
One positive thing about the social restrictions and mask wearing has been a huge decline in flu cases.I predicted this months ago. What I also noticed is that neither my wife or I have had a cold in the past year. Same reason. STD's must be down as well. :)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-flu-number-covid-cdc-b1809609.html
One positive thing about the social restrictions and mask wearing has been a huge decline in flu cases.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-flu-number-covid-cdc-b1809609.html
Yeah, and now "experts" are calling for us to wear mask every flu season.
I predicted this months ago. What I also noticed is that neither my wife or I have had a cold in the past year. Same reason. STD's must be down as well. :)
I didn't see any stats about STD's. Does the face mask help also against those ailments?Yes. Only if you leave it on while engaging. Sort of like keeping your mask on in a restaurant.
You're right. Some losers wash their hands every time they use the toilet! A real man isn't afraid of a bit of dysentery.
If you are for continuing to wear a mask until the day you die, go for it. I'm not.You could take up bank robbing.
Even if you told me that I would live for 5 more years if I wore a mask, guaranteed, I would still choose not to. I am not going to destroy my humanity by covering half my face, and the half that smiles non-the-less. What a pathetic world it would be to never see a smile again.
You could take up bank robbing.
The problem with Fauci is he speaks like a politician. He not direct. He couches his remarks in weasel words like "..it's most likely..." ...
Yeah, and now "experts" are calling for us to wear mask every flu season.
... I am not going to destroy my humanity by covering half my face ...
Actually, I prefer lemon juice!He probably forgot to pull the polaroid tab.
“I Wore the Juice”- The Dunning-Kruger Effect (https://medium.com/@littlebrown/i-wore-the-juice-the-dunning-kruger-effect-f8ac3299eb1)
Not going to lie, I would love to see that polaroid.
"...it's most likely" is a political weasel word? Sometimes all we have are probabilities, not certainties, is this really so difficult to understand.I understand that. The problem is he never says anything emphatically. If he doesn't know for sure, he should say I don't know rather than leaving it up in the air. So after you've listened to him, you're not much wiser. It's left to you to draw a conclusion. So some people who are less cautious figure heck it's OK to get rid of their masks. "Most likely" they'll be OK. Others, more cautious, keep wearing them out of fear. "Most likely" they'll get it and die. Then the debating starts. Interpretations multiply. Pretty soon no one remembers what he said. It happens all the time here in our forum regarding photography.
That might be a little over the top.
It is not an over the top statement. Nearly all other animals show their expressions through their eyes and tails. We smile; it's part of our humanity.
We smile; it's part of our humanity.
Merck Will Help Manufacture Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 VaccineMerck had received an order for millions of dollars to furnish vaccines by June from Trump under Operation Warp Speed. But their research into vaccines failed. It's good that they're trying to stay involved. They're a big and good pharmaceutical company.
https://www.npr.org/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/02/merck-will-help-manufacture-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/02/972873395/merck-will-help-manufacture-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine)
Pharmaceutical giant Merck will help manufacture Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine, White House press secretary Jen Psaki announced Tuesday, calling it "an unprecedented historic step," considering that the two companies are normally competitors.
Merck will produce the drug substance at the heart of Johnson & Johnson's vaccine as well as work on filling vaccine vials and getting them ready for distribution.
"The U.S. government will facilitate this partnership in several key ways, including invoking the Defense Production Act to equip two Merck facilities to the standards necessary to safety manufacture the vaccine and asking the Department of Defense to provide daily logistical support to strengthen Johnson & Johnson's efforts," Psaki said during Tuesday afternoon's press briefing.
The Food and Drug Administration authorized Johnson & Johnson's vaccine for emergency use on Saturday, making it the third authorized vaccine against COVID-19 in the U.S. Unlike the other two authorized vaccines, this one requires only one dose and does not need to be kept in ultra-cold freezers, which should make distribution easier.
A few years back I saw a documentary on people who are born with the rare condition of not being able to control any of their facial muscles, essentially having a blank stare on their face permanently. They lack the ability to show others what mood they are in and often are not treated as well as others, especially when young. (On the bright side, they never develop facial wrinkles.)Sounds like Botox Nancy.
The show focused on a small girl (grade school age) with this disorder who went though surgery to give her the ability to smile. Of all of the different types of expressions to pick, the ability to smile is what helps you the most in connecting to someone else, especially initially.
The surgery changed her life and how she socialized at school.
It is not an over the top statement. Nearly all other animals show their expressions through their eyes and tails. We smile; it's part of our humanity.
Smiling may be one aspect of humanity, but it's not the only one. Protecting other people from disease and/or making them feel comfortable when they are around you are aspects of humanity as well. Maybe wearing a mask during a pandemic is more a sign of your humanity than smiling at people. At least it is something to think about.It's hard to flirt with a mask on. Cuomo's getting desperate.
Steer the thread back to the topic of “promising new coronavirus vaccine” or shuttle the overtly political to the one and only political thread.
Thanks.
Have you ever noticed that this forum is provided free of charge by someone else that's paying the cost of providing it to you?No one would stay here if there wasn't a little levity.
Have you ever noticed that this forum is provided free of charge by someone else that's paying the cost of providing it to you?
What an old softy-pants. Whatever happened to Low-Empathy Libertard Joe ?
You know what they say - if you're not the client, you're the product.We're the product I'd say and the advertisers who pay the website owner are the clients. If it weren't for our posts, there would be no forum. Of course, every website is different. Cable channels collect from the viewer and the advertisers although, in the old days of broadcast TV before cable, the programs were free. The stations made all their money from the advertisers.
Smiling may be one aspect of humanity, but it's not the only one. Protecting other people from disease and/or making them feel comfortable when they are around you are aspects of humanity as well. Maybe wearing a mask during a pandemic is more a sign of your humanity than smiling at people. At least it is something to think about.
As an example, if I am in a senior living center, which I often am nowadays, wearing a mask to make the residents feel comfortable would be legitimate since they are the ones most as risk of dying from Covid. I may not agree that the mask does anything, but in this situation, I can have sympathy (which is not empathy) for this concern. If I am dining in a restaurant where all of the staff and patrons are under 50, as was the case last night when we dined out, wearing a mask is not a legitimate concern since no one there is of a high enough risk of dying from C-19 for it to be one, and I am not one to give into lunacy just because everyone else is.
The situation is not as rosy as it seems at the first glance. 20% of the covid deaths in USA have been among people younger than 65 years. That's over 106,000 people who died before reaching their retirement age. In addition, long term effects of covid have been observed in 10% of the people who survived covid. That's another 900,000 people who will have to live with compromised health for the rest of their lives.People who go out to restaurants know the chances they are taking. I wouldn't go. But there are others who would. At some point, people are getting out. More and more states are opening up as they are in other countries. The rates for infection and death have gone down probably where they're again matching the common flu. We don't shut down for it. Also, if people who have had their shots go to restaurants, it has little risk. Unless the food is bad.
People who go out to restaurants know the chances they are taking. I wouldn't go. But there are others who would. At some point, people are getting out. More and more states are opening up as they are in other countries. The rates for infection and death have gone down probably where they're again matching the common flu. We don't shut down for it. Also, if people who have had their shots go to restaurants, it has little risk. Unless the food is bad.
About 40k people die per year in car accidents in the US. Maybe if car crashes were infectious the comparison to covid would be closer.Who's post were you referring to? Although there are 40K deaths, no one stops driving because of it.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.What's wrong, wrong, wrong?
Who's post were you referring to? Although there are 40K deaths, no one stops driving because of it.
Engaging in empathy while making policies decisions often puts you in a situation where you will make concessions at the expense of others whom are not willing to do so, or even asked. Sometimes, you make concessions at the expense of those you are trying to help, but your empathy does not allow you to see it.
Who's post were you referring to? Although there are 40K deaths, no one stops driving because of it.
The situation is not as rosy as it seems at the first glance. 20% of the covid deaths in USA have been among people younger than 65 years....
I was out driving today and noticed that it might be better for all of us if some people weren't driving. I am not sure if they were actually driving. The car was moving in a straight direction, more or less, but they appeared to be texting or reading emails or something.
Ah, lies, damn lieas, and statistics! While technically correct (the 20% claim), it not as rosy as it seems. Only 7% of the fatalities are younger than 55. The difference between your (65) and my number (55), is just 10 years, yet it accounts for 12% of fatalities.
Ah, lies, damn lieas, and statistics! While technically correct (the 20% claim), it not as rosy as it seems. Only 7% of the fatalities are younger than 55. The difference between your (65) and my number (55), is just 10 years, yet it accounts for 12% of fatalities.
7% of 500,000 is 35,000, not like it's negligible.
7% is 7%.
Yes, and only 5% are younger than 50. On the other hand, about ten times more deaths were recorded for all patients under the age of 75 years.
7% of 500,000 is 35,000, not like it's negligible.
What's the rate for those under 140?
Based on a 100% rate for under 100 years, we could interpolate the rate for 140 years as 140%.
So, 35,000 in 220 million is 0.016 percent. And THAT is negligible.
I was out driving today and noticed that it might be better for all of us if some people weren't driving. I am not sure if they were actually driving. The car was moving in a straight direction, more or less, but they appeared to be texting or reading emails or something.Probably was adjusting his mask.
Now, saying that 7% of fatalities from C19 are younger than 55, doesn’t mean that 7% of those younger than 55 will die from C19.
To calculate that chance, we need the population of those younger than 55, and that is approximately 220 million. So, 35,000 in 220 million is 0.016 percent. And THAT is negligible.
Wouldn't you need to know the population of those under 55 who were infected to figure out how dangerous it is for them?...
... remember that that is the toll WITH lockdowns, masks, social distancing and full hospitals.
Not really. Places with or without those fared more or less the same.
Clearly false.
Not really, but good to know. Because the danger is twofold: to get infected and to die from it. Those two risks combined give 0.016%.
Well, lets look at the numbers.
Below is a list of all 50 states, plus DC, listed in order from most C-19 deaths per million too least. I bolded the states with no, or almost no, restrictions. As you can see, they range, rather randomly, throughout the list. Not exactly a slam dunk for lockdowns IMO.
You will notice FL, the fountain of all evil and 2nd oldest state next to Maine, is right in the middle and only three slots (not including DC) from CA, the fifth youngest state with one of the strongest lockdowns.
Well, lets look at the numbers.Hmmm. New Jersey is #1. I live in New Jersey. :(
Below is a list of all 50 states, plus DC, listed in order from most C-19 deaths per million too least. I bolded the states with no, or almost no, restrictions. As you can see, they range, rather randomly, throughout the list. Not exactly a slam dunk for lockdowns IMO.
You will notice FL, the fountain of all evil and 2nd oldest state next to Maine, is right in the middle and only three slots (not including DC) from CA, the fifth youngest state with one of the strongest lockdowns.
1. New Jersey: 263 per 100,000 people
2. New York: 244
3. Rhode Island: 239
4. Massachusetts: 236
5. Mississippi: 227
6. Arizona: 221
7. Connecticut: 215
8. South Dakota: 214
9. Louisiana: 208
10. Alabama: 205
11. North Dakota: 194
12. Pennsylvania: 189
13. Indiana: 188
14. Illinois: 180
15. New Mexico: 179
16. Iowa: 174
17. Arkansas: 174
18. South Carolina: 167
19. Tennessee: 166
20. Michigan: 166
21. Kansas: 165
22. Nevada: 162
23. Georgia: 161
24. Texas: 154
25. Delaware: 148
26. Florida: 146
27. District of Columbia: 145
28. Ohio: 143
29. Missouri: 140
30. California: 134
31. Maryland: 131
32. West Virginia: 129
33. Montana: 129
34. Wisconsin: 121
35. Wyoming: 118
36. Minnesota: 117
37. Oklahoma: 115
38. Nebraska: 114
39. Virginia: 109
40. Kentucky: 109
41. North Carolina: 109
42. Colorado: 105
43. Idaho: 105
44. New Hampshire: 86
45. Washington: 67
46. Utah: 61
47. Oregon: 54
48. Maine: 52
49. Alaska: 40
50. Vermont: 33
51. Hawaii: 31
I don't understand why we're arguing about statistics. According to Biden, everyone will have their shots by the end of May or June so we'll all be in herd immunity or whatever. At what point do you open up? When the very very last person gets their second shot? Or can we start opening up a little before? And if so, where is that line? How many deaths and cases become acceptable? After all, we accept the flu every year when 30-40,000 people die and millions get sick. Yet, nothing is shut down. We all walk around coughing on each other with no masks.
The question is how many dummies got duped by the QAnoners who deny the covid and advise against vaccinations. Then there will be people for whom the shots won't work, so get ready for walking and coughing a little longer with a mask.Herd immunity doesn't mean everyone is vaccinated or was exposed to the virus already. It means you reach a point where enough of the population is immune to the disease so it dies out as there are not enough victims left to keep spreading.
That's the feeblest excuse for an analysis I've seen. Have you compensated for all the other differences between the states? Err no, you haven't.
A better idea is to look at the cases/hospitalisations/deaths in a country and compare the peaks and troughs with the timing of lockdowns and other measures. It's a slam dunk - no further discussion needed.
... The ratio of 35,000 to 220 million means nothing...
... Your number is not a meaningful snapshot in time. (For example, the day after patient zero showed up, the overall infection rate was 1 in 350 million, another low but meaningless number.)
... As a reminder, 35,000 is not far off the average annual number of total flu deaths in all categories. Hence, my statement that it is not a negligible number.
That's the feeblest excuse for an analysis I've seen....
I suppose you also think vaccines cause Autism, since Autism is diagnosed shortly after infants get their shots. Makes sense, right?
Lockdown measures typically are put in place after the spread has already started and is partially on it's way to burn out. Regardless of lockdowns or not, the second wave this past winter in the USA came in and went out regardless of lockdown status with many similarities between states with and without measures.
;D ;D ;D
You don't like facts, do you?
... just cherry picked BS
;D ;D ;DA lot of my retired friends, "snowbirds", went to Florida again this winter for the sun. It seems they were able to get vaccinated quicker there as non-residents than here in New Jersey as residents.
As a side note, Florida has the oldest demographics in the US. That itself should put it on top of the list, but it didn't. Remember those discussions here on the forum how FL is going to implode, "just wait two weeks," a year ago?
Nope, makes no sense at all, but I don't see that stopping you.
Absolute rubbish - what mechanism can you imagine for the infection "burning out"?
As a side note, Florida has the oldest demographics in the US. That itself should put it on top of the list, but it didn't.
As to what mechanism other then lockdowns could have caused this, increase in the number of people immune from infection (burning out) or vaccination, better weather conditions, people spending more time outside where it does not spread, etc.
To you. Fair enough. I can't argue against what you find meaningful.
For me, however, it means that if you are one of those 220 million (that is, ⅔ of the US population), your chances of dying from and with Covid are 0.016%. Quite negligible. I think falling in the bathtub is higher than that.
Just to add to this, that is a 1 in 6250 odds of dying from C-19 if you under 55, being beat out by such things as:
Being a Pedestrian, 1/610
Being in a Car or other vehicle, 1/242
Off-roading, 1/4993
Falling out of bed, chair, or some other piece of furniture, 1/5508
Firearms, 1/4613
Chocking to death on food, 1/4812
There are plenty of more.
https://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm
The numbers of people immune have never approached herd immunity levels, even in places with really high levels of infection. Vaccination had not started last summer or last winter. Reductions in cases following lockdown occurred in summer and in winter.
Want to try again?
You are quoting lifetime odds, comparing with one year of risk from Covid.
Joe - your previous posts on other subjects gave me the impression that you are smarter than this, which makes me think that you are simply being dishonest. Disappointing.
So dying from C-19 is not a once in a lifetime event?
Insofar as being dishonest, I wholly feel that we should not have shut down society over this decease, or that we should have realized it was a mistake to do so last May. Last May is when we knew, without a doubt, that this effected mainly the elderly and that there were ways to keep our economy operating while protecting those whom are vulnerable.
You are quoting lifetime odds, comparing with one year of risk from Covid...
You are comparing the risk of a young person dying of Covid over one year with a person dying from a lifetime of driving or whatever. It would be more honest to assume that everyone will eventually get Covid, and then compare the risk with walking.Is my choice of either a leper colony or staying locked up with my wife for a whole year?
On top of that you are forgetting that we don't know the extent or severity of "long Covid" in young people, or that even if people don't eventually die, the sickness can be very severe with long term implications, and that while they are sick they are occupying hospital beds that are no longer avaiable for other patients with cancer or whatever
For the rest, it's simply unworkable as well as inhumane to isolate everyone over 65. There will always be "leaks" - who is going to care for these people? Are they never to see their families again? I realise that you are under this age, so those considerations are of no importance to you, but maybe Alan would not be happy to be sent to some latter day leper colony.
You are comparing the risk of a young person dying of Covid over one year with a person dying from a lifetime of driving or whatever. It would be more honest to assume that everyone will eventually get Covid, and then compare the risk with walking.
On top of that you are forgetting that we don't know the extent or severity of "long Covid" in young people, or that even if people don't eventually die, the sickness can be very severe with long term implications, and that while they are sick they are occupying hospital beds that are no longer avaiable for other patients with cancer or whatever
For the rest, it's simply unworkable as well as inhumane to isolate everyone over 65. There will always be "leaks" - who is going to care for these people? Are they never to see their families again? I realise that you are under this age, so those considerations are of no importance to you, but maybe Alan would not be happy to be sent to some latter day leper colony.
You are comparing the risk of a young person dying of Covid over one year with a person dying from a lifetime of driving or whatever. It would be more honest to assume that everyone will eventually get Covid, and then compare the risk with walking.
On top of that you are forgetting that we don't know the extent or severity of "long Covid" in young people, or that even if people don't eventually die, the sickness can be very severe with long term implications, and that while they are sick they are occupying hospital beds that are no longer avaiable for other patients with cancer or whatever
For the rest, it's simply unworkable as well as inhumane to isolate everyone over 65. There will always be "leaks" - who is going to care for these people? Are they never to see their families again? I realise that you are under this age, so those considerations are of no importance to you, but maybe Alan would not be happy to be sent to some latter day leper colony.
Perhaps I was being a little deliberately loose with what I was choosing to reference. However my point stands, C-19 is much less risky then other occurrences we rarely ever think about, such as strolling along the sidewalk. Who would have thought being a pedestrian came with a 1/610 chance of dying. That is a 0.16% chance of dying on the side of the road, yet we still take those strolls.
Meanwhile, the IFR for under 45 is 0.05%. Note, although my previous comparison may have been a little tongue in cheek, comparing these two stats is statistically sound. So, 0.16% chance of death and we doing nothing about it, vs. 0.05% and we are suppose to shut down the world. BTW this does not take into account the chances of catching it first, which if we did, would lower the chances of death from C-19 even more over a lifetime.
PS
Your second point is well intentioned, but what are your solutions, just hole up for all of time.
And your third point in contradictory in a few ways. Just to elaborate on one of them, in essence you are arguing it is inhumane to lockdown seniors, not to mention even if we did some of those pesky bastards would slip out anyway. So, lets just lockdown all of society instead, much more humane.
BTW, I am not for locking down anyone, even seniors. I am for letting people make their own risk assessment, and for those who are in the vulnerable category, provide concessions that will allow them to stay locked up if they so choose to.
...we are suppose to shut down the world.
...just hole up for all of time.
So, lets just lockdown all of society...
That is exactly the proof that it was negligible enough not to kill the economy and end life as we know it because of it.
I don't understand why we're arguing about statistics. According to Biden, everyone will have their shots by the end of May or June so we'll all be in herd immunity or whatever.
Beyond just sounding dumb, you are employing two logical fallacies: straw man and reduction to absurdity.
I think we all judge risk differently, even with other things beside Covid. And those change as we age or circumstances change.
Next week, I'm going to get a haircut and wash the cars to get a year's worth of mud off. The cars, not my hair.
With you, perhaps, with Jeremy, I disagree.
Jeremy has made it known that he highly disapproved of me traveling to Chicago and TX in January for work, and to Providence back in October. He also, on more then one occasion, stated his disapproval of me photographing local projects and continuing to work, which requires me to leave my house and enter other properties.
He is pushing the absurd notion, albeit indirectly, we should only be leaving our houses for food and necessary supplies. That is essentially fully locking down everyone.
Unless he would like to share a nuanced view of how he would like to see this handled, and how those whom need to leave our house to work should proceed, this is how I interpret his feelings on the subject.
By the time that rolls around, let's say June, maybe earlier, the number of people dying will be less than the common flu. So why couldn't we just get on with life as we did before Covid?
First, the end of May date is when we will have enough vaccine for all adults, not when all adults will be vaccinated. Some adults will tarry and dawdle getting their first shot and then won't be eligible to get their second shot for 3-4 weeks after that. Second, the under 16 crowd is not included. No telling when the vaccines will be approved for them and how long it will take them to get vaccinated. Third, the last poll I saw said 42% of Republicans and 25% of the whole population are planning not to get vaccinated, so we are going to have a tough time getting to herd immunity once we deduct the anti-vaxxers and under 16. Fourth, having herd immunity does not mean no one will contract the disease. Fifth, what will change from the day before we achieve herd immunity and the day after?
I always wash my hands but stopped washing my car a long time ago. The melting snow takes down both the mud and the virus.Fortunately, or unfortunately, I garage my cars. So the muck on them just hardens.
With you, perhaps, with Jeremy, I disagree.Maybe Jeremy can send you half his paycheck? Would you accept British Sterlings? :)
Jeremy has made it known that he highly disapproved of me traveling to Chicago and TX in January for work, and to Providence back in October. He also, on more then one occasion, stated his disapproval of me photographing local projects and continuing to work, which requires me to leave my house and enter other properties.
He is pushing the absurd notion, albeit indirectly, we should only be leaving our houses for food and necessary supplies. That is essentially fully locking down everyone.
Unless he would like to share a nuanced view of how he would like to see this handled, and how those whom need to leave our house to work should proceed, this is how I interpret his feelings on the subject.
An interesting note is that for those who make the least in society here in America, the unemployment rate is around 20%, not 6%. These are the people living week to week, paycheck to paycheck. These are the people most hurt by a shutdown and inability to earn a living to feed their family. Yet so many here are so nonchalant about that, so stuck on the possibilities of death from Covid they forget people die from starvation too. Should these people live on the street? I've been watching the homeless videos of people in LA living in tents on the streets there. It's pathetic. Like a third-world nation. Maybe some foreigners here just wish us ill. They enjoy seeing America in trouble. So they propose policies that make it worse for us.
By the time that rolls around, let's say June, maybe earlier, the number of people dying will be less than the common flu. So why couldn't we just get on with life as we did before Covid?
Maybe Jeremy can send you half his paycheck? Would you accept British Sterlings? :)
An interesting note is that for those who make the least in society here in America, the unemployment rate is around 20%, not 6%. These are the people living week to week, paycheck to paycheck. These are the people most hurt by a shutdown and inability to earn a living to feed their family. Yet so many here are so nonchalant about that, so stuck on the possibilities of death from Covid they forget people die from starvation too. Should these people live on the street? I've been watching the homeless videos of people in LA living in tents on the streets there. It's pathetic. Like a third-world nation. Maybe some foreigners here just wish us ill. They enjoy seeing America in trouble. So they propose policies that make it worse for us.
With you, perhaps, with Jeremy, I disagree.
Jeremy has made it known that he highly disapproved of me traveling to Chicago and TX in January for work, and to Providence back in October. He also, on more then one occasion, stated his disapproval of me photographing local projects and continuing to work, which requires me to leave my house and enter other properties.
He is pushing the absurd notion, albeit indirectly, we should only be leaving our houses for food and necessary supplies. That is essentially fully locking down everyone.
Unless he would like to share a nuanced view of how he would like to see this handled, and how those whom need to leave our house to work should proceed, this is how I interpret his feelings on the subject.
By the time that rolls around, let's say June, maybe earlier, the number of people dying will be less than the common flu. So why couldn't we just get on with life as we did before Covid?
If you move to Cambodia or Greenland, you'll eliminate C-19 dangers altogether. They haven't had any C-19 deaths.
Moving to Greenland has some attractions, at least for a while!
To be honest when you described the precautions you took for work on one occasion (don't remember what) I thought they seemed reasonable. What I don't find reasonable is the idea that you'll just suit yourself. A lot of the precautions are for protecting others. If going out for ribs or whatever was just a risk for you, that's fine (assuming you don't expect a hospital bed), but it's largely a risk you're imposing on others.
I agree with you that it seems that the risk of infection while outside is largely very small, given elementary precautions, so a lot of outdoor activities I'd guess are safe. Hopefully vaccines will take the pressure off the health services so that they can concentrate on tracing and combatting new variants that will inevitably pop up.
So just to be clear, going out to work while taking precautions you feel is reasonable, along with engaging outdoor activities. (I can live with that.)
Going out to eat however is not.
I, unlike other conservatives, will admit that the data clearly shows indoor dining is a vector for transmissions. Personally though, I feel people should have the right to choose if they want to dine out, which is something we will have to agree to disagree on.
You are opposed to Biden's COVID relief bill. How do you propose helping the people you describe without spending money?If we gave $2000 (not the $1400 proposed in the $1.9 trillion billi) to each of the 10 million people unemployed, it would cost $20 billion. Add $400 a week for 12 more weeks of unemployment insurance payments = $48 billion. That's $68 billion compared to $1900 billion in the latest bill. That's a savings of over $1.8 trillion.
To be honest when you described the precautions you took for work on one occasion (don't remember what) I thought they seemed reasonable. What I don't find reasonable is the idea that you'll just suit yourself. A lot of the precautions are for protecting others. If going out for ribs or whatever was just a risk for you, that's fine (assuming you don't expect a hospital bed), but it's largely a risk you're imposing on others.But everyone who goes to restaurants understands the risk. I wouldn't go and haven't although I have stopped by a restaurant for take-out to eat at home. Others find even my doing that as too risky. Everyone draws the line differently. If someone is willing to risk working to feed his family, you seem to be very hard on someone trying to take care of their kids. "Stay home" you insist. His family apparently isn't as important as yours.
I agree with you that it seems that the risk of infection while outside is largely very small, given elementary precautions, so a lot of outdoor activities I'd guess are safe. Hopefully vaccines will take the pressure off the health services so that they can concentrate on tracing and combatting new variants that will inevitably pop up.
If we gave $2000 (not the $1400 proposed in the $1.9 trillion billi) to each of the 10 million people unemployed, it would cost $20 billion. Add $400 a week for 12 more weeks of unemployment insurance payments = $48 billion. That's $68 billion compared to $1900 billion in the latest bill. That's a savings of over $1.8 trillion.
Because as long as there are a lot of infected people there is a good risk of new variants emerging which evade the vaccines, and that health services are not equipped to handle the resulting surge in infections. This has been explained many times, Alan.That's a weak excuse. Let's wait for the variants to hit, if they will. Otherwise, we can predict all sorts of stuff for the future and never leave our couches.
Much cleaner air, for sure.A girl behind every tree.
That's a weak excuse. Let's wait for the variants to hit, if they will. Otherwise, we can predict all sorts of stuff for the future and never leave our couches.
anyone for getting back to the vaccine topic ?
So nothing for small businesses, schools and colleges, renters and landlords, vaccine development and distribution, state and local governments, etc.?We can't afford it. The money is just being printed. You have to draw the line somewhere. The economy is supposed to rebound because of the vaccines. Let it do that naturally. These other entities will have to tighten their belts and allow the economy to go through a recession if that's what's required. Many will have to go broke. Bad companies will perish instead of being bailed out like zombie corporations. (It's estimated 20% of corporations have debt they can never survive. We're just spending good money after bad trying to save them. They have to go. That's how free markets work. ) Otherwise, it will be more painful later. Good companies will survive and grow creating jobs for the people who worked for the zombie companies. Half the little businesses like restaurants in trouble now will die regardless. Why give money to their owners to stick in their pockets? That's my money. They didn't share their profits with me when they were earning them. Our national debt just past $28 trillion about 130% of GDP. We're going broke.
Got Questions About Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 Vaccine? We Have AnswersIsn't the J&J vaccine less effective than the other two? I believe around 85% vs. 95%. Which would you rather take?
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/973436193/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers)
Short excerpts - More at link above
This week, health care providers began administering the first doses of Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S. — the third vaccine authorized by the Food and Drug Administration to help stop the coronavirus pandemic.
That's welcome news in a country that still faces high levels of circulating virus in most regions, and a demand for vaccine that still far outstrips supply.
The J&J vaccine has some significant advantages, health officials say. Unlike the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, it can be stored for up to three months at regular refrigerator temperatures, so it's easier to distribute to more places. And you're fully vaccinated after just one dose — a welcome convenience for many recipients who dread the two-shot regimen of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines...
How does the Johnson & Johnson vaccine work?
The J&J shot is based on a different technology than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. Those use mRNA, or messenger RNA, to deliver bits of genetic code to cells. This code serves as a sort of instruction sheet — telling cells how to make a harmless piece of the spike protein that sticks out of the surface of the coronavirus. The immune system then learns to recognize the spike protein and fight it.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, is what's known as a viral vector vaccine — the same technology that's been proven safe and effective in creating an Ebola vaccine and others currently in the works. Basically, Johnson & Johnson started with an adenovirus, which causes the common cold, and modified it so it can't make anybody sick. They then used this harmless cold virus to deliver the genetic blueprint of the protein spike to cells, so the immune system will learn to recognize that spike when it runs into the coronavirus.
To be clear, the J&J vaccine "can't give you the cold virus, and it definitely cannot give you COVID," says Dr. Cassandra Pierre, an infectious disease specialist and acting hospital epidemiologist at Boston Medical Center.
An interesting note is that for those who make the least in society here in America, the unemployment rate is around 20%, not 6%. These are the people living week to week, paycheck to paycheck. These are the people most hurt by a shutdown and inability to earn a living to feed their family. Yet so many here are so nonchalant about that, so stuck on the possibilities of death from Covid they forget people die from starvation too. Should these people live on the street? I've been watching the homeless videos of people in LA living in tents on the streets there. It's pathetic. Like a third-world nation. Maybe some foreigners here just wish us ill. They enjoy seeing America in trouble. So they propose policies that make it worse for us.
You are opposed to Biden's COVID relief bill. How do you propose helping the people you describe without spending money?
If we gave $2000 (not the $1400 proposed in the $1.9 trillion billi) to each of the 10 million people unemployed, it would cost $20 billion. Add $400 a week for 12 more weeks of unemployment insurance payments = $48 billion. That's $68 billion compared to $1900 billion in the latest bill. That's a savings of over $1.8 trillion.
By the way, there's almost one trillion left over from the last stimulus bill unspent. All this money is doing is making richer people richer as stock market, real estate and other assets increase in value. Meanwhile, the cost of living increases due to inflation will punish these poorer people on fixed income. The wealth between rich and poor will increase. Wasteful economics. Hurtful social policy.
So nothing for small businesses, schools and colleges, renters and landlords, vaccine development and distribution, state and local governments, etc.? Seems like the guy who just got a job last week after being unemployed for a year gets left out.
We can't afford it. The money is just being printed. You have to draw the line somewhere. The economy is supposed to rebound because of the vaccines. Let it do that naturally. These other entities will have to tighten their belts and allow the economy to go through a recession if that's what's required. Many will have to go broke. Bad companies will perish instead of being bailed out like zombie corporations. (It's estimated 20% of corporations have debt they can never survive. We're just spending good money after bad trying to save them. They have to go. That's how free markets work. ) Otherwise, it will be more painful later. Good companies will survive and grow creating jobs for the people who worked for the zombie companies. Half the little businesses like restaurants in trouble now will die regardless. Why give money to their owners to stick in their pockets? That's my money. They didn't share their profits with me when they were earning them. Our national debt just past $28 trillion about 130% of GDP. We're going broke.
What's going to happen in a few months when the $1.9 trillion runs out? How long can you print money? The day of reckoning will be worse. People have to get back to real work not handouts from the government.
That's a weak excuse. Let's wait for the variants to hit, if they will. Otherwise, we can predict all sorts of stuff for the future and never leave our couches.
Isn't the J&J vaccine less effective than the other two? I believe around 85% vs. 95%. Which would you rather take?
I would follow the advice in the article and take whatever is available to me first.Double-speak from experts. They;re afraid if they ackowledged there is a difference in effectiveness, no one would take J&J's vaccine.
Got Questions About Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 Vaccine? We Have Answers
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/973436193/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers)
Short excerpt - More at link above
Will I be as well protected against getting super sick with COVID-19 if I get the J&J shot as if I get a two-dose version from Pfizer or Moderna?
"When we look at the thing we probably care about most — making sure that we don't end up in the ICU or dying — the efficacy of the three vaccines is virtually identical," says Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, chair of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco.
The perception that some vaccines may be better than others has to do with the topline numbers from efficacy studies. The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna were both found to be about 95% effective against preventing symptomatic COVID-19 after the second dose. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, was found to be 66% protective against moderate and severe disease overall worldwide, and 72% protective against such cases in the U.S.
But you can't really compare those numbers head to head, says Pierre, because "these were different trials in different places at different times," and the strains of the coronavirus running around were likely somewhat different. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was tested more recently, including in South Africa and Brazil, at a time when more contagious variants of the coronavirus were widely circulating in those countries. The Moderna and Pfizer clinical studies, meanwhile, were started earlier, before such variants had become widespread.
Given those differences, Bibbins-Domingo says "the number you should probably compare is 85%" — that's how effective the J & J vaccine was found to be at preventing severe disease four weeks after immunization.
Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, agrees that the J&J vaccine seems to be "terrific" at saving lives. He tells NPR he's advising his family members to take whichever vaccine comes their way first.
Why shouldn't I just hold out for the vaccine with the highest efficacy rate?
Get whichever vaccine you can as soon as you're eligible, Pierre, Jha and other infectious disease experts urge. The longer you go unvaccinated, the longer you're at risk of contracting a COVID-19 infection that potentially could kill you.
"I view it as a race against time," Pierre says, based on the data and her own experience with her mom. Pierre scrambled to schedule an immunization appointment for her mother as soon as the older woman became eligible. But before she could get immunized, she was diagnosed with COVID-19.
Pierre's mom recovered from that infection, but more than 500,000 other Americans have not been so fortunate.
Any of the three will go a long way in reducing the number of cases that require hospitalization. Get the first one offered. . . . Getting vaccinated is more important than the specific choice as the only other option is getting the virus and seeing what happens to one and how far one can help spread it.
Double-speak from experts. They;re [they're] afraid if they ackowledged [acknowledged] there is a difference in effectiveness, no one would take J&J's vaccine.
Because as long as there are a lot of infected people there is a good risk of new variants emerging
That's a weak excuse.
Let's wait for the variants to hit, if they will.
I would follow the advice in the article and take whatever is available to me first.The Germans disagreed with you. They seemed very concerned with efficacies. Their concern about Astra zeneca put them behind the eightball.
Got Questions About Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 Vaccine? We Have Answers
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/04/973436193/got-questions-about-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-we-have-answers)
Short excerpt - More at link above
Will I be as well protected against getting super sick with COVID-19 if I get the J&J shot as if I get a two-dose version from Pfizer or Moderna?
"When we look at the thing we probably care about most — making sure that we don't end up in the ICU or dying — the efficacy of the three vaccines is virtually identical," says Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, chair of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco.
The perception that some vaccines may be better than others has to do with the topline numbers from efficacy studies. The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna were both found to be about 95% effective against preventing symptomatic COVID-19 after the second dose. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, was found to be 66% protective against moderate and severe disease overall worldwide, and 72% protective against such cases in the U.S.
But you can't really compare those numbers head to head, says Pierre, because "these were different trials in different places at different times," and the strains of the coronavirus running around were likely somewhat different. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was tested more recently, including in South Africa and Brazil, at a time when more contagious variants of the coronavirus were widely circulating in those countries. The Moderna and Pfizer clinical studies, meanwhile, were started earlier, before such variants had become widespread.
Given those differences, Bibbins-Domingo says "the number you should probably compare is 85%" — that's how effective the J & J vaccine was found to be at preventing severe disease four weeks after immunization.
Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, agrees that the J&J vaccine seems to be "terrific" at saving lives. He tells NPR he's advising his family members to take whichever vaccine comes their way first.
Why shouldn't I just hold out for the vaccine with the highest efficacy rate?
Get whichever vaccine you can as soon as you're eligible, Pierre, Jha and other infectious disease experts urge. The longer you go unvaccinated, the longer you're at risk of contracting a COVID-19 infection that potentially could kill you.
"I view it as a race against time," Pierre says, based on the data and her own experience with her mom. Pierre scrambled to schedule an immunization appointment for her mother as soon as the older woman became eligible. But before she could get immunized, she was diagnosed with COVID-19.
Pierre's mom recovered from that infection, but more than 500,000 other Americans have not been so fortunate.
The Germans disagreed with you. They seemed very concerned with efficacies. Their concern about Astra zeneca put them behind the eightball.
Germany should have led the world at handling the pandemic. But experts slam Merkel's vaccine response as a disaster
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/07/europe/germany-vaccine-disaster-grm-intl/index.html
You can sort of understand their point that at that moment there was limited complete trial data on over 65s so they were erring on the side of caution. That is maybe not the right call in a pandemic, but the reasoning was clear. What messed things up was that at the same time the EU were having a spat with Astra Zeneca about the contract to supply vaccines and Macron's small brain got overloaded and he described the AZ vaccine as "quasi-ineffective", which led to a lot of confusion, and there is still a lot of negativity about the AZ vaccine in many people who you'd have expected to know better.Maybe Brexit helped. Having to think and operate independently worked for you Brits. It appears from the article that the EU countries were depending for answers from Germany and a common roadmap while you made your own decisions.
On this occasion, it seems that the UK got it right. Well, you can't be wrong ALL the time.
As the virus crept into Europe in early 2020, the Czech government acted. Starting in March of last year, the country of 10.6 million people went into almost total lockdown and stayed locked down for five weeks. Shops, schools, even the borders were shut. Masks had to be worn outside.
But by March 2021, the situation was catastrophic. According to World Health Organization statistics, the Czech Republic now leads the world in new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population — 1,597 as of Saturday.
The Germans disagreed with you. They seemed very concerned with efficacies. Their concern about Astra zeneca put them behind the eightball.
Here are the new CDC Guidelines for fully vaccinated people.
COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized in the United States are effective against COVID-19, including severe disease.
Preliminary evidence suggests that the currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines may provide some protection against a variety of strains, including B.1.1.7 (originally identified in the United Kingdom). However, reduced antibody neutralization and efficacy have been observed for the B.1.351 strain (originally identified in South Africa).
A growing body of evidence suggests that fully vaccinated people are less likely to have asymptomatic infection and potentially less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others. However, further investigation is ongoing.
Modeling studies suggest that preventive measures such as mask use and social distancing will continue to be important during vaccine implementation. However, there are ways to take a balanced approach by allowing vaccinated people to resume some lower-risk activities.
Taking steps towards relaxing certain measures for vaccinated persons may help improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake.
The risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated people cannot be completely eliminated as long as there is continued community transmission of the virus. Vaccinated people could potentially still get COVID-19 and spread it to others. However, the benefits of relaxing some measures such as quarantine requirements and reducing social isolation may outweigh the residual risk of fully vaccinated people becoming ill with COVID-19 or transmitting the virus to others.
According to a survey conducted right as the first COVID-19 vaccine was authorized in the United States, most people expected it would take at least 6 months after vaccine rollout before they were able to resume activities such as going out to dinner, going to a gym class, or staying in a hotel. However, a survey conducted less than 2 months into the vaccination program suggest that over half of the general U.S. adult population have already started resuming some of these activities despite the risk of COVID-19 because they “just want their life back.” Reasons for taking fewer COVID-19 precautions than they did a month ago included COVID-19 fatigue, belief that population-based immunity has been achieved through vaccination or disease, belief about reduced disease risk for themselves as others get vaccinated, belief that they no longer pose a threat to high-risk people because high-risk groups are receiving protection through vaccination, and receipt of the vaccines themselves. [Citations omitted.]
I've never had a discussion with "The Germans", or anyone else, about the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine or any concern they may have, or had, about it.I didn't suggest you shouldn't take what you can get. I'm just stating that J&J's vaccine is not as effective as the other two.
I am involved in a discussion about the three currently available vaccines in the United States and the currently available data on their efficacy and effectiveness relative to each other and the differences in the way in which the various clinical trials were conducted for those vaccines.
All three are highly efficacious and effective at providing protection against serious to critical illness and death. All three are relatively scarce in availability relative to the adult population that would benefit from being vaccinated with any of them. The wise choice is to take whichever is available to you as early as possible rather than take the risk of becoming infected, and the concomitant risk of serious illness or death, while waiting for a specific vaccine to become available to you.
It's difficult to make anything other than broad comparisons between the vaccine choices from Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson / J&J) because they were tested at different times and in different places with different variants of the virus. Comparison is also difficult as the currently available data is derived from the limited clinical trials conducted prior to Emergency Use Authorization. Due to the immediate need for a means of slowing the spread of the virus, they were put into use under Emergency Use Authorization without lengthy clinical trials to produce more granular data. For instance, the J&J vaccine was tested in Brazil and South Africa at a time when variants of the virus were widespread and was shown to be protective against those variants. That data is limited at present for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Much more will be learned over time regarding the various vaccines as they are administered over a wider population. However, what is known is that all three have demonstrated highly effective protection against serious to critical illness from COVID-19 and prevention of death.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/how-the-different-covid-vaccines-will-handle-variants (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/how-the-different-covid-vaccines-will-handle-variants.html)
In the case of the Janssen (Johnson & Johnson / J&J) vaccine, which is the principle point of discussion in the Q&A article that I linked and the few comments that I made regarding it, the FDA conclusion was...
Efficacy against severe/critical COVID-19 (key secondary efficacy endpoint):
• Onset ≥14 days after vaccination: 76.7% (54.6, 89.1)
• Onset ≥28 days after vaccination: 85.4% (54.2, 96.9)
Reduction in COVID-19 requiring medical intervention:
• Onset ≥14 days after vaccination: 2 in vaccine group vs. 29 in placebo group
• Onset ≥28 days after vaccination: 0 in vaccine group vs. 16 in placebo group
Whatever conversation is happening inside your head regarding Germany and the AstraZeneca vaccine is not one I am a part of nor do I wish to be. Take that discussion to "The Germans".
New CDC recommendations for Americans who have been vaccinated...
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!Switzerland just voted against masks.
I guess Alan has me on ignore, since I posted a link to the new CDC guidelines an hour or so ago.Didn't see your post for some reason. Sorry if I stepped on your toes.
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Switzerland just voted against masks.
I'm just stating that J&J's vaccine is not as effective as the other two.
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Nothing to do with C-19. To clarify, the Swiss voted against wearing burkas by Muslim women in public.You're right. Additionally, I posted in the wrong thread. It belongs in the other thread about politics, racism, and other issues about man's inhumanity to man.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56314173
Unnecessary. The currently known data was already covered in the article which you described as doublespeak. In addition, the article indicated that based on currently limited data you can't really make head to head comparisons among them.The article is doublespeak. J&J vaccine is not as effective. The scientists are trying to convince everyone to disregard the numbers because they want people to use this vaccine along with the other more effective vaccines. So they're downplaying that it's less effective.
But you can't really compare those numbers head to head, says Pierre, because "these were different trials in different places at different times," and the strains of the coronavirus running around were likely somewhat different. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was tested more recently, including in South Africa and Brazil, at a time when more contagious variants of the coronavirus were widely circulating in those countries. The Moderna and Pfizer clinical studies, meanwhile, were started earlier, before such variants had become widespread.
Given those differences, Bibbins-Domingo says "the number you should probably compare is 85%" — that's how effective the J & J vaccine was found to be at preventing severe disease four weeks after immunization.
How the effectiveness of each will be judged over a longer period of time and a broader population is unknown. Efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines are two different measures. At the moment, all we have is limited data on efficacy and and even less data on effectiveness as new variants emerge.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/how-the-different-covid-vaccines-will-handle-variants (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/how-the-different-covid-vaccines-will-handle-variants.html)
So far, studies suggest that the vaccines currently in use can recognize the emerging variants — but they don’t provide as much protection against these new strains. The variant from South Africa, for example, reduced Pfizer-BioNTech’s antibody protection by two-thirds, according to a February study. Moderna’s neutralizing antibodies dropped six-fold with the South Africa variant.
(Experts say that it’s worth noting that Johnson & Johnson’s trials took place when the new variants had already become the dominant strains in South Africa and Brazil, while Moderna’s and Pfizer’s trials took place before that happened.)
Pfizer says South African variant could significantly reduce protective antibodies
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccines-variants/pfizer-says-south-african-variant-could-significantly-reduce-protective-antibodies (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccines-variants/pfizer-says-south-african-variant-could-significantly-reduce-protective-antibodies-idUSKBN2AH2VG)
A laboratory study suggests that the South African variant of the coronavirus may reduce protective antibodies elicited by the Pfizer Inc/BioNTech SE vaccine by two-thirds, and it is not clear if the shot will be effective against the mutation, the companies said on Wednesday.
The study found the vaccine was still able to neutralize the virus and there is not yet evidence from trials in people that the variant reduces vaccine protection, the companies said.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-vaccine-efficacy (https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-vaccine-efficacy)
Vaccine efficacy is the percentage reduction in a disease in a group of people who received a vaccination in a clinical trial. It differs from vaccine effectiveness, which measures how well a vaccine works when given to people in the community outside of clinical trials.
Vaccine efficacy only provides information about how well a vaccine works under the conditions of the clinical trial. Scientists usually base it on factors that they can quantify, such as numbers of laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19.
But the ideal conditions of a clinical trial do not necessarily reflect what is happening in the real world outside of clinical trials.
Vaccine effectiveness tells us how well a vaccine works under real-world conditions once people outside of clinical trials receive the vaccine.
that is how you are interpreting it. We understand that.It's this kind of doublespeak they presented that makes people wary of experts. They should just say, yes it's 80% or 90% as effective as Moderna and the other but it's effective enough so that you want to take it immediately if it's available. But they're afraid people won't take it and they want people to be vaccinated even if the effectiveness is slightly less. But you can't deceive people. It's like what they said about masks in the beginning. Once you're caught lying, it's hard to regain trust. So the reactions to their statements are met negatively. People know when they're being bullshi**ed.
Their presentation is factual. they are not trying to hide anything or lead you astray.
If you had the choice, which we understand you don't have to make anymore, which choice would you make - AZ or wait another month or more?
The article is doublespeak.
J&J vaccine is not as effective.
The scientists are trying to convince everyone to disregard the numbers because they want people to use this vaccine along with the other more effective vaccines. So they're downplaying that it's less effective.
That is obviously not true for anyone with average comprehension.Thanks Dr. TeckTalk. But I'll trust myself regarding my health rather than you.
Unfortunately, you're still unaware of what the word effective means as applied to vaccines. It will require more time and a great deal more data before any reasonable comparison of effectiveness among various vaccines can begin to be made. Comparative effectiveness of different vaccines may vary by region depending on the predominant variants and any new ones that may arise.
Ignorance combined with paranoia create a poisonous cocktail for the mind.
It's this kind of doublespeak they presented that makes people wary of experts.
They should just say, yes it's 80% or 90% as effective as Moderna and the other but it's effective enough so that you want to take it immediately if it's available.
“Fauci's favorite expression is, "...it seems likely..." Now that really encourages trust in what he recommends. How can the layman know what to do or what's best? Then the politicians who tell you to wear a mask, open up the businesses again only to see the infections pick up, and oops, they shut them down again. Another thing the public sees that engenders trust that our leaders don't know what they're doing. So some experts now say we can ignore the Maderna two-shot studies because they know best. Meanwhile, the two-shot pharmaceutical companies insist that two shots are the right and studied way to go. So you have public experts disagreeing with the experts who made the vaccines. But of course, Dr. TechTalk above has made his analysis, a guy who won't even give his first name and has never posted one photo he's ever taken in a photo forum he practices medicine in. But we should trust his analysis as to the efficacy of the J&J vaccines and skip the second dose of Moderna. Gee thanks, but no thanks.
But you can't deceive people. It's like what they said about masks in ......
“
The data wasn't there that even minimal masks could have a positive effect no matter how weak. I had the same opinion. The last thing we needed was a run on N95 masks as that shortage would leave the facilities with a severe shortage and could easily lead to a collapse of the health care system.
On a public health basis ie across the population, it was demonstrated to help. I changed my mind and started wearing a home made mask before they changed the guidance.
“the reactions to their statements are met negatively. People know when they're being bullshi**ed. “
I am not sure anyone can say that with an honest face.
“
They are also trying to convince people only one Moderna shot is necessary. They're doing this for the same reason they're pushing J&J. They want as many people vaccinated as possible.
“
For the good of all rather than the good of the individual ie you and me specifically. Efficacy of >50% still makes a big difference for the population. It just takes longer to get the spread reduced.
“
But the fact is Moderna has a two-shot protocol. That's how they tested it. Who knows what would happen if only one shot is given. Maybe without the booster being given with the four-week period, the first shot wears off after a few weeks and becomes non-effective.
“
The limited amount of data does suggest that extending the time between the two shots does not hurt the efficacy too much. You are correct, that approach has not been through a large third stage trial. There are some limited studies under way.
“
But so-called "experts" are trying to game the system, again losing the general public who knows doublespeak when they hear it.
“
Not gaming - as that implies deliberate distortion - except for the politicians and some of the media parroting them. Rather they have been transparent about their thoughts and also speculated. The latter gets you in trouble when you are not a politician and are looked at as “expert”. Bad idea when you are espousing public policy and guidance. KISS has to be followed in that arena. Many experts have a hard time doing that as their world is in shades of gray and nuanced.
Thanks Dr. TeckTalk. But I'll trust myself regarding my health rather than you.
You might want to consider listening to people that have spent their lives studying the sciences involved; who have experience in the field of epidemic viral pathology, prevention, and containment; and who develop the vaccines upon which we rely. They know far more about it than either of us.Exactly. I trust the recommendations of the pharmaceutical companies that developed the vaccines. They say take both shots.
Fauci's favorite expression is, "...it seems likely..." Now that really encourages trust in what he recommends. How can the layman know what to do or what's best? Then the politicians who tell you to wear a mask, open up the businesses again only to see the infections pick up, and oops, they shut them down again. Another thing the public sees that engenders trust that our leaders don't know what they're doing. So some experts now say we can ignore the Maderna two-shot studies because they know best. Meanwhile, the two-shot pharmaceutical companies insist that two shots are the right and studied way to go. So you have public experts disagreeing with the experts who made the vaccines. But of course, Dr. TechTalk above has made his analysis, a guy who won't even give his first name and has never posted one photo he's ever taken in a photo forum he practices medicine in. But we should trust his analysis as to the efficacy of the J&J vaccines and skip the second dose of Moderna. Gee thanks, but no thanks.
Exactly. I trust the recommendations of the pharmaceutical companies that developed the vaccines. They say take both shots.
But of course, Dr. TechTalk above has made his analysis, a guy who won't even give his first name and has never posted one photo he's ever taken in a photo forum he practices medicine in. But we should trust his analysis as to the efficacy of the J&J vaccines and skip the second dose of Moderna. Gee thanks, but no thanks.
See you down in the corner bar Alan, mask optional, buy you a brew or two. And no, i cannot get a shot yet nor have i had it. Cheers mate .Well, my wife and I have had the Moderna shots and it's been two weeks since the last one. So today, I went into the pizza store and actually ate my pizza slice without a mask on, tempting fate. I made sure I sat ten feet from everyone else. Then I sprayed my hands in 91% alcohol when I got back into the car which I just had washed and cleaned after one year of collecting mud.
;)
Why ?I thought of that. Except there would still be second shots coming afterwards. And the more first shots they would give, the more second shots would have to be ordered. They'd increase sales.
It is in their interest to sell as many doses as possible. They are just cya ing because they would get sued if they didnt have the stage 3 trial done and have a fed eua.
Governments are under no such restriction.
Attacking me won't change any facts regarding: the science of vaccines; how they've been tested; their known efficacy; their unknown effectiveness long term; or the science and common sense applied to recommendations for their use in a pandemic. It will remain so regardless of your awareness of those facts or approval of them—or me.If you took a poll, most people would select the more effective vaccine. Which would you choose?
Exactly. I trust the recommendations of the pharmaceutical companies that developed the vaccines. They say take both shots.
Isn't the J&J vaccine less effective than the other two? I believe around 85% vs. 95%. Which would you rather take?
If you took a poll, most people would select the more effective vaccine. Which would you choose?
First one available
But of course, Dr. TechTalk above has made his analysis, a guy who won't even give his first name and has never posted one photo he's ever taken in a photo forum he practices medicine in. But we should trust his analysis as to the efficacy of the J&J vaccines and skip the second dose of Moderna. Gee thanks, but no thanks.
Things are looking up.
America could soon be swimming in COVID-19 vaccine. The shift from scarcity to surplus could bring its own problems.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/03/09/covid-19-vaccine-us-surplus-april-coronavirus/4595458001/
No worry about surplus. A third dose could be used in fall by health workers and elderly whose antibodies will have faded by then.It's not the only thing that fades when you get older.
Interesting data from the CDC released yesterday on US C-19 deaths, being reported in England.But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
More than 73 percent of Americans who die of COVID-19 are overweight or obese, CDC data reveal (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9338761/More-73-Americans-die-COVID-obese-CDC-data-show.html)
Stay safe, stay in shape, and stay of appropriate weight. Time to head to the gym.
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
Those two stats are not directly related. 73% of those who have died are overweight, pointing to that being overweight is a leading precursor for death from C-19 (plus a litany of other things).I'm sorry. I don't see the relationship. What am I missing? If three-quarters of Americans are fat, then you'd expect three-quarters of covid deaths to be of people who happen to be fat. Now if you said 1/4 of Americans are fat but 3/4 of covid deaths are people who are fat, then the statistic would be important. Otherwise, the dead % who are fat just reflect the general population percentage.
The fact that we as a country are so overweight, as the 74% figure shows, is probably the lead reason (not Trump or any other politician) why so many Americans died in the last year. Similarly, the C-19 death rate for undeveloped countries, which have far fewer overweight citizens, is less, another striking correlation.
As has been pointed out long before C-19 showed up, if you want to live a more care free life free from many health issues, regardless of age, maintain an appropriate weight. In the vast majority of cases, it is a personal decision.
Interesting data from the CDC released yesterday on US C-19 deaths, being reported in England.
More than 73 percent of Americans who die of COVID-19 are overweight or obese, CDC data reveal (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9338761/More-73-Americans-die-COVID-obese-CDC-data-show.html)
I don't know where this article got its data, but both the data and the interpretation look bogus. Here is a link to actual CDC data. Table 3 shows that out of a sample of 160000 Covid deaths, 5600 were linked to obesity as a contributing cause.When you think about many statistics, you can create any scenario to prove a point., For example, they say older people with comorbidities are more likely to die. Well, most older people have some commorbities like heart issues, diabetes, etc. But the main reason they might be dying is because they're, well, old. Their bodies can't handle the Covid attack. So they die. Not because of the comorbidities but because the virus takes a toll on it's own. But it's hard to prove they would have died anyway just of old age and COvid by itself.
https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/new-cdc-report-shows-94-of-covid-19-deaths-in-us-had-underlying-medical-conditions/
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
When you think about many statistics, you can create any scenario to prove a point.
For example, they say older people with comorbidities are more likely to die. Well, most older people have some commorbities like heart issues, diabetes, etc. But the main reason they might be dying is because they're, well, old. Their bodies can't handle the Covid attack. So they die. Not because of the comorbidities but because the virus takes a toll on it's own. But it's hard to prove they would have died anyway just of old age and COvid by itself.
In my experience, that has not been true.Being old with comorbidities, I took their word for it and put on my mask. :)
Why would that be hard to prove? You could look at data and see if the mortality rate was the same in old patients with and without comorbidities.
When you think about many statistics, you can create any scenario to prove a point.
In my experience, that has not been true.
For example, they say older people with comorbidities are more likely to die. Well, most older people have some commorbities like heart issues, diabetes, etc. But the main reason they might be dying is because they're, well, old. Their bodies can't handle the Covid attack. So they die. Not because of the comorbidities but because the virus takes a toll on it's own. But it's hard to prove they would have died anyway just of old age and COvid by itself.
Why would that be hard to prove? You could look at data and see if the mortality rate was the same in old patients with and without comorbidities.
Being old with comorbidities, I took their word for it and put on my mask. :)
But the main reason they might be dying is because they're, well, old. Their bodies can't handle the Covid attack. So they die. Not because of the comorbidities but because the virus takes a toll on it's own. But it's hard to prove they would have died anyway just of old age and COvid by itself.
First, who is "they"? Second, what does that have to do with your assertion that:I'm making conversation. Trying to make people think beyond what they read. You don't have to agree with me. In fact, brainstorming is suppose to create different scenarios, even if some seem impossible.
I'm making conversation. Trying to make people think beyond what they read. You don't have to agree with me. In fact, brainstorming is suppose to create different scenarios, even if some seem impossible.
Why do you think old people die from Covid? Do you think age on its own has most to do with it? Forget the charts. What does your common sense say to you? In fact, don't Google it. Don't read any charts. What does your logic tell you?
I think facts matter, so I will continue to seek them out. I am not very impressed with wild ass guesses, particularly from people who have no education, training, or experience in what they are wild ass guessing about, and who actively ignore the facts.What did people do before Google search? Do you ever trust your own judgment and experience in life? Or do you always check things out with others? Maybe they're dumb and just have a good line and BSing you. A lot of people have great credentials and not a bit of common sense. Being able to read between the lines is often more important then the words themselves.
What did people do before Google search?
What did people do before Google search?
Being able to read between the lines is often more important then the words themselves.
What did people do before Google search? Do you ever trust your own judgment and experience in life? Or do you always check things out with others? Maybe they're dumb and just have a good line and BSing you. A lot of people have great credentials and not a bit of common sense. Being able to read between the lines is often more important then the words themselves.
That is about what I would expect to hear from you, a purveyor of false facts and logical fallacies. What you suggest is simply intellectual laziness on your part. Instead of ascertaining the facts about whether the COVID mortality rate is lower for older people without comorbidities than for older people with comorbidities, you just want to make stuff up.I don't think people who have read my posts believe that Frank. I think they've learned a lot from what I've had to say. Challenging assumptions like I do and thinking out of the box is intellectual curiosity, not laziness. It's the people who always believe what they read who are lazy.
I don't think people who have read my posts believe that Frank. I think they've learned a lot from what I've had to say.
Challenging assumptions like I do and thinking out of the box is intellectual curiosity, not laziness.
It's the people who always believe what they read who are lazy.
For example, they say older people with comorbidities are more likely to die. Well, most older people have some commorbities like heart issues, diabetes, etc. But the main reason they might be dying is because they're, well, old. Their bodies can't handle the Covid attack. So they die. Not because of the comorbidities but because the virus takes a toll on it's own. But it's hard to prove they would have died anyway just of old age and COvid by itself.
I don't think people who have read my posts believe that Frank. I think they've learned a lot from what I've had to say. Challenging assumptions like I do and thinking out of the box is intellectual curiosity, not laziness. It's the people who always believe what they read who are lazy.
I don't think people who have read my posts believe that Frank. I think they've learned a lot from what I've had to say. Challenging assumptions like I do and thinking out of the box is intellectual curiosity, not laziness. It's the people who always believe what they read who are lazy.
How lazy are the ones who don't read and just invent stuff?But I read the Daily Mall article and it didn't make sense regarding the 73% vs 74% overweight statistic. Even you said the article was BS. So I questioned it as I should have. Now you object to my doubt about it. Make up your mind.
But I read the Daily Mall article and it didn't make sense regarding the 73% vs 74% overweight statistic. Even you said the article was BS. So I questioned it as I should have. Now you object to my doubt about it. Make up your mind.
I pointed out that the charts it showed were reliable, and made sense in the context of age and risk. So you didn't read the article properly, and you didn't read my comment on it properly. Other than that - great job!When the first paragraph of an article seems to make a mistake in concept, why would I waste my time reading and trusting the rest of what they have to say? How could anyone trust anything they have to say? How can you so criticize the paper that published it as you did yet still trust what they're saying? What part of the article is true? How do you know?
When the first paragraph of an article seems to make a mistake in concept, why would I waste my time reading and trusting the rest of what they have to say? How could anyone trust anything they have to say? How can you so criticize the paper that published it as you did yet still trust what they're saying? What part of the article is true? How do you know?
Am I missing something?
Perhaps you're missing the difference between correlation and causation. Correlation in statistics may be an indicator of causation or it may not. Causation requires deeper investigation to determine if there are one or more additional factors that may be the causation for the correlation shown in data or to determine if the correlation is simply coincidental and unrelated to causation. Those are just a couple of examples. There are others. The point being that it is not safe to make assumptions on causation based solely on correlation without additional investigation or other supporting evidence.You didn't answer my question. So let me paste the whole original question I asked.
(NEXSTAR) — Obese individuals may be at a greater risk of severe COVID-19 complications, according to a new report released by The World Obesity Federation. The report links obesity with a series of health complications related to COVID-19. It found that increased bodyweight “is the second greatest predictor of hospitalization and a high risk of death for people suffering from COVID-19.” Only age ranks as a higher risk factor.
“We show that in those countries where overweight affects only a minority of the adult population, the rates of death from COVID-19 are typically less than one-tenth the levels found in countries where overweight affects the majority of adults,” the report states. It also found that “drivers” of obesity, including the consumption of high levels of processed foods, “are associated with mortality from COVID-19,” as a diet low in essential nutrients may weaken the immune system’s defenses.
About 78% of people who have been hospitalized, needed a ventilator or died from Covid-19 have been overweight or obese, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a new study Monday.
Just over 42% of the U.S. population was considered obese in 2018, according to the agency’s most recent statistics. Overweight is defined as having a body mass index of 25 or more, while obesity is defined as having a BMI of 30 or more.
You didn't answer my question. So let me paste the whole original question I asked.
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
You didn't answer my question. So let me paste the whole original question I asked.
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
You didn't answer my question. So let me paste the whole original question I asked.
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death...
You didn't answer my question. So let me paste the whole original question I asked.
But the article also says that 74% of all Americans are overweight. So if 73% who die are overweight, that seems like there's no relation between weight and death. In fact, it lines up exactly. Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?
CNBC uses different stats. The percentages of obese people quoted below are from 2018, so either in the last two years more people ate more junk or one of the sources uses wrong data.
Quote: About 78% of people who have been hospitalized, needed a ventilator or died from Covid-19 have been overweight or obese, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a new study Monday.
Just over 42% of the U.S. population was considered obese in 2018, according to the agency’s most recent statistics. Overweight is defined as having a body mass index of 25 or more, while obesity is defined as having a BMI of 30 or more.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/covid-cdc-study-finds-roughly-78percent-of-people-hospitalized-were-overweight-or-obese.html
Can you explain what you mean by "seems like there's no relation between weight and death." How did you come to that conclusion?I said:
I gave you a clue. So let me paste a highly simplified version that may be easier to understand.I didn't make the conclusion or assumption. The article did. I'm questioning what their point was. I don't see it as out of the ordinary.
"Correlation in statistics may be an indicator of causation or it may not. The point being that it is not safe to make assumptions... based solely on correlation"
Looks like it. I'd rather not speculate as to what it might be.
... Let's say there are 1000 Americans. That means 740 are fat. 100 Americans get sick from COvid and die. 73 of the 100 are fat. Well, that's expected because 74 of the 100 are fat. What does fat have to do with dying?
Let me write the article a different way. Let's say 74% of all Americans are women. So if 73% who die are women, would you say women are more likely to die because they're women?...
Maybe I should go eat dinner. I'm just not getting it.
I get it now, makes sense, thanks.I agree. You have two strikes against you. Old and sick to begin with.
Except being obese is not healthy. It puts a lot of strain on various organs, heart in particular. Contributes to diabetes. Makes it more difficult for the immune system to fight. So it could be both at the same time: coincidental and causal.
I am not sure eating dinner will help. But perhaps it will.Leftover Chinese. The worse stuff for old people who are fat like me.
CNBC uses different stats. The percentages of obese people quoted below are from 2018, so either in the last two years more people ate more junk or one of the sources uses wrong data.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/covid-cdc-study-finds-roughly-78percent-of-people-hospitalized-were-overweight-or-obese.html
Read more carefully ... this article is also clueless and misleading.
If 42% of the population is obese, what fraction of the population is obese or overweight?
I hate to agree with Alan, but I see no evidence from these statistics that obesity increases Covid mortality.
Here is a link to actual CDC data, for anyone who wants to play with real statistics:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR3-wrg3tTKK5-9tOHPGAHWFVO3DfslkJ0KsDEPQpWmPbKtp6EsoVV2Qs1Q#Comorbidities
Obesity shares with most chronic diseases the presence of an inflammatory component, which accounts for the development of metabolic disease and other associated health alterations. This inflammatory state is reflected in increased circulating levels of pro-inflammatory proteins, and it occurs not only in adults but also in adolescents and children. The chronic inflammatory response has its origin in the links existing between the adipose tissue and the immune system. Obesity, like other states of malnutrition, is known to impair the immune function, altering leucocyte counts as well as cell-mediated immune responses.
Read more carefully ... this article is also clueless and misleading.Thnaks for your comments and chart. I thought I'd personally figure it out to see what the truth really is. But after looking at the chart which is foreboding enough, I then read the Notes under the chart and decided I'm really not interested any longer. In fact, I'd rather blow my brains out or start scanning again all night before I would tackle it. :o
If 42% of the population is obese, what fraction of the population is obese or overweight?
I hate to agree with Alan, but I see no evidence from these statistics that obesity increases Covid mortality.
Here is a link to actual CDC data, for anyone who wants to play with real statistics:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR3-wrg3tTKK5-9tOHPGAHWFVO3DfslkJ0KsDEPQpWmPbKtp6EsoVV2Qs1Q#Comorbidities
Thnaks for your comments and chart. I thought I'd personally figure it out to see what the truth really is. But after looking at the chart which is foreboding enough, I then read the Notes under the chart and decided I'm really not interested any longer. In fact, I'd rather blow my brains out or start scanning again all night before I would tackle it. :o
So much for intellectual curiosity.I looked at the chart. I tried. But, they were too obtuse for me. Maybe you can figure them out and report back.
I looked at the chart. I tried. But, they were too obtuse for me. Maybe you can figure them out and report back.
It's not really my issue. Joe is responsible for introducing that link into the conversation.You'd have to be a masochist to try to figure that chart out. With what the Notes say, you'd never get to a complete conclusion in any case.
On the plus side for those doubters of the possibility of herd immunity and who only trust the experts, Fauci has just announced that he believes America will reach herd immunity by the end of August or early Fall. I didn't hear his usual qualification, "...it's most likely...", so that is a good sign some of us might actually see the end of the year. :)
Your comments about "doubters" or not trusting experts makes no sense. I don't recall anyone here doubting the importance of herd immunity, only that it hasn't been reached yet. And Dr. Fauci is saying exactly that, isn't he? After all, isn't what vaccines provide an "accelerated" herd immunity, i.e., you don't have to wait for it to occur naturally by infection and illness/death.There are many here who have stated over and over that either there is no herd immunity or America would never reach it. I would like to hear what they now think since an expert is predicting that it will happen.
I think you're so hell-bent on being antagonistic, instead of engaging in discussion for the purpose of greater understanding, that you unthinkingly always take what you perceive to be an opposite position, but you do so to absurd lengths. You are not alone in this. In fact it's commonplace these days, and lame "two-sided" debate TV news shows have perpetuated the farce, which are not debates at all. It's a front people put on, a show. Not many people actually behave like this in real life, not without consequence anyway. But for some reason, many now think this is how public discourse should proceed.
There are many here who have stated over and over that either there is no herd immunity or America would never reach it. I would like to hear what they now think since an expert is predicting that it will happen.
There are many here who have stated over and over that either there is no herd immunity or America would never reach it.
With all this talk about herds, I think I'm going to Bar B Q steak tonight for dinner.
With all this talk about herds, I think I'm going to Bar B Q steak tonight for dinner.
On the plus side for those doubters of the possibility of herd immunity and who only trust the experts, Fauci has just announced that he believes America will reach herd immunity by the end of August or early Fall. I didn't hear his usual qualification, "...it's most likely...", so that is a good sign some of us might actually see the end of the year. :)
Just to add to this, that is a 1 in 6250 odds of dying from C-19 if you under 55, being beat out by such things as:
Being a Pedestrian, 1/610
Being in a Car or other vehicle, 1/242
Off-roading, 1/4993
Falling out of bed, chair, or some other piece of furniture, 1/5508
Firearms, 1/4613
Chocking to death on food, 1/4812
There are plenty of more.
https://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm
I've been waiting for Joe to come back and further educate us on which items in his list are contagious and have been shown to increase exponentially in a short period of time.
CDC Monthly Death Statistics - 2020
February 2020: Deaths Caused by Accident this Month = 14,446 / Deaths Caused by COVID-19 this Month = 15
March 2020: Deaths Caused by Accident this Month = 15,379 / Deaths Caused by COVID-19 this Month = 6,705
April 2020: Deaths Caused by Accident this Month = 15,371 / Deaths Caused by COVID-19 this Month = 61,713
* Deaths for COVID-19 uses statistics where COVID-19 is the sole cause of death listed. Statistics for COVID-19 with multiple cause of death listed is slightly higher and not included above.
... increase exponentially in a short period of time...
Who cares?
When you are dead, you are dead, who cares whether the car that killed you was speeding exponentially? It is the risk that matters, not the particular qualifiers of that risk.
Besides, covid is a one-time event, lasting a year or two, while accidents and other cause happen every year, year after year.
Who cares?
When you are dead, you are dead, who cares whether the car that killed you was speeding exponentially? It is the risk that matters, not the particular qualifiers of that risk.
Besides, covid is a one-time event, lasting a year or two, while accidents and other cause happen every year, year after year.
Unfortunately, Covid is not a one-time event. It could take years to completely eradicate it.Of course, China could start another one too.
A car accident doesn't spread onto other roads and countries, whereas a single case of covid can keep propagating for infinite amount of time in all directions.
Of course, China could start another one too.
As could the US. Your point being?But American didn;t start this one. China did. It's worked so well, they may do it again.
Of course, China could start another one too.
Why to start another one if the first one works so well?I agree. They won't need too.
But American didn;t start this one. China did. It's worked so well, they may do it again.
When you say "they", do you mean the communists bat and pangolins?We've argued that before. Enough already.
We've argued that before. Enough already.
We've argued that before. Enough already.
I don't believe we have ever engaged in a discussion about Chinese bats and pangolins, except you said a couple of times that the Chinese created the COVID virus in a lab and deliberately spread it throughout the world to extend their political and economic hegemony, because former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said so based on super secret investigation reports he carries around with him in his briefcase which no one is allowed to see. Maybe Tucker Carlson said it too. If Tucker Carlson said it, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Lou Dobbs probably said it too. And then everyone on the fair and balanced news staff at Fox News reported that they said it as if it were a news story.You're being naive.
You're being naive.
So I guess that means you got nothing.Well I know the virus was being worked on in a lab in Wuhan the city where the virus started? What do you got? Pangolins? ::)
Well I know the virus was being worked on in a lab in Wuhan the city where the virus started?
What do you got? Pangolins?
Well I know the virus was being worked on in a lab in Wuhan the city where the virus started?
How do you know that the COVID-19 virus was being "worked on" in the Wuhan lab at the time of the outbreak?
There are many articles about the pangolins being a possible carrier of the virus. Here is one for example.
https://www.sciencealert.com/more-evidence-suggests-pangolins-may-have-passed-coronavirus-from-bats-to-humans
You don't know that.SARS viruses were being studied there in the Wuhan Lab for years. That's why the lab was there. One of the researchers probably carried it out when he went to the nearby food market to get an eggroll for lunch. I doubt if Pandolins like eggrolls.
Well I know the virus was being worked on in a lab in Wuhan the city where the virus started.
How do you know that the COVID-19 virus was being "worked on" in the Wuhan lab at the time of the outbreak?
SARS viruses were being studied there in the Wuhan Lab for years. That's why the lab was there. One of the researchers probably carried it out when he went to the nearby food market to get an eggroll for lunch.
SARS viruses were being studied there in the Wuhan Lab for years. That's why the lab was there. One of the researchers probably carried it out when he went to the nearby food market to get an eggroll for lunch. I doubt if Pandolins like eggrolls.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology
Unfortunately, Covid is not a one-time event. It could take years to completely eradicate it....
Knock it off.
Everybody knows O.J. Simpson did it, just as everybody knows the Chinese did it.
What exactly is the "it" that everybody knows the Chinese did?
Everybody knows O.J. Simpson did it, just as everybody knows the Chinese did it.
What exactly is the "it" that everybody knows the Chinese did?
Released the virus, of course. Or, as a minimum, responsible for the virus.
You are smarter than that, my friend. You certainly don't think I meant it is a one-time event. It will become seasonal, like the flu. But what is one-time event are the panic-porn numbers - 500K+ - that are not going to be repeated every year. Like the flu, it is going to take 30-50K every year and we won't even notice. Hopefully, the fascists (aka Democrats) won't stay that long in power to enforce idiotic masks and catastrophic lockdowns every year.
Like the flu, it is going to take 30-50K every year and we won't even notice.
Stay tuned, and until then, get vaccinated, stay masked, maintain physical distancing, and keep washing your hands.
The fact that you have responded in the alternative indicates that you do not know that China "released the virus". The "responsible for" alternative is certainly vague enough to cover a wide range of actions or inactions and levels of accountability or culpability. It really doesn't describe the "it" which you assert that everybody knows the Chinese "did".
Ok, Hairsplitter-In-Chief.
Who cares?
When you are dead, you are dead,
the fascists (aka Democrats)... idiotic masks and catastrophic lockdowns
Steer the thread back to the topic of “promising new coronavirus vaccine” or shuttle the overtly political to the one and only political thread.
Thanks.
You are smarter than that, my friend. You certainly don't think I meant it is a one-time event. It will become seasonal, like the flu. But what is one-time event are the panic-porn numbers - 500K+ - that are not going to be repeated every year. Like the flu, it is going to take 30-50K every year and we won't even notice. Hopefully, the fascists (aka Democrats) won't stay that long in power to enforce idiotic masks and catastrophic lockdowns every year.
How do you discuss policies without discussing politics? They go together
Just trying to work out what you actually are claiming - can you explain?
I am saying that China released the virus to see how quickly the West would resort to fascism. So far, they are succeeding splendidly. No amount of Chinese military aggression would have achieved it so quickly and thoroughly.
I am saying that China released the virus to see how quickly the West would resort to fascism. So far, they are succeeding splendidly. No amount of Chinese military aggression would have achieved it so quickly and thoroughly.
I am saying that China released the virus to see how quickly the West would resort to fascism. So far, they are succeeding splendidly. No amount of Chinese military aggression would have achieved it so quickly and thoroughly.
The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) for infectious diseases predicted that the number of daily reported cases could exceed 30,000 in the 14th week of the year starting April 12.
"An extrapolation of the trends shows that case numbers can be expected above the Christmas level from week 14 onwards," the RKI said in its current situation report. On Saturday, the number of COVID-19 cases rose by 12,674 and the death toll was up 239, with the number of cases per 100,000 over seven days jumping to 76.1 from 72.4.
Germany's death toll from the virus stands at 73,301, with a reported 2,558,455 infections.
German health experts warned on Saturday against any further easing of coronavirus lockdown measures as the number of cases dramatically increased.
Why would we ease up at the start of the vaccination process?
Over the past few years, Canada has seen many well-known retailers experience financial troubles. Especially now more than ever, with the ongoing pandemic, these companies have had to endure store closures or even shut down business permanently in 2021. Although, some storefront closings may be due to changing business models and customer demands, others have been because of the lack of business revenue.
Fascist? I thought we were all leftie communist "libtards". ...
Same difference. China is a fascist state now. America slowly growing into.
As is usually the case, it all depends on how you define fascism, but perhaps more importantly why you define it in the manner you do.When a government gets so powerful and the people lose more of their freedoms, then you have a system I don't think any of us would want to live in. Arguing about the definition of Fascism is really beside the point. And too late.
Arguing about the definition of Fascism is really beside the point.
Not really. For example, you are using the term fascist as a vague pejorative (a political system in which the "government gets so powerful and the people lose more of their freedoms" that "I don't think any of us would want to live in"), and not as a specific descriptor (a political system which has the following characteristics: [and then list them]). It is helpful to know that so we can carry on a discussion without talking past one another. So if I say Trump is a fascist, you and I may disagree on what the term means, and it would be helpful for me to explain what I mean. You might still disagree, but you and I would at least know what we are disagreeing about.I deliberately avoided an exact definition. People dispute what it actually means especially left vs. right. But it does include an authoritative or totalitarian regime that generally controls the populace and the levers of government and industry. I would rather discuss which methods of government lead to more or less freedom. That avoids the confusion of defining Fascism.
This Wiki essay reviews its various meanings. As you'll see, it's quite diverse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
I asked Slobodan what he meant by fascism because of the diversity of meanings you noted. You butted in and said definitions were beside the point. Then you provide a link to different definitions of fascism.Well, China's government controls their state and the people suffer from a loss of many freedoms. Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and other countries have oppressive governments as well. America is moving in that direction as we give up economic, political, and social decisions and control to the government. I think that's the point Slobodan was making. Arguing whether it's Fascist or some other term is a diversion to what's actually happening. We should stay focused on the effect, not a name.
Well, China's government controls their state and the people suffer from a loss of many freedoms. Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and other countries have oppressive governments as well. America is moving in that direction as we give up economic, political, and social decisions and control to the government. I think that's the point Slobodan was making. Arguing whether it's Fascist or some other term is a diversion to what's actually happening. We should stay focused on the effect, not a name.
As is usually the case, it all depends on how you define fascism, but perhaps more importantly why you define it in the manner you do.
This thread is suppose to be about the Novavax vaccine. It is not supposed to be about policy and politics. We should go back to the other thread.
Socialism, communism, and fascism have many things similar. While socialism and communism are generally rather well defined and have theoretical underpinnings via the works of Marx and Engels, in my view fascism is mostly defined via historical examples (Italy, Germany) and not exactly via a theory. One of the key differences between fascism vs. the other two is the relationship with private property. While socialism (and communism as its final stage) reject private property, fascism embraces it, especially in its corporate form. By that definition, China is today a fascist country: totalitarian, one-party regime with private property, corporations, and more billionaires than New York (I didn't check that).
We were discussing this recently.Just to clarify a point that had some heated arguments.
Most Americans who got first COVID-19 vaccine dose also got final shot - CDC
https://www.yahoo.com/news/most-americans-got-first-covid-173334070.html
On Thursday, I am getting my second Pfizer shot, exactly 21 days after the first. I have to give it to Serbian authorities for an extremely well organized vaccination campaign. It puts us at 1st or 2nd place in Europe, and 3rd or 4th in the world.Good luck. That's good news. I feel a lot safer since getting my second (Moderna). I'm getting my first haircut on Thursday after a year of growth. I have more hair laying on my shoulders than on the top. 8)
On Thursday, I am getting my second Pfizer shot, exactly 21 days after the first. I have to give it to Serbian authorities for an extremely well organized vaccination campaign. It puts us at 1st or 2nd place in Europe, and 3rd or 4th in the world.
Well, China's government controls their state and the people suffer from a loss of many freedoms. Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and other countries have oppressive governments as well.
You can now add the UK to the list, where the government is passing legislation that will make it illegal to protest in a way that "causes annoyance". The punishment will be up to 10 year in prison. Compare with the 5 years you get for rape...
You can now add the UK to the list, where the government is passing legislation that will make it illegal to protest in a way that "causes annoyance". The punishment will be up to 10 year in prison. Compare with the 5 years you get for rape.The US constitution's Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom of speech and freedom of assembly cannot be legislated away by Congress or a president or any of the 50 state governments. When I suggested a while back here that GB had jeopardy in this area, I was told by the moderator that I was wrong. Isn't there something in the Magna Carta or elsewhere that supersedes the ministers and the law will be found "unconstitutional"?
Sorry - nothing to do with Covid.
The US constitution's Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom of speech and freedom of assembly cannot be legislated away by Congress or a president or any of the 50 state governments. When I suggested a while back here that GB had jeopardy in this area, I was told by the moderator that I was wrong. Isn't there something in the Magna Carta or elsewhere that supersedes the ministers and the law will be found "unconstitutional"?
You can now add the UK to the list, where the government is passing legislation that will make it illegal to protest in a way that "causes annoyance". The punishment will be up to 10 year in prison. Compare with the 5 years you get for rape.
The maximum sentence is proposed to be 10 years in prison. The maximum sentence for rape is life in prison.My mistake. The average sentence for rape may be 8 years. I'm not sure that makes things much better.
S
Sorry - nothing to do with Covid.
My mistake. The average sentence for rape may be 8 years. I'm not sure that makes things much better.
Comparing the average sentence for one offence (by reference to an article just under 10 years old) to the proposed maximum sentence for another which is unconnected and doesn't yet exist is an odd way to advance an argument, but maybe it's the best you can manage.
How does this change anything, really?
Updated CDC guidance says 3 feet of physical distancing is safe in schools
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/19/health/cdc-physical-distancing/index.html
What change were you expecting? Until the infection rates dwindle down to very low levels, it's not over. Vaccinations are not a cure for the pandemic, they are an important tool, let's hope they are a decisive tool.Don't kids sit closer than 3 feet? I don't see how that changes anything.
Nothing wrong with making a comparison of current or proposed offenses, and their current or proposed punishments. Such a comparison can reveal the norms and values of a society.
How does this change anything, really?
Updated CDC guidance says 3 feet of physical distancing is safe in schools
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/19/health/cdc-physical-distancing/index.html
Don't kids sit closer than 3 feet? I don't see how that changes anything.
He compared the proposed penalty with data from ten years ago. How does that help?I think you have to have sentences relative to the crimes. You shouldn't send a pickpocket to jail longer than a guy who commits armed robbery. Of course, no one should go to jail because you find them "annoying". Go home and have a beer and lighten up.
S
What?Well, maybe someone measured the normal distance and saw it was 3 feet. Now they can open the schools yet make-believe they still have a rule.
Do they sit closer than 3 feet?
I think you have to have sentences relative to the crimes. You shouldn't send a pickpocket to jail longer than a guy who commits armed robbery. Of course, no one should go to jail because you find them "annoying". Go home and have a beer and lighten up.
He compared the proposed penalty with data from ten years ago. How does that help?
Don't condescend to me, Klein. You're obviously one of those who think rape can be trotted out to be used as a cheap comparison to any other crime. Some of us with more experience think differently.I'm Mr. Klein to you.
S
How does this change anything, really?
Updated CDC guidance says 3 feet of physical distancing is safe in schools
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/19/health/cdc-physical-distancing/index.html
Physical distancing helps limit the spread of COVID-19 – this means we keep a distance of at least 1m from each other and avoid spending time in crowded places or in groups.
The number of droplets produced by various activities (coughing, sneezing, breathing, phonation, etc.) is very variable. By using a laser light scattering method, 1 minute of loud speaking was estimated to produce thousands of fluid droplets from the oral cavity per second; of these, at least 1,000 droplet nuclei contain virions, and under the conditions of the experiment, they could remain airborne for more than 8 minutes. Notably, patients infected with influenza virus exhaled aerosol particles containing infectious viral particles more frequently after coughing than after a forceful exhalation. Individuals who produce much higher quantities of infectious aerosols may be more likely to spread infection and be responsible for the “super spreader effect” in which an individual is responsible for infecting an unusually large number of susceptible individuals. Other factors to consider in the spread of respiratory viral infections are the frequency of respiratory events, viral concentration in the exhaled fluid and its volume, and the duration of exposure to an infected individual. Because breathing and speaking occur more frequently than coughs and sneezes, they could have an important role in transmission of viral infections, especially from asymptomatic infected individuals.
Larger droplets settle quickly, whereas small airborne droplet nuclei are transported over longer distances by airflow. The distance droplets traverse depends on how forcefully a person coughs or sneezes. Large respiratory droplets containing pathogens like influenza can travel approximately 6 feet when a sick person coughs or sneezes. The aerosol expelled from the mouth during a cough emerges not as individual droplets but as a jet with a leading vortex that has properties similar to those of a puff from a pressurized metered-dose inhaler and can penetrate an impressive distance into the surrounding ambient air before finally dissipating. Thus, emissions from coughs and sneezes contain droplets of various sizes suspended in a multiphase turbulent buoyant cloud. Turbulence sweeps around smaller particles, and eddies within the cloud resuspend the particles so that they settle more slowly, with some particles traveling more than 8 feet horizontally through the air. Moreover, smaller droplets could spray 13–20 feet vertically in the air, which is theoretically high enough to enter and travel through ceiling ventilation systems in some buildings.
How does this change anything, really?
6ft or 2 m distance has been recommended from the beginning of the pandemic as the gold standard.The question, in a school environment, where kids sit next to one another and cough on each other and chat with each other before and after, how does three feet change anything? It might as well be 0". It seems like a sop, just something to satisfy politically without having any bearing on the spread of the disease.
However, in many situations even a 1m distance, especially for a short duration may be sufficient and of course, 3m or further is safer than 2m.
short article for dummies
https://www.who.int/westernpacific/emergencies/covid-19/information/physical-distancing
comprehensive and scientific explanation for others
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7462404/
It changes the topic of a discussion thread away from its purpose. That appears to suit those that have nothing useful to contribute and need something else to discuss.This is exactly what this thread is about. Discussing the benefits of different suggestions to help eliminate the spread. Are we only to agree with the poobahs? Should teachers and others who are exposed to the new variance accept them without question and risk their lives because you think we should all fall in line?
just another "Q" from the other thread. ;D
This is exactly what this thread is about. Discussing the benefits of different suggestions to help eliminate the spread.
Don't condescend to me, Klein. You're obviously one of those who think rape can be trotted out to be used as a cheap comparison to any other crime. Some of us with more experience think differently.
S
James Bond Q? Something else?That's what I was hoping for. But I think it's someone more sinister. Someone like Dr. No.
Yes. In addition, Chris Kern, who started this discussion topic, also brought in the J&J vaccine for discussion. That's the topic "Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine" — Novavax, J&J, perhaps others in trial or rolling out.The title of the thread is Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine. It should have been labelled Novavax Discovery. The named title is too open to stay so limited. How would anyone know it\'s about Novafax? Until you mentioned it, I didn't know or forgot.
It's not uncommon that someone diverts a topic for their own agenda. They then wait for others to take the bait. Their stinky cheese just sits in a trap to promote whatever they would prefer to discuss. I'm not looking to be their mouse.
The Astrazeneca vaccine has been in the news. Some countries suspended its use because of concerns over it causing blood clots. The European Medicines Agency has deemed it safe, but there is some concern that the public may have lost confidence in it.It'll be OK if they don't give them back.
https://apnews.com/article/eu-regulator-review-astrazeneca-shot-blood-clot-links-437190969ed016e40bdfcbb4b63fc7a9
The US is going to "loan" 4 million Astrazeneca doses to Canada and Mexico.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mexico-exclusi/exclusive-u-s-plans-to-send-four-million-doses-of-astrazeneca-vaccine-to-mexico-canada-official-idUSKBN2BA22S
The Astrazeneca vaccine has been in the news. Some countries suspended its use because of concerns over it causing blood clots. The European Medicines Agency has deemed it safe, but there is some concern that the public may have lost confidence in it.
https://apnews.com/article/eu-regulator-review-astrazeneca-shot-blood-clot-links-437190969ed016e40bdfcbb4b63fc7a9
The US is going to "loan" 4 million Astrazeneca doses to Canada and Mexico.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mexico-exclusi/exclusive-u-s-plans-to-send-four-million-doses-of-astrazeneca-vaccine-to-mexico-canada-official-idUSKBN2BA22S
Why Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot Covid-19 vaccine is a game changerThis article seems like it was written by a guy who owns Johnson and Johnson stock. First off, Moderna and Pfizer were approved months ago and over 70 million people just in the US have already gotten the earlier shots who are now immuned and adding to the herd immunity. J&J was just approved. People are just starting to get them.
March 1, 2021 - The vaccine is very effective — and most importantly, it only requires one shot.
https://www.vox.com/covid-19-vaccine-johnson-and-johnson-coronavirus (https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22301014/covid-19-vaccine-johnson-and-johnson-coronavirus)
Excerpts below...
One big reason to be excited about the new Johnson & Johnson vaccine for Covid-19, which was authorized by the Food and Drug Administration over the weekend for emergency use in the US: Unlike the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines already in use, it requires only one shot for full protection.
That’s a big deal. From a practical standpoint, it means that the new vaccine could really speed up America’s vaccination campaign — certainly more than another two-dose vaccine would. It also fixes a problem that’s long bedeviled medical treatments that require multiple doses: A lot of patients tend to drop off after the first appointment.
“Especially when you’re trying to think about a massive public health program like this vaccine rollout, a single-dose vaccine would have made it much, much simpler” if it were the first to get approval, Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told me.
Based on research that evaluated compliance with other multi-dose vaccines, patients are really, really bad at getting their second dose. Bad as in, as many as half of patients never do. Studies conducted in both the US and UK on the hepatitis B vaccine — which, like the Covid-19 vaccines, is supposed to have around a one-month period between the first and second doses — found that roughly 50 percent of patients failed to get their follow-up shot within a year after their first.
Maybe the numbers will look better for the Covid-19 vaccines. The stakes of a deadly pandemic are much higher, and perhaps people will react accordingly. But if a significant number of people fail to get their second shots, and the first dose of Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines proves to not be enough, that could doom the prospects of herd immunity, when enough of the population is vaccinated to stop the spread of the virus.
One of the most obvious benefits to a one-shot Covid-19 vaccine is it could dramatically speed up — literally double — the US’s vaccine rollout.
Now imagine that the US manages to get to 3 million shots a day (which no longer seems unlikely). At that rate, two-dose vaccines would get us to herd immunity at the end of the summer, and a one-shot–only approach would get us there before summer. If one-third of vaccines are one-shot versions, we reach herd immunity by mid-summer — leaving the rest of the summer to, hopefully, live much closer to normal than the last year.
But the numbers, at least, demonstrate the potential of a one-shot vaccine like Johnson & Johnson’s. It could speed up the vaccination process in the US by weeks or even months.
With thousands of people still dying every day from Covid-19, that boost could translate to upward of tens of thousands of lives saved.
Thanks for the link. Interesting article. I've been following the AstraZeneca story and other vaccines not authorized for use in the U.S. currently.I thought Biden was going to give other nations some of ours. Did he lie?
From the article you linked...
Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador had requested the vaccine. The administration official said the countries were in touch about the vaccine loan. “We’ve been working through the diplomatic channels,” he said.
Mexico has in recent weeks leaned increasingly on China and Russia to secure vaccines to carry out its inoculation plans.
I thought Biden was going to give other nations some of ours. Did he lie?
I don't know. You could probably look it up on Google if you are interested. Or you could just assume he did. It's up to you.Biden does not intend to give any doses to any other peoples until Americans get their doses. His campaign promise was a lie.
Biden does not intend to give any doses to any other peoples until Americans get their doses. His campaign promise was a lie.
The Astrazeneca vaccine has been in the news. Some countries suspended its use because of concerns over it causing blood clots. The European Medicines Agency has deemed it safe, but there is some concern that the public may have lost confidence in it.
https://apnews.com/article/eu-regulator-review-astrazeneca-shot-blood-clot-links-437190969ed016e40bdfcbb4b63fc7a9
The US is going to "loan" 4 million Astrazeneca doses to Canada and Mexico.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mexico-exclusi/exclusive-u-s-plans-to-send-four-million-doses-of-astrazeneca-vaccine-to-mexico-canada-official-idUSKBN2BA22S
What exactly did Biden say during the campaign about sharing vaccine doses with other countries?He implied he would rejoin WHO (which he did) and be involved in the world as a partner country that helped out others regarding Covid vaccine. Giving Astra Zeneca to Mexicans and Canadians, which we can't use, and promising we'll give other good vaccines after all Americans get theirs, doesn't sound like much of a sacrifice. I wonder what he'll charge them?
Biden does not intend to give any doses to any other peoples until Americans get their doses. His campaign promise was a lie.
What exactly did Biden say during the campaign about sharing vaccine doses with other countries?
He implied he would rejoin WHO (which he did) and be involved in the world as a partner country that helped out others regarding Covid vaccine. Giving Astra Zeneca to Mexicans and Canadians, which we can't use, and promising we'll give other good vaccines after all Americans get theirs, doesn't sound like much of a sacrifice. I wonder what he'll charge them?
I'll ask again. What did he say during the campaign about sharing vaccine doses with other countries that was a lie?He promised to set up a $25 billion dollar plan to distribute the vaccine when approved. They were to go to Americans and the rest of the world. (This was recorded in Jul 8, 2020 obviously before any vaccines were approved. ) Giving away Astra Zeneca which we can't use or waiting until the end of the year after all Americans are vaccinated, which are what Biden is promising now, does not seem to be in the spirit of help he offered last July.
The first two are at 95% while J&J is somewhere between 10-20% less effective.
I've already posted information on the difference between efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines. They are not the same thing.The bottom line is that J&J was rated at 75-85% and Moderna and Pfizer were rated at 94-95%. Which camera would you prefer with similar ratings?
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-vaccine-efficacy (https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-vaccine-efficacy)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/vaccines/effectiveness/why-measure-effectiveness (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/why-measure-effectiveness.html)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/vaccines/effectiveness/how-they-work (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/how-they-work.html)
I also posted information on why it's foolish to try to compare efficacy with the limited data from separate clinical trials of different vaccines; conducted at different times; in different places; with different populations; with different protocols; with different virus variants. Only a head-to-head clinical trial designed for that purpose would provide comparative results.
Providing this information to you has had 0% efficacy or effectiveness and the effort has now been abandoned.
He promised to set up a $25 billion dollar plan to distribute the vaccine when approved. They were to go to Americans and the rest of the world.
The COVID relief plan passed earlier this month contained approximately $93 billion for vaccine distribution, testing, contact tracing, surveillance, and the public health workforce. In February, the US pledged $4 billion to the WHO to purchase vaccines for distribution globally.WHO can use the $4 billion to purchase the Chinese or Russian vaccines which I wouldn't use to develop my film (much less put into my arms). But he's not giving away any of our approved vaccines until every last American is vaccinated. Very generous of him. And very unlike his promises and intent before the election. Should we start a lie list for Biden as we had for Trump?
The bottom line is that J&J was rated at 75-85% and Moderna and Pfizer were rated at 94-95%. Which camera would you prefer with similar ratings?
And very unlike his promises and intent before the election.
Should we start a lie list for Biden as we had for Trump?
Given the fact that you can't understand the basic terminology, methodology, or variables involved in vaccine assessment; there's no point in discussing that topic. As for cameras compared to vaccines—the best vaccine to take is the one that's available at the time—the best camera to capture an image is the one that's available at the time.How smart do you have to be to know that a vaccine rated at 94/95% is better than one rated at 75/85%?
How smart do you have to be to know that a vaccine rated at 94/95% is better than one rated at 75/85%?
Given the fact that you can't understand the basic terminology, methodology, or variables involved in vaccine assessment..
WHO can use the $4 billion to purchase the Chinese or Russian vaccines which I wouldn't use to develop my film (much less put into my arms). But he's not giving away any of our approved vaccines until every last American is vaccinated. Very generous of him. And very unlike his promises and intent before the election. Should we start a lie list for Biden as we had for Trump?
... the Chinese or Russian vaccines which I wouldn't use to develop my film (much less put into my arms).
Why?
It may be more a matter of willingness to learn and a modicum of attention in order to achieve a basic level of comprehension. That's not happening and there is no expectation that will change.Thanks for your advice on life.
Who the fuck is "sf" to come here anonymously and pontificate?
There is no single culprit. Rather, a cascade of small decisions have led to increasingly long delays. The bloc was comparatively slow to negotiate contracts with drugmakers. Its regulators were cautious and deliberative in approving some vaccines. Europe also bet on vaccines that did not pan out or, significantly, had supply disruptions. And national governments snarled local efforts in red tape.
But the biggest explanation, the one that has haunted the bloc for months, is as much philosophical as it was operational. European governments are often seen in the United States as free-spending, liberal bastions, but this time it was Washington that threw billions at drugmakers and cosseted their business.
Brussels, by comparison, took a conservative, budget-conscious approach that left the open market largely untouched. And it has paid for it. . . .
The bloc shopped for vaccines like a customer. The United States basically went into business with the drugmakers, spending much more heavily to accelerate vaccine development, testing and production.
The New York Times has published an interesting piece (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/20/world/europe/europe-vaccine-rollout-astrazeneca.html?smid=em-share) describing why experts believe the coronavirus vaccine rollout in Europe has been slower than here in the States and in Britain, with reporting from Belgium, Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.The portion you quoted below was the results of Trump's Operation Warp Speed. It would have been nice for the NY Times to mention that. Of course, they intend to give all the credit to Biden.
Nevertheless, the Times article points out, "[c]ompared with nearly all the rest of the world, the European Union is in an admirable position" because it should be possible to vaccinate 70 percent of the population by this summer.
There is no single culprit. Rather, a cascade of small decisions have led to increasingly long delays. The bloc was comparatively slow to negotiate contracts with drugmakers. Its regulators were cautious and deliberative in approving some vaccines. Europe also bet on vaccines that did not pan out or, significantly, had supply disruptions. And national governments snarled local efforts in red tape.
But the biggest explanation, the one that has haunted the bloc for months, is as much philosophical as it was operational. European governments are often seen in the United States as free-spending, liberal bastions, but this time it was Washington that threw billions at drugmakers and cosseted their business.
Brussels, by comparison, took a conservative, budget-conscious approach that left the open market largely untouched. And it has paid for it. . . .
The bloc shopped for vaccines like a customer. The United States basically went into business with the drugmakers, spending much more heavily to accelerate vaccine development, testing and production.
Who the hell are you to think you can swear at me?
S
The New York Times has published an interesting piece (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/20/world/europe/europe-vaccine-rollout-astrazeneca.html?smid=em-share) describing why experts believe the coronavirus vaccine rollout in Europe has been slower than here in the States and in Britain, with reporting from Belgium, Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Nevertheless, the Times article points out, "[c]ompared with nearly all the rest of the world, the European Union is in an admirable position" because it should be possible to vaccinate 70 percent of the population by this summer.
I am posting under my real name. . . . Newbie, anonymous smart asses, however, get less respect from me.
The necessity for people to use real names seems to have been considered here: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=131904.msg1131072#new. I don't see you swearing at TechTalk or jeremyrh (who even uses a stolen comedian's photograph).I can swear at whomever I want (although what I said was not swearing at you, but a rhetorical expression).
However, I am posting under my real name, have been a member here since 2005, and know other members quite well, so I have good reasons not to swear at them. Newbie, anonymous smart asses, however, get less respect from me.
Agree. Posting political views with a pseudonym really is egregious behavior.
... comparisons with rape...
???
P.S. re jeremyrh... while we are often at the opposing political ends, he and I get quite nicely along in PM exchange and would surely enjoy a pint if we ever get together. I also happen to know his real name. But that relationship has been built over time. You, however, started rather aggressively in the very first two or three posts. Perhaps, in due time, we can also get along better.
The necessity for people to use real names seems to have been considered here: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=131904.msg1131072#new. I don't see you swearing at TechTalk or jeremyrh (who even uses a stolen comedian's photograph).
The derogatory term "smart ass" is an unjustified attack on me, without any attempt to address my argument.
Some of us, and with good reason, find the typically male resort to comparisons with rape as a supposedly kill-all argument extremely offensive.
S
That's just a standard smartass technique of the left nuts - question what the definition of "is" is. And condescension.
Agree. Posting political views with a pseudonym really is egregious behavior.
..albeit a behavior with a long and distinguished history. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/08/anonymous-criticism-helped-make-america-great/)
A quote from the article you linked...
"As Madison, Hamilton and Jay published the Federalist essays, they protected their identities closely, using the pseudonym “Publius” and denying their involvement to all but their closest associates. Yet some contemporaries quickly and accurately guessed their identities.
Their use of a pseudonym was probably not intended to avoid detection or retribution. Rather, they probably hoped that their pseudonym would focus their readers’ attention on their arguments rather than their personalities."
Of course, They weren't alone in their use of pseudonyms...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the_American_Constitutional_debates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the_American_Constitutional_debates)
Facebook Inc (FB.O) said on Monday it took down 1.3 billion fake accounts between October and December and that it had over 35,000 people working on tackling misinformation on its platform.
The company also removed more than 12 million pieces of content about COVID-19 and vaccines that global health experts flagged as misinformation, it said in a blog post.
A quote from the article you linked...I doubt if there are any Madisons or Hamiltons posting here.
"As Madison, Hamilton and Jay published the Federalist essays, they protected their identities closely, using the pseudonym “Publius” and denying their involvement to all but their closest associates. Yet some contemporaries quickly and accurately guessed their identities.
Their use of a pseudonym was probably not intended to avoid detection or retribution. Rather, they probably hoped that their pseudonym would focus their readers’ attention on their arguments rather than their personalities."
Of course, They weren't alone in their use of pseudonyms...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the_American_Constitutional_debates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the_American_Constitutional_debates)
Some posts submitted by anonymous posters are superior to rushed tripes contrived by posters under real names.How can they decide what's misinformation when experts themselves disagree on practically every subject if not all? Plus knowledge is changing constantly and being upgraded. Is it 6 feet or 3 feet that's right? Will inflation stir the economy or just cause the price of everything to go up?
On the other hand, some newbie accounts are obviously fake or troll accounts. Facebook stated that they removed just in the last quarter of 2020 1.3 billion fake accounts.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/facebook-disables-13-billion-fake-accounts-oct-dec-last-year-2021-03-22/
Facebook stated that they removed just in the last quarter of 2020 1.3 billion fake accounts.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/facebook-disables-13-billion-fake-accounts-oct-dec-last-year-2021-03-22/
Your link didn't work for me. This link should work.FB is worried about losing its monopoly and be broken apart. So they're sucking up to Democratic control committees to show they're "woke". They're cowards. The last time the CEO was up in the Capitol, he defending not getting involved in these things. He took a lot of static for supporting free speech. So he's worried. Money talks. He's backing off that position showing he'll back democratic positions and social policy as long as they don't hurt him and his company. What a disgrace. He's selling out.
https://www.reuters.com/article/Facebook says took down 1.3 billion fake accounts in Oct-Dec (https://www.reuters.com/article/facebook-misinformation-int-idUSKBN2BE12M)
(Reuters) - Facebook Inc said on Monday it took down 1.3 billion fake accounts between October and December and that it had over 35,000 people working on tackling misinformation on its platform.
The company also removed more than 12 million pieces of content about COVID-19 and vaccines that global health experts flagged as misinformation, it said in a blog post.
False claims and conspiracies about the coronavirus vaccines have proliferated on social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter during the pandemic.
Facebook’s disclosure of data on misinformation comes ahead of an inspection by the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce into how technology platforms including Facebook are tackling misinformation.
U.S. says Russian-backed outlets spread COVID-19 vaccine 'disinformation' - March 7, 2021The article didn't say what the disinformation was. It could have just been typical competitive arguments whose products are better just like American advertisers do. It would have been nice if the article gave examples. Russian vaccines are not being used in America. So it would have to be that they're being sold in the rest of the world against Moderna, Pfizer, and Chinese vaccines. There's a lot of profit to be made. So competition is normal. I would hope that American organizations will be trying to diminish our competitor's ads. By the way, the article says that the Russian product was peer-reviewed at 92% effective. That's less than Moderna and Pfizer but more than J&J and Astra Zeneca. Not that I would use it, but it seems the Russian version is pretty good.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-covid-disinformation/u-s-says-russian-backed-outlets-spread-covid-19-vaccine-disinformation (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-covid-disinformation/u-s-says-russian-backed-outlets-spread-covid-19-vaccine-disinformation-idUSKBN2B0016)
Excerpt below...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has identified three online publications directed by Russia’s intelligence services that it says are seeking to undermine COVID-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna, a State Department spokeswoman said on Sunday.
The outlets “spread many types of disinformation, including about both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, as well as international organizations, military conflicts, protests, and any divisive issue that they can exploit,” the spokeswoman said.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) first reported on the identification of the alleged campaign on Sunday. A Kremlin spokesman denied the U.S. claim Russia was spreading false information about vaccines to the WSJ.
Russia’s embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The article didn't say what the disinformation was.
How can they decide what's misinformation when experts themselves disagree on practically every subject if not all? Plus knowledge is changing constantly and being upgraded. Is it 6 feet or 3 feet that's right? Will inflation stir the economy or just cause the price of everything to go up?
new study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases suggests that 3 feet may be as safe as 6 feet, so long as everyone is masked. The authors compared infection rates at Massachusetts schools that required at least 3 feet of distancing with those that required at least 6 feet, and found no significant difference in the coronavirus case rates among students or staff in the two cohorts.
COVID-19 Vaccine Myths Are Spreading Thanks to Russian Propaganda: What to Know - March 12, 2021Your article confirmed my guess. It is because different manufacturers are competing with each other. Not much different than the misinformation you read in photography forums about Nikon vs. Canon vs Leica vs Sony, each highlighting or downright lying about the other's camera's problems.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-vaccine-myths-are-spreading-thanks-to-russian-propaganda-what-to-know (https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-vaccine-myths-are-spreading-thanks-to-russian-propaganda-what-to-know)
The websites involved have questioned the efficacy of the vaccines, exaggerated the risk of side effects, and claimed that the vaccines were rushed through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process, the WSJ reported.
This misinformation campaign comes as the vaccine rollout continues across the United States. Recent polling, though, suggests that public willingness to be vaccinated is on the rise.
Still, health officials face an ongoing fight against the spread of COVID-19 misinformation — some of it perpetuated byTrusted Source the algorithms of social media sites such as Instagram.
3ft is a minimum safe distance, 6 ft is recommended and 8ft is even better.That's not what the study you quoted said. If we go by your "rule", schools would stay closed indefinitely.
Staying at home is the best.
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/15/977564878/cdc-looks-at-whether-3-feet-instead-of-6-is-safe-for-schools-social-distancing
That's not what the study you quoted said. If we go by your "rule", schools would stay closed indefinitely.
quote from your article: new study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases suggests that 3 feet may be as safe as 6 feet, so long as everyone is masked. The authors compared infection rates at Massachusetts schools that required at least 3 feet of distancing with those that required at least 6 feet, and found no significant difference in the coronavirus case rates among students or staff in the two cohorts.
More health problems from the shutdown. Even I put on an extra 5 pounds. Isn't helping my back problem when I have to carry heavy camera equipment.
How Much Weight Did We Gain During Lockdowns? 2 Pounds a Month, Study Hints
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/health/virus-weight-gain.html
Extra weight might hamper also sex life.Oh. So that's the problem.
Russians again!?
Hahahaha... you guys never learn.
Yeah! Putin and his pals are comedy gold! I mean, their efforts to undermine democracy in the U.S. and Europe—HeeHee! And when they put their critics in prison or assassinate them—HoHoHo! Invading their neighbors causing death and destruction—HaHaHa! Just looking at how Putin and his corrupt, criminal, comedic, cronies steal the resources and wealth in their country and launder the money all over the world is always good for at least a chuckle or two.99% of the propaganda was spread by Democratic politicians
Putin probably polished his comedic talents when he was in the KGB. I hear he used to crack up the Stasi in East Germany with his jokes! I'm sure that he'll give you plenty of laughs and giggles into the foreseeable future! It's nice to know that his attempt to undermine the health and safety of Americans, by spreading propaganda about vaccines, has brought a smile to your face. Thanks for teaching us how to laugh about it!
Yeah! Putin and his pals are comedy gold! I mean, their efforts to undermine democracy in the U.S. and Europe—HeeHee! And when they put their critics in prison or assassinate them—HoHoHo! Invading their neighbors causing death and destruction—HaHaHa! Just looking at how Putin and his corrupt, criminal, comedic, cronies steal the resources and wealth in their country and launder the money all over the world is always good for at least a chuckle or two.I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it. Were the Democrats colluding with the Russians?
Putin probably polished his comedic talents when he was in the KGB. I hear he used to crack up the Stasi in East Germany with his jokes! I'm sure that he'll give you plenty of laughs and giggles into the foreseeable future! It's nice to know that his attempt to undermine the health and safety of Americans, by spreading propaganda about vaccines, has brought a smile to your face. Thanks for teaching us how to laugh about it!
Is this Russian propaganda?
It's just the opposite. It's transparency...
Yeah! Putin and his pals are comedy gold! I mean, their efforts to undermine democracy in the U.S. and Europe—HeeHee! And when they put their critics in prison or assassinate them—HoHoHo! Invading their neighbors causing death and destruction—HaHaHa! Just looking at how Putin and his corrupt, criminal, comedic, cronies steal the resources and wealth in their country and launder the money all over the world is always good for at least a chuckle or two.
Putin probably polished his comedic talents when he was in the KGB. I hear he used to crack up the Stasi in East Germany with his jokes! I'm sure that he'll give you plenty of laughs and giggles into the foreseeable future! It's nice to know that his attempt to undermine the health and safety of Americans, by spreading propaganda about vaccines, has brought a smile to your face. Thanks for teaching us how to laugh about it!
I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it.
;D ;D ;D
Oh, man, what's your real name, Spin Doctor?
But if the same info came attributed to, say, anonymous sources instead of Dr. Fauxi, it would have been labeled "Russian propaganda," right?
;D ;D ;D
Have you tried a career in stand up?
I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it. Were the Democrats colluding with the Russians?
Your article confirmed my guess.
It is because different manufacturers are competing with each other. Not much different than the misinformation you read in photography forums about Nikon vs. Canon vs Leica vs Sony, each highlighting or downright lying about the other's camera's problems.
The article didn't say what the disinformation was. It could have just been typical competitive arguments whose products are better just like American advertisers do....
Trump was ahead of this time.
Israel and New Zealand Permit Sale of SaNOtize’s Breakthrough Anti-Viral Nasal Spray
“The product we have developed, which kills viruses in the upper nasal pathways, will be delivered via a nasal spray bottle that contains a month’s supply for an individual,” said Dr. Gilly Regev, the Israeli CEO and co-founder of SaNOtize. “We look forward to updating the public in Israel and New Zealand with details on when Enovid will hit store shelves.”
Last week, SaNOtize and Ashford and St Peter’s Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in Surrey, UK announced results of clinical trials indicating that NONS represents a safe and effective antiviral treatment that could prevent the transmission of COVID-19, shorten its course, and reduce the severity of symptoms and damage in those already infected. The study has been submitted to a leading medical journal for review and publication.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210322005226/en/Israel-and-New-Zealand-Permit-Sale-of-SaNOtize%E2%80%99s-Breakthrough-Anti-Viral-Nasal-Spray
I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it. Were the Democrats colluding with the Russians?
... the material that you find funny. Not many people would find it so amusing.
Maybe because I speak Russian, spent eight years in Moscow (working for American companies), from Yeltsin to Putin... maybe because of that I have a more realistic grasp of Russian affairs than someone who reads about it.
Maybe because I speak Russian
spent eight years in Moscow (working for American companies), from Yeltsin to Putin... maybe because of that I have a more realistic grasp of Russian affairs than someone who reads about it.
I seem to remember you claiming this before and failing to substantiate it when you were challenged. Got any more this time around?There was a constant drum beat before the election to make Trump's Operation Warp Speed look ineffective. Heck, you still claim Trump had nothing to do with its success. You want to have it both ways. Frankly, you are distorting it now as well as then. Your attacks on the vaccines undermined many Amricans support of it.
The practice of immunisation dates back hundreds of years. Buddhist monks drank snake venom to confer immunity to snake bite and variolation (smearing of a skin tear with cowpox to confer immunity to smallpox) was practiced in 17th century China. Edward Jenner is considered the founder of vaccinology in the West in 1796, after he inoculated a 13 year-old-boy with vaccinia virus (cowpox), and demonstrated immunity to smallpox. In 1798, the first smallpox vaccine was developed. Over the 18th and 19th centuries, systematic implementation of mass smallpox immunisation culminated in its global eradication in 1979.
... what’s your take on how Russia is operating here?...
The same thing we are doing there. And in the other 193 countries in the world. Interfering in internal affairs. Except we do it more aggressively and on a grander scale. Bomb countries into submission. Change regimes. Assassinate foreign leaders. Target civilians.In addition to Russia and America having to deal with radical Islam, is the geopolitical threat of China. Russia could be our ally for that as a nuclear power and being located along China's northern border. Instead, because of the stupid domestic politics in the USA against Trump for five years, we've driven them to be friends with China. Now, how dumb is that?
One of the most attractive electoral promises made by Trump was better relations with Moscow. We are not the same ideological enemies as during the Cold War. We have the same enemy today: radical Islam. There are still certain geopolitical realities where we have different interests, so the best strategy is to treat them as frenemies. It doesn’t help that we continue encroaching them years after the fall of the Soviet empire and Warsaw Pact.
That there is certain bipartisan agreement on Russia is not a surprise. Many Republicans represent the military industrial complex, which thrives on a permanent bogeyman. Many intelligence agencies were wrong before. They also depend on constantly amplifying threats, real or mythical.
You might remember that I spent seven years working in the American embassy in Belgrade in the ‘80s, and had a front row seat to how events were misinterpreted by mid-rank diplomats I worked with. Or their intellectual level and “expertise.”
#orangemanbad #russiabad
A useful video that might help people understand what vaccine efficacy numbers mean and what they don't mean.The video does not support that J&J and other vaccines with lower efficacy rates are just as good. In fact, they support a position that they don't know how good they really are for the normal Covid 19 we have in the USA. This is so because the test for J&J was made in South Africa and other areas where a variant was spreading. Since Moderna and Pfizer were not tested there, the video claims we don't know how effective they would against the variants. Of course, that works both ways. So J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA. So why would you take J&J when you don't really know how effective it is in America?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A
The whole video seems to be political in trying to get J&J and other less effective vaccines accepted from an overall population standpoint.
It's not remotely political, it's simply explaining what the efficacy numbers are and how they were obtained.Who produced the video and why? When you click on the link there titled Learn More, you go to the CDC website who has taken a political position that all vaccines are equal. That's false.
Who produced the video and why? When you click on the link there titled Learn More, you go to the CDC website who has taken a political position that all vaccines are equal. That's false.
To me, it seems they were trying to convince people J&J is just as effective. For the people who didn't listen to what they really were saying, it seems that way. But their statements actually prove the opposite or at a minimum, do not prove its effectiveness in America one way or the other because they didn't test it much on the American common strain but rather on a foreign variant.
The video does not support that J&J and other vaccines with lower efficacy rates are just as good. In fact, they support a position that they don't know how good they really are for the normal Covid 19 we have in the USA. This is so because the test for J&J was made in South Africa and other areas where a variant was spreading. Since Moderna and Pfizer were not tested there, the video claims we don't know how effective they would against the variants. Of course, that works both ways. So J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA. So why would you take J&J when you don't really know how effective it is in America?
The other argument the video made is that all vaccines seem to reach 100% effectiveness for suffering less and living should you get it and go to the hospital. The point they're stressing the herd immunity overall and not the individual. Again, from a personal standpoint, this still makes Moderna and Pfizer more effective since it has a supposed higher rate of immunity against getting it in the first place. I'd rather not get infected than be assured that should I get infected because I'm using J&J, I won't die but still need hospitalization.
The whole video seems to be political in trying to get J&J and other less effective vaccines accepted from an overall population standpoint. I understand that might be true. But still, from a personal standpoint, in America, you'd want to take the ones that have the higher effectiveness especially because they were the ones tested against Covid 19 and J&J wasn't.
J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA.
Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions.
Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions. Then they can chose J&J if they agree with you and Moderna or Pfizer if they agree with me. Simple.
I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it.
I seem to remember you claiming this before and failing to substantiate it when you were challenged. Got any more this time around?
Democrats face quandary on vaccine support as election nears
President Donald Trump is escalating his promise for a coronavirus vaccine before Election Day.
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-virus-outbreak-elections-public-health-archive-8790eda23e94aec7cf7b4beaaa67ceaf
Please tell us what in the article that you linked confirms your false assertion that "democrats for political reasons" told "the world how they wouldn't take" "Trump's vaccine". I'll save you some time... absolutely nothing.You deliberately clipped out the part of my response that refuted your point. Let me repeat it here. and the fact is he did release effetive vaccines in time. Democrats were claiming it couldn't be done in two years, maybe by Spring when the fact is 20,000,000 shots were given befor Biden became president.
The push back was against Trump claims that vaccines could start shipping before election day and the distrust expressed was in regard to what Trump was saying—NOT the vaccines, which hadn't completed their FDA evaluation or received authorization for use.
You deliberately...
Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.
The necessity for people to use real names seems to have been considered here: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=131904.msg1131072#new. I don't see you swearing at TechTalk or jeremyrh (who even uses a stolen comedian's photograph).
Slobo - interested in your "insider's take" on this new item:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/25/i-am-begging-you-get-the-vaccine-pockets-of-fear-emerge-in-serbia
Don't kids sit closer than 3 feet? I don't see how that changes anything.
The CDC had to "say" something to justify their existence.My question was rhetorical. Of course, I agree with you.
So, it looks like 200 million shots will be administered in the first 100 days of Biden's presidency.Oh Les stop it. The only reason the vaccines are ahead of schedule is because of Trump's Operation Warp Speed. 20,000,000 shots were already injected by Jan 20 on Trump's last day in office.
Under promised and over delivered, unlike many things over promised and under delivered under the previous president.
Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.
Gratefully,
Dale
Didn't last, did it?
S
The CDC had to "say" something to justify their existence.
Oh Les stop it. The only reason the vaccines are ahead of schedule is because of Trump's Operation Warp Speed. 20,000,000 shots were already injected by Jan 20 on Trump's last day in office.
Warp speed or not, 20 million shots in the two months prior to Jan 20, or 180 million in the last 2 months are remarkable achievements.They were all in the pipeline from orders from Warp Speed. After all the Decmorts laughing at Trump's promise to get the vaccines out by the end of the year, for Biden to take credit and for you to acknowledge his claim is incredible. Meanwhile, in two months, Biden has completely reversed the lid Trump put onto illegals coming across the border. Even the Mexican President blames him for the crisis.
Oh Les stop it. The only reason the vaccines are ahead of schedule is because of Trump's Operation Warp Speed. 20,000,000 shots were already injected by Jan 20 on Trump's last day in office.Even Macron admits that America had the vision last summer to go for the stars in developing vaccines.
Even Macron admits that America had the vision last summer to go for the stars in developing vaccines.
“We didn’t think it would happen that quickly... You can give that to the Americans, as early as the summer of 2020 they said: let’s pull out all the stops and do it,” Macron said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccines-macron-idUKKBN2BG33P
I'm surprised that most countries didn't do a proper planning. They had full year to plan it. But what can you expect from the government employees and career bureaucrats?
I'm surprised that most countries didn't do a proper planning. They had full year to plan it. But what can you expect from the government employees and career bureaucrats?It required a leader with foresight and willingness to act.
It required a leader with foresight and willingness to act.
It required a leader with foresight and willingness to act.
And what would you say is your most valuable contribution to the discussion of new vaccines?
... why the first ever mRNA vaccines were ready for development and use just when the world needed them. It seems like their development came overnight, in reality they have been in development for several decades.
Enough said:
Clearly unequivocal proof that MASKS CAUSE COVID.
Also, going on boats causes summer, and falling leaves causes snow.
Enough said:
You are smarter than that, buddy ;)
Enough said:
Not even remotely enough.
She doesn't provide much confidence as a CDC director. "I'm scared," she says.
Covid-19: CDC head warns of 'impending doom' in US
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56572452
Meanwhile, the CDC director says:
CDC Director: Vaccinated People Don't Carry Virus, Don't Get Sick
People who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 are not carriers of the virus and don't have symptoms from the disease, according to a new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Our data from the CDC today suggest that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said Monday on MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show."
"And that it’s not just in the clinical trials, but it’s also in real-world data," she said.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/ny-woman-contracts-coronavirus-month-after-covid-19-vaccination-report-says
Meanwhile, the CDC director says:I forgot to add the link to my original post as I normally do. This is it. It's from Newsmax, but basically, the same story others have linked to in other articles.
CDC Director: Vaccinated People Don't Carry Virus, Don't Get Sick
People who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 are not carriers of the virus and don't have symptoms from the disease, according to a new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Our data from the CDC today suggest that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said Monday on MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show."
"And that it’s not just in the clinical trials, but it’s also in real-world data," she said.
What is missing is the inoculation status of all of the family members and others she was around within the last 4-5 days or even a week.The article says she only got a mild bout of the virus. That's what the "experts" are saying. That even if you get the virus, it's like a common cold. You don't need the ICU and you don't die. So the vaccine is really a great thing for the small percentage of people who will get Covid despite getting their shots.
This appears to be about getting the infection after inoculation rather than spreading the virus after inoculation.
What i apparently was not clear about in my comment about inoculation status was where/who she was infected by. As written in the article, it implied that other members of the funeral party that she was in contact with were the source of her infection as they tested positive for having been infected at some time.Just to be clear to other readers. There's nothing in the article that indicated that someone who was vaccinated passed the virus to someone else or could do this.
It would be equally likely that she was infected elsewhere since this is transmitted by air.
I was responding to earlier posts that seemed to be using this example somehow to show that if one had been vaccinated one could infect others.
Just to be clear to other readers. There's nothing in the article that indicated that someone who was vaccinated passed the virus to someone else or could do this.
Which, of course, is a very real possibility. Being vaccinated doesn't prevent you from being infected, it just mitigates the consequences. If you are infected, you can pass it on as well.
The benefit of vaccination is that, supposedly, a vaccine-induced immune reaction would be faster and more potent, thus killing more viruses quicker. As a result, even if you infect others, it would be with a smaller viral load. Not unlike if you are asymptomatic.
Nearly a third of people who have been in hospital suffering from Covid-19 are readmitted for further treatment within four months of being discharged, and one in eight of patients dies in the same period, doctors have found. The striking long-term impact of the disease has prompted doctors to call for ongoing tests and monitoring of former coronavirus patients to detect early signs of organ damage and other complications caused by the virus.
Guardian reports that one third of C19 patients who were treated in the hospital are re-admitted within 4 months back to the hospital. Very likely, they have infected others while there were re-infected.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/01/almost-third-of-uk-covid-hospital-patients-readmitted-within-four-months
... one in eight of patients dies...
That's just more commie panic porn. There is no chance in hell that ⅓ are reinfected.
Note that when someone dies within days of weeks after being vaccinated, it is dismissed as "coincidental" (i.e., they would have died anyway, from old age or underlying illness). But when someone dies within four months after recovering from Covid... it is a long-term Covid damage(!) ;D ;D ;D
Which, of course, is a very real possibility. Being vaccinated doesn't prevent you from being infected, it just mitigates the consequences. If you are infected, you can pass it on as well.There was nothing in the article stating retransmission happened although the poster implied the article stated that. I was correcting his statement.
The benefit of vaccination is that, supposedly, a vaccine-induced immune reaction would be faster and more potent, thus killing more viruses quicker. As a result, even if you infect others, it would be with a smaller viral load. Not unlike if you are asymptomatic.
There was nothing in the article stating retransmission happened although the poster implied the article stated that. I was correcting his statement.
Is your primary expertise in panic, porn, or pathology? If it isn't pathology, I would give considerably more weight to the opinions of doctors and research scientists.Which experts are we to believe? One of the major problems is the average person on the street reads these headlines and is just more confused every day. Evidence supposedly shifts and we go back and forth opening businesses then closing them again only to open them again. Who is right? Experts are mistrusted. On top of "no-nothing" experts, you got politicians playing politics. People get fed up.
The poster said: "This appears to be about getting the infection after inoculation rather than spreading the virus after inoculation." You corrected nothing. You simply didn't understand the statement.Here is my post and his. There were a number of posts. You can't take one out of context.
Look up what "rather than" means.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than)
What is missing is the inoculation status of all of the family members and others she was around within the last 4-5 days or even a week.
This appears to be about getting the infection after inoculation rather than spreading the virus after inoculation.The article says she only got a mild bout of the virus. That's what the "experts" are saying. That even if you get the virus, it's like a common cold. You don't need the ICU and you don't die. So the vaccine is really a great thing for the small percentage of people who will get Covid despite getting their shots.
Also, your comment is erroneous that she passed the infection along to others or can be passed along even if you had the vaccine is not confirmed in the article. In fact, only she said that with out proof or knowledge that she passed it to anyone else. Could you copy here where in the article it says says anyone else got the disease from her?
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1213313#msg1213313 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1213313#msg1213313)
You skipped the original post from degrub and your response that indicated you didn't understand his statement. He then had to post a reply in an effort for you to understand what he originally posted.You're beating this thing to death to prove a minor and silly point. Who cares if your interpretation differs from mine? We've passed that issue of what someone said about some insignificant article that proved nothing. The most important thing now is that the CDC director said you can't spread the disease if you got the shots. The earlier discussion points are outdated.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1213313#msg1213313 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1213313#msg1213313)
You called "erroneous" a statement ("that she passed the infection along to others") which no one made.
Which experts are we to believe?
Experts are mistrusted.
You're beating this thing to death to prove a minor and silly point. Who cares if your interpretation differs from mine? We've passed that issue of what someone said about some insignificant article that proved nothing. The most important thing now is that the CDC director said you can't spread the disease if you got the shots. The earlier discussion points are outdated.
The ones with the most knowledge and experience in the relevant field.If this was true, no one would bother getting a second opinion of medical advice from a doctor. We'd accept the advice from the first expert.
Mostly by those that lack a basic understanding of science, making them an easy target for those with an agenda and desire to spread confusion and distrust of science.
If this was true, no one would bother getting a second opinion of medical advice from a doctor. We'd accept the advice from the first expert.
You might note that in my reply, I said "The ones with the most knowledge and experience in the relevant field." — ones, plural, not singular.The problem is different experts are giving different opinions on what to do. And then they change their minds every few weeks. How do average people suppose to decipher all this? It's all confusing to them.
That's how science, including doctors and medical science, works. Each has their individual work, but they also work together, often in teams, in order to broaden their understanding and expand the range of knowledge being applied. As they all have human limitations, no one person can absorb all of the available knowledge and data in science, medicine, or particular field and they routinely seek out knowledge, opinions, and advice from others within their field of expertise and from other fields as well. They routinely engage in consultations with each other. The more serious or complex a disease or condition, the more likely those additional consultations become.
This is why often, a doctor making a diagnosis or recommending a treatment plan will suggest a second opinion or consult with other colleagues themself. It's done to insure that before a consensus is reached on diagnosis or treatment that someone else with similar expertise, but their own collection of knowledge and experience, has come to the same conclusions and recommendations. If there are differences of opinion or questions raised, it indicates a need for further investigation. It's good professional practice, good advice, good medicine, and good science. It's also why science journals engage in peer review prior to publishing articles. Scientists and doctors check each others work for omissions or errors in data, including human error, looking for explanations and recommendations based on the best available evidence. That's how science, including medical science, routinely works.
The confused are mostly those that lack a basic understanding of science, making them an easy target for those with an agenda and desire to spread confusion and distrust of science.People aren't stupid. They're concerned about their health and the health of their families. However, when conflicting rules occur or keep changing, you can't expect ordinary people to behave consistently. That requires clear messaging. It's up to political officials and experts to be concise and clear. However, when you get Politicians like Gov Newsom of California to pronounce edicts against mingling yet we discover he's comingling at expensive restaurants with his rich supporters, you can understand why people think the whole thing is BS. Or you get the CDC lying about masks early on. They lose credibility. I'm excited about science as much as you are. But, science isn't the problem. It's the game playing and lies and distortion and politics that create opposition.
I'm excited about science as much as you are.
But, science isn't the problem.
You're the judge of your own excitement. It's of no concern to me.Science isn't the truth. And people make mistakes. And everyone has agendas, even scientists. You have to use discernment. Do not put your trust in princes.
No, science isn't the problem. It's lacking a fundamental understanding of what science is; what it is not; and its basic principles. That creates an opportunity for those with an agenda to exploit those lacking that basic knowledge to sow confusion and doubt. It's your basic FUD tactic of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt being used by people that don't care about science to manipulate those that don't understand it.
In six months when the disease will be forgotten because it passed, millions of people will be worried about how they will feed their family because they are out of work, losing their homes and savings if they have anything left. The experts and politicians would have moved on to some other issue.
hard to take anyone seriously who still, after more then a year of this, somehow think this will "pass". it won't....I have no clue if vaccines are the answer, what the long term effects of the vaccines or covid are, I do know that masks and washing hands work (to a degree) and that this is real and still very much around and kicking and morphing.....I'm sorry you're having difficulty. But you are the point I'm trying to make. After the virus is gone, and it's predicted it will be gone soon, the country and world will be left with economic problems to deal with. People who have lost their businesses, jobs, and livelihoods. While many people seemed to not be concerned with these things and moved to fight the disease to a higher level than jobs, once the disease is gone, we're left with the economic issues. I hope things work out for you and your family. I'm sure it must be very tough on you all.
I am probably more worried about my livelihood then you are, which is also why I have taken this seriously from day one on and taken and adjusted to all measures put in place....my kids missed a year of school and after school sports....and everything we (as a family) have sacrificed has been less effective because of people like you....
what on earth is wrong with you to think that NOW, a year later this will just magically pass?!
You're beating this thing to death to prove a minor and silly point. Who cares if your interpretation differs from mine? We've passed that issue of what someone said about some insignificant article that proved nothing... The earlier discussion points are outdated.
I have no clue if vaccines are the answer . . .
Science isn't the truth.
Do not put your trust in princes.
Science isn't the truth. And people make mistakes. And everyone has agendas, even scientists. You have to use discernment. Do not put your trust in princes.
Just to lay a wreath on the grave of what you understandably now want to bury and forget, I only made a grand total of two posts on this subject prior to your post above. The first post I made was only after you had made multiple false assertions in multiple posts. I pointed out that you clearly misunderstood what a poster (degrub) had said. I also pointed out that your repeated claims of "correcting" a statement were unfounded. It was just your own misreading and resulting assertion of what you stated as his "erroneous" "claim" which needed "correcting".Well, now you posted three posts. I hope you feel better. :)
The second post was just a response to your reply in which you attempted to obfuscate by ignoring and deliberately skipping over the original post that contained what I had quoted and your reply. I pointed out that no one had made the statement (except yourself) which you repeatedly claimed to be correcting. If two posts is "beating this thing to death", you must have run over it with a bulldozer.
Those two posts and this one were made because, you have all too often made false assumptions and assertions regarding what others have said in a post. It has been pointed out to you multiple times, by multiple people, in multiple threads and yet you persist. In my opinion, it's a result of being in a rush to reply and as a result, hastily made assumptions come out as a false assertion regarding what someone has written or means in your reply. I'm not saying nor implying that it is intentional. I'm suggesting, again in my opinion, that some of your replies would be less contentious and more accurate if you took a bit more time to consider what someone is actually saying before hitting reply.
I think it's fairly clear that vaccines are the answer....
....and everything we (as a family) have sacrificed has been less effective because of people like you....
I think it's fairly clear that vaccines are the answer....
They most certainly are not. Unless we want to vaccinate the whole world every six months. And invent newer and newer vaccines for newer and newer virus strains. The ONLY answer is improving one’s immune system. And deal with it like we deal with a seasonal flu. That is, some will take a vaccine, some won’t, and we won’t crash the economy every year and screw lives of 99.9x percent of the population for the sake of fat bitches who don’t want to take care of their own health.
The ONLY answer is improving one’s immune system.
And deal with it like we deal with a seasonal flu. That is, some will take a vaccine, some won’t . . .
... This virus is very different from any influenza. It is significantly more infectious and more lethal...
Actually, as I am sure you already know, the flu killed more people than Covid ever will. Just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population, while Covid currently stands at 1/100 of that (0.03%). That calc doesn’t even take into account annual death toll from the flu ever since (or before).
Actually, as I am sure you already know, the flu killed more people than Covid ever will. Just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population, while Covid currently stands at 1/100 of that (0.03%). That calc doesn’t even take into account annual death toll from the flu ever since (or before).
Actually, as I am sure you already know, the flu killed more people than Covid ever will. Just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population . . .
Besides the properties of the virus itself, many additional factors contributed to the virulence of the 1918 pandemic. In 1918, the world was still engaged in World War I. Movement and mobilization of troops placed large numbers of people in close contact and living spaces were overcrowded. Health services were limited, and up to 30% of U.S. physicians were deployed to military service.
In addition, medical technology and countermeasures at the time were limited or non-existent. No diagnostic tests existed at the time that could test for influenza infection. In fact, doctors didn’t know influenza viruses existed. Many health experts at the time thought the 1918 pandemic was caused by a bacterium called “Pfeiffer’s bacillus,” which is now known as Haemophilus influenzae.
Influenza vaccines did not exist at the time, and even antibiotics had not been developed yet. For example, penicillin was not discovered until 1928. Likewise, no flu antiviral drugs were available. Critical care measures, such as intensive care support and mechanical ventilation also were not available in 1918. Without these medical countermeasures and treatment capabilities, doctors were left with few treatment options other than supportive care.
In terms of national, state and local pandemic planning, no coordinated pandemic plans existed in 1918. Some cities managed to implement community mitigation measures, such as closing schools, banning public gatherings, and issuing isolation or quarantine orders, but the federal government had no centralized role in helping to plan or initiate these interventions during the 1918 pandemic.
—The Deadliest Flu: The Complete Story of the Discovery and Reconstruction of the 1918 Pandemic Virus (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html), publication of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Comparison of Spanish Flu in 1918-20 and Covid-19 in 2020 is a compelling point of view. There were no vaccines for the Spanish Flu, but at that time people were not such wussies as today and their immune system must have been stronger. They had fewer comorbidities due to obesity, diabetes, and poor nutrition, and generally they didn't suffer from the lack of vitamin D, so the large percentage of Spanish Flu deaths can be explained only by the lack of ventilators and also by rather poor distribution of necessary information due to missing Internet.Their rules were sterner in many cases. One guy who refused to wear a mask was shot by a cop. Churches and saloons were exempt. "Open face" sneezers were arrested.
... majority of those infected are asymptomatic, and therefore transmit the pathogen unknowingly...
Sounds like you're still clinging to the "this is just another flu, nothing to see here" line.
Fully vaccinated people can travel at low risk to themselves, new CDC guidance says
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/02/health/cdc-travel-guidance-fully-vaccinated-wellness/index.html
Who cares what you say. You don't seem to have a moral issue with telling lies so we can't assume that anything you say is true, that anything you quote as fact is actually correct. You are just a waste of time.
My wife teaches workout classes part time (mainly for fun and getting us significantly reduced gym memberships) and two weeks ago two ladies (60+) did the class without any masks. Their response was it is time for this silliness to end. No in the class pushed back.
Jimmy Kimmel touched on a surprising change of heart by former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin in the Covid culture wars on Thursday evening. After revealing that she and several members of her family had been stricken with the coronavirus, Palin encouraged others to wear masks.
“Which is rich,” said Kimmel, “because back in May she flew all the way to Texas to visit a beauty salon to support the owner of that salon who went to jail because she refused to shut her business down.” The Texas woman “said that it was her constitutional right to endanger her community,” Kimmel continued, “but now that Sarah has herself been bitten by the bug, she changed her tune."
Déjà vu.
Jimmy Kimmel on Sarah Palin:
“I love these people who only believe in science when it happens to them,” Kimmel deadpanned. “It’s like saying ‘now that I’ve been mauled by a bear personally, I realize that their claws and teeth are very sharp.”
Furthermore, spare me the argument that I, a singular person, am responsible for the health of the world. I give that no credence anymore.
How feeble: a purer example of argumentum ad hominem would be hard to find.
S
None of us is "responsible for the health of the world". It's a non-argument.
If you live in a society of people, you do have an obligation not to needlessly put the health or well-being of those around you at risk. It may not be an obligation you want or accept, but it exists nonetheless. Neither ignorance nor ideology is a reason to do so during a pandemic. There is no sensible reason not to wear a mask and take other common sense public health measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
If you cant let go of the fear, that is understandable.
PS, I did enjoy how you shot down my critique of the health of the world arguments out there and then proceeded to use one, justifying my need for critiquing it in the first place.
I did dismiss anyone being responsible for "the health of the world" as a non-argument. That's why I then referred to an obligation to "those around you". The "world" and "those around you" are two different things; unless, of course, you believe that the world revolves around you.As an old guy in the worse demographic for this disease, I can still understand why others wish to get on with their lives. Taking care of people around you also includes your family, who are the people closest to you and for which you are most responsible. Blood is thicker than water.
I did dismiss anyone being responsible for "the health of the world" as a non-argument. That's why I then referred to an obligation to "those around you". The "world" and "those around you" are two different things; unless, of course, you believe that the world revolves around you.
Just as an aside, if you could guarantee me that by wearing a mask I would live 5 years longer then by not wearing one, I would still choose to not wear one. As to why, life is not just about ensuring you will wake up the next day. A life without joy or laughter or company is not a life worth living. A life inside left purely to your own devices and slowing going mad in the process is certainly not one I choose to live either.
The actual good time would depend on when that 5 year period starts. For some it could be drastically shortened.The problem with spending all that time exercising in mid-life to stay healthy is that the extra years you may obtain are added at the end when you're senile and drooling. :o
Once again, you are showing us how bright of a future you would have in left wing fact checking. I can see your retort.
"Although anyone with half a brain knows Joe is referring to his personal community with the use of "world," this is rated as false since, you know, he is in fact not responsible for the health of the world even though we know he did not mean that."
Cuba has their own vaccine development program. Two are being tested in Phase III trials. A couple of news stories and a video below...I hope Cuban vaccines work well and the Cuban people are vaccinated against this dreadful disease. But I think it's unfair to blame America for its economic condition. The Communist nation should have thrown off their socialist economy 30 years ago when their benefactor the Soviet Union collapsed economically. You think they would have learned something from that.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/americas/cuba-vaccines-covid-phase-three (https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/americas/cuba-vaccines-covid-phase-three-intl-latam/index.html)
Despite a worsening economy and increased US sanctions, the communist-run island has pulled off a feat no other Latin American country can claim to date: the development of five Covid-19 vaccine candidates, two of which that are in their final phase three trials.
As the number of coronavirus cases on the island continue to rise, its vaccine candidates and the island's aspirations to be a biomedical powerhouse will be put to the test. On Wednesday, Cuba hit a grim new record in Covid-19 infections -- 1,051 new cases diagnosed in 24 hours.
Cuban officials in March announced they were expanding the vaccine trials already underway to include hundreds of thousands more people. First up in the expanded trials are 150,000 front line workers, including Ida Martínez Hernández, a dentist who early on in the pandemic was sent by the government to help fight the spread of the virus.
https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/analysis/cuba-vaccine-covid-19/ (https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/analysis/cuba-vaccine-covid-19/)
https://www.youtube.com/Vaccine Watch: Cuba develops its own COVID-19 vaccines (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K14lvAeQUCE)
Which experts are we to believe? One of the major problems is the average person on the street reads these headlines and is just more confused every day. Evidence supposedly shifts and we go back and forth opening businesses then closing them again only to open them again. Who is right? Experts are mistrusted. On top of "no-nothing" experts, you got politicians playing politics. People get fed up.Here's an example of my point. CDC says one thing. Then they qualify it. Then the president, who tells everyone to listen to the experts, overrides the CDC and qualifies their qualifications. So what should the poor guy who's trying to get on with life make of these confusing and contradictory edicts? It's a joke. Of course, since Biden is overriding experts, and not Trump, the press gives him a pass.
That why not only in America but in Europe too, people are protesting shutdowns because they see their livelihoods disappearing. In six months when the disease will be forgotten because it passed, millions of people will be worried about how they will feed their family because they are out of work, losing their homes and savings if they have anything left. The experts and politicians would have moved on to some other issue.
Here's an example of my point. CDC says one thing. Then they qualify it. Then the president, who tells everyone to listen to the experts, overrides the CDC and qualifies their qualifications.
Just as an aside, if you could guarantee me that by wearing a mask I would live 5 years longer then by not wearing one, I would still choose to not wear one. As to why, life is not just about ensuring you will wake up the next day. A life without joy or laughter or company is not a life worth living. A life inside left purely to your own devices and slowing going mad in the process is certainly not one I choose to live either.
What if you wearing a mask meant that your best friend didn't get COVID-19 from you and die as a result?
What if wearing a mask means that you don't get COVID-19 and survive but with much reduced kidney function that is unknown now but means you are on dialysis in 10 years? For many people, surviving COVID-19 is not the end of their encounter with COVID-19, just the beginning of living with the aftermath.
;D ;D ;D
Just more panic-porn.
I have two close friends that have died, and my Father in law was not looking good until he got hit with the monoclonal antibody treatments. It's not panic porn to me, at least.
Sorry to hear that. However, that doesn't have much to do with what I was ridiculing, that is that someone healthy not wearing a mask was responsible for those deaths.
So far you've made no worthwhile contribution of any kind in any of your posts. You're a fly at a picnic and that seems to be the role you enjoy. Pathetic.
Yeah, I get that. I'm just saying that if someone, somewhere could have prevented their infections by having a mask on, it seems an inconsequential price to pay. I guess one could argue that they don't believe masks would have prevented that, but again, it's just so damn small an inconvenience for most of us, y'know? I really don't understand the problem with it.
I think I can tolerate personal abuse from another hider in anonymity.
S
Yes, this is a problem because it requires intelligence to put it all together and understand the message.Well, I was planning a trip when I first read the headline. Now, I don't know. What are the odds I'll get sick anyway? Do you know? Would you go on the trip? Pass on the trip?
I can see why you liked Trump - his message was always easy to understand (even if it was wrong.)
Well, I was planning a trip when I first read the headline. Now, I don't know. What are the odds I'll get sick anyway? Do you know? Would you go on the trip? Pass on the trip?
How do you know what to do based on this advisory?
Alan, enjoy life. Go on a trip. Do not listen to political idiots, the likes of CDC and Dr. Fauxi.
Not sure it's that wise to take advice from the guy who said "wake me up when we get to 60K deaths" :-)
Well, that doesn't mean anything.
Alan, enjoy life. Go on a trip. Do not listen to political idiots, the likes of CDC and Dr. Fauxi.
I appreciate the advice. But rhetorically, my main point was that the waffling of our politicians and experts only confuses people. It's been going on since this began. People finally throw up their hands in frustration and tell them to screw it.
The confused are mostly those that lack a basic understanding of science, making them an easy target for those with an agenda to spread confusion and distrust of science.Did you read my earlier post? What does a basic understanding of science have to do with deciphering this advice? It seems Yahoo did not understand the advice either.
Here's an example of my point. CDC says one thing. Then they qualify it. Then the president, who tells everyone to listen to the experts, overrides the CDC and qualifies their qualifications. So what should the poor guy who's trying to get on with life make of these confusing and contradictory edicts? It's a joke. Of course, since Biden is overriding experts, and not Trump, the press gives him a pass.
CDC tells vaccinated Americans travel is 'low risk,' as Biden urges caution amid rising infection numbers
While appearing to condone travel, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky still urged even vaccinated Americans to remain at home as case numbers continue to rise, a message that could be confusing for people weighing visits to family or vacation spots.
Speaking from the White House earlier on Friday afternoon in celebration of both jobs gained and coronavirus vaccinations administered throughout the course of March, President Biden also offered a cautious message. “The progress we’ve worked so hard to achieve can be reversed,” he said, speaking of both economic and pandemic-related developments.
“Too many Americans are acting as if this fight is over,” Biden warned a few minutes later. “It is not.”
The White House did not respond to a Yahoo News inquiry regarding whether the president agreed with the new CDC guidance. Such seemingly contradictory messages have marked the response to the coronavirus at all levels of government. Much as every elected official has vowed to “listen to the science,” science and politics rarely walk hand in hand.
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-tells-vaccinated-american-travel-is-low-risk-as-biden-urges-caution-amid-rising-infection-numbers-185026202.html
Did you read my earlier post? What does a basic understanding of science have to do with deciphering this advice? It seems Yahoo did not understand the advice either.
What does a basic understanding of science have to do with deciphering this advice?
Just more panic-porn.
Here's the summary of recommendations from CDC for those who are fully vaccinated. Which part do find confusing?I read the Yahoo article which is confusing. Most people see Yahoo or some TV program that are confusing. 99.9% of people don't read the CDC;s official site.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html)
... The guidance is that nobody should travel unless absolutely necessary...
Seriously, if you've survived COVID-19, get a blood and urine test done to check on the health and function of your internal organs (kidneys, liver, etc.) Or just do it anyway if you don't do it regularly (ie yearly) as early signs of prostate cancer can show up there too. Talk to your doctor.
Seriously, if you've survived COVID-19, get a blood and urine test done to check on the health and function of your internal organs (kidneys, liver, etc.) Or just do it anyway if you don't do it regularly (ie yearly) as early signs of prostate cancer can show up there too. Talk to your doctor.
COVID-19 symptoms can sometimes persist for months. The virus can damage the lungs, heart and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems.
Apparently. Covid-19 virus can damage also brain....
As can a prolonged participation in LuLa forums.
As can a prolonged participation in LuLa forums.
Rather than the CDC telling us it's OK to travel but you'd be safer not traveling, would be if they said nothing at all.
The CDC under the current administration, IMO, can not be taken seriously. The director at first said going back to school was okay, but then changed her tune the following week based on nothing but talks with teacher unions (by her own admission). That is not science, but engaging in politics.
You made this same false claim recently which I showed you was false with verbatim transcript quotes. Why make it again? Didn't think anyone would notice or you forgot?
You made this same...
You are really not paying attention then.
Two weeks the head of the CDC issued a statement in which she said schools are safe to reopen. Jen Psaki was asked about this the day after and she said the director was speaking in her own person position (even though it was a CDC press conference). This past Friday at 5 PM, the CDC changed the reopening policies for schools in which they admitted that took advice from teachers on what the policies would be.
This is blatant political manipulation of the CDC.
I thought you got off this bus!?
Your chances of NOT getting infected are 95%-ish . . .
I got off the ride that Alan was taking. I asked a straightforward question and got everyone and everything but the kitchen sink in reply.
It's always safer to not travel then to travel. This is nothing but them stating a truism to try and further panic.Well, Fauci is trying to get on the Emmy committee.
The CDC under the current administration, IMO, can not be taken seriously. The director at first said going back to school was okay, but then changed her tune the following week based on nothing but talks with teacher unions (by her own admission). That is not science, but engaging in politics.
It use to be that the CDC would list the infection fatality rates by age on their website. I was on there this week and that was taken down and replaced by the likelihood you would die from C-19 compared to a reference group of 5 to 17 year olds. I believe my age group was 130x more likely to die from it then the reference group. Sounds scary, until you realize 5 to 17 years are not dying from this, so that really small probability times 130 is still a really small probability. So this is specifically being used to make the disease look more scary then it is for those under 55. Once again, not science, but politics.
Trump may have tried to push the CDC in certain directions, but Biden is clearly forcing them to align with his politics. Even Fauci is giving in, not that I have had any respect for him since his famous "NY did everything right" line last summer. It is obvious now they are doing this to try and force through stupid policies, since you can never let a good crisis go to waste, right?
God help us if vaccine passports become required. That's just what I want to do, share my medical information with oh so trustworthy private tech companies. Not to mention that I would need to always have my phone on me (and charged), not something I always do.
In my opinion, if your older and not vaccinated, you should probably not travel too much. If you are vaccinated, well you only have a little more time left on this planet, and there is no reason to waste it held up in your house. This is the opinion of my parents, and much to my brother's chagrin, they will be traveling this year.
She very specifically said that children can be back in school without teachers being vaccinated.It never was about science with the Democrats. It was always politics. The only thing that's changed is now they're in power.
Psaki was asked about this the same week, and Psaki said the director was speaking from a personal position.
The next week the guidance was suddenly changed on the CDC website, because they had talked to parent and school administration personal (aka teacher unions).
This is not a false accusation, and it is pretty obvious why the change was made, pure politics. All the science shows kids should be back in school and doing so does not increase spread, especially for grade and middle schools. The current guidance from the CDC would close 99% of all schools. They are not following the science here, but politics.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947)Oh, stop it. She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion.
What the CDC director said is NOT "schools are safe to reopen" the remarks were around a question regarding vaccination priorities and teachers and the statement was that "there is increasing data to suggest that schools can safely reopen". Also, she said "taken under recommendation guidance from the states" regarding the prioritization of vaccines NOT "advice from teachers on what the policies would be". And, the latest CDC guidance did NOT contradict the statements made about schools and teacher vaccinations. Just the opposite, the guidance was in agreement with Walensky’s statement that schools could reopen before teachers had been vaccinated. If you think that I'm not paying attention that's fine, but let's get the facts straight.
Question: Great. I wondered if we could get an update on vaccine prioritization. I know under the previous administration this was largely left up to states to decide when they wanted to move to the next levels of priority. But we’re seeing a lot of states open this up for teachers, and it’s kind of created a patchwork. And I just wondered if the federal government would be working more closely with states to kind of get more vaccinations to teachers in particular so that schools can reopen in the fall.
DR. WALENSKY: Yeah, thank you for that question. You know, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has created these guides — this guidance for how we should be thinking about prioritizing among all essential workers and all of the population at large.
You know, those have been taken under recommendation — guidance from the states, and then the states are creating their own individual plans. And, you know, those plans have to, sort of, be in sync with how they are able to titrate, really, their supply versus the number of people who are wanting it. We don’t want to be too prescriptive so that they have these queues of people, and yet we don’t want to be too open so that they also have queues of people. We don’t want to have too much supply on the shelf.
So we’ve left that to the states to manage, in terms of recognizing the prioritization of ACIP, but also manage at their own local level.
That said, I want to be very clear about schools, which is: Yes, ACIP has put teachers in the 1b category, the category of essential workers. But I also want to be clear that there is increasing data to suggest that schools can safely reopen and that that safe reopening does not suggest that teachers need to be vaccinated in order to reopen safely.
So while we are implementing the criteria of the Advisory Committee and of the state and local guidances to get vaccination across these eligible communities, I would also say that safe reopening of schools is not — that vaccination of teachers is not a prerequisite for safe reopening of schools.
MR. ZIENTS: Yeah, let me just add here. You know, President Biden has been very clear that he wants schools to reopen and actually to stay open. And that means that every school has the equipment and the resources to open safely — not just private schools or schools in wealthy areas, but all schools. And that’s why we need the American Rescue Plan passed now. It includes money to get schools better access to testing, enables smaller class sizes, acquire the necessary ventilation, ensure everyone has PPE, and that schools are properly sanitized. It also includes much-needed funds to support the learning and social, emotional needs of our kids in what has been an extremely, extremely difficult year. So again, Congress has to do its part in order to make sure that we can safely reopen schools and keep them open.
Is there muddled messaging coming from the administration? Yes there is. That does not equate to "blatant political manipulation of the CDC". If anything, it shows that the CDC director isn't being muzzled; that the administration is new; and that getting information out unfiltered is a higher priority right now than everyone singing from the same hymnal.
Like I said, messaging has benn muddled. For an editorial critique of that muddled messaging you can read commentary here from yesterday...
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-02-18/editorial-covid-19-school-reopening
Now if you want to get bogged down in the minutia of things to try and obscure the clearly obvious 30K foot view, that being we are not following the science but politics instead, be my guest.
Oh, stop it. She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion.
The question was in regard to your claim. When did the CDC switch their opinion on teachers not needing to be vaccinated for schools to re-open?I seem to recall the reduction to 3 feet from six feet was a sop to the unions. Biden was trying to split the baby.
My wife and I are looking to travel in the Fall, maybe, overseas. We might need some sort of vaccine "passport" that would make it easier to get in and out of various countries.
I seem to recall the reduction to 3 feet from six feet was a sop to the unions. Biden was trying to split the baby.
You refuse to answer the question about your claim that the CDC director switched her opinion on teachers not needing to be vaccinated for schools to reopen because it's false. So, you try to dance around it.I said Biden split the baby when he reduced the distance from 6 feet to 3 feet. It wasn't a full concession. That's what splitting the baby means. I didn't say he kissed their ass. He tried to have it both ways. Following the science somewhat, but giving the teacher's union a sop.
To once again dance around that question, you make another claim that the the CDC guidance which reduced desk spacing was a concession to teachers' unions. Despite the fact that it was the opposite of what their unions wanted. Teachers' unions opposed that change, just like they opposed CDC guidance that teachers did not need to be vaccinated for schools to re-open. The new Secretary of Education, that Biden appointed, successfully overcame resistance and protests from the teachers' unions in Connecticut to reopen their schools as Education Commissioner. Reopening schools for in person learning is a top priority for Biden and they're actively working to overcome reluctance from teachers' unions to get schools open and provide the necessary resources to make it happen.
The current guidance from CDC for school reopening recognizes local situations and has flexibility.
"Schools should determine, in collaboration with state and local health officials to the extent possible, whether and how to implement each of these considerations while adjusting to meet the unique needs and circumstances of the local community. Implementation should be guided by what is feasible, practical, acceptable, and tailored to the needs of each community. It is also critically important to develop strategies that can be revised and adapted depending on the level of viral transmission in the school and throughout the community, as this may change rapidly. Strategies should be implemented in close coordination with state, local, or tribal public health authorities, recognizing the differences between school districts, including urban, suburban, and rural districts."
Your claims are so far off base that they're not even in the ballpark.
You missed some:
On or around Feb. 3rd, she said, “There is increasing data to suggest that schools can safely reopen and that safe reopening does not suggest that teachers need to be vaccinated ... Vaccinations of teachers is not a prerequisite for safely reopening schools.” That is pretty clear cut.
Schools can safely reopen without vaccinating teachers, CDC says (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEHI_Ia6zmg)
Then on February 4th, Jen Psaki walks the director backwards by saying “Dr. Walensky spoke to this in her personal capacity,” Psaki said. “Obviously, she’s the head of the CDC, but we’re going to wait for the final guidance to come out.” I look at this as a massive insult towards Dr. Walensky, especially since she was talking in front of CDC logos, not in her personal capacity, and not to mention she is a doctor while Psaki is just a media personality, and an obvious signal the administration was going to dictate what the guidance should be.
Then the following week, we got the new guidance, which, if followed, would require 99% of schools nationwide to close down even though 50+% were open at the time.
It is obvious the administration stepped and "guided" the CDC on what to do due to concerns from teachers unions. After the guidance came out, many experts in the private sector rejected them for being too stringent and difficult to achieve.
Now if you want to get bogged down in the minutia of things to try and obscure the clearly obvious 30K foot view, that being we are not following the science but politics instead, be my guest.
;D ;D ;D
Just more panic-porn.
Regarding what the CDC and its director said, I got my information from Joe's post. It seems what I believe about the situation and I believe Joe's point. Here it is again:
Sorry to hear that. However, that doesn't have much to do with what I was ridiculing, that is that someone healthy not wearing a mask was responsible for those deaths.
Alan, enjoy life. Go on a trip. Do not listen to political idiots, the likes of CDC and Dr. Fauxi.
Well, that doesn't mean anything. I didn't imply it will stop at 60K, just to wake me up. I had it, survived it. You? Still live in fear?
Now you want to pass the buck to Joe. You made the claim "She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion". When did the CDC director switch her opinion on teachers not needing to be vaccinated for schools to re-open?I believe she was told by Biden to back off when it came to the teacher's union. I wasn't a fly on the wall. There were no witnesses, no transcripts, no video. When he told her , how it developed, I will leave it to Joe and everyone's imagination. She understood the science that it was OK to open schools. But, it is my belief based on the fact that the union supported Biden in the election and he had to pay them back. So he told her to back off. That's how politics work. In order to satisfy the science and to give the union a sop, she reduced it from 6 feet to 3 feet. That's what I believe. You can believe what you want to believe.
Stop with the copy and paste, the dancing around it, it's your claim — own it. When did the CDC director switch her opinion on teachers not needing to be vaccinated for schools to re-open?
I said Biden split the baby when he reduced the distance from 6 feet to 3 feet. It wasn't a full concession. That's what splitting the baby means. I didn't say he kissed their ass. He tried to have it both ways. Following the science somewhat, but giving the teacher's union a sop.
And this is just more BS as well. The CDC director pointed to recent evidence from a study of Massachusetts schools in the decision to decrease the desk separation recommendation.They found a fig leaf to satisfy the union and the science. You can always find something to justify your political position. Politicians are great at that. They talk out of both sides of their mouths all the time. Walensky is kissing Biden's ass as Birx kissed Trump's. It's all politics.
CDC Looks At Whether 3 Feet — Instead Of 6 — Is Safe For Schools' Social Distancing - March 15, 2021
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/15/977564878/cdc-looks-at-whether-3-feet-instead-of-6-is-safe-for-schools-social-distancing (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/15/977564878/cdc-looks-at-whether-3-feet-instead-of-6-is-safe-for-schools-social-distancing)
The CDC's current guidance for schools recommends seating or desks be "at least 6 feet apart when feasible."
But a new study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases suggests that 3 feet may be as safe as 6 feet, so long as everyone is masked. The authors compared infection rates at Massachusetts schools that required at least 3 feet of distancing with those that required at least 6 feet, and found no significant difference in the coronavirus case rates among students or staff in the two cohorts.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the CDC, addressed the Massachusetts study at the White House COVID-19 briefing on Monday, and noted that schools have struggled with the 6-foot guidance.
"We are looking at these data carefully," Walensky said. "The question actually prompted more studies to be done, so we know more are forthcoming. We're taking all of those data carefully and revisiting our guidances in that context."
I believe she was told by Biden to back off when it came to the teacher's union. I wasn't a fly on the wall. There were no witnesses, no transcripts, no video. When he told her , how it developed, I will leave it to Joe and everyone's imagination. She understood the science that it was OK to open schools. But, it is my belief based on the fact that the union supported Biden in the election and he had to pay them back. So he told her to back off. That's how politics work. In order to satisfy the science and to give the union a sop, she reduced it from 6 feet to 3 feet. That's what I believe. You can believe what you want to believe.
They found a fig leaf to satisfy the union and the science. You can always find something to justify your political position. Politicians are great at that. They talk out of both sides of their mouths all the time. Walensky is kissing Biden's ass as Birx kissed Trump's. It's all politics.
Many people are asymptomatic and can spread the virus just like someone else on their death bed.
Really. Well I have a cousin right now fighting for his life on an intubator in a induced comma with major damage to his lungs and kidneys. Very poor prognosis. His wife a teacher brought Covid home and infected my cousin.
I'm getting a little sick of your attempt of humour around this deadly virus. Quit being such an ass and have a little companion for the millions that died and 10's of millions that survived but will be compromised for the rest of their lives.
... Many people are asymptomatic and can spread the virus just like someone else on their death bed...
Bullshit. At the time you were claiming Covid is no worse than the yearly flew where on a bad year it kills 60,000 people in the US. Well I guess your smart ass remarks back then about waking you up hasn't changed any...you are still a selfish inconsiderate smart ass.
;D ;D ;D
I have posted, months ago, links to research that found zero to negligible chance of asymptomatic transmission.
I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.
Perhaps it's just one of those statements which provides less reassurance with repetition.
Feel free to dispute it.
What neo-fascism is like:
I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.
Some updates:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851
As Chris Kern points out above, because of its nature, it's difficult to produce definitive evidence on the importance of asymptomatic transmission.
I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.
I think
... Your notion that it was never anything to worry is preposterous.
... If everyone in the room looks up at the sky and says it's blue, your calling it yellow does not make you an independent thinker, it makes you wrong....
My position then, as now, is that of whatever seriousness Covid might be, it is not worth lockdowns and mask mandates. It is a natural event that is going to play out regardless of what you do to stop it (you can't). I certainly know better than to compare annual figures with those of few weeks. As for the historic comparison, just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population, while Covid is currently, after more than a year, at only 0.03%, that is 1/100 of that.
... The greater question to ask is that by providing treatment to prevent people from dieing from diseases like this are we collectively weakening the human race to survive in the future. i.e we're playing God and telling Darwin to take a hike. it's not exactly hypothetical either, as more women now need IV treatment to get pregnant because more women have been born with related defects due to it being passed down from their mothers....
... Looking at the % of the population that died from each ignores what % of the population was exposed to the disease. That's what's missing in your 3% vs 0.03%....
Your whole post (as well as chez' - but he is not worth debating) is based on a several straw-man arguments, i.e., something you think I said. Quote me as saying "it was never anything to worry about." My position then, as now, is that of whatever seriousness Covid might be, it is not worth lockdowns and mask mandates. It is a natural event that is going to play out regardless of what you do to stop it (you can't).
I certainly know better than to compare annual figures with those of few weeks. As for the historic comparison, just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population, while Covid is currently, after more than a year, at only 0.03%, that is 1/100 of that. Which does NOT take into account annual death from flu, before or after the Spanish one. So, certainly Covid is never going to match the Spanish flu record. We will live with it just as we live with the flu. Which means no lockdowns, no mask mandates, nor any other fascist measures. If we can resist the commie wave that is rolling across the world, that is.
As for the historic comparison, just the Spanish flu killed about 3% of the world population, while Covid is currently, after more than a year, at only 0.03%, that is 1/100 of that. Which does NOT take into account annual death from flu, before or after the Spanish one. So, certainly Covid is never going to match the Spanish flu record. We will live with it just as we live with the flu. Which means no lockdowns, no mask mandates, nor any other fascist measures. If we can resist the commie wave that is rolling across the world, that is.
As more seniors get vaccinated for COVID-19, Canada is seeing a shift in the coronavirus spread with an increasing number of cases among the younger population.
While infections have declined in Canadians aged 80 and older since January, cases are now highest among young adults aged 20 to 39, according to the latest national public health modelling released March 26. The rise of new more transmissible variants, vaccination programs focusing on the elderly and coronavirus fatigue are driving the spread among the younger group, experts say.
“It is important to remember that although severe illness is less common in younger age groups, serious or prolonged illness can occur at any age, and there are emerging concerns about increasing severity of the B.1.1.7 variant in adults,” Theresa Tam, Canada’s chief health officer, said during a March 26 news conference.
... The simple fact is that lockdowns etc have reduced the spread of infection and kept the level of death from reaching the levels they could have got to if we'd just gone about our business as normal....
... there are plenty of reports of even young healthy people falling ill and dying due to the C19 virus...
Not reduced... just postponed... that your and many other countries have to resort to 3rd or 4th lockdown is a proof of that. Just like masks. Since one is not effective, the current advice is two or even three. As demonstrated before, countries with stricter lockdowns do not have better (and often worse) results than those with more lax (or none). The same goes with strict vs. lax mask mandates.
But modern society does reduce the danger of diseases. It doesn't matter why the current disease is not as dangerous whether innately compared to Spanish flu or because of better measures available today to deal with it. So it is valuable to compare to other diseases in the past that had a larger effect to figure out if similar measures done then have to be done now.
It's hard to compare the Spanish Flu in 1918-20 with Covid-19 in 2020. Spanish Flu killed between 20 million to 50 million lives. Covid-19 killed in the first 15 months 3 million people worldwide. It is highly probably that without the modern communications, lockdowns, testing facilities, skilled medical personnel and advanced medical equipment the number of Covid-19 infections and deaths would be substantially higher, quite possibly on the same level as Spanish Flu.
Although more dangerous for the seniors, there are plenty of reports of even young healthy people falling ill and dying due to the C19 virus. In Canada, we are going through the third wave which is more deadly, and spread also among younger individuals.
https://globalnews.ca/news/7731485/covid-variant-cases-young-canadians/
But modern society does reduce the danger of diseases. It doesn't matter why the current disease is not as dangerous whether innately compared to Spanish flu or because of better measures available today to deal with it. So it is valuable to compare to other diseases in the past that had a larger effect to figure out if similar measures done then have to be done now.
You are just proving my point, Jeremy, with that graph. Of course lockdowns work, albeit temporarily. That's why you need three of them (so far).
"Until vaccines" argument... it was "two weeks to flatten the curve" initially, now it is two years. And then variants occur. And vaccines needed every six months. And different vaccines for different mutations. And then, like the seasonal flu, some people will take it, others want. But the cost of the two years until vaccines is staggering, measured by many other parameters than just death from Covid: world hunger, premature child death, lack of education, depression, obesity, alcoholism, narcotics, denied medical services, and last, but not least, unemployment, ruined lives and careers, economic crash.
P.S. Forgot to add: the rise of fascism and communism.
My point was that Covid-19 is not necessarily more benign than Spanish flu.I agree. But I was only pointing out that modern advantages like vaccines allow us to adjust the measures we take in dealing with it.
Your alternative seems to be to just let millions of people die, and to say it's no big deal cos millions of people died from some other diseases in the past. That makes no sense, and that's before you even try to figure out the economic cost of large amounts of your workforce being sick, and what's the impact on your health care system of the hospitals being permanently clogged up with Covid patients.
p.s. you seem to have dodged the fascism bullet in the US; we are not so lucky here.
I agree. But I was only pointing out that modern advantages like vaccines allow us to adjust the measures we take in dealing with it.
My point was that Covid-19 is not necessarily more benign than Spanish flu.
Well, no. Some states ask us to wear masks inside public places. It’s a very short and exceedingly slippery slope from there to the gulags ;)
Your alternative seems to be to just let millions of people die...
Although more dangerous for the seniors, there are plenty of reports of even young healthy people falling ill and dying due to the C19 virus. In Canada, we are going through the third wave which is more deadly, and spread also among younger individuals.
Are you suggesting that we actually have a cure for Covid?
The global precautions including vaccines and advanced medical care during the last year saved hundreds of millions of lives.Like when the cop shot the guy who refused to wear a mask. :)
Spanish flu was fought 100 years ago with by today's standards more primitive methods and on much smaller and uncoordinated level, and consequently the outcome was much worse.
You are again proving my point, which you are not disputing. Your retort is "we got to do something." Never mind that it isn't working, but it looks good as it seems the nanny state is doing something.
Millions of people die every year regardless. Very early in the pandemic it was clear that this virus is dangerous predominantly and overwhelmingly to the 65+ population. Retirees. Thus not the workforce.
The solution should have been "targeted protection," as advocated by the Great Barrington Declaration.It's beyond naive to imagine you can achieve such a thing. In any case, I think even pensioners deserve to be allowed out one day. How else are we going to tempt them away from typing BS on their keyboards?
As for the "overwhelmed" medical facilities... I do not know about your country, but here, where I am now, Serbia, hospitals have been at full capacity ever since the dawn of time (i.e., socialized medicine). Way before I left, 28 years ago, patients were in corridors, or on long-waiting lists for major operations. My mother waited seven months for a triple bypass, three times being invited to come and then returned home, or invitation canceled. There seems to be the case everywhere with socialized medicine. Makeshift hospitals are relatively quick to build, many have been in the States and then dismantled, for the lack of patients. Military ships sent to NY to deal with non-covid patients returned unused soon thereafter. Serbia has built I think three specialized Covid hospitals, fourth under construction.
The global precautions including vaccines and advanced medical care during the last year saved hundreds of millions of lives.
Spanish flu was fought 100 years ago with by today's standards more primitive methods and on much smaller and uncoordinated level, and consequently the outcome was much worse.
... but young people also got very sick, and a lot are now strugglinhg with long term health issues that we don't yet understand fully.
... Hospitals are quick to build - we built three huge ones here. They were never used because hospitals need staff, not just beds...
Forget vaccines. We are talking about a cure. I know no one who was cured from Covid, thanks to a medication. Medication just mitigates the symptoms. It is always one's immune system.
Therapeutic applications for CRISPR are on the rise, with the technology playing a key role in the development of potential cures for a variety of genetic diseases by directly editing the genome. Meanwhile, taking a different approach and looking outside the human genome, researchers from Stanford University (CA, USA) are working towards a CRISPR-based therapeutic for infectious disease. Beginning their work targeting the influenza virus, the team have followed suit of many before them and refocused the aim of their gene-targeting antiviral agent towards COVID-19 and the global battle against the pandemic.
The Prophylactic Antiviral CRISPR in huMAN cells – or PAC-MAN – technology includes the Cas13 enzyme and a strand of gRNA that is specific to nucleotide sequences in the SARS-CoV-2 genome. In targeting and subsequently destroying the viral genome, PAC-MAN technology effectively eliminates the threat of the virus by preventing viral replication. Further, by targeting RNA sequences that are conserved across all members of the Coronaviridae family, the researchers suggest that PAC-MAN could become a pan-coronavirus inhibition strategy that is effective against all disease-causing coronaviruses.
You'll be pleased to know that a cure is coming...
... What is kind of ironic is that you seem happy to sacrifice millions of lives on the altar of ideological purity?...
Which is just a confirmation that it doesn't exist today.
and also it is an entirely different matter than the previously discussed comparison of CC19 with Spanish flu.
Not reduced... just postponed... that your and many other countries have to resort to 3rd or 4th lockdown is a proof of that. Just like masks. Since one is not effective, the current advice is two or even three. As demonstrated before, countries with stricter lockdowns do not have better (and often worse) results than those with more lax (or none). The same goes with strict vs. lax mask mandates.
You are hiding behind weasel words "also." "some," "a lot" etc. These are media panic-porn headlines. The percentages are miniscule.
It only appears to you so, because you are obsessed only with direct deaths from Covid, while I look at the much broader measure of overall casualties, mostly due to our misguided response to Covid (see how my vocabulary has mellowed? - in the past I would say "idiotic" :) )
The problem with statements like this is that it can be shown to be wrong wtih some good examples: Australia, China, New Zealand and Vietnam...
"Obsessed" - no. Your "much broader measure" is 99% imagination.
Some "imagination":
https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/150-million-additional-children-plunged-poverty-due-covid-19-unicef-save-children
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/coronavirus-food-children-hunger-lockdown-a9497166.html
https://www.dhakatribune.com/world/2021/03/05/unicef-mental-health-alert-for-332-million-children-linked-to-covid-19-lockdown-policies
The problem with statements like this is that it can be shown to be wrong wtih some good examples: Australia, China, New Zealand and Vietnam.They locked-down Wuhan to other parts of China only. But they allowed Wuhans to travel to other countries and spread the disease to the world. Yes, China is a great example.
There is now close to 0 community transmission of SARS-CoV-19 in Australia, China, New Zealand and Vietnam.
The problem was only gotten on top of in Wuhan by a very strict lockdown and that worked.
Summary: lockdowns work.
For lockdowns to work there are some essential requirements:
- the area being locked down has to have a reduced number of people entering and leaving that area to critical people only (transport workers for freight, etc)
- people within the locked down zone also need to limit travel, curfews are one way of doing that
- they need to be long enough to get to the point of 0 unknown causes of infection (this can take 2-3 months)
Which is to say that if California went into "lockdown" but still allowed people to fly in from Florida or NYC or Houston then it is not going to be very effective because you've still got the potential for new infection to arrive by plane.
The Spanish Flu was limited to traveling between continents by boat. SARS-CoV-19 gets a free ride on planes that will take it from one side of the planet to the other before a victim because symptomatic.
Mask wearing was part of how the Spanish Flu was defeated.
They locked-down Wuhan to other parts of China only. But they allowed Wuhans to travel to other countries and spread the disease to the world. Yes, China is a great example.
They locked-down Wuhan to other parts of China only. But they allowed Wuhans to travel to other countries and spread the disease to the world. Yes, China is a great example.
Exceptions that prove the rule.
Australia and New Zealand are islands, small population, at the end of the world, and draconian, fascist measures.
China is a completely different matter, given the opacity and questionable accuracy of information coming from there, plus knowing the true nature of the virus, given that they created it.
Have no clue about Vietnam. But doubt Vietnam has a large obese population, which is the main predictor of covid spread.
Could you imagine the uproar if the Chinese locked down Wuhan from people leaving and they trapped American citizens for 2 months. I'm sure you would be singing a different tune.They could have allowed Americans to leave. That is a strawman. The question is why did they allow Wuhan Chinese to travel to other countries to infect the world but not to other parts of their own country to infect their own people? What they did is criminal.
I love that :)You would prefer to live in a Communist dictatorship like China or Vietnam?
Whether the measures were fascist or not depends on your point of view. Governments are elected to govern and sometimes that means making hard decisions that a lot of people don't like. While the measures were extreme, they also worked.
There are also nations in the Pacific Ocean that cut off external contact to prevent the virus from landing.
Money was sacrificed, not people.
Agreed.
Well we don't know for sure that they created it but it came from there. I agree it feels rather coincidental that there's that lab in Wuhan and lots of strange things going on there in late 2019. Those more knowledgable about me on this say that if China could have created SARS-CoV-19 then they'd be able to cure cancer. Note that both SARS and MERS are naturally occuring with no conspiracy theories. This coronavirus is not the first and won't be the last:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/types.html
- there are 7 known coronaviruses.
As I understand it, Vietnam has managed it because everyone acts in a community minded fashion. There aren't anti-maskers on internet forums or TV - they all get that some amount of personal inconvenience is necessary for the benefit of everyone. There's a somewhat unique sense of commuity there and less sense of individuals being important.
You would prefer to live in a Communist dictatorship like China or Vietnam?
They could have allowed Americans to leave. That is a strawman. The question is why did they allow Wuhan Chinese to travel to other countries to infect the world but not to other parts of their own country to infect their own people? What they did is criminal.
You would prefer to live in a Communist dictatorship like China or Vietnam?
As Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Did they in fact let Chinese nationals from Wuhan to fly to the US after their lockdown? I know many Americans came home from China, but where did you read that Chinese came to the US after their lockdown? Remember, not all of China was under a lockdown.Yes, Chinese in Wuhan were allowed to fly to other countries in the world but not to other parts of China.
Yes, Chinese in Wuhan were allowed to fly to other countries in the world but not to other parts of China.
Yes, Chinese in Wuhan were allowed to fly to other countries in the world but not to other parts of China.How China locked down internally for COVID-19, but pushed foreign travel
I'd have zero problems living in Vietnam. In fact many Americans have moved to Vietnam to live out their lives. What issue do you have with living in Vietnam?I'm sure Vietnam is a wonderful place to live for Vietnamese. For me, I don't speak the language, practice their religion, customs, or politics. I like to speak freely. They probably don't allow posts like this on LuLa even if they allow LuLa. Do they stock Velvia film? Plus it's too damn hot there. :)
How China locked down internally for COVID-19, but pushed foreign travel
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/blogs/Whathappensif/how-china-locked-down-internally-for-covid-19-but-pushed-foreign-travel/
I'm sure Vietnam is a wonderful place to live for Vietnamese. For me, I don't speak the language, practice their religion, customs, or politics. I like to speak freely. They probably don't allow posts like this on LuLa even if they allow LuLa. Do they stock Velvia film? Plus it's too damn hot there. :)
And here's the rest of the story:That's a Chinese publication published in China. Of course, they're going to be apologists for the Chinese government. Maybe an article from the NY Times might help you believe in addition to the one from India.
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-04-28/Did-China-deliberately-export-COVID-19-to-the-rest-of-the-world--Q2oGomPRss/index.html
Alan, I'd bet you have a bunch of clothes made in Vietnam. Many speak at least a bit of English. There are various forms of religion practiced in Vietnam. Internet can be tricky, but there are no controls of what people access. The food and customs are amazing...just might broaden your close mind.Closed mind? Because I'm opposed to dictatorships. What a strange belief you have.
They locked-down Wuhan to other parts of China only. But they allowed Wuhans to travel to other countries and spread the disease to the world. Yes, China is a great example.
Even more stupid is that all those other countries didn't enforce quarantine for the incoming travellers.You're blaming the victims for China's duplicity.
You're blaming the victims for China's duplicity.
Closed mind? Because I'm opposed to dictatorships. What a strange belief you have.
I am not blaming the poor victims who got infected abroad (and it wasn't only in China), but their governments for not thinking about quarantining them.China quarantined 50 million Chinese by government fiat to keep their own people effectively walled in. By comparison, America can't build a wall to keep other people out. Quarentining Americans just won't work.
Dr. Fauxi confused by the Neanderthal Texans:
Could be because Texans eat more chili and steaks.
My wife and are both type A and worried about this. More bad advice from experts proven wrong.
Your deliberate misdirections are truly beyond endurance.
There was some preliminary indication very early suggesting that there might be a blood type effect, which indicted something worthy of further study. That preliminary info came with the proviso that they had a small data sample and that it was not conclusive. So they studied it more and now know more. HOW THE FUCK ELSE do you think it can work?
Your trying to make this more "confusion by experts" is insufferably stupid ESPECIALLY because this exact topic has been discussed before.
It is impossible to take a word you say seriously. Almost everything you ever say turns out to be factually wrong. And you continue to spout the falsehoods ever AFTER they are pointed out to you.
It can work by NOT publishing preliminary, inconclusive indications.
you woke people
Oh, get off the high horse!Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again. They can't control themselves.
It can work by NOT publishing preliminary, inconclusive indications.
There is nothing Alan said that was factually wrong in this case.
P.S. It would be nice if you woke people would refrain from personal attacks. But I won't hold my breath.
That's EXACTLY how it works. Researchers send indications to each other all the time in the scientific literature. Provisos are included. That's how knowledge is built up. Some ideas pan out after further research, other ideas don't.The type A blood issue was published in many articles giving the factors that made people get Covid worse including diabetes, overweight, older age, etc. Blood type was one of the listed comorbidities. There were many single articles re-stating the problem with Type A patients.
Some reporter published this somewhere and people (like Alan) jumped on it. NOT AT ANY TIME did any "expert" release this info to the public health authorities (let alone to the public) as something that was actionable.
NOBODY presented this info as gospel to the public at large and this exact topic has come up before when these same things were said.
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again. They can't control themselves.
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again. They can't control themselves.
The type A blood issue was published in many articles giving the factors that made people get Covid worse including diabetes, overweight, older age, etc. Blood type was one of the listed comorbidities. There were many single articles re-stating the problem with Type A patients.
Too funny.You use personal attacks like everyone else on the left. It's your and their modus operandi. Shut them down. Delete their tweets. Attack their businesses. Call them names.
How often do you expect to keep repeating the same untruths and not get any blow back? Do you think it's ok to say that "experts" told you that blood type may affect Covid outcomes, when they never said any such thing, and that THAT has been discussed before.
You keep inventing things that "experts" told you to do, when that never occurred. The "experts" told you to avoid contact, wash your hands, get vaccinated, etc. That's all they ever told you. Side issues, like the blood type conjecture, were in-progress studies, nothing for you to act on, nothing for you to even consider in your decisions, until they were throughly studied and recommendations derived therefrom. You have been told this before and yet you bring it up AGAIN, claiming it as an example of lies "experts" told you.
This is deliberate trolling, imo. You claim the right to speak whatever is on your mind. Cool. I have no problem with that. But that cuts both ways, and others have the right to call you on what you say.
You use personal attacks like everyone else on the left. It's your and their modus operandi. Shut them down. Delete their tweets. Attack their businesses. Call them names.
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again. They can't control themselves.
There were all conjecture, based on limited data. NONE of it was a call to action to public health authorities. NONE of it was official and you were told it was not. Reporters may have written about the conjecture in popular media, but so what. Why would you take medical advise from popular media that is not approved by the correct medical authorities? It's not the "experts" fault if you cannot understand what you're reading. You jumped to conclusions, were told that you were jumping to conclusions, but you continue to repeat the same malarkey 6-8 months AFTER it was dealt with. You need to assimilate new information, not keep falling back on your own misconceptions.You're mistaken. There were studies described by organizations read by millions like AARP and more studied research from government agencies like the NIH (National Institute of Health) If you look, you will find hundreds of articles similarly describing differences due to blood type.
You use personal attacks like everyone else on the left. It's your and their modus operandi. Shut them down. Delete their tweets. Attack their businesses. Call them names.
You're mistaken. There were studies described by organizations read by millions like AARP and more studied research from government agencies like the NIH (National Institute of Health) If you look, you will find hundreds of articles similarly describing differences due to blood type.
Does Blood Type Play a Role in COVID-19 Risk?
Studies show link between blood types, from A to O, and the body's response to the coronavirus
Researchers in Denmark found that among more than 7,400 people who tested positive for COVID-19, fewer individuals had type O blood compared to type A, despite the fact that the two blood types accounted for the same share of the population when compared to a larger control group. Canadian researchers reached a similar finding in their retrospective study published in Annals of Internal Medicine. They found that people with type O blood had a lower risk for contracting the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) compared to those with type A, B or AB. They also observed that individuals with type O blood had a slightly lower risk for getting severely ill or dying from COVID-19 if they did become infected. And several other peer-reviewed studies reinforce these findings.
https://www.aarp.org/health/conditions-treatments/info-2020/blood-type-coronavirus.html
Here's another by the NIH (National Institute of Health), a US government agency similar to the CDC.
Genes, Blood Type Tied to Risk of Severe COVID-19
" In fact, the findings suggest that people with blood type A face a 50 percent greater risk of needing oxygen support or a ventilator should they become infected with the novel coronavirus. In contrast, people with blood type O appear to have about a 50 percent reduced risk of severe COVID-19."
https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/06/18/genes-blood-type-tied-to-covid-19-risk-of-severe-disease/
Of course there were. That's how research is done. People post findings, then others try to replicate, then eventually a more comprehensive picture emerges as more and more information is acquired and the issues are better understood.Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman. Similar articles in media and on cable and broadcast TV made similar representations about covid and blood type. How can anyone ignore their statements? How does the public know which statements they should listen to and which to ignore?
Why are you attempting to read/understand works-in-progress in fields in which you're not knowledgeable? It only leads to your misunderstanding. Those research-in-progress articles are NOT written for the layman, they're specialized articles written for colleagues. And you have been told THAT before too. I'm done here.
No one's arguing that we should stop research and ignore later results of studies. The issue is every time the experts change their minds, the public gets confused. They lose confidence in the so-called "expert's" knowledge of what to do to stay safe.
Meanwhile, people have lost their livelihoods, can't afford to pay rent and their mortgages, and can't feed their families. Shrugging your shoulders and saying that's how science works doesn't help the poor guy out of work who's trying to make ends meet. They get to the point where they'll just ignore the expert's advice and move on.
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.
Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman.
Science is not a religion...
Do you consider yourself a member of "the public" who has lost "confidence in the so-called "expert's" knowledge of what to do to stay safe." Have you gotten to the point where you just "ignore the expert's advice and move on." Or are you just talking about what other people believe and do? On what basis have you determined what other people believe and do?We all get bombarded with news reports, expert advice as well as what our friends and family tell us. I was speaking with a friend who's in Florida for a couple of months on vacation. He's old like me and has the shots. He and his wife go to restaurants down there. They decided to take a chance. My wife and I, who also have had the shots, aren't ready for that yet. Joe and Slobodan made their decisions that are different.
I must be hanging around with the wrong people because I don't know of anyone who has lost confidence in the so-called "expert's" knowledge of what to do to stay safe, nor do I know of anyone who just ignores the expert's advice and moves on. Except maybe Joe and Slobodan.
Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman. How can anyone ignore their statements? How does the public know which statements they should listen to and which to ignore?
By not assuming a conclusion where no conclusion exists. By understanding that research that finds a correlation is not the same as finding a causation; it only suggests the need for further investigation and more evidence. In other words, it requires only a very basic and fundamental scientific literacy to understand what science is and what it is not. It also helps to read within context what is actually written including the caveats and the reasons given for the caveats as opposed to jumping to conclusions.You're expecting too much from the general public. They're not English majors. You want them to read between the lines. Most people don't have time to read articles. They usually stop at the headlines or what the newscaster says on TV. How many photographers follow LuLa or other forums. They're out shooting pictures unlike us. :) Even if they read photo forums, how much diverse opinion is there? How many threads have you read where some poor new shooter posts a simple question and is bombarded with 16 theories about it and thirty-five answers, none of which match?
Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman. Similar articles in media and on cable and broadcast TV made similar representations about covid and blood type. How can anyone ignore their statements? How does the public know which statements they should listen to and which to ignore?
;D ;D ;D
No, but it is adopted by the woke as the new religion, because, apparently, humanity can not survive without some form of religion.
You read an article in a layman's journal about a possible avenue of research that's being investigated, and it's FAR from final, and when later things turn out a bit differently than some people anticipated, you call that "experts" lying to you? Are you kidding me?Would you prefer I listen to Trump? How about Biden? :)
Why are you looking for medical advice in a layman's journal based on preliminary research? It was simple reporting about something ongoing, that's all. There are probably 1000 articles like that every month about some ongoing research somewhere.
The only thing that would be surprising is that if speculation, even educated speculation, at the start of a research project turned out to be 100% correct. That would be a first, maybe.
You want them to read between the lines.
Science always looks like a false religion to those that would rather curse, condemn, or ignore evidence from it that conflicts with their predetermined views. Ask Galileo.But Galileo was wrong as well. You see religion is about the Truth. It doesn't change. Science is not the Truth because our knowledge of it does change. So putting your faith in science will disappoint you. You might get Covid. :)
You're expecting too much from the general public. They're not English majors. You want them to read between the lines. Most people don't have time to read articles. They usually stop at the headlines or what the newscaster says on TV. How many photographers follow LuLa or other forums. They're out shooting pictures unlike us. :) Even if they read photo forums, how much diverse opinion is there? How many threads have you read where some poor new shooter posts a simple question and is bombarded with 16 theories about it and thirty-five answers, none of which match?
Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman. Similar articles in media and on cable and broadcast TV made similar representations about covid and blood type. How can anyone ignore their statements?
Would you prefer I listen to Trump? How about Biden? :)
Would you prefer I listen to Trump? How about Biden? :)
You see religion is about the Truth. It doesn't change.
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.
So putting your faith in science will disappoint you.
Please tell me you are not taking medical advice from articles you read in the AARP magazine. I drop my copy off in the recycle bin on the way from the mailbox to my house.I do the same Frank. :) I just was looking for an article with Google and found the AARP one. With its millions of readers, I thought it would make a pertinent point. In any case, how do you get medical advice about Covid?
WTF do Trump and Biden have to do with anything?That's not the advice. Once you get vaccinated, you don't have to stay away from people. Haven't you read the new CDC guidelines? You're not keeping up.
Wash your hands, stay away from people, get vaccinated, wear a mask in public.
You can whine all your want, there's no magic bullet, there's no antidote. Don't worry, if one turns up, we'll all know soon enough.
... In any case, how do you get medical advice about Covid?
That's not the advice. Once you get vaccinated, you don't have to stay away from people. Haven't you read the new CDC guidelines? You're not keeping up.
In any case, how do you get medical advice about Covid?
Science has nothing to do with faith. Understanding that would go a long way toward your first steps in understanding science.You're right. But as Slobodan was alluding to, many people do put their faith in science thinking that with natural knowledge in hand, they can adjust the universe to their understanding and be protected from harm. Then science pulls a jujitsu, and you're back to square one.
Are you kidding or what?Doctors? Which one? I always get second opinions.
Your doctor, your public health office, CDC, Mayo Clinic web site, those would be good starts.
Well in that case, in the future I'll come to you for medical advice, since you seem to be on top of things.Don't ask me. I'm just as confused as everyone else.
You're right. But as Slobodan was alluding to, many people do put their faith in science thinking that with natural knowledge in hand, they can adjust the universe to their understanding and be protected from harm. Then science pulls a jujitsu, and you're back to square one.
Don't ask me. I'm just as confused as everyone else.
What sort of adjustments to the universe are these people making?
Don't ask me. I'm just as confused as everyone else.
You're right. But as Slobodan was alluding to, many people do put their faith in science thinking that with natural knowledge in hand, they can adjust the universe to their understanding and be protected from harm. Then science pulls a jujitsu, and you're back to square one.
Doctors? Which one? I always get second opinions.
Most people get their advice from family and friends, headlines, and 20-second newscasts on TV. They don't get advice from the Mayo, the CDC or LuLa. :)
Forty-six cases of COVID-19 were linked to an indoor bar opening event that occurred during February 2021 in a rural Illinois county. Event patrons were linked to secondary cases among household, long-term care facility, and school contacts, resulting in one hospitalization and one school closure affecting 650 students.
Can I buy you a drink...
The more people infected, the better.
46 cases dubiously connected to a bar and one hospitalization!? What's the big deal? That seems like a more pleasurable way to get Covid mmunity. The more people infected, the better.
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.
;D ;D ;D
No, but it is adopted by the woke as the new religion, because, apparently, humanity can not survive without some form of religion.
46 cases dubiously connected to a bar and one hospitalization!? What's the big deal? That seems like a more pleasurable way to get Covid mmunity. The more people infected, the better.
46 cases dubiously connected to a bar and one hospitalization!? What's the big deal?
Every time there's a small outbreak it is "oh 1 in 40 needed to go to hospital. . . . " It is highly contagious. . . .
The hard part for many people to understand is that this virus expands exponentially amongst the population if it is not checked.
Yes, of course. But Slobodan makes a valid point, even if he states it in an unnecessarily (and characteristically) provocative way. If I were to reformulate it less tendentiously, it would be something like this:
"To what extent is it appropriate to extrapolate to a large population a small-N study, however rigorously conducted, in the absence of similarly rigorous corroborating studies?"
It's a fair question. The answer, as always, is that science is a process, not an end result, and that one of the reasons for publication is to encourage further research that can replicate or challenge the initial finding.
46 cases dubiously connected to a bar and one hospitalization!? What's the big deal? That seems like a more pleasurable way to get Covid mmunity. The more people infected, the better.
Science:
I'm not sure what is the relevance to science?
Well... There is science and then there is science. The science Alan and I are talking about is a filtered science, the one that reaches us common folks, via media. Our friend here, TechTalk, will often provide the right definition for the true science (the non-filtered one), which is of course correct.
But none of us here are true scientists (with possibly a few exceptions). We all have access only to the filtered version, where we are told that's what experts say. That's where the natural path of developing knowledge appears often as flip-flopping, and causes distrust for science (or "science").
But that is not the real problem. The real problem is that the science is first transformed into the filtered version of itself, then into mandated science (like ridiculous mask rules, as described in the meme above).
Then, based on the mandated science (note that the authorities always justify their mandated rules as based on science, hence my shortening into "mandated science") we start snitching on neighbors, shaming, attacking or even killing curfew or mandate breakers, are prohibited from leaving our homes, arrested, sent to jail, etc.
So, yes, the perception of the real science gets distorted by the filtered and mandated ones by the time it reaches a Joe Blow. And the real science becomes guilty by association.
Then, based on the mandated science (note that the authorities always justify their mandated rules as based on science, hence my shortening into "mandated science") we start snitching on neighbors, shaming, attacking or even killing curfew or mandate breakers, are prohibited from leaving our homes, arrested, sent to jail, etc.
So, yes, the perception of the real science gets distorted by the filtered and mandated ones by the time it reaches a Joe Blow. And the real science becomes guilty by association.
... The hard part for many people to understand is that this virus expands exponentially amongst the population if it is not checked.
Well... There is science and then there is science. The science Alan and I are talking about is a filtered science, the one that reaches us common folks, via media. Our friend here, TechTalk, will often provide the right definition for the true science (the non-filtered one), which is of course correct.It's worse than that. Even real science is wrong often. The original reports that Type A blood was worse than Type O were based on studies. "Real" science. If you ignored the media interpretation and only read the 'real" science studies, you would have had the same impression. Type A is bad. It was only recent studies that reversed the original studies. Heck, the latest studies could be reversed again. Who knows?
But none of us here are true scientists (with possibly a few exceptions). We all have access only to the filtered version, where we are told that's what experts say. That's where the natural path of developing knowledge appears often as flip-flopping, and causes distrust for science (or "science").
But that is not the real problem. The real problem is that the science is first transformed into the filtered version of itself, then into mandated science (like ridiculous mask rules, as described in the meme above).
Then, based on the mandated science (note that the authorities always justify their mandated rules as based on science, hence my shortening into "mandated science") we start snitching on neighbors, shaming, attacking or even killing curfew or mandate breakers, are prohibited from leaving our homes, arrested, sent to jail, etc.
So, yes, the perception of the real science gets distorted by the filtered and mandated ones by the time it reaches a Joe Blow. And the real science becomes guilty by association.
It's worse than that. Even real science is wrong often. The original reports that Type A blood was worse than Type O were based on studies. "Real" science. If you ignored the media interpretation and only read the 'real" science studies, you would have had the same impression. Type A is bad. It was only recent studies that reversed the original studies. Heck, the latest studies could be reversed again. Who knows?
The fact is science is often wrong or concepts change dramatically with time. Meanwhile, the poor ignorant schnook, who's out of work and trying to stay well and feed his family, gets bounced from pillar to post with government edicts influenced by incomplete science and tinged with political influence. No wonder so many ignore or have contempt for the rules.
Can I buy you a drink?
Here's an interesting initial report (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e3.htm?s_cid=mm7014e3_w) of what happened after a bar reopened in a rural county in the U.S. state of Illinois.
I suspect we're going to see many more events like this until the vaccination effort reaches a much larger proportion of the population than it has so far.
I was sitting at a bar on Easter having a drink. Plan on doing it again this weekend regardless of all the panic porn the media just cant seem to let go of.
It's worse than that. Even real science is wrong often. The original reports that Type A blood was worse than Type O were based on studies. "Real" science. If you ignored the media interpretation and only read the 'real" science studies, you would have had the same impression. Type A is bad. It was only recent studies that reversed the original studies. Heck, the latest studies could be reversed again. Who knows?
The fact is science is often wrong or concepts change dramatically with time. Meanwhile, the poor ignorant schnook, who's out of work and trying to stay well and feed his family, gets bounced from pillar to post with government edicts influenced by incomplete science and tinged with political influence. No wonder so many ignore or have contempt for the rules.
I was watching youtube videos about electric cars on Easter in my home. Plan to do it again this weekend.
Oh not again. Those were preliminary findings that suggested further study. Nothing final, nothing actionable. Poor ignorant schnooks should not be inferring anything from layman's articles about preliminary studies on topics that they don't understand. Why would you, it makes no sense.Then why release them and confuse the public? It's click porn. https://www.hematology.org/newsroom/press-releases/2020/possible-link-between-blood-type-and-covid-19 How does Joe Blow decipher what's "real", "fake", and "maybe"?
Your second paragraph is yet one more repetition of the usual nonsense, which implies that you did not even attempt to understand anything that was said yesterday (and on previous occasions).
Then why release them and confuse the public? It's click porn. https://www.hematology.org/newsroom/press-releases/2020/possible-link-between-blood-type-and-covid-19 How does Joe Blow decipher what's "real", "fake", and "maybe"?
Well... There is science and then there is science. The science Alan and I are talking about is a filtered science, the one that reaches us common folks, via media. Our friend here, TechTalk, will often provide the right definition for the true science (the non-filtered one), which is of course correct.
But none of us here are true scientists (with possibly a few exceptions). We all have access only to the filtered version, where we are told that's what experts say. That's where the natural path of developing knowledge appears often as flip-flopping, and causes distrust for science (or "science").
But that is not the real problem. The real problem is that the science is first transformed into the filtered version of itself, then into mandated science (like ridiculous mask rules, as described in the meme above).
Then, based on the mandated science (note that the authorities always justify their mandated rules as based on science, hence my shortening into "mandated science") we start snitching on neighbors, shaming, attacking or even killing curfew or mandate breakers, are prohibited from leaving our homes, arrested, sent to jail, etc.
So, yes, the perception of the real science gets distorted by the filtered and mandated ones by the time it reaches a Joe Blow. And the real science becomes guilty by association.
How does Joe Blow decipher what's "real", "fake", and "maybe"?
Same way you do. Most everyone I know knows that science is a work in process and so are not confused or trustful of science when scientists discover that what they thought was true isn't, and now they have a better explanation.But why should a guy give up his livelihood and jeopardized his family for a year based on science that's a work in progress? You're asking too much from people.
But why should a guy give up his livelihood and jeopardized his family for a year based on science that's a work in progress? You're asking too much from people.
Maybe the government was doing pretty much what the people wanted. Also, they were caught between a rock and a hard place. Britain was already dealing with Brexit and its economic problems. The last thing you needed was Covid to make it worse. So you try to balance maintaining economic conditions so people can feed themselves vs. risking the spreading of disease. Also, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback the game after it's over. We should have done this. We should have done that. Stop "should-ing" on yourself. At least you did some things better, such as the vaccinations. You should be happy and proud of that.
But why should a guy give up his livelihood and jeopardized his family for a year based on science that's a work in progress? You're asking too much from people.
Then why release them and confuse the public? It's click porn. https://www.hematology.org/newsroom/press-releases/2020/possible-link-between-blood-type-and-covid-19 How does Joe Blow decipher what's "real", "fake", and "maybe"? ...
Because that is the best information we had at the time. Could the scientists be wrong? Of course. Could the politicians be wrong? Of course. There is no certainty in life. You just have to do the best you can with the information you have available. But you have to do the best you can.Easy for scientists and politicians to speculate at what you should do. It doesn't affect their salary. They're still working.
Maybe this will answer your question:
Easy for scientists and politicians to speculate at what you should do. It doesn't affect their salary. They're still working.
Re-read the title of the article. Notice the word "possible" in it. Something was noticed by someone so they put the word out so that others in the field see it and eamine their own data, maybe collaborate, maybe refute, maybe replicate.It's not the studies. Those are picked up by regular media and repeated over and over. Or you hear it from a friend. "Hey Joe, Do you have Type A blood. That's bad." Do you think most people sit around like we do googling everything and breaking apart sentences to check to see if "possible" is in there? In any case, everything Fauci says is couched with that word in everything he says: "Possible" or "it's likely". So what's the difference?
Uncertainty seems to cause you stress, I'd advise you then not to read about work-in-progress in specialized fields. There is no useful info for you there, there is nothing you can use to make a decision. You already know who to consult for current best practices.
Why are you repeating this discussion? No new information has emerged since yesterday.
Cheers!Better than bleach.
It's not the studies. Those are picked up by regular media and repeated over and over. Or you hear it from a friend. "Hey Joe, Do you have Type A blood. That's bad." Do you think most people sit around like we do googling everything and breaking apart sentences to check to see if "possible" is in there? In any case, everything Fauci says is couched with that word in everything he says: "Possible" or "it's likely". So what's the difference?
What did you do about having Type A blood besides worry about it? I remember at one point reading that more males than females contract COVID, or maybe it was more males than females die from COVID. Did you worry about being male? What did you decide to do about it? Since you distrust experts, I am not sure why you worry about what they say anyway.It's not the worriers like me. It's the others who don't worry who decide the "experts" are confused and politicians are distrustful because they keep changing their minds and do what they tell the public not to do like Gov Newsom of CA eating inside a restaurant. It's these doubters, especially the ones out of work, who won't use masks and follow other guidelines.
You do realize that you are in charge of what you worry about?
It's not the studies. Those are picked up by regular media and repeated over and over. Or you hear it from a friend. "Hey Joe, Do you have Type A blood. That's bad." Do you think most people sit around like we do googling everything and breaking apart sentences to check to see if "possible" is in there? In any case, everything Fauci says is couched with that word in everything he says: "Possible" or "it's likely". So what's the difference?
You keep wanting to blame "experts" but no expert tried to tell you to do ANYTHING about your blood type wrt Covid. It was only ever an on-going research area, still is. Why would you or anyone think that you have to do something about it? Did your doctor tell you to worry about it? Did the CDC? Did Trump?The Type A blood issue was only an example. The CDC, politicians, and other experts have flipped flopped on all sorts of issues that just confuse the public.
The "problem", if there is one (and actually, there isn't) is only in your head. You created the problem out of thin air and you're clinging to it like grim death because you think it illustrates something, which it does not. You're stressing yourself for no purpose. Why are you doing that?
Stop reading specialized technical articles that you're not qualified to understand, that would be my advice.
It's not the worriers like me. It's the others who don't worry who decide the "experts" are confused and politicians are distrustful because they keep changing their minds and do what they tell the public not to do like Gov Newsom of CA eating inside a restaurant. It's these doubters, especially the ones out of work, who won't use masks and follow other guidelines.
The Type A blood issue was only an example. The CDC, politicians, and other experts have flipped flopped on all sorts of issues that just confuse the public.
This article will add some context to the information in Slobodan's graphic.
https://wineindustryadvisor.com/2021/03/31/nielseniq-beverage-alcohol-update-march
Easy for scientists and politicians to speculate at what you should do. It doesn't affect their salary. They're still working.
... Shall we not listen to the scientists, and not factor what they say into decisions about what to do? ...
Gosh, I thought you were worried because you can't believe the experts because they are always changing their minds, like about Type A blood, but now it seems you trust what the experts are saying about "masks and other guidelines" and are worried because other people don't trust the experts because they are always changing their minds, and so other people, especially the ones out of work, don't listen to what the experts are saying about "masks and other guidelines."Because I'm an old fart and 50% of the dead are my age. :(
So do you trust the experts or not?
Why do you think that other people come to a different conclusion than you do about believing or not believing the experts?
Are you a member of the public? Are you confused? If not, why not?
They are just giving advice based on their education, training, and experience about the best way to protect the public from illness or death. The politicians, with input from the economists, will decide what, if any, restrictions to impose on the country.That's not what you've been preaching. You've said politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists. Even Biden says that mumbling through his mask. "I'm going to listen to the scientists."
What is your alternative? Shall we not listen to the scientists, and not factor what they say into decisions about what to do?
Is their anything else you would like to complain about today?
Oh, sure, WE should factor it in OUR decisions, not let the government factor it for us, then penalize us for not obeying what they decided is in our best interest.
Living in a society has its advantages and disadvantages. None are perfect. Live in the one that you feel best balances the advantages and disadvantages. There is also the option of being a hermit.Join a photo forum. Isolation comes naturally. :)
That's not what you've been preaching. You've said politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists. Even Biden says that mumbling through his mask. "I'm going to listen to the scientists."
Because I'm an old fart and 50% of the dead are my age. :(
You have completely lost your mind.Aren't you one of those who said, "What good is being able to work if you're dead?" Maybe it was other posters. Sorry.
Aren't you one of those who said, "What good is being able to work if you're dead?" Maybe it was other posters. Sorry.
Must have been another poster, although I don't recall anyone ever saying that "politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists".Oh yes. All the time. Every time I bought it up I was pooh-poohed with what good is working if you are dead or words to that effect. You;re getting forgetful, Frank.
Oh yes. All the time. Every time I bought it up I was pooh-poohed with what good is working if you are dead or words to that effect. You;re getting forgetful, Frank.
You've said politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists.
Damn. The experts changed their minds. Again.
All that disinfecting was a waste of time.
I sincerely doubt that. I have data for Serbia (mostly because I can't open Facebook or IG without being bombarded by the numbers). In more than a year, only about 7-8% of the population has been confirmed positive (not necessarily sick or even noticing). Hardly exponential. You may want to double or triple that number by people who, like myself, were infected but never went to a doctor, thus not part of any stats. It still wouldn't be exponential.
Damn. The experts changed their minds. Again. All that disinfecting was a waste of time. I suppose I could throw out Trump's Tonic too.
Soap and water are enough to reduce COVID-19 risk in your home, says CDC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCnQPatQUqU
Well... There is science and then there is science. The science Alan and I are talking about is a filtered science, the one that reaches us common folks, via media. Our friend here, TechTalk, will often provide the right definition for the true science (the non-filtered one), which is of course correct.
Do you think most people... check to see if "possible" is in there?
everything Fauci says is couched with that word in everything he says: "Possible" or "it's likely".
Even Biden says... "I'm going to listen to the scientists."
Oh, sure, WE should factor it in OUR decisions, not let the government factor it for us, then penalize us for not obeying what they decided is in our best interest.
You should reference an actual quote. Your use of "you said" or "you say" and similar expressions is without any doubt whatsoever completely unreliable as you've repeatedly demonstrated. Your false assertions, as to what others have said, have been repeatedly pointed out and you simply ignore or deflect when they are shown to be false.You are completely wrong. Many people here have repeatedly taken the follow the science and ignore the economy view. Their argument has been that the economy must wait until Covid is defeated.
It's easy to just make up false quotes and assign them to others as you've often shown. It's also a totally phony way to make a point. It's unnecessary to make false claims regarding what others "say" or have "said" to make a point. Why do you persist?
No. They didn't. It's just your attempt to find a molehill from which to build a mountain.nonsense. The CDC now tells us soap and water is enough. I spent a good part of the last year on Amazon tracking down hard ti purchase disinfectants to wipe down surfaces. Where have you been?
There's no great scientific breakthroughs to report in understanding that soap and water or disinfectant are capable of cleaning a surface to remove, reduce, or kill bacteria and viruses. They simply perform that same function differently and to different levels of effectiveness. Does this really need to be explained to you?
No it wasn't. Whether the surface is your hands or something else, soap and water works the same way in breaking down and removing the things that you wish to remove. Disinfectant may do the job more effectively, efficiently, or thoroughly and, depending on the surface and circumstances, may be the better choice or may be more than is really needed for the desired level of sanitation and hygiene. But in any event, it isn't a waste of time. Does this really need to be explained to you?
nonsense. The CDC now tells us soap and water is enough.
The Internet enables access to a lot of information - including true science. Understanding may not be easy for the layperson.
nonsense. The CDCnowtells us soap and water is enough. I spent a good part of the last year on Amazon tracking down hard ti purchase disinfectants to wipe down surfaces. Where have you been?
nonsense. The CDC now tells us soap and water is enough. I spent a good part of the last year on Amazon tracking down hard ti purchase disinfectants to wipe down surfaces. Where have you been?
When did they tell you that soap and water wasn't helpful in reducing virus spread?Stop changing my words. I never said soap and water was not helpful. But the CDC was pushing disinfectants to clean surfaces other than your hands. Now they say soap and water is enough on surfaces. That's a change.
Do you really think it's ok to just make shit up? From the very start, and more generally from as far back as I can remember in my life, we've been told to wash hands with soap and water to stop spread of infection.The CDC wasn't referring to hands. You didn't view the link I posted. So here's an extract. They just released this revised recommendation.
Soap is a disinfectant. Every report I've ever read tells you not to buy anti-bacterial soap because the anti-bacterial additives are superfluous (and bad things to flush down the drain).
Sales of those alcohol disinfectant bottles increased because they're handy to keep around public places. You can't have a sink and soap at the grocery store front door, for example.
Stop changing my words. I never said soap and water was not helpful. But the CDC was pushing disinfectants to clean surfaces other than your hands. Now they say soap and water is enough on surfaces. That's a change.
there is nothing new about the soap being good enough. Actually, in many way it is better than disinfectant. And a bar of soap is better than the liquid stuff. You don't need CDC for that.The purpose of my post was to show that the CDC changed one of their primary recommendations again on another important protocol this time regarding cleaning surfaces. Additionally, they're basically not worried about transmission of Covid touching surfaces. So all those bottles of disinfectant cleaners bought wasn't really required.
Were they really pushing disinfectants the way you say?Yes. Didn't you see all those videos of people spraying door handles and counter tops with alcohol and chemical disinfectants? CDC has a web site that lists all the disinfectants that were approved for use against Covid. I would check the ones on Amazon before I bought them to make sure they were approved. So now they're saying a soapy rag would have even been good enough. Plus there's really no or little chance you can get Covid from surfaces.
Stop changing my words. I never said soap and water was not helpful. But the CDC was pushing disinfectants to clean surfaces other than your hands. Now they say soap and water is enough on surfaces. That's a change.
The CDC wasn't referring to hands. You didn't view the link I posted. So here's an extract. They just released this revised recommendation.
Soap and water may be all that’s needed to keep surfaces coronavirus-free in your home, according to the latest federal guidance released Monday.
“In most situations, regular cleaning of surfaces with soap and detergent, not necessarily disinfecting those surfaces, is enough to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spread,” said Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
You've been on this obsessive crusade against "experts" for whatever reason. This is just a transparent attempt to slap those "experts" you distrust with a red herring.My wife and I spent hours on the web trying to track down disinfectants most that were backordered often for weeks and months. That's because they were pushed by experts especially the CDC. Everyone was buying them in America. To make light of their new protocol that just soap and water is sufficient is a huge change. And yes this is to flag that so-called "expert" advice is often wrong or hyperventilated. This gets people to throw up their hands and doubt much of their recommendations.
The CDC director gives some common sense advice that "In most situations, regular cleaning of surfaces with soap and detergent is enough to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spread" and you don't "necessarily" need disinfecting (it's recommended if someone is sick) and like a predator seeing a meal, you swoop down for a feast!
The fact that soap and water and disinfectants BOTH "reduce the risk" from bacteria and viruses has been known for eons for crying out loud! You want to make a big deal out of a simple statement for your own crusade and to justify your suspicions. I doubt if anyone but you cares, so enjoy your feast.
Many people here have repeatedly taken the follow the science and ignore the economy view.
This is the shocking and incredible "new" guidance...The new protocol from the CDC was just released Monday. The following is from the news link posted earlier.
Clean Regularly
Cleaning with a household cleaner that contains soap or detergent reduces the amount of germs on surfaces and decreases risk of infection from surfaces. In most situations, cleaning alone removes most virus particles on surfaces. Disinfection to reduce transmission of COVID-19 at home is likely not needed unless someone in your home is sick or if someone who is positive for COVID-19 has been in your home within the last 24 hours.
When and how to clean surfaces in your home
- Clean high-touch surfaces regularly (for example, daily) and after you have visitors in your home.
- Focus on high-touch surfaces such as doorknobs, tables, handles, light switches, and countertops.
- Clean other surfaces in your home when they are visibly dirty or as needed. Clean them more frequently if people in your household are more likely to get very sick from COVID-19. You might also choose to disinfect.
- Clean surfaces using a product suitable for each surface, following instructions on the product label.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/disinfecting-your-home (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/disinfecting-your-home.html)
Please accept this molehill and may it serve you well in your quest.
My wife and I spent hours on the web trying to track down disinfectants most that were backordered often for weeks and months. That's because they were pushed by experts especially the CDC. Everyone was buying them in America. To make light of their new protocol that just soap and water is sufficient is a huge change. And yes this is to flag that so-called "expert" advice is often wrong or hyperventilated. This gets people to throw up their hands and doubt much of their recommendations.
The new protocol from the CDC was just released Monday. The following is from the news link posted earlier.
I've never seen anyone here suggest "ignore the economy". It's your twisted interpretation to fit your repetitious narrative.People insulted Joe for wanting to work and "exposing" others to get sick. People repeated over and over that what good is an economy when you're dead. Others suggested we should wait until the entire Covid was gone before opening the economy. Others posited that we should be listening to scientists only and not economists. Life was more important than money. There was no balance from these posters. Where have you been?
Others suggested we should wait until the entire Covid was gone before opening the economy.
Others posited that we should be listening to scientists only and not economists.
Life was more important than money.
There was no balance from these posters.
Where have you been?
Well... There is science and then there is science. The science Alan and I are talking about is a filtered science, the one that reaches us common folks, via media. Our friend here, TechTalk, will often provide the right definition for the true science (the non-filtered one), which is of course correct.
... The exponential growth is what you see last year in Nov/Dec and again at the start of March this year. This means that Serbia has seen exponential growth of coronavirus amongst its population.
... If you want true science, all you have to do is use Google...
... Public health is, however, a natural concern of government...
... the first major pandemic in 100 years....
People insulted Joe for wanting to work and "exposing" others to get sick. People repeated over and over that what good is an economy when you're dead. Others suggested we should wait until the entire Covid was gone before opening the economy. Others posited that we should be listening to scientists only and not economists. Life was more important than money. There was no balance from these posters. Where have you been?
There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?
Clean water - another communist plot :-(
My wife and I spent hours on the web trying to track down disinfectants most that were backordered often for weeks and months. That's because they were pushed by experts especially the CDC. Everyone was buying them in America. To make light of their new protocol that just soap and water is sufficient is a huge change. And yes this is to flag that so-called "expert" advice is often wrong or hyperventilated. This gets people to throw up their hands and doubt much of their recommendations.
You are listening to wrong experts, Alan
Same nonsense as taking daily aspirin for your heart or drinking milk for your bones.
Countries with the strongest government role possible (i.e., communist ones) have had the worst ecological results.
Perfect illustration:
If something goes up and down in certain shorter periods, it is not exponential overall. Obviously, it is in the up phase.That's why the statement was accompanied by the caveat that growth is exponential IF NOT CONSTRAINED.
Besides, the apparent growth in cases is more of a factor of increased testing, especially around holidays (travel-related testing). Initially, you couldn’t even get a test if you didn’t have symptoms. Over time, private labs started offering cheaper tests and people got curios.
There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?
... If you are a European, then I understand. Europeans still have a serfdom mentality in their genes. ...
That's why the statement was accompanied by the caveat that growth is exponential IF NOT CONSTRAINED...
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vera+sharav+youtube&atb=v244-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D5_Af9GDaklQ
"Vera Sharav is a medical activist and a holocaust survivor. In her testimony before the German Corona Inquiry Committee she draws comparisons to the Nazi regime"
You are listening to wrong experts, AlanThe CDC who I;ve followed the most, is the wrong expert regarding disinfectants cleaning surfaces? So who should I listen to? Trump? Biden? :)
Same nonsense as taking daily aspirin for your heart or drinking milk for your bones.
The CDC who I;ve followed the most, is the wrong expert regarding disinfectants cleaning surfaces? So who should I listen to? Trump? Biden? :)
Countries with the strongest government role possible (i.e., communist ones) have had the worst ecological results.Chernoble?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vera+sharav+youtube&atb=v244-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D5_Af9GDaklQFortunately we have a written constitution and 50 sovereign states that would keep the imperial gene for centralized power in Washington in check. But who knows for sure? Every day, another treasured freedom is watered down like death from a thousand cuts. It's a slippery slope.
"Vera Sharav is a medical activist and a holocaust survivor. In her testimony before the German Corona Inquiry Committee she draws comparisons to the Nazi regime"
The CDC who I;ve followed the most, is the wrong expert regarding disinfectants cleaning surfaces? So who should I listen to? Trump? Biden? :)
Given your frequent diatribes against experts and the unreliability of their opinions, I am shocked that you would believe the experts at the CDC when they recommended disinfecting the surfaces of your home, and am even more shocked that you now believe the experts at the CDC when they say that soap and water is all that is needed. Since this is fundamentally medical advice about how to keep you and your family safe from COVID, I assume you followed your usually practice of obtaining second and third opinions. Which brings me to the subject of vaccines. Do you actually believe the experts when they tell you they work?It's true, Frank, that I'm a contrarian, a rebel really. I love playing Devil's advocate, thinking out of the box. Agreeing with others is boring. You learn nothing. You become a clone. Challenging convention makes you think and explore alternatives which are often a better approach. I don't trust experts blindly because they're often wrong or just repeating what they heard from others. That's true about photographers as well as virologists. :)
I'm talking about drinking water. How is that private well in your back yard working out?
It's true, Frank, that I'm a contrarian, a rebel really. I love playing Devil's advocate, thinking out of the box. Agreeing with others is boring. You learn nothing. You become a clone. Challenging convention makes you think and explore alternatives which are often a better approach. I don't trust experts blindly because they're often wrong or just repeating what they heard from others. That's true about photographers as well as virologists.
No. I'm not making them out to be bad per se, just that they are not a suitable solution for all, eg an urban population.
I have pleaded several times for a more civilized debate, apparently in vain.
There are three options now:
1. to call you an idiot too
2. report you to moderator
3. you delete the post and apologize
Which one is it going to be?
Given that Alan falsely attributed clearly racist remarks to Jeremy and, despite multiple people calling him out on it, he refused to even acknowledge what he had done; I'm inclined to go with 4) ignore it. Alan has made false attributions of statements to multiple people, myself included. Each time he refuses to acknowledge them and now seems to kind of enjoy doing it.
Forgive me for not believing you when you say that you are a rebel and a contrarian and like to think outside the box, because, in just this example alone, you have done exactly the opposite? You are not challenging convention or exploring alternatives. You followed the CDC instructions about disinfecting the surfaces of your home to the letter, including, as you tell it, spending days on Amazon tracking down the specific disinfectants approved by the CDC. And you told us all about the elaborate routine you went through with your mail which was a real Kabuki dance. You even mentioned a week or so ago that you are still letting your mail sit for a day before opening it. And now you are following the CDC recommendations of continuing to wear a mask and not eating in restaurants even though you are fully vaccinated. You are doing exactly what the experts are telling you do, even though you castigate them for changing their minds, tell everyone within hearing distance that they can't be trusted, and are now bitching and moaning about having wasted all that time tracking down disinfectants and cleaning your home. You are not a rebel or contrarian, and you don't think outside the box. You just complain a lot. Read much Thurber?Well, I may be a rebel and contrarian. But I'm not stupidly so. :)
True, although their is always rainwater. Bermuda makes it work.Are you sure he doesn't hide his wine there from his wife?
PS, I have a flat roof and could easily modify my gutters to collect rain water. I dont because I'm not crazy, but there are crazy people in my neighborhood who do this, mainly for gardening. One guy, and I shit you not,has a puncheon barrel hooked up to his gutters.
It's true, Frank, that I'm a contrarian, a rebel really. I love playing Devil's advocate, thinking out of the box.
Given that Alan falsely attributed clearly racist remarks to Jeremy and, despite multiple people calling him out on it, he refused to even acknowledge what he had done; I'm inclined to go with 4) ignore it. Alan has made false attributions of statements to multiple people, myself included. Each time he refuses to acknowledge them and now seems to kind of enjoy doing it.I don't recall that statement. Would you refer me to my post so I can address it? I've had Jeremy on Ignore for weeks due to his recurring insults directed at me. Others here have called me a racist by association with the Republican party and Trump and my beliefs about election laws. Posters have associated me with the Nazi party and Fascism.
Debatable. What is not debatable is that you are a liar.
I don't recall that statement. Would you refer me to my post so I can address it? I've had Jeremy on Ignore for weeks due to his recurring insults directed at me. Others here have called me a racist by association with the Republican party and Trump and my beliefs about election laws. Posters have associated me with the Nazi party and Fascism.
None of that equates directly insulting people.
Since apparently that is the way you guys want to go, and the site owner seems to agree with that ("report to moderator" button is disabled)... I will bow out of this thread.
Your pretense at having no recollection rings as hollow as your pretense at victimhood now; just as it did when you tried the victim act immediately following your insulting falsehoods aimed at Jeremy.I already apologized in general. Since I don't know what post you're referring to, I can't apologize for anything specific if I said something untoward unless I can see what it was. I have gone halfway. How about you? Will you agree to join me in eliminating all insults and keeping our posts on a friendly basis? How about others?
Button is not disabled...
Is there anything at all constructive still occurring for each of you in this thread? Is there even a thread?
Reflect and if the thread continues on coarse simply as a place where insults and revisited grievance is dominant then I see no reason to keep it going. Mental health is important. Take stock. Breath. Resume as you see fit.
Thanks
What I would like to do is continue on the topic of Coronavirus Vaccines. I'm glad that Chris Kern started the thread on this topic as I'm interested in the ongoing developments. Restraint from diversions would likely be helpful in learning more about the thread's stated topic.
. . . the chances of young people dying from Covid in current conditions (low level of infection in the community) are more or less zero. That calculation may change, of course, if the level of infection rises.
Question What are the clinical characteristics and geographic and temporal distribution of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) in the United States?
Findings In this cross-sectional study, 1733 patients with MIS-C were identified with predominantly gastrointestinal, mucocutaneous, and cardiovascular manifestations, and a majority required intensive care. MIS-C peaks closely followed the peaks of COVID-19 and the spread of the pandemic from urban to rural communities.
Meaning The data are consistent with observations that MIS-C resulted from delayed immunologic responses to infection by SARS-CoV-2.
Luckily there are alternative vaccines, but suppose there weren't? How justified would it be to ask a young person to take a small risk in order to protect an old one. . . . What do you think?
What I would like to do is continue on the topic of Coronavirus Vaccines. I'm glad that Chris Kern started the thread on this topic as I'm interested in the ongoing developments. Restraint from diversions would likely be helpful in learning more about the thread's stated topic.
On that theme then, I’d refer everyone to a new article in the NYT. Not new for Europeans and as yet, not prevalent in the USA but underlines the moving ‘window’ that this virus represents.
Is there anything at all constructive still occurring for each of you in this thread? Is there even a thread?
Our genomic analysis efforts here in the United States are still rather pathetic, although they are becoming more extensive. Based on the latest test results, the very aggressive B.1.1.7 variant first identified in the U.K. is now believed to be responsible for most new infections here as well as in Europe, and may account for why more people in their 30s and 40s are requiring hospitalization for COVID-19.
I read the other day that Brazil set a one day record of 3,780 COVID deaths. Just to put that in perspective using rough approximations, that would be something in the range of 40,000 COVID deaths in one day in the US. I think perhaps Trump's pal Jair Bolsonaro might want to revisit his response to the pandemic, but he appears to be more concerned with maintaining his support by the military.How do you arrive at 40,000 American deaths? Brazil's population is 211 million against America's 330 million. The rate would be 6,000 deaths in America not 40,000.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/americas/brazil-bolsonaro-military-upheaval-covid-intl-latam/index.html
On the other hand, we could discuss the role, if any, of government in public health on a theoretical level.
While children and adolescents rarely die from COVID-19, and often exhibit no symptoms at all when infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, there is recent evidence that asymptomatic infections in young people may have other adverse consequences (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2778429?guestAccessKey=145e1ae6-2d09-4378-897a-90dc868ec13e&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=040621):Good news for children.
This somewhat complicates the risk-benefit assessment of which vaccines are most appropriate to administer to this segment of the population.
How do you arrive at 40,000 American deaths? Brazil's population is 211 million against America's 330 million. The rate would be 6,000 deaths in America not 40,000.
My mistake. I thought Brazil's population was 28 million. Turns out that is the population of neighboring Venezuela. Sill, 6000 dead a day is a lot.Well, I'm glad they're really not Americans. WE have enough problems. :o
New York Times reports the official covid death toll in Russia was about 57,000 and says that number is under-reported by about...300,000. Now THAT's under-reporting.
New York Times reports the official covid death toll in Russia was about 57,000 and says that number is under-reported by about...300,000. Now THAT's under-reporting.Navalny might be safer in the Gulag than Moscow.
Is there anything at all constructive still occurring for each of you in this thread? Is there even a thread?
Reflect and if the thread continues on coarse simply as a place where insults and revisited grievance is dominant then I see no reason to keep it going. Mental health is important. Take stock. Breath. Resume as you see fit.
Thanks
The conversation in this thread and another are being dominated by back and forward with one person that is trolling large numbers of the LuLa forum members and they have has said as much in a recent post. The trolling appears to be for no value other than their own entertainment.
The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention's director said Saturday authorities are considering mixing COVID-19 vaccines because the country's domestically made doses "don't have very high protection rates," per AP.
Here is an excellent website (https://covariants.org/) created by a Swiss researcher that allows you to explore data about the genomic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 "variants of interest," along with various tools for visualizing those data over time.So if I understand the chart correctly, it seems that Great Britain has more variants to date and the USA seems to be just getting started with variants? Is that the point of this study?
(Attached: a screen grab of a graphic from the site showing the increase in sequences reported by several countries for the B.1.1.7 variant first identified in the United Kingdom. Note that this shows the proportion of identified genome sequences associated with the variant, not the number of cases of COVID-19 from infections by that variant.)
New York Times reports the official covid death toll in Russia was about 57,000 and says that number is under-reported by about...300,000. Now THAT's under-reporting.
Most likely, the infection counts are under-reported in many other countries.Canada had an issue with long waits before Covid.
In Canada, the death count is relatively low, but the official infection count has been rising. The emergency departments and ICU's are running at full capacity in many hospitals and surgeries had been cancelled and suspended again.
Many patients who were classified before as waiting for "elective surgeries" are now after more than a year of waiting in critical situations and backlogs are one to two years long. When it comes to seniors, many are either already dead or staying put at home. It's the young reckless idiots who get infected, fill up the emergencies and cause cancellations of cancer, heart and other surgeries, thus indirectly killing many people.
Canada had an issue with long waits before Covid.
Canada had an issue with long waits before Covid.
TORONTO -- Starting Monday, most Ontario hospitals will “ramp down” all elective surgeries and non-emergent/non-urgent activities in the wake of a record number of COVID-19 patients in intensive care units. Ontario Health President and CEO Matthew Anderson released a memo on Thursday to hospital CEOs and primary care providers telling most hospitals across the province to scale back elective surgeries as of 12:01 a.m. on Apr. 12. “Today, given increasing case counts and widespread community transmission across many parts of the province, we are facing mounting and extreme pressure on our critical care capacity,” he said.
A study published by the Canadian Medical Association Journal in September estimated that the move to delay elective care amid the first wave resulted in a backlog of more than 184,000 surgeries. It said at the time that it could take upwards of 84 weeks to clear.
For those unwilling to click on the video link, here is a transcript:
... In the year since then, the evidence has accumulated that a significant number...
But the real question behind this statement is the one Alan Klein would raise, and rightfully so: science flip-flopping. Yeah, yeah, I know, science is a never-ending process of expanding knowledge in light of new evidence, blah, blah, blah.
I agree. Medical research...
Sarcasm duly noted, but misplaced. As I stated, medical research in the last year did not find asymptomatic transmission. That is, until woke scientists panicked that their (and their masters) main narrative is failing, and started producing "research" that asymptomatic account for up to 60% of all transmission. The numbers before (but after Dr. Fauxi's statement, and half way through the pandemic) the woke jumped into the fray was zero to negligible.
Sarcasm duly noted, but misplaced. As I stated, medical research in the last year did not find asymptomatic transmission. That is, until woke scientists panicked that their (and their masters) main narrative is failing, and started producing "research" that asymptomatic account for up to 60% of all transmission. The numbers before (but after Dr. Fauxi's statement, and half way through the pandemic) the woke jumped into the fray was zero to negligible.
I sort of feel bad for you guys. It now seems de rigueur for you wingnuts to throw "woke" onto the fire whenever you're trolling out your pejoratives...
You are actually right. It is inevitable these days, given just how far the woke "culture" has penetrated everything, from universities, to the media, to workplace and company policy. I wouldn't mind using the good old commies, fascists, socialists, liberals, etc., but for the fact that most Americans a. do not understand what those terms mean and b. do not realize that their wokeness is actually all that combined. But since the term "woke" is the term YOU guys invented, not us, we are giving you the courtesy of calling things the way you like it. Why would you complain then?
. . . antibodies that were elicited by mRNA-1273 persisted through 6 months after the second dose, as detected by three distinct serologic assays. Ongoing studies are monitoring immune responses beyond 6 months as well as determining the effect of a booster dose to extend the duration and breadth of activity against emerging viral variants. Our data show antibody persistence and thus support the use of this vaccine in addressing the Covid-19 pandemic.
Hold on. "Fascist" is you guys. Keep it straight.
A recent research report published in the New England Journal of Medicine (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2103916) indicates that one of the mRNA vaccines (Moderna mRNA-1273) produces an effective antibody response for at least six months after the second dose is administered.
Hardly.
It is government (big, mighty - your preference) + corporatism (which is supposedly big capital - which would be us - but you succeeded in placing woke CEOs there, or creating enough grassroot pressure of your woke legions) = fascism. Not to mention that Nazi comes from "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei"
Isn't that old news?
It is probably old news....
If we get to claim corporatism too, what's that leave you guys with? The rabble of Populism? Unhinged Nationalism? That seems like a crap consolation prize to me....
It is government (big, mighty - your preference) + corporatism (which is supposedly big capital - which would be us - but you succeeded in placing woke CEOs there, or creating enough grassroot pressure of your woke legions) = fascism. Not to mention that Nazi comes from "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei"
Isn't that old news?
Six days old, at the time I am writing this.
. . . hasn't that being in the news for at least several weeks now? Or was it only for Pfizer?
No, but seriously, Chris, hasn't that being in the news for at least several weeks now? Or was it only for Pfizer? Both are mRNA type, so I would expect they would behave similarly.
I don't know whether it is old news or new news. I also don't know whether the research was done by woke scientists, so I don't know whether to believe it or not. Any idea who their masters are?
I don't know whether it is old news or new news. I also don't know whether the research was done by woke scientists, so I don't know whether to believe it or not. Any idea who their masters are?The problem with science changing and researchers' "flip-flopping" is not something the public doesn't appreciate under normal circumstances. They can understand the knowledge of science changes. The issue is that politicians have deliberately selected certain scientific claims of the moment to push a particular social policy. On both sides. So the average schnook, caught between a rock and a hard spot, who isn't stupid, sees through the hustle and ignores what might otherwise be good advice.
The problem with science changing and researchers' "flip-flopping" is not something the public doesn't appreciate under normal circumstances. They can understand the knowledge of science changes. The issue is that politicians have deliberately selected certain scientific claims of the moment to push a particular social policy. On both sides. So the average schnook, caught between a rock and a hard spot, who isn't stupid, sees through the hustle and ignores what might otherwise be good advice.
What are you now, Alan Klein for the woke side? 😉
So is this new research, which not or might not actually be new, since Slobodan thinks it may be old, but didn't check before he just threw the possibility out there, an example where "politicians have deliberately selected certain scientific claims of the moment to push a particular social policy"?
Are you an "average schnook"?
Have you seen through the "hustle"?
How are you going to change your life, if at all, based on this new news that might or might not be new?
In Slobodon's defense, I think the general assumption for awhile has been at least a 3-6 month minimum efficacy on the mRNA vaccines, and I certainly remember seeing reporting to that effect. When Chris posted this, I sort of figured that it was more data and/or a new specific study confirming what was already thought/known.
I have read all kinds of stuff. This new news which might be old news is just a piece of an ever evolving puzzle. I would not in the least bit be surprised if this is updated over time as new data is acquired. Certainly if scientists later say the effectiveness period is four months or eight months or whatever, I am going to throw my hands up in the air and lose confidence or trust in science. If and when the scientists determine I need another vaccination or booster or whatever, I'll get it. I also put the recommended air pressure in my tires.
Are you TRYING to start a fight?????? (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11249-020-1273-5)
Are Canadians being forced to get shots?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Zz2eZWyQsD4K/
The problem with science changing and researchers' "flip-flopping" is not something the public doesn't appreciate under normal circumstances. They can understand the knowledge of science changes. The issue is that politicians have deliberately selected certain scientific claims of the moment to push a particular social policy. On both sides. So the average schnook, caught between a rock and a hard spot, who isn't stupid, sees through the hustle and ignores what might otherwise be good advice.
Especially when the same political side pushes two contradictory messages. Over the weekend it broke that conservatives just are not posting vaccine selfies online, and, well, that should be concerning. Stelter, of liberal CNN, was really concerned about this, and had a good whining session on his show over it. Meanwhile, rabid lefty Joy Reid engaged in vaccine denialism by insisting that even after getting vaccinated, we should continue to double mask, not invite people over or go out to enjoy ourselves, because, I guess, she thinks they're ineffective.
It's so hard to nail down the messaging here. Do these vaccines actually work or is it just a senseless passing fad that really does nothing? I've all but given up hope at ever really figuring out what the stance on the left is other then being for the eternal hobbit who never leaves the house.
Only when the civil service health police panels demand it. They don't do it to everyone, they just pick out some high profile cases so the rest of us fall in line.Who can they demand to have the shots? What happens if you refuse?
Who can they demand to have the shots? What happens if you refuse?
I think you would have to e-mail the guy in the video and ask him.I directed my question to Robert who posted it and is a Canadian and would know more about it than you. You don't have to be a wise guy with every post I make.
I directed my question to Robert who posted it and is a Canadian and would know more about it than you. You don't have to be a wise guy with every post I make.
I directed my question to Robert who posted it and is a Canadian and would know more about it than you. You don't have to be a wise guy with every post I make.
... You don't have to be a wise guy with every post I make.
Oh wait. I was assuming that your original post of the video was a joke, even though you didn't use an emoji. That's why my smart alecky answer. Did I misjudge the situation? Were you being serious? Do you think there are civil service health police panels who interview patients before we get treatment?Yes. :-[
Yes. :-[
This thread has become an interesting research project in itself. It's testing the impulse control of individuals with regard to their ability to discuss the thread topic without giving into the impulse to convert the thread into a platform for their views on whatever other subject matter is causing them an itch they feel an impulse to scratch.What are your observations and conclusions?
There's no scientific rigor to it, but it's interesting as an observational study nonetheless.
You're right. All the propaganda you've heard from American health care insurance companies is true. Even the stuff they haven't thought to make up yet is true. Sorry fellow Canucks, but he beat it out of me.Well, when I was a kid, I looked at the RCMP as heroes, always getting the bad guy, and rescuing the damsel. It would have been disappointing to me to learn they were locking up people for not taken taking their vitamins. Eh.
What are your observations and conclusions?
Well, when I was a kid, I looked at the RCMP as heroes, always getting the bad guy, and rescuing the damsel. It would have been disappointing to me to learn they were locking up people for not taken taking their vitamins. Eh.
...Yes, we can easily believe that you have health panels forcing people to "fall in line," as you said, by prosecuting high-profile individuals. Especially when YOU have no reputation of being funny or satirical.
The thing is I still don't know if you've been kidding or not. Do you believe that Canadians are being forcibly vaccinated?no longer. I did from your post.
... Do you believe that Canadians are being forcibly vaccinated?
Note to TechTalk: there is no fun in discussion serious issues ;)
https://apple.news/AGMV7LZZFR4eOBriSS-VQEAIt's very rare. She'll be OK.
P.S. My daughter falls in that risk group and is in that window too (6-13 days)
From my last post, one can argue that just not moving around in business cause 400,000 - 57000= 343,000 fewer deaths. That's a great argument to shut down the economy permanently and isolate and wear masks all the time. We'd save 343,000 lives every year.It proves that just living normally causes more death. But then we all knew that already. Didn't we?
From my last post, one can argue that just not moving around in business cause 400,000 - 57000= 343,000 fewer deaths. That's a great argument to shut down the economy permanently and isolate and wear masks all the time. We'd save 343,000 lives every year.
It also possibly makes the case for shutting down all social media, eliminating the primary of stupidity in modern culture. :)An unscientific response. Please explain why the deaths in 2020 were not higher.
... Please explain why the deaths in 2020 were not higher.
No.I already stated this in my first post about it: "Maybe the number of deaths being only 57000 higher was because Covid prevented other deaths. With people not going to work and isolating, maybe there were fewer accidents, falls, heart attacks, and other communicable diseases that would have killed people but were avoided."
You raised the subject, not me.
Sure.
That's what fascism is capable of. Or doing things like this:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/04/shock-troops-coming-200-heavily-armed-canadian-police-deployed-edmonton-church-harass-christians-video/?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-gatewaypundit&utm_content=later-16183972&utm_medium=social&utm_source=instagram
“The Shock Troops Are Coming!” – 200 Heavily-Armed Canadian Police Deployed to Edmonton Church
Note that the SCOTUS just ruled that the similarly commie/fascist California can not prevent church goers from coming to church. But in Canada, they can (prevent it).
... I found these numbers interesting. As reported by the CDC ...
Here are the US deaths by year and the change from the previous year.
Year 2017: 2,818,503 Americans died
Year 2018: 2,839,205 deaths (20,702 more than the previous year 2017) plus .007%
Year 2019: 2,855,000 deaths (16,300 more than the previous year 2018) plus .006%
The year of the pandemic ...
Year 2020: 2,913,144 deaths (57,641 more than the previous year 2019) plus .019%
I already stated this in my first post about it: "Maybe the number of deaths being only 57000 higher was because Covid prevented other deaths. With people not going to work and isolating, maybe there were fewer accidents, falls, heart attacks, and other communicable diseases that would have killed people but were avoided."
I also said: "It proves that just living normally causes more death".
So if shutting down the economy and isolating saved 343,000 deaths from other causes, that's an argument to shut down the economy regardless of COvid, just to save all those lives. But we already knew or should now understand that living normally does cause more deaths. That's what Joe's been arguing all along. Certainly, we could reduce deaths, but then we would have to stop living.
I think it's a fascinating statistic that requires a lot of discussion.
You realize, don't you, that the photo of police in that article is a stock image and not what actually happened at the church. A simple google search will show the real picture. This is National Enquirer level reportage...
An unscientific response. Please explain why the deaths in 2020 were not higher.
In May 2016, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published an article with the headline: Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the U.S. The article estimated that as many as 250,000 deaths per year in the United States were caused by medical error.
You realize, don't you, that the photo of police in that article is a stock image and not what actually happened at the church. A simple google search will show the real picture. This is National Enquirer level reportage.They weren't given a free pass. The court felt that churches were required to have more restrictions than other similar venues.
Why should church goers get a free pass during a public health emergency? You can listen to a preacher on Zoom or Youtube. Or TV. Or just pray in private.
The SCOTUS decision to place religious observance above public health reminds me a bit of Easter Island. I don't consider it something to be proud of. It's what I expect of the Taliban not a modern state.
Your frequent strident accusations of fascism sound a bit hollow, btw. Are you back on caffeine? I did warn you.
QuoteYou mean I should get a third opinion? :)
In May 2016, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published an article with the headline: Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the U.S. The article estimated that as many as 250,000 deaths per year in the United States were caused by medical error.
A Mystery Under Study: How, Why And When COVID Vaccines Aren't Fully Protective
The NPR story strikes me as well-reported, although the website headline (which probably wasn't written by the reporter) is somewhat misleading. There is no mystery. Anyone who has been paying attention should have been aware all along that some individuals who have been "fully vaccinated" will be infected by this coronavirus. Based on the limited real-world information about the effectiveness of the vaccines that is currently available, it appears that if you received both doses of one of the two mRNA vaccines and are subsequently exposed to someone who is shedding the virus, you are unlikely to become infected, quite unlikely to get sick, very unlikely to require hospitalization, and almost certain not to die. My understanding is that the current estimates should be considered provisional, especially in view of the fact that they are based on data gathered before the new, more aggressive variants of SARS-CoV-2 became dominant in North America and Europe, but apparently approximately 10 percent of those who are exposed can be expected to be infected and 5 percent will experience symptoms of COVID-19. The risk of hospitalization or death if you are exposed after receiving one of these vaccines apparently is too small to have been estimated by the limited real-world data that so far have been collected.Thanks for the positive post. It makes me more confident. The problem is my wife's really nervous still. She stills wears double masks etc.
Although I am not a huge fan of this website, I feel this article sums up the whole issue with trying to get people to get vaccinated.
Americans Will Never Vaccinate If Fauci’s Retort To Normalcy Is Always ‘No, It’s Still Not OK’ (https://thefederalist.com/2021/04/12/americans-will-never-vaccinate-if-faucis-retort-to-normalcy-is-always-no-its-still-not-ok/?fbclid=IwAR3g-xsH3ceqTekTym5cehA8GaK_Swi-a_QDXej89we3CRXQuhVpMduW1WM)
“So, if you’re not vaccinated, please get vaccinated as soon as vaccine becomes available to you, and if you are vaccinated, please remember that you still have to be careful and not get involved in crowded situations, particularly indoors where people are not wearing masks,” Fauci.
So, if the vaccines work, why do we need to still act as if they do not after getting them?
This is the very basic natural rhetorical questions being asked by nearly everyone in the country. For someone like me, who is under 50 and healthy and fully understands that this does not pose any real threat to myself, there simply is no incentive to get the vaccine except to be allowed to return to normalcy, especially after seeing how shitty some people are one or two days after the second shot. So long as the Biden administration keeps on pushing this message, a large number of young people are just simply not going to get it, or go out of their way to get it until they have to.
If you don't perceive any incentive to get a vaccine, don't get a vaccine. As far as I know, the government is not making you get one. I haven't seen any polling numbers indicating what percentage of young people are planning not to get a vaccine. I have seen numbers indicating that half of Republican men are either planning not to get the vaccine or are not sure.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/vaccine-hesitancy-republican-men/
“And for the time being, until we show definitively that a person who’s vaccinated does not get this subclinical infection and can spread to others, you should also continue to wear a mask.”
Although I am not a huge fan of this website, I feel this article sums up the whole issue with trying to get people to get vaccinated.Raldi says the RCMP is going to come down from Canada and twist your arm and then inject you in the other one. :) Eh.
Americans Will Never Vaccinate If Fauci’s Retort To Normalcy Is Always ‘No, It’s Still Not OK’ (https://thefederalist.com/2021/04/12/americans-will-never-vaccinate-if-faucis-retort-to-normalcy-is-always-no-its-still-not-ok/?fbclid=IwAR3g-xsH3ceqTekTym5cehA8GaK_Swi-a_QDXej89we3CRXQuhVpMduW1WM)
“So, if you’re not vaccinated, please get vaccinated as soon as vaccine becomes available to you, and if you are vaccinated, please remember that you still have to be careful and not get involved in crowded situations, particularly indoors where people are not wearing masks,” Fauci.
So, if the vaccines work, why do we need to still act as if they do not after getting them?
This is the very basic natural rhetorical questions being asked by nearly everyone in the country. For someone like me, who is under 50 and healthy and fully understands that this does not pose any real threat to myself, there simply is no incentive to get the vaccine except to be allowed to return to normalcy, especially after seeing how shitty some people are one or two days after the second shot. So long as the Biden administration keeps on pushing this message, a large number of young people are just simply not going to get it, or go out of their way to get it until they have to.
... Fauci is pretty straightforward:
Fucc Fauxi.
Fucc Fauxi.
So, if the vaccines work, why do we need to still act as if they do not after getting them?
So should I get together for breakfast with my friends who've had the shots like me? Then there are the waiters etc. My wife's panicking.
A Mystery Under Study: How, Why And When COVID Vaccines Aren't Fully Protective
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/04/13/986411423/a-mystery-under-study-how-why-and-when-covid-vaccines-arent-fully-protective
Because, while the vaccinated may have better protection against getting infected themselves, they may still be infectious to others.
Fucc Fauxi.
Because, while the vaccinated may have better protection against getting infected themselves, they may still be infectious to others.
Yah, because some dickhead who said "Wake me when it (the US death total) gets to 60K" knows more about virology than, well, pretty well anybody. Including Fauci....
You are setting up the excuse for people not to get it; it is just a logical conclusion to not do so if you imply it does not work by saying it does not allow us to get back to normal.
My experience is that when people are looking for an excuse to not do something, they will latch on to pretty much anything, rational or irrational. People already have half a dozen excuses for not getting the vaccine. What's one more? All this may do is shift some people from one excuse to the another without affecting the number of people not getting vaccinated. I mean you didn't need this new excuse for deciding not to get vaccinated. You rationalized not getting vaccinated a long time ago.
Surely you can do better than Rand Paul as an oracle of wisdom.
... I just don't want morons who have the title virologist to run and ruin my life.
(Maybe he can't.)
... Virologist speaking on viral infection - questionable.
Ophthalmologist speaking on viral infection - heck yeah!
Makes perfect sense.
Please remain calm.
Appeal to authority, much? A logical fallacy, btw.
In Logic, Appeal to Authority is an informal fallacy of weak induction. This fallacy occurs when someone uses the testimony of an authority in order to warrant their conclusion, but the authority appealed to is not an expert in the field in question.
Nope. Quoth Google.
Ironically, in dragging the self-board-certified ophthalmologist Rand Paul into this discussion of virology, it's YOU, sir, that have committed the fallacious, outrageous, and mendacious Appeal to Authority.
Nope. Quoth Google.
Ironically, in dragging the self-board-certified ophthalmologist Rand Paul into this discussion of virology, it's YOU, sir, that have committed the fallacious, outrageous, and mendacious Appeal to Authority.
Nope. You appealed to Dr. Fauxi's authority, who IS (supposedly) "an expert in the field of question" (virology)Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people even more. Instead of being a tyrant, he should have revealed the concern and let people decide if they still wanted the shots. One death in six million is 1/30th the death rate of the pill at one in 200,000.
As a politician, Paul Rand is an authority on "petty tyrants," which was the subject of my post, not virology. Virologists exist to write research papers, collect titles and positions, and associated remuneration, not to run my life. When they do, they are petty tyrants, not virologists.
... your opponent must be an idiot...
Nope. You appealed to Dr. Fauxi's authority, who IS (supposedly) "an expert in the field of question" (virology)
As a politician, Paul Rand is an authority on "petty tyrants," which was the subject of my post, not virology. Virologists exist to write research papers, collect titles and positions, and associated remuneration, not to run my life. When they do, they are petty tyrants, not virologists.
Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people even more.
... It seem perfectly normal that he would get beat up by someone sooner or later given his winning personality...
I am speechless 😱😱😱
Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people even more. Instead of being a tyrant, he should have revealed the concern and let people decide if they still wanted the shots. One death in six million is 1/30th the death rate of the pill at one in 200,000.
https://www.nydailynews.com/coronavirus/ny-us-covid-johnson-vaccine-fauci-20210414-5kxzkualbraytmurnscadphec4-story.html
Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people even more. Instead of being a tyrant, he should have revealed the concern and let people decide if they still wanted the shots. One death in six million is 1/30th the death rate of the pill at one in 200,000.
https://www.nydailynews.com/coronavirus/ny-us-covid-johnson-vaccine-fauci-20210414-5kxzkualbraytmurnscadphec4-story.html
Nope. You appealed to Dr. Fauxi's authority, who IS (supposedly) "an expert in the field of question" (virology)
After lecturing us for weeks about how the avg lay person can't understand research findings, you now want the authorities to abdicate their responsibility and to leave a medical choice up to a joe on the street.We don't need a nanny state. Final decisions are already made by "joes on the street" to get or not get the vaccine safe or not safe. We decide, not Fauci. We didn't need Fauci to stop Johnson vaccinations midstream for such a relatively minor risk. With a one in a million death, that's less than most other medicines that aren't pulled off the market, why not leave it up to people and their doctors to decide? After all, if teenage girls can make a decision to take birth control pills with a risk of death thirty times more dangerous, certainly adults can make similar choices about their health with safer medicines like the Johnson vaccine.
Do you want the era of snake oil salesmen to make a comeback?
Let me ask you something, if the NY Daily News had come out in full support of Fauci, would you be calling them sellouts and purveyors of fake news?
Dr. Fauci is an immunologist and has been recognized and honored as one of the world's leading scientists in his field for decades. His contributions to the understanding, treatment, and prevention of multiple diseases, which were previously considered fatal, has prolonged and saved an untold number of lives. Those contributions have been cited, used, and carried forward by medical researchers around the world and led to his earning the respect, gratitude, and honors he has received from the world medical community, long before anyone ever heard of COVID-19.
The disrespect and criticism that he has received in the past year, from those those with an agenda entirely unrelated to medical science and the advances derived in saving peoples' lives, is entirely undeserved. They may serve some other purpose, but do nothing whatever to undermine his well deserved respect in the medical community as a researcher, scientist, and doctor.
As Alfred Sidgwick, a British logician, wrote in his Fallacies: A View of Logic from the Practical Side:
A man may have all the wisdom and learning of an Aristotle, and yet be quite mistaken on a given point. The recognition of this fact tends to make us value conclusions more on their merits and less on the merits of those who advance them.
Fallacies: A view of Logic from the Practical Side (1883) by Alfred Sidgwick.
Maybe "entirely predictable" would be a better choice of words.
I read the article you linked to and didn't see the death rate for the pill you cited. I just saw stuff about Dr. Fauci saying Tucker Carlson was spreading crazy conspiracy theories. I did see the death rate for the pill on a commie/lib news show, but took your advice and disregarded it. Now it seems you believe the commie/lib news, so I am confused.Oh, stop conflating Fox with my statement. It's got nothing to do with it. I heard somewhere else about the 1 in 200,000 deaths from birth control pills. I just googled and found that 300-400 women die every year from hormonal contraception. The point is we'd have been better off making the decision to take the Johnson vaccine or not based on the statistics. We're not stupid. We all calculate risk and chance and harm every day when we get out of bed. We didn't need the government to pull it when millions are lining up to get it. What are they going to do now? They lost their chance. Now they might have to go to the end of the line.
The CDC should have announced the risk, and let people decide to get the vaccine or not. We are all faced with that regardless of the medicine we take.
Is that the way the CDC usually does it? Does the CDC approve every medicine that is submitted to it, and just publish the death rates, and then let the public decide whether they want to take it or not?
Is that the way the CDC usually does it? Does the CDC approve every medicine that is submitted to it, and just publish the death rates, and then let the public decide whether they want to take it or not?They have the legal right to do what they did. I just think it was stupid for the reasons I gave above.
I'd be interested in what the death rates are for the medicines you take just to gauge your level of risk aversion. I can't find the death rates for any of the medications I take.
Aren't you confusing CDC with FDA?
They have the legal right to do what they did. I just think it was stupid for the reasons I gave above.
Yes, the FDA approves medicines. I don't know which agency put a pause on the J&J vaccine. Ask Alan.Why ask me? Ask Fauci. He's the one bragging about pulling it.
Is that how you think medicines should be handled? The government should approve every medicine that is submitted to it, and just publish the death rates, and then let the public decide whether they want to take it or not?You know I never suggested that. As usual, you're putting words in my mouth that I never said. The Johnson vaccine was already approved as are birth control pills. I think around 6 million Americans already have taken the J&J vaccine. If they found one death out of those people, you don't pull the vaccine when millions are lining up to get it trying to avoid deadly Covid. It seems to reasonable people that the risks don't justify stopping the vaccine, even just pausing it "for days or weeks" as Fauci said.
Virologists exist to write research papers, collect titles and positions, and associated remuneration
not to run my life. When they do, they are petty tyrants, not virologists.
It seems to reasonable people that the risks don't justify stopping the vaccine, even just pausing it "for days or weeks" as Fauci said.
Virologists that provide direct patient care as doctors exist to diagnose and treat people suffering from viral diseases. Virologists that perform research exist to advance the understanding, prevention, and treatment of viral diseases. Many virologists devote their lives to both patient care and research. They do so to save lives and alleviate human suffering from infectious diseases. Given the respect I have for your intelligence, I'm surprised that you would describe them the way you have above.I believe the point Slobodan was making was that doctors should not be making public policy. They weren't elected. Their position is only to provide data, choices, statistics, and recommendations. Of course, most people like power, including virologists, and I'd posit Fauci. So due to their position, they become little tyrants deciding public policy that should be left to elected officials who respond to the public.
The sickest that I have ever been in my life was as a healthy and athletic 20-year old that was hospitalized due to influenza. From the first symptoms to hospitalization was just a matter of hours. Thanks to the medical care that I received, I recovered quickly. The second worst illness I've had was viral pneumonia decades later. Thanks to antiviral drug treatments that were available, I again recovered quickly and without hospitalization. The medical care that I received was informed and made possible by the prior research and advances in treatment by virologists. So, I for one am quite grateful for the work they've done over many years. Of course, I'm also grateful to virologists for their work in prevention of diseases that I've thankfully never suffered from, such as small pox and polio, due to their work in developing vaccines.
So to doctors, scientists, virologists, immunologists, epidemiologists, I say thanks. I'm grateful.
The advice and expertise of virologists and other scientists is sought out by policy makers and decision makers in government. They are not the ones making those decisions that appear to be running your life nor are they "petty tyrants". If you feel victimized, please blame the right people for your victimhood.
Who are these reasonable people you are talking about?Apparently not you.
Appeal to authority, again.
And before I hear again that Wikipedia is an authority on the Appeal to Authority fallacy (i.e., that it is not a fallacy if the authority is real), let me clarify something (bold mine):
I believe the point Slobodan was making was that doctors should not be making public policy. They weren't elected. Their position is only to provide data, choices, statistics, and recommendations. Of course, most people like power, including virologists, and I'd posit Fauci. So due to their position, they become little tyrants deciding public policy that should be left to elected officials who respond to the public.
The public should decide individually how we should live. That's what freedom is all about. If we need to give up personal liberty at a time during a crisis, the next in line are elected officials who represent us, not experts, either scientific or economic. We don't need a bunch of petty virologists or economists, meaning well I'm sure, who because of their ego, thinking they know what's best for everyone, to decide how we should live. At least politicians, egotistical and petty as well, respond somewhat to the public.
I believe the point Slobodan was making was that doctors should not be making public policy.
In case it is not clear, I am speechless that you consider it "perfectly normal" to beat someone up because of their personality.
It seems to reasonable people that the risks don't justify stopping the vaccine, even just pausing it "for days or weeks" as Fauci said.
Who are these reasonable people you are talking about?
Apparently not you.
Appeal to authority, again.
And before I hear again that Wikipedia is an authority on the Appeal to Authority fallacy (i.e., that it is not a fallacy if the authority is real), let me clarify something (bold mine):
As usual, you're putting words in my mouth that I never said.
Of course, and no one argued such. But that doesn't mean that anyone's opinion on anything is equally valid.
That helps to confirm my decisions not to ask a plumber to examine my teeth or ask my dentist about sewer line drainage issues. I suppose advice from authority does have some place in life.
... Given the respect I have for your intelligence, I'm surprised that you would describe them the way you have above....
No, not the cross authority as in your example (plumber > teeth, etc.). But even when my dentist advised me to do something, the final decision is mine. I had one particularly aggressive in upselling, who had offices of his daughter and son-in-law (two separate offices) in the same building, practicing different dental specializations, and he always tried to sell their services too. I listened, but I ultimately declined or accepted the advice.
As for plumbers, after paying two or three times up to $300 for their services, next time I went to Lowe and rented the snake-cable machine and did it myself.
So, yes, advice from authority does have some place in life. But the ultimate decision should be mine. I have nothing against Dr. Fauci telling me to use three mask layers... just that I am not going to do so.
That was a rhetorical and hyperbolic sarcasm :)
... So due to their position, they become little tyrants deciding public policy that should be left to elected officials who respond to the public.
The public should decide individually how we should live. That's what freedom is all about. If we need to give up personal liberty at a time during a crisis, the next in line are elected officials who represent us, not experts, either scientific or economic. We don't need a bunch of petty virologists or economists, meaning well I'm sure, who because of their ego, thinking they know what's best for everyone, to decide how we should live. At least politicians, egotistical and petty as well, respond somewhat to the public.
Health Minister Christine Elliott says the government is exploring its options to boost hospital capacity and staffing levels as variants of concern wreak havoc on the province. She said in a news conference on Monday that hospitals have been instructed to ramp down all surgeries “except the ones that are absolutely life-and-death matters.”
Ontario may have to turn to 'last resort' of triage protocol if ICU number surpasses 900. The cancellation of elective surgeries is “unfortunate, but sadly necessary right now,” Elliott said in the legislature.
The province reported 4,401 new cases of COVID-19 on Monday - more than 1,280 in Toronto - and 15 new deaths due to the virus.
One day I'm sure you'll get over Fauci dissing Trump.I don't like Fauci for what he did thirty years ago and my feelings about it. I forget the particular situation. But he was in charge back then too. What I remember for these thirty years is that I got the feeling then he's a politician and I just didn't trust him since then. That was long before Trump. I still feel the same way.
There have been a number of misrepresentations made today about what was done; what was said; and who said or did it; in regard to the J&J/Janssen vaccine. A couple of highlighted items in the CDC Reports of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis from the Vaccine Safety Team stand out. These were also contained in the CDC Health Alert published yesterday.What misrepresentation has been made? The CDC stopped vaccinations using J&J.
https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2021/CDC Health Alert Network 00442 (https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2021/han00442.asp)
"CDC will convene an emergency meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on Wednesday, April 14, 2021, to further review these cases and assess potential implications on vaccine policy. FDA will review that analysis as it also investigates these cases. Until that process is complete, CDC and FDA are recommending a pause in the use of the J&J COVID-19 vaccine out of an abundance of caution. The purpose of this Health Alert is, in part, to ensure that the healthcare provider community is aware of the potential for these adverse events and can provide proper management due to the unique treatment required with this type of blood clot."
In addition to the summary above, specific and important recommendations were made for evaluation, treatment, and reporting for clinicians caring for patients...
Recommendations
For Clinicians
1. Pause the use of the J&J COVID-19 vaccine until the ACIP is able to further review these CVST cases in the context of thrombocytopenia and assess their potential significance.
2. Maintain a high index of suspicion for symptoms that might represent serious thrombotic events or thrombocytopenia in patients who have recently received the J&J COVID-19 vaccine, including severe headache, backache, new neurologic symptoms, severe abdominal pain, shortness of breath, leg swelling, petechiae (tiny red spots on the skin), or new or easy bruising. Obtain platelet counts and screen for evidence of immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.
3. In patients with a thrombotic event and thrombocytopenia after the J&J COVID-19 vaccine, evaluate initially with a screening PF4 enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) assay as would be performed for autoimmune HIT. Consultation with a hematologist is strongly recommended.
4. Do not treat patients with thrombotic events and thrombocytopenia following receipt of J&J COVID-19 vaccine with heparin, unless HIT testing is negative.
5. If HIT testing is positive or unable to be performed in patient with thrombotic events and thrombocytopenia following receipt of J&J COVID-19 vaccine, non-heparin anticoagulants and high-dose intravenous immune globulin should be strongly considered.
6. Report adverse events to VAERS, including serious and life-threatening adverse events and deaths in patients following receipt of COVID-19 vaccines as required under the Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID-19 vaccines.
You know what is hilarious? A couple of weeks ago some of you guys were saying that no one in his right mind would take the J&J vaccine because it had a lower efficacy rating than the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Now that the CDC and FDA have recommended that it be taken off the market temporarily until it can be determined whether it causes blood clots in the brain, all of a sudden it is a national catastrophe. I don't know how it could be a national catastrophe if no one in his right mind was going to take it anyway, particularly now they now learn that it could cause blood clots in the brain. Seems like a non-event.Your point just confirmed my argument back then. I said I would wouldn't take J&J because it wasn't as effective as Moderna and Pfizer. Others argued it was just as effective. When I asked if people had a choice, who would take Johnson, no one said they would. Now Johnson has even more problems. So I'll ask the question again. Who would take Johnson over the other two?
I don't like Fauci for what he did thirty years ago and my feelings about it. I forget the particular situation. But he was in charge back then too. What I remember for these thirty years is that I got the feeling then he's a politician and I just didn't trust him since then. That was long before Trump. I still feel the same way.
... Now when something could affect others, then it’s not quite that simple, like smoking in planes or driving drunk can have severe effects on others, so those decisions are taken out of your hands...like they should be.
Many women feel exactly like that when recalling some perceived slight their husbands did or said thirty years ago.
...Now Johnson has even more problems. So I'll ask the question again. Who would take Johnson over the other two?...
...The CDC should have just allowed vaccinations to continue until they investigated it so millions of people could get some protection from Covid if they chose.
I don't like Fauci for what he did thirty years ago and my feelings about it. I forget the particular situation. But he was in charge back then too. What I remember for these thirty years is that I got the feeling then he's a politician and I just didn't trust him since then. That was long before Trump. I still feel the same way.
...Now Johnson has even more problems. So I'll ask the question again. Who would take Johnson over the other two?...
...The CDC should have just allowed vaccinations to continue until they investigated it so millions of people could get some protection from Covid if they chose.QuoteI never said no one would take them. My question was to the posters if they had a choice among three vaccines, who would take Johnson's? But millions of Americans already had appointments to take Johnson's. Now they've been cancelled. It should have been left to them to cancel it or not.
If no one would take it, how will it protect millions of people?
I never said no one would take them. My question was to the posters if they had a choice among the vaccines, who would take Johnson's? But millions of Americans already had appointments to take Johnson's. Now they've been cancelled. It should have been left to them to cancel it or not.
Ontario reported 4,401 new cases of COVID-19 on Monday. The number of COVID-19 patients in intensive care units jumped to a record high of 612.
https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-frantically-adding-icu-beds-to-hospitals-as-occupancy-due-to-covid-19-hits-record-high-1.5385128
Around here they just swapped the Pfizer and Moderna for the J&J and carried on. I haven't done a multi-state analysis to see if it is the same elsewhere. Have you?I heard yesterday that Pfizer is going to produce an extra 20 million doses to make up the difference by the end of April or May, not sure which. So that means they have to be short doses somewhere and people are getting canceled.
Here in Ottawa we're getting record number of infections....
I heard yesterday that Pfizer is going to produce an extra 20 million doses to make up the difference by the end of April or May, not sure which. So that means they have to be short doses somewhere and people are getting canceled.
So, even with the draconian measures (note I didn't say fascist this time ;)) you can't keep people obedient enough? Would live ammunition help? Like Duterte?
So, even with the draconian measures (note I didn't say fascist this time ;)) you can't keep people obedient enough? Would live ammunition help? Like Duterte?
Or that they are not short now, but will be in the future if they don't manufacture the other doses. I read a couple of days ago that many states haven't drawn down all of their allocated doses because supply is outstripping demand. They don't want to draw down those doses because they don't want them to go bad waiting around for people to show up and get the shot.Well, if they can administer Moderna or Pfizer, so they don't miss their vaccinations, that would be great. Plus, those two are more effective anyway. I could see most people now refusing to take Johnson. Did their stock price go down?
You got the sequence wrong. FIRST we had record infections, THEN they imposed stay-at-home and store closings."Officer, I was just running out to get my baby some formula. Please don't shoot."
"Officer, I was just running out to get my baby some formula. Please don't shoot."
The death of a second person in Denmark who died after getting the AstraZeneca vaccine was reported this week.
I am not trying to make any point with this, other than being a freakish coincidence:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/04/head-denmarks-health-agency-keels-drops-unconscious-presser-decision-stop-using-astrazeneca-vaccines-happens-vaccinated/?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-gatewaypundit&utm_content=later-16321105&utm_medium=social&utm_source=instagram
About 5,800 people who have been vaccinated against coronavirus have become infected anyway, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tells CNN. Some became seriously ill and 74 people died, the CDC said. It said 396 -- 7% -- of those who got infected after they were vaccinated required hospitalization.
Breakthrough cases are expected. The vaccines are not 100% effective in preventing infections and as tens of millions of people are vaccinated, more and more such cases will be reported.
So far, 5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught COVID-19 anyway in U.S. 5,800 cases is a large absolute number but a relatively small count compared to the total number of completed vaccinations. CDC will attempt to identify who is most prone to become infected despite having been vaccinated.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/so-far-5-800-fully-vaccinated-people-have-caught-covid-19-anyway-in-u-s-cdc-says-1.5388245
So far, 5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught COVID-19 anyway in U.S. 5,800 cases is a large absolute number but a relatively small count compared to the total number of completed vaccinations. CDC will attempt to identify who is most prone to become infected despite having been vaccinated.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/so-far-5-800-fully-vaccinated-people-have-caught-covid-19-anyway-in-u-s-cdc-says-1.5388245
I get that argument, in principle.
The disagreement has been all this time if those effects are really "severe" and even if so, would they justify crashing the whole world economy and draconian lockdown measures. As I explained many times before, I think they are not severe, and do not justify terrorizing 99.9x % of the population for the questionable effect on the 0.0y%. Isolating infected, yes, like in all other pandemics before. Assuming that 99.9x% of the population is dangerous, is, well... very dangerous (assumption).
... I don’t see you all excited about these assaults on your liberty.
6 people who didn't get the AstraZeneca vaccine died from Covid in Denmark just in the last 3 days.
6:2 is an awfully bad ratio, given that you make a choice for the vaccine.
It would be if it weren't bollocksing statistics. Why do you do that?
I don't mind taking off the street someone who is knowingly Covid positive AND coughing deliberately in people's faces.
No one has said the vaccines are 100% effective. Neither are natural antibodies.
The probability of so-called breakthrough infections (stupid term) doesn't seem to be known yet, but the current real-world data appear to indicate that the mRNA vaccines, at least—I haven't seen real-world data regarding any of the others—are quite effective for the overwhelming majority of individuals.My poker friends, all seniors and all vaccinated, want to re-start our weekly poker games before we die from natural causes. I've said yes but my wife isn't in favor of it. She, also vaccinated, still wears two masks, although we stopped disinfecting the grocery food. ::) I might have to skip the games at least until more people are vaccinated and we get closer to herd immunity just to keep peace in the family. :)
Most people who are exposed to someone who is shedding the coronavirus and have been "fully vaccinated" with either the Moderna or Pfizer/BioNTech product (two doses plus a two-week waiting period) won't get infected at all. Of those who do get infected, approximately 10 percent or thereabouts, only about half will get sick. Of those who get sick, few will need hospitalization. A very small number will die.
In the meantime, if you aren't exposed to the coronavirus, you can't get infected. Period. Full stop.
So until you have been vaccinated, if you want to avoid getting sick, don't spend any more time than necessary indoors with strangers; wear an effective facemask* when you must spend time indoors with people other than those in your household and, while you're doing that, maintain as much distance as possible from them; wash your hands after touching smooth surfaces which have been recently handled by strangers. These are the same simple and easy-to-observe precautions that have been understood for many months now by anyone paying attention.
After you have been vaccinated, keep doing these things because some vaccinated or previously-infected individuals are expected to become infected if they come into contact with someone who is shedding the virus. These are the "breakthrough" infections. And, of course, you could become infected, yourself, not have symptoms or not have them yet, and transmit the virus to other people.
If you have been vaccinated and you really want to spend time indoors with people other than those in your household without observing these precautions, verify that they have also been vaccinated and that the venue where you intend to meet will not expose you to other individuals who are unvaccinated or whose vaccination status you can't verify.
Of course, if everybody took these precautions, the reproduction factor of the virus would quickly fall below 1.0, the frequency of new cases would be reduced dramatically, and the risk of coming into contact with an infected individual soon would become low enough that none of these precautions would be necessary any longer.
In other words, once there is little or no chance you will be exposed to the virus, you won't get infected. Period. Full stop.
Alternately, you are within your rights (at least in most industrial democracies) to ignore the precautions, take your chances, and be confident that you were doing your part to retard the return to normal life.
———
E.g., an N95, KN95, or FFP2 respirator, properly fitted, or a surgical mask covered with a tight-fitting cloth mask to pull the edges of the surgical mask close to your face.
... I don't mind taking off the street someone who is knowingly Covid positive AND coughing deliberately in people's faces.
What misrepresentation has been made?
The CDC stopped vaccinations using J&J.
... have been "fully vaccinated" with either the Moderna or Pfizer/BioNTech product (two doses plus a two-week waiting period) won't get infected at all...
... when the US gets 6 million dead...
... when the US gets 6 million dead..
Most people who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recover completely within a few weeks. But some people — even those who had mild versions of the disease — continue to experience symptoms after their initial recovery. Older people and people with many serious medical conditions are the most likely to experience lingering COVID-19 symptoms, but even young, otherwise healthy people can feel unwell for weeks to months after infection.
Although COVID-19 is seen as a disease that primarily affects the lungs, it can damage many other organs as well. This organ damage may increase the risk of long-term health problems. Organs that may be affected by COVID-19 include:
- Heart. Imaging tests taken months after recovery from COVID-19 have shown lasting damage to the heart muscle, even in people who experienced only mild COVID-19 symptoms. This may increase the risk of heart failure or other heart complications in the future.
- Lungs. The type of pneumonia often associated with COVID-19 can cause long-standing damage to the tiny air sacs (alveoli) in the lungs. The resulting scar tissue can lead to long-term breathing problems.
- Brain. Even in young people, COVID-19 can cause strokes, seizures and Guillain-Barre syndrome — a condition that causes temporary paralysis. COVID-19 may also increase the risk of developing Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.
COVID-19 can make blood cells more likely to clump up and form clots. While large clots can cause heart attacks and strokes, much of the heart damage caused by COVID-19 is believed to stem from very small clots that block tiny blood vessels (capillaries) in the heart muscle. Other parts of the body affected by blood clots include the lungs, legs, liver and kidneys. COVID-19 can also weaken blood vessels and cause them to leak, which contributes to potentially long-lasting problems with the liver and kidneys.
Maybe but I didn’t present it as a realistic estimate - just a number bigger than your initial guess if less than 60000.
Many young and fit people succumb to C19 and will experience long lasting effects. ...
More panic-porn.
Your number is vastly exaggerated. Currently, the fatality rate of those tested as infected is about 1%. Actually, much less than 1%, because of those asymptomatic and those infected but who never got tested. So, worst case scenario, without vaccination, it would be less than 3 million. Much less than even 3 mio, as it would continue to spread among younger and healthier population.
Please, Les... "Many"!? "May"!? "Can"?!
I may be hit by a bus, crossing the street. It surely can happen. And it may happen to many people. In reality, the percentages are negligible.
But just imagine the benefits! Social Security solvent into eternity and beyond. Retirement homes get cheaper, due to empty beds. Millennials get to spend their inheritance much sooner, creating a boost to the economy. Middle-aged finally could lead a stress-free life, liberated from the dual pressure to raise their kids and care for their parents. Etc., etc.
In the meantime, thanks to Dems (demons?) and Satan:
The ones that you made yesterday come to mind.A distinction without a difference. The point is, the government stopped the Johnson vaccinations. Who cares if it wasn't just the CDC but rather a joint statement between the CDC and the FDA? Who cares if they "paused" it rather than "stopped it"? That's just nonsensical "cover-your-ass" verbiage from Fauci. You're obfuscating the matter with unimportant factoids. No one is getting vaccinated with it. All those people who had appointments now have to scramble to find other means to get their shots. So they're exposed to the virus for a longer period. How many of them will die compared to the one person who might die from blood clots?
First, CDC does not have that authority, only the FDA does. Second, CDC and FDA issued a joint statement which recommended a pause in the use of J&J vaccine. The FDA did not pull, stop, or prevent the J&J vaccine from continuing to be administered nor withdraw its Emergency Use Authorization. However, the recommendation of a pause from CDC and FDA was enough for states to follow thru and do just that for now.
A distinction without a difference. The point is, the government stopped the Johnson vaccinations. Who cares if it wasn't just the CDC but rather a joint statement between the CDC and the FDA? Who cares if they "paused" it rather than "stopped it"? That's just nonsensical "cover-your-ass" verbiage from Fauci. You're obfuscating the matter with unimportant factoids. No one is getting vaccinated with it. All those people who had appointments now have to scramble to find other means to get their shots. So they're exposed to the virus for a longer period. How many of them will die compared to the one person who might die from blood clots?
I don't understand your consternation about this. The preliminary data is making the researchers nervous and they've decided to have a better look before proceeding. Would you prefer if they rolled the dice and went ahead, and it turned out that lots of people developed clots, more than what has emerged so far? It's a novel treatment, doesn't it make sense to keep a close watch? So some appointments get cancelled or postponed. It's inconvenient and frustrating for the people involved but it's not the end of the world either.But not taking the flu shot was my choice, not the government's. I listened to the experts, the non-experts, and my own intuition and feelings and decided not to take them any longer. That was a really informed move last year because practically no one got it as I figured they wouldn't due to measures taken to protect against Covid.
I remember you once stated that you didn't take the annual flu shot because you were convinced that it gave you the flu. Now you're complaining about being cautious about the Covid vaccine rollout.
Let me guess, "experts" flip-flopping again, right?
All I suggested was that the CDC should warn people of the blood clot issue while they check things out. But not stop it. Then let individuals decide to get the Johnson shot or not. Only one person died of blood clots out of 6 million. How many will die from Covid because they didn't get their shot? Let people figure the odds and make a decision just like we do with elective surgery.
You're obfuscating the matter with unimportant factoids. No one is getting vaccinated with it. All those people who had appointments now have to scramble to find other means to get their shots. So they're exposed to the virus for a longer period. How many of them will die compared to the one person who might die from blood clots?
Around here they just swapped the Pfizer and Moderna for the J&J and carried on. I haven't done a multi-state analysis to see if it is the same elsewhere. Have you?
You know what is hilarious? A couple of weeks ago some of you guys were saying that no one in his right mind would take the J&J vaccine because it had a lower efficacy rating than the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Now that the CDC and FDA have recommended that the J&J vaccine be taken off the market temporarily until it can be determined if it causes blood clots in the brain, all of a sudden it is a national catastrophe. I don't know how it could be a national catastrophe if no one in his right mind was going to take it anyway. Seems like a non-event.
I cannot believe you're doubling down on this idea.Why not? I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am. Proceed with the Johnson vaccine if you have an appointment and if the supplier is still willing to give them to you (which is probably doubtful because then they would be liable and be sued if something happens). Also, I didn't hear Fauci say his "pause" allows you to get the shot anyway. There seems to be a conflict in government advice.
I don't understand something. If you don't care about the people who die from Covid, why do you care about the "millions" falling into poverty?
Besides which, the other day you got hot and bothered about a remark someone made about beating somebody up (I couldn't find the exchange, too many pages to search through), which struck me as a somewhat surprising "snowflakey" reaction on your part. But now you're making cracks about millennials getting their inheritances sooner than anticipated. If you can't take it, maybe you shouldn't dish it out. :)
All I suggested etc., etc. . . .
I cannot believe you're doubling down on this idea.
Why not? I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am.
Then you haven't been paying sufficient attention. It's evident that he has developed a robust immune response to infection by facts that contradict his previously-expressed opinions.I provided facts that support my opinion. See #1267. Your comment is just a cheap shot, Chris.
I have come to the conclusion that you don't believe expert opinions you don't agree with. The expert opinions you do agree with are fine. Hilarious.You do the same. So does everyone else here. Who provides evidence that undermines their own position? I wouldn't want them as a trial attorney defending me.
You do the same. So does everyone else here. Who provides evidence that undermines their own position? I wouldn't want them as a trial attorney defending me.
I provided facts that support my opinion. See #1267. Your comment is just a cheap shot, Chris.
I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am.
I am not the one that every other post says that experts can't be trusted, and then in the next breath rely on a expert's opinion I happen to agree with.I never said I don't listen to experts. What I said is that Covid experts kept changing their minds and scientific knowledge keeps changing. I read experts' advice with caution and try to read between the lines. I admit I'm biased toward experts who agree with my thinking. Who isn't?
I never said I don't listen to experts.
You have said ad nauseum that experts can't be trusted. If experts can't be trusted, why do you trust them?It's why I get second opinions. How do you decide which expert to listen to when experts have differing opinions? Is the market going up or down? How do you decide these things? How do you decide which experts are "right"? I take advice with a grain of salt. Don't you?
What I said is that Covid experts keptchangingtheir minds and scientific knowledge keepschanging.
What misrepresentation has been made? The CDC stopped vaccinations using J&J.
The point is, the government stopped the Johnson vaccinations. No one is getting vaccinated with it.
"What’s more, doctors and vaccination sites can still give you the J&J vaccine. “This is a recommendation, and it’s not a mandate. It’s out of an abundance of caution,” Dr. Peter Marks, the director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a press conference on Tuesday. “If an individual health care provider has a conversation with an individual patient, and they determined that the benefit risk for that individual patient is appropriate, we’re not going to stop that provider from administering the vaccine.”
“The takeaway message here is, the single most important thing people can do is get vaccinated,” said Panettieri. “Not to get vaccinated would put you at such an enhanced risk of death from COVID, or serious risk from COVID, that I would not be worried about these isolated and very rare cases of blood clots.”
Why not? I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am. Proceed with the Johnson vaccine if you have an appointment and if the supplier is still willing to give them to you (which is probably doubtful because then they would be liable and be sued if something happens). Also, I didn't hear Fauci say his "pause" allows you to get the shot anyway. There seems to be a conflict in government advice.
Johnson & Johnson vaccine pause: What to know if you got or scheduled the shot
"What’s more, doctors and vaccination sites can still give you the J&J vaccine. “This is a recommendation, and it’s not a mandate. It’s out of an abundance of caution,” Dr. Peter Marks, the director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a press conference on Tuesday. “If an individual health care provider has a conversation with an individual patient, and they determined that the benefit risk for that individual patient is appropriate, we’re not going to stop that provider from administering the vaccine.”
“The takeaway message here is, the single most important thing people can do is get vaccinated,” said Panettieri. “Not to get vaccinated would put you at such an enhanced risk of death from COVID, or serious risk from COVID, that I would not be worried about these isolated and very rare cases of blood clots.”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/johnson-johnson-vaccine-pause-what-to-know-if-you-got-or-scheduled-the-shot-11618338584
Hence the reason that there was only a recommendation for a pause and NOT a withdrawal of the Emergency Use Authorization to administer the vaccine.I haven't found an article where the Johnson vaccine is still being administered. Typically, the government talks out of both sides of its mouth. We're putting it on pause says one guy. Meanwhile, another guy says it's OK to keep administering it. Flip-flopping again. Wich government expert should you believe? Who in their right mind will give the shot now without the government reapproving it? They would open themselves up to a lawsuit if someone gets sick. I'm sure every corporate liability lawyer is telling their company to not give the vaccine. If you miss out on your vaccination appointment, too bad!
But not taking the flu shot was my choice, not the government's. ...
If they had let the thing proceed without comment and study and a few more people got blood clots, you'd be foaming at the mouth about how "experts" put people at risk.But the same government that says they're putting a pause on the vaccine is also saying it's OK to proceed with the Johnson vaccinations. That people and their doctors can make up their own minds. So your point doesn't even make sense. It's very basis is in error.
Something worrisome came up with a new drug/treatment and they want to re-examine things. How is it possible to be against this and instead say that people should make up their own minds. If the people who study this stuff want to have another look, then how can you possibly expect the avg joe on the street to make an informed choice.
All you ever do, Alan, is complain without reflection. Why do you do this? These are not difficult concepts.
Honestly, you're not making any sense.
But the same government that says they're putting a pause on the vaccine is also saying it's OK to proceed with the Johnson vaccinations. That people and their doctors can make up their own minds. So your point doesn't even make sense. It's very basis is in error.
It's why I get second opinions. How do you decide which expert to listen to when experts have differing opinions? Is the market going up or down? How do you decide these things? How do you decide which experts are "right"? I take advice with a grain of salt. Don't you?
Asked and answered many times by me as well as other here.Well, in fairness, I believe many experts who I agree with also take payoffs. :) I had a relative who worked for a pharmaceutical company. Their job was to see doctors to promote their medicine. They would pick up the cost for trips to conventions in Las Vegas, etc. It was a very cozy relationship. Samples were given to doctors to give to their patients. This still goes on although the AMA has clamped down. Researchers need to get research money also do work that is often more in demand and see in their research results that would support more funding. It blinds the eye.
I would note that that I think there is a difference between taking an expert's opinion with a grain of salt, and going on a multi-year crusade against the untrustworthiness of experts and their opinions, including alleging that the experts with whose opinions you disagree are taking payoffs for rendering such opinions.
Well, in fairness, I believe many experts who I agree with also take payoffs. :) I had a relative who worked for a pharmaceutical company. Their job was to see doctors to promote their medicine. They would pick up the cost for trips to conventions in Las Vegas, etc. It was a very cozy relationship. Samples were given to doctors to give to their patients. This still goes on although the AMA has clamped down. Researchers need to get research money also do work that is often more in demand and see in their research results that would support more funding. It blinds the eye.
That goes on all the time as well. It's not direct payoffs.
Is Dr. Peter Marks, whose opinion you quoted here and with which you said you agree, getting a direct or indirect payoff to render his opinion? Are his eyes being blinded?I don't recall which comment was Marks. But I believe he's telling it as he sees it, or at least hope it is. The problem is that many people including "experts" tend to find confirmation to support their beliefs. Just like I find evidence to back up my point, and you find evidence to back up a contrarian point, experts can do the same thing. It requires real discipline to not allow beliefs to interfere. I read an article a while back about how studies of research by a major science organization found that many conclusions could not be duplicated. They worried that people were fudging it. It's one of the reasons we have peer reviews.
I don't recall which comment was Marks. But I believe he's telling it as he sees it, or at least hope it is. The problem is that many people including "experts" tend to find confirmation to support their beliefs. Just like I find evidence to back up my point, and you find evidence to back up a contrarian point, experts can do the same thing. It requires real discipline to not allow beliefs to interfere. I read an article a while back about how studies of research by a major science organization found that many conclusions could not be duplicated. They worried that people were fudging it. It's one of the reasons we have peer reviews.
It reminds me of the story of a scrupulously honest and religious judge who recused himself from a case just getting started. He just didn't feel right about it and felt he was somehow being influenced in his decisions. When he put on his suit jacket to leave the courthouse, he found an envelope with a bribe inside the jacket pocket that someone had slipped in there secretly without his knowledge. Such is the power of bribes.
As expected, you quoted my post, and then gave us two paragraphs of non sequiturs. I'll ask again:I already said in #1289 that many experts I agree with take payoffs too. Apparently, you're not reading my entire post, something you accuse me of. How could I know whether the ones I quoted actually were falsely stating things? I'm not a mind reader. I never even met them. That's why I take all experts with a grain of salt.
Is Dr. Peter Marks, whose opinion you quoted here and with which you said you agree, getting a direct or indirect payoff to render his opinion? Are his eyes being blinded?
I already said in #1289 that many experts I agree with take payoffs too.
Apparently, you're not reading my entire post, something you accuse me of.
How could I know whether the ones I quoted actually were falsely stating things? I'm not a mind reader. I never even met them. That's why I take all experts with a grain of salt.
I would note that that I think there is a difference between taking an expert's opinion with a grain of salt, and going on a multi-year crusade against the untrustworthiness of experts and their opinions, including alleging that some of the experts with whose opinions you disagree are taking payoffs for rendering such opinions.
There you go with that grain of salt business. You repeated yourself so I'll repeat myself:Let me tell you a little story that would clarify my point about trusting experts and witnesses to truth. Before I moved to NJ 8 years ago, I was living in NYC, the boro of Queens. I was called for Federal jury duty at the Eastern District in Brooklyn. It turned out it was a Mafia case where a few guys were charged with murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and a few other acts of miscellaneous mischief, mostly against other gangsters. There were over two hundred prospective jurors. Everyone was given a number. Names were kept secret and not used. We all had to fill out a 30-40 page questionnaire relating to the case and our personal beliefs. One of the questions was "Could you believe a convict as a juror testifying for the government" I didn't like the answers you could check like yes, no, and don't know. I wrote on the side - It depends.
Let me tell you a little story that would clarify my point about trusting experts and witnesses to truth. Before I moved to NJ 8 years ago, I was living in NYC, the boro of Queens. I was called for Federal jury duty at the Eastern District in Brooklyn. It turned out it was a Mafia case where a few guys were charged with murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and a few other acts of miscellaneous mischief, mostly against other gangsters. There were over two hundred prospective jurors. Everyone was given a number. Names were kept secret and not used. We all had to fill out a 30-40 page questionnaire relating to the case and our personal beliefs. One of the questions was "Could you believe a convict as a juror testifying for the government" I didn't like the answers you could check like yes, no, and don't know. I wrote on the side - It depends.
Unlike most juror screening at civil trial where everyone pretty much all sits around, each prospective juror was called separately to the very courthouse where the actual trial would be held. I had to sit in the witness box and swear to tell the truth. The defendants were sitting in the court along with their half dozen lawyers,. Also present was four government prosecutors, all considerably younger than me. There were about half dozen armed marshalls. It was very intense. The judge asked all the questions that were given to him previously by each side. He finally got around to asking me what I meant by It Depends?
I told him if I was in jail, and was promised to get out early if I testified, put in a witness protection program, and sent to New Mexico to sit by a pool for the rest of my life, free, drinking Pina Coladas, I might lie to help the prosecution, or at least embellish the truth. So as a juror I couldn't believe a witness like that. However, if the prosecutors, and I pointed to the four of them and looked them in their eyes, could come up with a number of witnesses who were in different jails who could independently corroborate each other's testimony, then it might be more believable.
I wasn't chosen as one of the jurors. The actual trial went on for about 6 weeks. The jury found them all guilty.
I hope that clarifies how I look at things.
I already said in #1289 that many experts I agree with take payoffs too.
Also present was four government prosecutors, all considerably younger than me.
Just when I thought it was safe to go out again. Here we go with blood types again.
If You Have This Blood Type, You're More Likely to Get Blood Clots
RESEARCH HAS ESTABLISHED A LINK BETWEEN THIS BLOOD TYPE AND BLOOD CLOTTING RISK.
https://bestlifeonline.com/blood-type-blood-clots-news/
Just when I thought it was safe to go out again. Here we go with blood types again.
If You Have This Blood Type, You're More Likely to Get Blood Clots
RESEARCH HAS ESTABLISHED A LINK BETWEEN THIS BLOOD TYPE AND BLOOD CLOTTING RISK.
https://bestlifeonline.com/blood-type-blood-clots-news/
April 2013:
The prevalence of non-O blood group and inherited thrombophilia (deficiencies of natural anticoagulants, factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A mutation) was assessed in a series of 712 consecutive patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs who were referred to our Institution between 2004 and 2010, and in 712 age- and gender-matched healthy volunteers. Odds ratios (OR) of deep vein thrombosis and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed for non-O group and thrombophilia, both separately and in combination.
A non-O blood group was present in 492 cases and 358 controls (OR 2.21; 95% CI, 1.78 to 2.75). A thrombophilic abnormality was present in 237 cases and 105 controls (OR 2.82; 2.18 to 3.66). The combination of non-O group and thrombophilia was present in 152 cases and 51 controls (OR 7.06; 4.85 to 10.28).
Alan, out of all people who don't like to read the linked articles, you could have put it right into your first line.
For the benefit of others, here it is: Best blood - type O, 2nd best type A, worst for blood clotting - type B.
BTW, association of type A and B as a risk factor for venous thromboembolism has been known for many years, so it is not necessarily linked to the current versions of the C19 vaccines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3626477/
That benefit outweighs potential risk is very likely the decision that all of the global public health agencies will reach based on currently public data. The prudent course of action, when a safety signal of a rare event is found in a new and emergency use authorization vaccine or therapy, is to recommend a pause while the data is examined and evaluated; inform the public; insure that the public and healthcare providers know what symptoms to watch for; and issue guidance to healthcare providers on proper diagnoses and treatment if symptoms are found.That's not what the non-Fauci expert said. He said it should have not been paused. So we have a conflict in opinions among different experts. Frankly, the worse measure was Fauci stopping them due to one death. That was dumb. But Fauci is a politician and always errs on being politically correct.
That's not what the non-Fauci expert said. He said it should have not been paused. So we have a conflict in opinions among different experts. Frankly, the worse measure was Fauci stopping them due to one death. That was dumb. But Fauci is a politician and always errs on being politically correct.
That's not what the non-Fauci expert said. He said it should have not been paused.
That benefit outweighs potential risk is very likely the decision that all of the global public health agencies will reach based on currently public data. The prudent course of action, when a safety signal of a rare event is found in a new and emergency use authorization vaccine or therapy, is to recommend a pause while the data is examined and evaluated; inform the public; insure that the public and healthcare providers know what symptoms to watch for; and issue guidance to healthcare providers on proper diagnoses and treatment if symptoms are found.
That was dumb. But Fauci is a politician and always errs on being politically correct.
Why do you single Fauci out? It was the FDA and the CDC which recommended the pause, not the NIAID. You appear to have a vendetta against Fauci for reasons you say you can't even remember. If you don't like the decision, the least you can do is blame the right people. The individuals who issued the statement recommending the pause were Dr. Peter Marks, Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, and Dr. Anne Schuchat, Principal Deputy Director of the CDC.Fauci was the face of the news of the cancellation. It was he who was broadcasting the decision that I saw on regular broadcast TV. Nobody knows who those other two guys are. Regular people don't read fda press announcements.
If you haven't read the statement, you can do so on the FDA website here:
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/joint-cdc-and-fda-statement-johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine
The press event announcing the decision and answering media questions can be accessed on the FDA's YouTube channel here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ELXnGYgsJY
No. He didn't say "it should have not been paused." You may believe that "Dr. Reynold Panettieri, a pulmonary physician and a professor of medicine at Rutgers University", who was quoted in the article you linked was implying that, but it was NOT what he said. He was quoted discussing the rarity of the condition, that there are a variety of causes, that it shouldn't cause worry, and "the single most important thing people can do is get vaccinated”. Beyond that, quoting him as having said "it should have not been paused" is your misquote based on a biased spin of his actual words quoted. In fact, according to a local news source, he believes that the pause was the right thing to do.How do people who had the appointments canceled because they were scheduled to take Johnson's vaccine suppose to get the shot? They now go to the end of the line and have to make re-appointments. Many places only have the Johnson vaccine so they can't immediately substitute. The other vaccines have to be distributed to them or the person has to make an appointment somewhere else which is a difficult thing to do.
"Dr. Reynold Panettieri, vice chancellor and director at the Rutgers Institute for Translational Medicine and Science and a professor at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, believes this pause is the right course of action."
https://nj1015.com/Dr. Reynold Panettieri believes pause is the right course (https://nj1015.com/no-we-dont-that-jj-vaccine-caused-serious-blood-clots-in-6-women/)
This doesn't conflict with statements from the FDA, CDC, or Fauci. They have also stated that it is a rare combination of conditions; not a cause for alarm; and have never wavered in telling the public that the important thing is for people to get vaccinated.
At present, there are two other vaccines that are in much wider production and distribution than the J&J vaccine and which can take up any current slack.
How do people who had the appointments canceled because they were scheduled to take Johnson's vaccine suppose to get the shot? They now go to the end of the line and have to make re-appointments. Many places only have the Johnson vaccine so they can't immediately substitute. The other vaccines have to be distributed to them or the person has to make an appointment somewhere else which is a difficult thing to do.
Also, how is their cancellation of the vaccine going to encourage people sitting on the fence to get any vaccine shot at all? It just creates more doubt in many people that they shouldn't get them. It was a terrible and counterproductive decision that put more people at risk from getting Covid than the potential lives saved from blood clots that may be caused by Johnson's vaccine.
This might the third or fourth iteration of this. We know what you think. Not many people agree with you, and you will just have to come to terms with that.My beliefs are not dependent on what others think.
How do people who had the appointments canceled because they were scheduled to take Johnson's vaccine suppose to get the shot?
They now go to the end of the line and have to make re-appointments.
Many places only have the Johnson vaccine so they can't immediately substitute.
The other vaccines have to be distributed to them
My beliefs are not dependent on what others think...
By substituting one or both of the more plentiful and widely available mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech or the Moderna vaccine which was jointly created by Moderna and the Vaccine Research Center which was spearheaded and formed by Dr. Fauci as part of the NIAID in 1997.I don't know why any places would stock and use more than one vaccine. First off, no one is stocking backup because of short shelf lives and limited supply to begin with. Second, It would be too confusing especially since J&J only required one shot while Moderna and Pfizer requires two. Thirdly, J&J does not require freezing. So it would make no sense for those using J&J to also use the other two that require freezing in addition to having to worry about setting up second appointments. Note the place I went to to get mine, only vaccinated with Moderna. Had Moderna been stopped, I would have been out of luck.
Do they? Where is that happening? What percentage of vaccine providers are telling patients that, if any?
How many? Are there any? Does a vaccine provider only have access to one of the three vaccines that are currently available and not have the other two available to them?
Sure, unless they already have other vaccines in stock in addition to the J&J, in which case that stock simply would need to be replenished more rapidly. How long does it take to reallocate the available vaccine inventories?
So many assertions made without any evidence in support of their assumed existence and magnitude.
I don't know why any places would stock and use more than one vaccine.
Note the place I went to to get mine, only vaccinated with Moderna. Had Moderna been stopped, I would have been out of luck.
Because there are three options available and any one of the three could experience disruptions in supply due to manufacturing glitches or errors. This happened most recently with the J&J vaccine and required discarding millions of doses due to a manufacturing error.You're guessing most places did this. The place I went to, did not. They only handled Moderna. It doesn't make sense to carry more than one vaccine, especially when Johnson is the only one that requires no second dose and no refrigeration, as Moderna and Pfizer do. Additionally, it would make the shipments to each place more complicated because there would have to be coordination between the different manufacturers. Can you imagine the mistakes that would occur when they shipped second doses of a different vaccine. What a clusterf$$k.
https://www.reuters.com/April 19, 2021/J&J COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing halted at U.S. plant that had contamination issue (https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/fda-tells-emergent-plant-behind-botched-covid-19-vaccines-stop-manufacturing-2021-04-19/)
Balancing an inventory from two or more supplier options provides a cushion for any temporary disruption from a single source. It's basic sound inventory management 101.
You have your facts wrong about the things you said.
You're guessing most places did this. The place I went to, did not. They only handled Moderna. It doesn't make sense to carry more than one vaccine, especially when Johnson is the only one that requires no second dose and no refrigeration, as Moderna and Pfizer do. Additionally, it would make the shipments to each place more complicated because there would have to be coordination between the different manufacturers. Can you imagine the mistakes that would occur when they shipped second doses of a different vaccine. What a clusterf$$k.
While I'm sure some localities were able to make up the difference because of central supply like in a big city, many smaller locations and facilities would not be able to until they received a replacement shipment of a different vaccine. Appointments would be backlogged. And I have to tell you that just setting up appointment if you haven't done it yet is quite frustrating. Hopefully it will be better by the time you have to get yours.
You're guessing most places did this.
Additionally, it would make the shipments to each place more complicated because there would have to be coordination between the different manufacturers.
Apparently, some of you got your facts wrong again.
No coordination between manufacturers would be required. Each manufacturer simply receives an updated shipping order to balance where you want available inventory distributed. It isn't rocket science for anyone that has the slightest experience in managing distribution, including drop shipments if that's part of the plan.If you use Johnson, you don't need special freezers. To switch to Moderna or Pfizer requires setting up a whole different procedure for double dose appointments as well as special refrigeration equipment. You're making it seem like some food store switching from Oreos to ice cream. we're talking about distribution and outlets throughout all of America. On the other hand, maybe Trump's Operation Warp Speed distribution is that good as you seem to think. :)
Which facts are those?The facts I confirmed with the Times article.
The reaction prompted an intense debate among public health experts about whether guarding against such a rare disorder was worth the cost. Scores of vaccine appointments were canceled this week, and some public health officials feared that by fueling vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy theorists, the pause could prompt fewer Americans to get vaccinated — and expose them to far more risk.
The facts I confirmed with the Times article.
Debate is a good thing, even healthy, including among public health experts. The other side of the debate, not mentioned above, is that for those that have been hesitant due to concern that safety has been compromised, rushed, or minimized in bringing multiple vaccines into use in record time, the recommended pause — and public information regarding the relatively very low risk and advisory on symptoms and treatment — is evidence that prudent safety precautions and measures are being taken and may provide reassurance or alleviation of those concerns.That's not what the experts said, and we should follow the experts, shouldn't we?
In all likelihood though, I think that the majority of people who are currently hesitant about being vaccinated are not going to be very motivated to change their mind regardless of what they read in any current news and more likely will use any excuse that's handy to rationalize their preexisting beliefs.
That's not what the experts said, and we should follow the experts, shouldn't we?
it would make no sense for those using J&J to also use the other two that require freezing
If you use Johnson, you don't need special freezers. To switch to Moderna or Pfizer requires... special refrigeration equipment.
Also note that Dr. MArks called for a stop like Fauci said at least in this NY Times article which is opposite what you said. Apparently, some of you got your facts wrong again.
“We are recommending a pause in the use of this vaccine out of an abundance of caution,” Dr. Peter Marks, the director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, and Dr. Anne Schuchat, the principal deputy director of the C.D.C., said in a joint statement."
To switch to Moderna or Pfizer requires setting up a whole different procedure for double dose appointments
How did you come to the conclusion that it "requires setting up a whole different procedure for double dose appointments"? Why would it require any "procedure" that differs beyond making two appointments 3 or 4 weeks apart instead of just one? How complex and difficult is that to accomplish? If your doctor wants to schedule a followup appointment when you visit, does it require "setting up a whole different procedure" than your initial appointment?
I don't know where you're getting your assumptions regarding the cold chain requirements for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. I would guess it's most likely you get them where your other assumptions originate.You're assuming that outlets only giving Johnson have Pfizer or Moderna as backup in their facilities. No one is keeping storage like that. So once the Johnson vaccinations are stopped, the facility would have to wait for a shipment of Moderna or Pfizer. How long does that take? Even I don't think Trump's Operation Warp Speed is that efficient.
There are very few locations that have ultra-cold storage equipment for the mRNA vaccines and it is not neccessary for vaccination sites to have any special equipment for storage of their vaccine supplies from Pfizer and Moderna. The shipping containers used will retain the correct temperature using dry ice or other means during transport by FedEx and UPS. The Pfizer vaccine, which requires the colder ultra-cold storage, can be maintained in their unique shipping container for 30-days by replenishing the dry ice every 5-days and ships with one dry ice replenishment. It can then be stored in a conventional freezer for two-weeks, and a refrigerator for 5-days once unfrozen.
Moderna vaccine can be stored at normal refrigerator temperature for 30-days after removal from the shipping container. Your doctor, pharmacy, clinic, stadium, or wherever you get your vaccination from, does not have special equipment requirements as you have assumed.
More detailed instructions are below...
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/moderna/storage-summary.pdf (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/moderna/downloads/storage-summary.pdf)
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/storage-summary.pdf (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/downloads/storage-summary.pdf)
How did you come to the conclusion that it "requires setting up a whole different procedure for double dose appointments"? Why would it require any "procedure" that differs beyond making two appointments 3 or 4 weeks apart instead of just one?How complex and difficult is that to accomplish? If your doctor wants to schedule a follow up appointment when you visit, does it require "setting up a whole different procedure" than your initial appointment?You're mistaken again. A facility can only set up so many appointments based on their staff and operation. So let's say they had set up 4000 single dose Johnson vaccination appointments over the next month. Because PFizer and Moderna require two shots and two appointments, they would only be able to vaccinate 2000 people during that time instead of the originally scheduled 4000. All the appointments they originally scheduled with the single dose Johnson vaccine for later in the month would have to be cancelled as those appointment slots would be needed for the second dose of the first 2,000 people.
Do you not even bother to read your own posts? How is "recommending a pause" the "opposite" of what nearly everyone has posted here — except for your own descriptions.You conveniently ignored the part of the article I put in the post #1327 that shows that everyone in the world apparently stopped their Johnson vaccinations. No one it appears took it as a recommendation and continued the vaccinations. They stopped them. Let me copy it for you again:
In Ontario, the pause between the two shots has been lately stretched to 3-4 weeks.America may have been very lackadaisical about masks, but we did a good job in pushing the development and securing the vaccine in enough doses to apparently match our ability to gear up to currently giving 3 million doses a day. When the Johnson vaccine was stopped, I think it was Pfizer who said they would up their manufacturing an additional 20 million doses by the end of the month.
How effective is the first shot for the first 3-4 months, and how effective is the second shot after 3-4 months as compared to 2-3 weeks per original guidance?
You're mistaken again. A facility can only set up so many appointments based on their staff and operation. So let's say they had set up 4000 single dose Johnson vaccination appointments over the next month. Because PFizer and Moderna require two shots and two appointments, they would only be able to vaccinate 2000 people during that time instead of the originally scheduled 4000. All the appointments they originally scheduled with the single dose Johnson vaccine for later in the month would have to be cancelled as those appointment slots would be needed for the second dose of the first 2,000 people.
I dunno, Robert, why DO you(*) read and respond to his opinion about anything? He is ignorant on every subject, makes assumptions that suit his extreme political views, and is dishonest to boot. And yet you allow him to lead you by the nose down these alleyways of stupidity.
(* yes, me too probably)
You're assuming that outlets only giving Johnson have Pfizer or Moderna as backup in their facilities. No one is keeping storage like that. So once the Johnson vaccinations are stopped, the facility would have to wait for a shipment of Moderna or Pfizer. How long does that take? Even I don't think Trump's Operation Warp Speed is that efficient.
In Ontario, the pause between the two shots has been lately stretched to 3-4 weeks.
How effective is the first shot for the first 3-4 months, and how effective is the second shot after 3-4 months as compared to 2-3 weeks per original guidance?
. . . vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3–85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59–0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3–91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0–69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18–55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01–2·68]).
Which vaccine? I've read that most experts believe extending the interval between the first and second doses of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccines by several weeks and possibly longer is likely to provide equivalent protection to using the intervals that were selected for their respective clinical trials, but I haven't come across any rigorous studies that validate that. However, there is some evidence that for the AstraZeneca vaccine, a longer interval may actually provide superior protection (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00432-3/fulltext):
I suspect we'll see many more real-world reports about how well the vaccines work before the end of the year. They've only been administered to the general public for a few months and it takes time to collect and analyze the data.
Do you have an actual link for this? - I didn't see it on the Gallup site, but maybe my Google-fu is weak.
(I did, however, come across a survey showing the "better grasp" Republicans are significantly less likely than Democrats to realise that CV19 is more lethal than flu)
Thanks.
I'm sorry to be so rude, but why should we read your opinion...
... He is ignorant on every subject, makes assumptions that suit his extreme political views, and is dishonest to boot...
... Republicans are significantly less likely than Democrats to realise that CV19 is more lethal than flu)
Thanks
So, not at all what was claimed by Maher, then.
Alan is demonstrably a liar, but I'm not going to waste more energy on proving it. He isn't worth the steam off my ...
Personal attack. This is the place we want to avoid.Thanks Josh for your post. Jeremy's been personally insulting me for weeks. I had to put him on my Ignore list along with Digital Dog who was doing the same. It really makes it difficult to have intelligent discussions.
Retract, reframe, or focus on something / someone else.
Josh
Thanks Josh for your post. Jeremy's been personally insulting me for weeks. I had to put him on my Ignore list along with Digital Dog who was doing the same. It really makes it difficult to have intelligent discussions.
So you think Black Americans are ignorant. That they're still picking cotton and don't know how to get an ID when ID's are required to get into an office or public building, drive, have a bank account, or to get welfare or food stamps if they're poor. Maybe we should stick black people's thumbs into purple ink after they vote as they did in Iraq to prevent double-voting since they're incapable of showing identity and signing their names on the voting list at the voting place like white people do. Do you realize how insulting and racist your opinion of black people is?
More assumptions without any evidentiary support.I stated that the place I went to only had Moderna shots to give. That's evidentiary support. Out of the thousands of vaccinations places, I'm sure there are many similar ones who were similarly situated. Why are you giving your opinion without evidentiary support but I need it? Why is your opinion better than mine? This is a photo forum not a court of law. We all are giving our opinions all the time. What make your opinions the truth?
I will share an anecdote about my vaccine experience. I got my first shot in early March. It was a drive through site. The vaccine was Pfizer. I had a short wait of perhaps five or ten minutes. There were three cars in front of me. My follow up dose was scheduled for a Thursday three weeks later. Thursday arrived, and I received a notification that my appointment had been rescheduled for Friday because it was raining. On Friday there was a long line. I probably waited an hour. The tech that administered my shot apologized for the wait, and told me there were fulfilling appointments for both Thursday and Friday. Just making sure everyone got their shots in a timely manner. Oh, I didn't see a freezer anywhere. I suspect that is different from your experience in January and February. There are over 3000 counties in the US, some of which have several vaccination locations. I suspect each of them is doing things a little differently.
I think I may have mentioned that different locations in my county use different vaccines. When the FDA and CDC recommended pausing the J&J vaccine, the J&J location used one of the other vaccines. I doubt that my county is unique in that regard. At least in my county, getting an appointment is not a problem. There are so many appointment slots going unfilled, some of the locations are taking walk-ins.
You're assuming that outlets only giving Johnson have Pfizer or Moderna as backup in their facilities. No one is keeping storage like that. So once the Johnson vaccinations are stopped, the facility would have to wait for a shipment of Moderna or Pfizer. How long does that take? Even I don't think Trump's Operation Warp Speed is that efficient.
Why are you giving your opinion without evidentiary support but I need it? Why is your opinion better than mine? This is a photo forum not a court of law. We all are giving our opinions all the time. What make your opinions the truth?
To argue as you have that it's cancellation has had no effect on the vaccination rate counters common sense.
We won't know the full effect for weeks when surveys are completed that will provide exact statistics.
It may have been worse in other countries who didn't have access to other vaccines at all.
In any case, it seems to me and a lot of other more experience people, that the government over-reacted.
I did not express any opinions in my post. I recounted anecdotal information about my vaccination experience. I expressed two suspicions, first that my vaccination experience in March was different than your experience in January, and second that since there are 3000 counties in the US, some with multiple vaccination locations, different locations may handle things a little differently. I never expressed that any of my opinions were better than yours, nor did I claim my opinions were true, because I didn't express any opinions.We're giving our opinions on how smart it was for the government to stop Johnson's vaccination. Of course, much statistical evidence of what effect it has caused can't be collected until time has passed. Meanwhile, thousands may die of Covid because they missed their shots. I forget which general said that attacking the enemy today without all the facts is a lot better than attacking with more facts a week from now. The war could be over by then.
It is immediately obvious to anyone who reads my post that I made no such argument.
Which make one wonder how you have reached the conclusions you have.
That might be be true or it might not be true. I have not seen any data one way or the other.
That is one view. There is a difference of opinion among experienced people. You are free to agree with whomever you want for whatever reason you want. I haven't expressed an opinion on whether the government over-reacted or not. I have challenged your opinion because it is based on many assumptions without evidentiary support.
We're giving our opinions on how smart it was for the government to stop Johnson's vaccination. Of course, much statistical evidence of what effect it has caused can't be collected until time has passed. Meanwhile, thousands may die of Covid because they missed their shots. I forget which general said that attacking the enemy today without all the facts is a lot better than attacking with more facts a week from now. The war could be over by then.
You conveniently ignored the part of the article.. [Blah, Blah, Blah]
You do realize you are participating in an Alan Klein vs. the World series on your own volition?
Alan represents a common man's views on the matter, his views are not extreme politically, and definitely is not dishonest.
One might want to consider this post from Alan in response to one of Jeremy's posts before drawing any conclusions about why Alan finds it difficult to have an intelligent conversation:
It goes without saying that Alan's description does not reflect Jeremy's opinion of black people. It is a heinous accusation.
Since you went to the trouble to find and quote the “offending” post (thank you), perhaps it would have been fair to quote the reason for such a post? Namely, what in Jeremy’s earlier posts prompted Alan to say what he said.
Now I have a question for you. Why should your Canada and probably most other countries have ID requirements but America should waive its requirements? That's what Democrats want us to do.
It could be because in Canada there is not such racism and inequality that strict ID requirements don't result in disenfranchisement of a specific demographic.
So you think Black Americans are ignorant. That they're still picking cotton and don't know how to get an ID when ID's are required to get into an office or public building, drive, have a bank account, or to get welfare or food stamps if they're poor. Maybe we should stick black people's thumbs into purple ink after they vote as they did in Iraq to prevent double-voting since they're incapable of showing identity and signing their names on the voting list at the voting place like white people do. Do you realize how insulting and racist your opinion of black people is?
Jeremy said nothing of the sort. They're your words and I daresay your opinion.
If you have a modicum of self-respect, you'll apologise.
I'm not holding my breath
But that's what Jeremy is implying when he says black people don't have the ability or intelligence to obtain ID's so they can vote just like white people. He's the one who owes the apology. To them. If Jeremy believes otherwise, then he can defend himself.
Now, I take a different view., I believe not only do black people know how to get ID's, but they too want the vote to be honest and not allow their votes to be watered down by those who would use gaps in the rules to stuff ballot boxes for candidates who would not have won the election but for election fraud.
Since you went to the trouble to find and quote the “offending” post (thank you), perhaps it would have been fair to quote the reason for such a post? Namely, what in Jeremy’s earlier posts prompted Alan to say what he said. Which, to me, without seeing Jeremy’s arguments, sounds like an inference or conjecture, a reaction to the claim that certain state voting laws are designed to limit voting rights by requiring an ID. If so, Alan’s position shouldn’t be seen as personally offensive to Jeremy, but simply as a political position shared by many in the Congress. Namely, that opposing the ID requirements on the grounds that certain segments of the black population might find it difficult to obtain it is in itself racist, as it presupposes that such a segment is too stupid to do so.
In any case, that’s my reading of the Alan’s quote you presented.
Since you went to the trouble to find and quote the “offending” post (thank you), perhaps it would have been fair to quote the reason for such a post? Namely, what in Jeremy’s earlier posts prompted Alan to say what he said. Which, to me, without seeing Jeremy’s arguments, sounds like an inference or conjecture, a reaction to the claim that certain state voting laws are designed to limit voting rights by requiring an ID. If so, Alan’s position shouldn’t be seen as personally offensive to Jeremy, but simply as a political position shared by many in the Congress. Namely, that opposing the ID requirements on the grounds that certain segments of the black population might find it difficult to obtain it is in itself racist, as it presupposes that such a segment is too stupid to do so.Thanks for explaining my post. You did a better job than I could have.
In any case, that’s my reading of the Alan’s quote you presented.
The exchange went like this...I'll repeat what I said. It's demeaning if not racist for white people to think that blacks are incapable of getting ID's as white people do.
All-in-all, pretty disgusting and insulting. It definitely prompted an ongoing response from Jeremy as Alan simply ignored or deflected Jeremy's multiple requests for an apology.
Excellent point. Much of this repetitive bickering serves nobody's interest, except, perhaps, to keep the respective bickerers occupied.Like Hillary Clinton you wou;d never associate with lepers or deplorables. Well, maybe the first.
I quite agree, at least with your first two arguments. He articulates a certain perspective that is representative of almost half the voting population of the United States, and which deserves to be heard and understood by the other half. (I have no personal exposure to people who share that perspective, so I read all—well, maybe almost all—his posts, however fatuous and repetitive they may be.)
With respect to dishonest, I can't tell. He asserts as facts many things that are obviously untrue, and when confronted with contrary and sometimes incontrovertible evidence, keeps repeating them. But it doesn't matter whether he is intentionally making things up or is just confused: either way, he represents an important segment of current public opinion in the United States.
I'll repeat what I said. It's demeaning if not racist for white people to think that blacks are incapable of getting ID's as white people do.
This is not the argument, as I’ve explained 4 (I think) times now. I think you even agreed with me once.I agree with much of what we discussed. But while many whites feel legitimately that some black people would have problems getting ID's, many whites look at the situation with a noblesse oblige attitude. I think that's demeaning to people, of any race. Every human wants to feel that others respect that he can stand on his own feet.
In any case, this thread is disintegrating as is LuLa overall.
The exchange went like this...
All-in-all, pretty disgusting and insulting. It definitely prompted an ongoing response from Jeremy as Alan simply ignored or deflected Jeremy's multiple requests for an apology.
This will be my last word on this or any subject on Lula...
... perhaps it would have been fair to quote the reason for such a post? Namely, what in Jeremy’s earlier posts prompted Alan to say what he said. Which, to me, without seeing Jeremy’s arguments, sounds like an inference or conjecture, a reaction to the claim that certain state voting laws are designed to limit voting rights by requiring an ID. If so, Alan’s position shouldn’t be seen as personally offensive to Jeremy ...
So you think Black Americans are ignorant. That they're still picking cotton and don't know how to get an ID when ID's are required to get into an office or public building, drive, have a bank account, or to get welfare or food stamps if they're poor. Maybe we should stick black people's thumbs into purple ink after they vote as they did in Iraq to prevent double-voting since they're incapable of showing identity and signing their names on the voting list at the voting place like white people do. Do you realize how insulting and racist your opinion of black people is?
If you feel the need to comment, it would be best to have read the relevant posts first.
You, inadvertently, hit the nail on the head when you say ‘inference or conjecture’.
Words are important, 'You think' and 'your opinion' are definitive statements and, yes, they are offensive when falsely attributed.
Here I would agree with you. The words should have been chosen more carefully. However, since I know there is no mean bone in Alan's body*, I know he didn't mean it to offend, but rather rhetorically.
In which case if, as you say, 'he didn't mean to offend', all that would have been needed was a simple correction, an amendment or retraction - any one would have put this to bed long ago.
Again, I agree.
Demanding that a particular race should get special voting advantages is just as racist to the remaining races as would be denying them the same advantages granted to other races. Everyone should be treated equally.
Arguing that black voters aren't capable of meeting ID requirements that whites can handle is a put down of black people. The fact is they are capable of meeting these reuqirements. Some Democrats are using that excuse because they want to cheat with the vote.
This will be my last word on this or any subject on Lula:
Alan, you claimed I said certain things, as quoted above. You didn't say "suggested", or "implied" or anything of that sort which would have served to qualify your claim. You made a statement of fact, which was false, and served to impugn me. Your words fit any definition of 'libel'. Instead of apologising and retracting your claims, you have restated your position.
Josh, you seem to want to run this website as a free fire zone where Klein can make any claims he wants, valid or false, without constraint. You may imagine that the internet is some magic land where the laws of libel do not apply. I assure you that it isn't. I am an elderly person and I don't plan to spend the last years of my life pursuing satisfaction over this issue. One day you may encounter a poster who has more leisure to do so, and at that point you will regret this policy.
Regardless, I am done here. I thank those who have entertained and informed, and wish you fair light and full frames.
I'll repeat what I said. It's demeaning if not racist for white people to think that blacks are incapable of getting ID's as white people do.
So you think Black Americans are ignorant. That they're still picking cotton and don't know how to get an ID when ID's are required to get into an office or public building, drive, have a bank account, or to get welfare or food stamps if they're poor. Maybe we should stick black people's thumbs into purple ink after they vote as they did in Iraq to prevent double-voting since they're incapable of showing identity and signing their names on the voting list at the voting place like white people do. Do you realize how insulting and racist your opinion of black people is?
No. I'll repeat what you said:
Like Jeremy, this will be my last post on LuLa.
Josh, you are not running a website. You are running a sewer.
No. I'll repeat what you said:
Like Jeremy, this will be my last post on LuLa.
Josh, you are not running a website. You are running a sewer.
Harry Potter and The Curious Case of Missing Flu (my title)
“We do not know when it will come back in the United States, but we know it will come back,” said Sonja Olsen, an epidemiologist at the C.D.C.
Experts are less certain about what will happen when the flu does return. In the coming months — as millions of people return to public transit, restaurants, schools and offices — influenza outbreaks could be more widespread than normal, they say, or could occur at unusual times of the year. But it’s also possible that the virus that returns is less dangerous, having not had the opportunity to evolve while it was on hiatus.
“We don’t really have a clue,” said Richard Webby, a virologist at the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis. “We’re in uncharted territory. We haven’t had an influenza season this low, I think as long as we’ve been measuring it. So what the potential implications are is a bit unclear.”
Scientists do not yet know which public health measures were most effective in eradicating the flu this season, but if behaviors like mask-wearing and frequent hand-washing continue after the coronavirus pandemic is over, they could help to keep influenza at bay in the United States.
Much also depends on the latest flu vaccines, their effectiveness and the public’s willingness to get them. The recent drop in cases, however, has made it difficult for scientists to decide which flu strains to protect against in those vaccines. It’s harder to predict which strains will be circulating later, they say, when so few are circulating now.
Our own Jim Kasson published this on his Facebook.I predicted this flu situation last year because everyone was isolating and wearing masks. It's one of the reasons my wife and I didn't take the flu shot. I suspect the common cold cases are also down. We both haven't had a cold in twelve months when we average one or two a year each. How did you and others make out with getting colds?
Harry Potter and The Curious Case of Missing Flu (my title)
I predicted this flu situation last year because everyone was isolating and wearing masks. It's one of the reasons my wife and I didn't take the flu shot. I suspect the common cold cases are also down. We both haven't had a cold in twelve months when we average one or two a year each. How did you and others make out with getting colds?
J&J vaccine update:
White House writes off Johnson & Johnson vaccine after string of production failures
The chaos has disappointed the Biden team, which once argued that the company’s one-dose vaccine would be central to turning the tide of the pandemic.
The results suggest that beyond the first 30 days of illness, people with COVID-19 are at higher risk of death, health care resource utilization, and exhibit a broad array of incident pulmonary and extrapulmonary clinical manifestations including nervous system and neurocognitive disorders, mental health disorders, metabolic disorders, cardiovascular disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and signs and symptoms related to poor general wellbeing including malaise, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, and anemia. Increased risk of incident use of several medication classes was also observed including pain medications (opioids and non-opioids), antidepressants, anxiolytics, antihypertensives, anti-hyperlipidemics, oral hypoglycemics, insulin, and other medication classes. Our analyses of pre-specified outcomes complement the high dimensional approach to identify specific post-acute sequalae with greater diagnostic resolution and reveal two key findings: a) the risk and associated burden of post-acute sequalae is evident even among those whose acute disease was not severe enough to necessitate hospitalization — the segment that represents the majority of people with COVID-19, and b) the risk and associated burden increases across the severity spectrum of the acute COVID-19 infection (non-hospitalized, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care). Our comparative approach to examine post-acute sequalae in those hospitalized with COVID-19 vs. seasonal influenza (using a high dimensional approach and through examination of pre-specified outcomes) suggests substantially higher burden of a broad array of post-acute sequelae in those hospitalized with COVID-19 vs. seasonal influenza — providing differentiating fea-tures of post-COVID-19 (both in magnitude of risk and breadth of organ involvement) from a post-influenza viral syndrome. The constellation of evidence suggests that 30-day survivors of COVID-19 exhibited increased risk of death and health resource utilization, and substantial burden of health loss (spanning pulmonary and several extrapulmonary organ systems) and highlights the need for a holistic and integrated multidisciplinary long-term care of COVID-19 survivors.
Is the CDC not in Biden's pocket this week? Or was that last week? It's all so confusing :/If you're confused following this stuff, imagine the average guy on the street.
CDC recommends resumption of J&J vaccinations (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/23/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/)
... the coronavirus survivors had a significantly higher risk of death in the six months following their recovery, even those whose symptoms were considered mild and did not require hospitalization...
Compared with over 279,000 US daily cases in January, India's numbers per capita don't look as critical yet. If it gets there as bad as in January in USA, India will be reporting a million cases per day.Yeah you're right. What's 347,000 cases a day?
Yeah you're right. What's 347,000 cases a day?
Yeah you're right. What's 347,000 cases a day?
Personal attack. This is the place we want to avoid.You of all people could do something about that; CLOSE this Coffee Corner forum, attempt to move LuLa back to a photograph only location and delete all non photo discussions like your dad setup long ago. Focus on something? How about solely photo topics?
Retract, reframe, or focus on something / someone else.
Josh
This thread may contain sewage but it is in the appropriate spot, near the bottom, and for many/most users not even on the radar. We can return to zero politics if the hand-full of those engaging here all agree that it will clean up the site (?)We all agree? Site run by committee? After all these pages from this group, your say this seriously???
You of all people could do something about that; CLOSE this Coffee Corner forum, attempt to move LuLa back to a photograph only location and delete all non photo discussions
AFAIK, all photography topics which might appeal to you are still there and can be easily accessed without going through this thread.
Yeah, but how would he derive the typical leftie pleasure of canceling everything they don't like?
Anybody been "cancelled" on this site?
More on Faucism:Fauci said there's no problem with Covid on 1/26/20. Despite that, Trump shut down travel from China on 1/31/20, five days later, yet was criticized months later for not acting quick enough. Biden called him xenophobic. Democrats called him racist. Afterward, the press made it seem he did nothing to help the spread and they claimed the experts had it right all along.
Fauci said there's no problem with Covid on 1/26/20.
Newsmax interview
On Jan. 21 - the day the first covid-19 case in the U.S. was confirmed - Fauci appeared on conservative Newsmax TV. "Bottom line, we don’t have to worry about this one, right?" asked Greg Kelly, the host.
Fauci said, "Obviously, you need to take it seriously and do the kind of things the (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the Department of Homeland Security is doing. But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."
So Fauci, in a qualified response said, don't worry "right now;" "you need to take it seriously;" and although "this is not a major threat," keep an ear open to the CDC and Homeland Security.
As usual, you are not being honest.A distinction without a difference. I deliberately gave the dates to show that only five days after Fauci said "...But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.", Trump stopped all travel from China. That's not mismanagement? Your "right now" are weasel words. Fauci wasn't concerned. Did he call for a freeze on travel? More so, Biden and the democrats called Trump xenophobic and a racist for stopping Chinese travel. You're the one not being honest.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/29/steve-bannon/did-fauci-tell-us-not-worry-about-coronavirus/
It was not a major threat at the time, but it did evolve and was mismanaged by the Trump administration.
As usual, you are not being honest...
Stop posting rubbish, as usual, Bart.
Your own citation contains the same words: ... But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."
Your "right now" are weasel words. Fauci wasn't concerned. Did he call for a freeze on travel?
Fauci doesn't decide on travel restrictions, he is an immunologist.So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.
That statement is devoid of logic, on several levels.
That's a feature, not a bug.
That statement is devoid of logic, on several levels.It makes more sense than your post. It's over your head.
I didn't see this one coming. At a private school in Florida, teachers who have been vaccinated are not wanted back, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/florida-private-school-threatens-jobs-teachers-who-seek-covid-19-vaccines (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/florida-private-school-threatens-jobs-teachers-who-seek-covid-19-vaccines).
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.
Are you having reading comprehension issues, Slobodan? And why are you trying to obfuscate by selectively quoting without context? "RIGHT NOW" means that at that moment in time there was not a big problem in the USA (yet!). Fauci also said that people should take it seriously and follow the CDC guidelines.
Slob has a great skill. . . .
You mean Slobodan? He has never concealed his actual name: why not use it? He also identifies his location, for that matter. People posting in a political forum (that's not how I intended this thread when I started it, but, sigh, welcome to the Internet) really ought to identify themselves, at least minimally.
Alan, we've been around this block a few times. Yes, Trump sort of shutdown travel from China...but during this shutdown, many thousands of people that were in China came back to the US without any testing or tracing or other measures...free to wander the US spreading the virus. Shutting down the travel without a plan on how to handle the people still coming in was totally useless as we can see with the death toll the virus has racked up. You put Trump on such a high pedestal for his quick action...but he did not follow through with an entire plan and the rest is history...not one to be proud of.Strawman You totally missed the point. While Fauci was declaring everything is fine, Trump shutdown Chinese travel and Biden called him xenophobic for doing so. We were talking about Fauci's incompetence.
Does that make idiotic responses somehow better?His responses are fine and on the mark. You're the one stooping to insults.
Are you having reading comprehension issues, Slobodan? And why are you trying to obfuscate by selectively quoting without context? "RIGHT NOW" means that at that moment in time there was not a big problem in the USA (yet!). Fauci also said that people should take it seriously and follow the CDC guidelines.
You mean Slobodan? He has never concealed his actual name: why not use it?...
Alan, we've been around this block a few times. Yes, Trump sort of shutdown travel from China...but during this shutdown, many thousands of people that were in China came back to the US without any testing or tracing or other measures...free to wander the US spreading the virus. Shutting down the travel without a plan on how to handle the people still coming in was totally useless...
Trump did what he had a constitutional authority to do: restrict international flights. He did not have any authority to do what you think he should have done. This is something governors have prerogatives for. What federal authorities could have done, is to recommend certain measures. But again, such recommendations should not come from a politician, even if he is the president, but from CDC and Fauxi. They didn't do it.
Yeah, don't worry about it...it will be gone when it gets hot. Go out and party it up and have a drink of some Lysol. Is this all Trump could have done...all he had under his authority. I think not.Let's see. When Trump stopped Chinese travelers from coming to the USA, Biden called him xenophobic and the Democrats called him racist. When he isolated and detained illegals coming across the southern border he was castigated for that as he was when he limited Muslims from dangerous countries due to terrorist issues. What would you have called him if he detained and isolated regular American citizens?
Do a bit of research before you state something as a fact. The federal government has the authority to detain and isolate people entering the us with suspected disease. Your dribble is totally false.
... Do a bit of research before you state something as a fact. The federal government has the authority to detain and isolate people entering the us with suspected disease. Your dribble is totally false.
Let's see. When Trump stopped Chinese travelers from coming to the USA, Biden called him xenophobic and the Democrats called him racist. When he isolated and detained illegals coming across the southern border he was castigated for that as he was when he limited Muslims from dangerous countries due to terrorist issues. What would you have called him if he detained and isolated regular American citizens?
The fact is whatever he did was played in the press as wrong, illegal, immoral. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. That's all unfortunate. Because of politics many of his good policies are being reversed just because it was he who implemented them. Such as Iran, illegal immigration at the southern border, climate, taxes, etc. This knee-jerk reaction by Biden is hurting the country. One can say what's going on at the border is better now. The claims of children being locked up in jails have really come true under Biden. Iran is about ready to walk over the whole ME again and get clearance to produce their nukes. Biden and the Democrats are going to break the bank with their stimulation and central planning. I congratulate him for seemingly sticking with being tough on China. But how long will that last?
Let's see. When Trump stopped Chinese travelers from coming to the USA, Biden called him xenophobic and the Democrats called him racist. When he isolated and detained illegals coming across the southern border he was castigated for that as he was when he limited Muslims from dangerous countries due to terrorist issues. What would you have called him if he detained and isolated regular American citizens?
The fact is whatever he did was played in the press as wrong, illegal, immoral. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. That's all unfortunate. Because of politics many of his good policies are being reversed just because it was he who implemented them. Such as Iran, illegal immigration at the southern border, climate, taxes, etc. This knee-jerk reaction by Biden is hurting the country. One can say what's going on at the border is better now. The claims of children being locked up in jails have really come true under Biden. Iran is about ready to walk over the whole ME again and get clearance to produce their nukes. Biden and the Democrats are going to break the bank with their stimulation and central planning. I congratulate him for seemingly sticking with being tough on China. But how long will that last?
It’s not the Chinese travelers that caused the problem, it was the infected American travelers coming home without being checked for the virus and without any quarantine or self isolation and without any tracking...
Can you tell us who at that time (end of January 2020) recommended such measures? Fauxi? CDC? Anyone?
An asinine question if ever there was one.
January 2020 ?
Lockdowns started in March 2020. Different dates for different countries in the West. Quarantining and self-isolation weren't effective until effective testing and contact tracing (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/principles-contact-tracing.html) were implemented much later...
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/
An asinine question if ever there was one.You didn't answer Slobodan's question of "who" among the scientists and experts, CDC or Fauci, recommended the shutdowns? We know what Trump shutdown as president. While Trump made a decision on January 31 to start them, Fauci was still claiming there's nothing to worry about and Democrats called Trump a racist for his China shutdown order. You keep ignoring what actually happened and who said what. Who cares what Ron Klain said in March over a month after Trump's shutdowns started. Klain is a political hack for the Democratic party. He's not a scientist. He worked for Obama and now works for Biden.
January 2020 ?
Lockdowns started in March 2020. Different dates for different countries in the West. Quarantining and self-isolation weren't effective until effective testing and contact tracing (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/principles-contact-tracing.html) were implemented much later.
January 31: Trump blocks travel from China. An executive order blocking entry to the US from anyone who has been in China in the last 14 days. It does not apply to US residents and family members or spouses of US residents or citizens. The order becomes effective on February 2.
March 11: Trump bans travel from Europe. The ban does not apply to US citizens and only includes the 26 Schengen countries. The UK and Ireland are not included, and US citizens are exempt.
-
At a House subcommittee hearing on the coronavirus on Feb. 5, Ron Klain , White House Ebola response coordinator under the Obama administration, took issue with the characterization of the travel restrictions as a travel “ban.” “We don’t have a travel ban,” Klain said. “We have a travel Band-Aid right now. First, before it was imposed, 300,000 people came here from China in the previous month. So, the horse is out of the barn.”
-
From Covid is a “hoax” to needing supplementary oxygen. How a disaster unfolded.
https://youtu.be/eeuHkBGOp3E
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CGAI9EqnQBi/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
You are taking advantage of the missing moderator.When links without explanation and without stating your point were discouraged.
It’s not the Chinese travelers that caused the problem, it was the infected American travelers coming home without being checked for the virus and without any quarantine or self isolation and without any tracking that caused the biggest problem. The travelers quickly spread throughout the states along with the virus some of them carried.You totally missed the point again. At least Trump started doing something. Biden and Fauci were opposed to doing anything.
Over four days in the White House Situation Room, the nation’s top public health and national security officials engaged in a fierce debate over whether to take the extraordinary step of banning travel from China.
Public health officials were initially wary. Experts have long recommended against restricting travel during outbreaks, arguing that it is often ineffective and can stymie the response by limiting the movements of doctors and other health professionals trying to contain the disease. A ban would anger China, they worried, ending any hope of cooperation with American medical teams.
Officials at the National Security Council and Department of Homeland Security argued that China had already proved unwilling to cooperate. A third group inside the White House was worried that the move would incite panic and could roil the financial markets.
By Thursday, Jan. 30, the public health officials had come around. Mr. Azar, Dr. Redfield and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, agreed that a ban on travel from the epidemic’s center could buy some time to put into place prevention and testing measures. “There was so much we didn’t know about this virus,” Dr. Redfield said in an interview. “We were rapidly understanding it was much more transmissible, that it had a great ability to go global.”
He [Trump] also was reluctant to sign off on the first virus-related travel ban aimed at China, concerned about the signal it would send to markets and his relationship with President Xi Jinping, aides said. He eventually agreed to it on the advice of Mr. Azar, aides said, and now touts it as one of his proudest actions during the crisis.
The URL is pretty clear in this case ;)
That's simply not true.
According to a March 7, 2020 NY Times Article (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html):
If you don't like that source, according to a March 12th WSJ article (https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-crisis-tests-trumps-unusual-governing-style-11584060221):
That's simply not true.So your articles confirmed that the CDC and Fauci changed their minds. But you failed to mention that it was Trump, as president, who ordered the shutdown on Jan 31st, risking political fallout which did occur when Biden called him a xenophobe and Democrats called him racist. Exactly what his advisors told him would happen. Yet Trump took the politically hard decision and faced contempt from the other side. It's interesting, you don't show articles of Biden and the Democrat's positions against Trump's decision. You keep repeating the false claim he didn't act and somehow Biden and the Democrats were ahead of him.
According to a March 7, 2020 NY Times Article (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html):
If you don't like that source, according to a March 12th WSJ article (https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-crisis-tests-trumps-unusual-governing-style-11584060221):
Again, James, what is your point? At least related to what I've been posting on the subject?
So your articles confirmed that the CDC and Fauci changed their minds. But you failed to mention that it was Trump, as president, who ordered the shutdown on Jan 31st, risking political fallout which did occur when Biden called him a xenophobe and Democrats called him racist. Exactly what his advisors told him would happen. Yet Trump took the politically hard decision and faced contempt from the other side. It's interesting, you don't show articles of Biden and the Democrat's positions against Trump's decision. You keep repeating the false claim he didn't act and somehow Biden and the Democrats were ahead of him.
Simply to show that Fauci, Azar and other health officials DID, in fact, recommend shutting down travel from China in the late days of January, 2020. I wasn't making any point about Trump - clearly he had to agree to for it to happen.
I didn't say anything positive OR negative about Biden/Democrats - in fact, I didn't mention them at all. I'm refuting the idea that somehow Trump was ahead of the curve and that the health officials were all wrong, especially when, at least according to WSJ, it was *they* who had to convince *Trump* to restrict travel. Heck, Alan, I'm not even condemning Trump for considering the impact the decision would have on China/US relations - that consideration makes sense to me.He was ahead of the curve. Democrats and Biden were opposed to his shutting down Chinese from traveling here. His political opponents treated it just like they complained about his Mulsim ban as being racist and xenophobic. Maybe if Democrats hadn't attacked him so hard regarding the Muslim ban, he would have even been stronger regarding Covid. But Democrats denigrated him so much about the ban, he probably was gunshy to go further with Covid travel to the US and quarantine. Even today, Democrats still complain when he calls the virus the Chinese Flu. They imply that's racist although we have the Asian Flu, the Spanish Flu, and other named diseases called where they supposedly started.
. . . we have the Asian Flu, the Spanish Flu, and other named diseases called where they supposedly started.
The Alan Klein Flu has certainly infected this thread about coronavirus vaccines. There is no known cure.
NYC is going broke due to Covid shutdowns. The mayor finally sees the handwriting on the wall. I was in Manhattan the other day. It seems busier but it has a long way to go.
New York City will reopen 100% on July 1, Mayor Bill de Blasio says
An official report released Wednesday details the full economic impact of the loss of tourism and business in New York City due to the coronavirus pandemic.
New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said a 10-year period of record growth in tourism came to an abrupt end in 2020, as 43.7 million fewer visitors came to the city because of COVID-19. (was around 65 million visitors the previous year)
Tourists spent only $13 billion in 2020 (instead of around $60B), a 73% decline from the prior year, and in the end, that will cost the city $1.2 billion in lost tax revenues in Fiscal Year 2021.
Employment in the tourism industry also saw a significant decline in 2020, as 89,000 jobs were lost from 2019, when employment reached a record 283,200 jobs.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/29/new-york-city-mayor-bill-de-blasio-says-the-city-will-re-open-100percent-on-july-1.html
https://abc7ny.com/health/nyc-tourism-industry-decimated-by-covid-pandemic-report/10556641/
Texas will do OK. All the billionaires and Teslanaires are moving from CA and NY there.
Anyone want to check my statistics? If you allow 100,000,000 Americans fully vaccinated, there are 7157 of those who got covid (0.0007%) and 88 who died(0.000088%) That means only 7 people out of one million vaccinated people got covid and less than one person died out of million vaccinated. By comparison, 110 people per million died from auto accidents in 2010. That’s about 125 times worse than vaccinated, The risk is even less since the 100,000,000 are the double dosed and don’t include the millions of others who only took one shot of the two.
The claim: Death rate among COVID-19 vaccinated people is significantly higher compared to unvaccinated population
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/30/fact-check-misleading-claim-deaths-fully-vaccinated-people/4856504001/
Vehicle deaths stats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
Anyone want to check my statistics? If you allow 100,000,000 Americans fully vaccinated, there are 7157 of those who got covid (0.0007%) and 88 who died(0.000088%) That means only 7 people out of one million vaccinated people got covid and less than one person died out of million vaccinated. By comparison, 110 people per million died from auto accidents in 2010. That’s about 125 times worse than vaccinated, The risk is even less since the 100,000,000 are the double dosed and don’t include the millions of others who only took one shot of the two.
The claim: Death rate among COVID-19 vaccinated people is significantly higher compared to unvaccinated population
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/30/fact-check-misleading-claim-deaths-fully-vaccinated-people/4856504001/
Vehicle deaths stats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
redo your math. it is off by a factor of 10 for the %, unless i had a typo.Thanks for correcting the zero. The point the article made I believe, and that I am making, is that the death rate of vaccinated people is very low from getting the virus subsequently to vaccination despite some missing statistics. After all, why would we be taking the vaccines if they didn't do their job? Also, if younger people were vaccinated at the same higher rate as older people, then the death rate would be even lower. All that is great news about the vaccines.
7,000 in 100,000,000 is 7 in 100,000.
and here is the conclusion of the fact check and why -
"
Our rating: False
We rate the claim that the death rate from COVID-19 among fully vaccinated individuals is significantly higher than the unvaccinated FALSE, based on our research. Experts say because the total number of vaccine breakthrough infections is unknown and voluntary state reporting to the CDC skews toward more serious COVID-19 cases, it is not possible to directly infer an accurate death rate. And regardless, any comparison between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated is heavily skewed by the fact that the vaccinated group at present has a much higher proportion of older adults who are most at risk.
"
A virus is just an annoyance for a well-developed immune system.
"Wake me when the death toll exceeds 60,000"
Yep, wonder what bbq crow tastes like?
"Wake me when the death toll exceeds 60,000"
Yep, wonder what bbq crow tastes like?
The share of Indians testing positive for covid-19 is now 23.5%; if a greater proportion of India’s population of 1.4bn were tested, no doubt millions of new cases would be detected. South America, another region with a surging caseload, is recording 60% more cases today than at the peak of the first wave. South Asia is logging four times as many, and with no sign of slowing.
So certain someone really went after me in months past for implying that the teacher's unions, not science, was dictating the school reopening guidance. Welp ...The CDC and Fauci have been acting like politicians the whole time, not like experts.
Critics slam CDC after teachers union influences guidelines: 'Based in politics and not science' (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/teachers-union-american-federation-cdc-white-house-reopen-schools)
This is why people dont trust our health experts. They have given up being scientists for being politicians.
I am going to get vaccinated this week, and then I am done paying attention to the little amount of things I am still doing.
What happens when you throw caution to the wind ...I wonder if China infected India their adversary with the new variant?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51157375635_80220aac26_z.jpg)
The share of Indians testing positive for covid-19 is now 23.5%; if a greater proportion of India’s population of 1.4bn were tested, no doubt millions of new cases would be detected. South America, another region with a surging caseload, is recording 60% more cases today than at the peak of the first wave. South Asia is logging four times as many, and with no sign of slowing.
Your Fürer's Covid death rate in his first 100 days is already at 45% of what you accused Trump of for the whole year.
Your ignorance is showing, AGAIN.
You have zero idea who my “Furer” is.
You really think you said something smart?
Your Fürer's Covid death rate in his first 100 days is already at 45% of what you accused Trump of for the whole year.
Everyone keeps on saying we are going to see an boom when this is over, but I just dont think it is going to happen, at least not in the blue states. PA, NY, NJ and the rest of the north east lost 30% of small businesses due to the lockdowns. That does not just fix itself.My wife voted for Trump, thinks Biden is a jerk, but yet. In order to maintain peace in my family, I had to cancel going to my poker game even though all the players including me are fully vaccinated, as is my wife. She still thinks it's unsafe. The CDC and newspapers cautions, and Bidens still wearing his mask indoors, gets to people. Even I wonder? Maybe the shots aren't that great? The government because of politics, isn't following science and still scaring everyone. Biden goes in with his wife, takes off their masks, and sees the 96-year-old former President Carter and his 93-year-old wife. Then when he leaves, he puts his mask back on outdoors where it's not required at all. Now, what does that tell the average person? It's all a joke. All politics. No wonder so many people have stopped getting vaccinated.
On top of that, many liberals are still scared to go outside even if they are vaccinated. Too many in these regions have been broken mentally. I live in a fairly sane neighborhood, Roxborough, which is purple and leans red, so most of the time when I walk around most people are not wearing masks outside. This though is not the normal in the city, and I know many lefties who think even by Summer's end, they still dont think we should be doing anything. Red states will obviously fair better with this.
On top of that, I read that if you look at how inflation has been tracking over the first few months of the year and assume it continues, we are in a 16% to 18% inflationary curve already. Hold on to your bank accounts, because in a year your money will be worth a lot less. The reason for this is pointed to the government putting too much money into the market, artificially increasing future demand, while keeping people home during the last year, artificially decreasing supply. Houses, all building materials, gasoline, food prices, etc. have all gone up.
I think any uptick in GDP will be offset by inflation, if not more so. You cant throw a year-long Covid-19 stay-at-home party without the bill eventually coming due.
My wife voted for Trump, thinks Biden is a jerk, but yet. In order to maintain peace in my family, I had to cancel going to my poker game even though all the players including me are fully vaccinated, as is my wife. She still thinks it's unsafe. The CDC and newspapers cautions, and Bidens still wearing his mask indoors, gets to people. Even I wonder? Maybe the shots aren't that great? The government because of politics, isn't following science and still scaring everyone. Biden goes in with his wife, takes off their masks, and sees the 96-year-old former President Carter and his 93-year-old wife. Then when he leaves, he puts his mask back on outdoors where it's not required at all. Now, what does that tell the average person? It's all a joke. All politics. No wonder so many people have stopped getting vaccinated.
It's not at all complicated. Vaccines aren't 100% effective. Not everyone has had one yet. There are still a lot of new infections and deaths every day. We are not in herd immunity yet. So all the protection methods continue to make sense. You don't stop protecting yourself at the start of the vaccination process, you stop at the end of the vaccination process, after infections have died down to the point where getting infected is very rare. I am not sure why this is controversial.Because we were told that vaccinations prevent us from getting the disease. If we still have to hide like Biden does, what' the point of the vaccine?The problem is it's all become political. Has been since it started. as I said a year ago, it's all because 2020 was an election year. The mask and vaccinations all became political. Your argument rings hallow.
... I'm sure 'tis but a simple spelling mistake...
... Biden goes in with his wife, takes off their masks, and sees the 96-year-old former President Carter and his 93-year-old wife. Then when he leaves, he puts his mask back on outdoors where it's not required at all...
Because we were told that vaccinations prevent us from getting the disease. If we still have to hide like Biden does, what' the point of the vaccine?The problem is it's all become political. Has been since it started. as I said a year ago, it's all because 2020 was an election year. The mask and vaccinations all became political. Your argument rings hallow.
Grandma and grandpa killers:
I'm pretty sure those are just puppets that resemble the Carters.Just to think, if we live that long, we're going to shrink into puppet size too. :)
In case you haven't had enough doom and gloom for a lifetime, this Sam Harris podcast is about what a future more deadly viral outbreak would mean and how unprepared we are, https://samharris.org/podcasts/special-episode-engineering-apocalypse/ (https://samharris.org/podcasts/special-episode-engineering-apocalypse/). Warning, it's very long at nearly 4 hours. They basically blue-sky a future disaster and discuss past errors and the state of viral research.Why we need labs to develop any of these diseases is immoral and just plain nuts. Whether it gets out by accident or is deliberately released are scary things to contemplate.
I'll copy the first couple of paragraphs from the blurb, it does a better job to introduce the discussion than anything I could write:
<<<<<
In this nearly 4-hour SPECIAL EPISODE, Rob Reid delivers a 100-minute monologue (broken up into 4 segments, and interleaved with discussions with Sam) about the looming danger of a man-made pandemic, caused by an artificially-modified pathogen. The risk of this occurring is far higher and nearer-term than almost anyone realizes.
Rob explains the science and motivations that could produce such a catastrophe and explores the steps that society must start taking today to prevent it. These measures are concrete, affordable, and scientifically fascinating—and almost all of them are applicable to future, natural pandemics as well. So if we take most of them, the odds of a future Covid-like outbreak would plummet—a priceless collateral benefit.
>>>>>
This is a global health crisis, and the extraordinary circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic call for extraordinary measures. The [Biden] Administration believes strongly in intellectual property protections, but in service of ending this pandemic, supports the waiver of those protections for COVID-19 vaccines.
for the same reason the UK gave the US the design for the Merlin engine and fighter planes back at the beginning of WWII. Oh , and not to mention several key research findings from their "tubular alloys" project.Why would a company develop a drug the next time there's a virus if the government gives away their ownership? Who reimburses the company for the loss of sales? Why shouldn't India pay for it?
Call it lend-lease if you will, but it benefits the whole world if we can get the virus stamped down before natural selection takes another shot at us.
Why would a company develop a drug the next time there's a virus if the government gives away their ownership? Who reimburses the company for the loss of sales? Why shouldn't India pay for it?
Why would a company develop a drug the next time there's a virus if the government gives away their ownership? Who reimburses the company for the loss of sales? Why shouldn't India pay for it?
Don’t be naive, Alan. The Left wants a commie world with no private ownership, no property, no copyright (watch out, photographers!) no intellectual property.Now that you mention it, what Biden has done this with Covid vaccines, China will claim the same argument, that their "using" intellectual property of America and others is not stealing but just a continuation of good economic policy for the world and that America should get over the fact it's discoveries are being used by the Chinese.
I thought ...
I thought you claimed Trump sunk a bunch of money into the development of the vaccine? Now you are playing the poor pharma card losing all their profits. Which is it here Alan, was the vaccine development funded as you claimed previously or not?The American taxpayer provided support to some companies through the American government. India didn;t pay for it. However, the negotiated cost of purchasing the doses was included in their financial support. So I assume if the government negotiators did their job, the final cost per dose was less to offset the upfront advances. It's like I just made a deal to install an emergency generator. I had to give upfront money on signing the job. That's what the government did with the vaccines.
An extremely rare event.
Why would a company develop a drug the next time there's a virus if the government gives away their ownership? Who reimburses the company for the loss of sales? Why shouldn't India pay for it?
Why would a company develop a drug the next time there's a virus if the government gives away their ownership? Who reimburses the company for the loss of sales? Why shouldn't India pay for it?
I was just listening to Richard Epstein on this, and there are so many negatives on why you should not do it, it is hard to list them all. First, the companies would almost certainly fight it in court, so it will get mired down there. Second, other countries are going to oppose it, so you will get mired down in the WTO and other international agencies with endless debates. Third, the manufacturing will need to be created in many of these places first before you can manufacture the vaccines, which will take time. Fourth, more then likely the reason for poor rates of vaccination in these countries is due to ineffective distribution in these countries, not limits to supply, so releasing these patents may not even have the desired results.I've been thinking about it. This is just Biden trying to be Mr. Nice Guy,("the world loves me more than Obama"), knowing it's not going anywhere. He screwed up the southern border, Iran, climate control, North Korea, etc. reversing every good policy in place, he might as well screw this up too.
It would be much easier and faster to renegotiate the federal contracts with these companies for more doses at a lower cost, and provide them, along with distribution help, as aid instead.
But assuming this did happen, there is another negative to add that no one is really thinking about, who is held liable for a bad vaccine produced by a not so great lab? Lets say you give up the IP and a shitty lab in one of these countries makes a vaccine that ends up having cryonic side effects, who pays? That lab? The US government? The company that originally created the vaccine? All of them? This is a situation litigation lawyers are looking at and licking their teeth over.
All you need is one creative litigator who comes up with some crazy argument to somehow insist both the USA, who released the IP, and the pharma company who originally produced the vaccine (for not properly giving instructions on the production even if what they happened to leave out was mundane and already common practice) are liable for one serious shit storm to start. And as soon as the first creative guy gets his argument to win, all of the copycats will come out of the woodwork.
I've been thinking about it. This is just Biden trying to be Mr. Nice Guy,("the world loves me more than Obama"), knowing it's not going anywhere. He screwed up the southern border, Iran, climate control, North Korea, etc. reversing every good policy in place, he might as well screw this up too.
The U.S. government has endorsed a proposal to waive intellectual property protections for coronavirus vaccines. Katherine Tai, the United States trade representative, made the announcement in a short press release earlier today:
The waiver, proposed by India and South Africa, is being discussed at the current World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva. The idea is controversial on both sides of the Atlantic, and there are technical issues that are likely to make drafting waiver language that would be acceptable to the W.T.O. members both complex and time-consuming.
I understand the US bans exporting raw material needed to make vaccins. This is because of the Defense Production Act.
Because of the lack of raw material the production in india is limited, although they have the knowledge and equipment to make vaccins.
New CDC guidelines. Good news.
Vaccinated Americans now may go without masks in most places, the C.D.C. said.
I was talking to a medical doctor when the new CDC guidance was released today. His take on it: "This is public health policy, not science. The CDC is trying to create an incentive for everyone to be vaccinated. They're trying to reach the vaccine deniers and the people who just aren't making an effort to get vaccinated. Nothing has actually changed."So you recommend we shouldn't listen to experts at the CDC but rather to you and your doctor?
He and I were alone in his office, both wearing respirator-style facemasks (his an American N95, mine a Chinese KN95). We are both "fully vaccinated" and it appears the current vaccines are effective against the mutations of the coronavirus that are currently circulating in the United States, but he didn't remove his facemask and he didn't offer me an opportunity to remove mine.
So you recommend we shouldn't listen to experts at the CDC but rather to you and your doctor?
Alan,Well, we had long discussions about taking the expert's advice. My problem is that who are the experts. According to my wife who considers herself an expert, "they're all full of it." She doesn't believe any of them especially now that the decisions seem very political because the pressure is on from the public to get past the draconian rules. So CDC got a call from Biden, and now they've moved on as he has dropping the mask. The Democrats have gotten past the politics of the mask and they can't gain any advantage from it anymore. But the decision was more political then scientific.
There is no absolute, only shades of gray in the world.
As Chris's doctor stated, this is a public health policy decision, not science.
Well, we had long discussions about taking the expert's advice. My problem is that who are the experts. According to my wife who considers herself an expert, "they're all full of it." She doesn't believe any of them especially now that the decisions seem very political because the pressure is on from the public to get past the draconian rules. So CDC got a call from Biden, and now they've moved on as he has dropping the mask. The Democrats have gotten past the politics of the mask and they can't gain any advantage from it anymore. But the decision was more political then scientific.
But where does that leave the rest of us? Is Chris's doctor and my wife right? Or has the science allowed more finesse in our decisions? If we're all fair about how this developed, one could argue that it's been a mess from the beginning.
Well, we had long discussions about taking the expert's advice. My problem is that who are the experts.
According to my wife who considers herself an expert, "they're all full of it."
Well, we had long discussions about taking the expert's advice. My problem is that who are the experts. According to my wife who considers herself an expert, "they're all full of it." She doesn't believe any of them especially now that the decisions seem very political because the pressure is on from the public to get past the draconian rules. So CDC got a call from Biden, and now they've moved on as he has dropping the mask. The Democrats have gotten past the politics of the mask and they can't gain any advantage from it anymore. But the decision was more political then scientific.
But where does that leave the rest of us? Is Chris's doctor and my wife right? Or has the science allowed more finesse in our decisions? If we're all fair about how this developed, one could argue that it's been a mess from the beginning.
Experts on what?You're not making a definitive statement, Bart. "Reducing" is in the middle. It's maybe you can or maybe you shouldn't kind of advice, the same that we've been getting from the experts for 16 months.
Epidemiology? Chance has it that epidemiologists probably know a bit more about it than, say, your wife.
Immunology? Chance has it that Immunologissts (like Dr. Fauci) know a bit more about it than, you, me, and your wife.
As the saying goes; she's entitled to her own opinion, not her own truth.
Truth is that as more and more people get vaccinated or have had Covid-19 and developed a good amount of antibodies, the reproduction rate will go down and it will become less likely that people infect each other. So, the modest positive effect of wearing mouth/nose masks, is further reduced, and therefore the need to have them on is also reducing. Also, those who have been vaccinated are less likely to need hospitalization (or if they do, less likely to need ICU care) if they still get infected.
You're not making a definitive statement, Bart. "Reducing" is in the middle. It's maybe you can or maybe you shouldn't kind of advice, the same that we've been getting from the experts for 16 months.
Which is it? "You don't have to wear your masks if you've been vaccinated." OR, "You should wear your mask even if you've been vaccinated."
Bill Maher was recently tested positive, depsite being vaccinated twice.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/05/15/bill-maher-tests-positive-for-covid-19-coronavirus-and-is-fully-vaccinated/?sh=626e8f837ebf
Which shows that, while the reaction of the human to the virus will probably be milder and most likely will not result in ICU care, people can still be infected, and thus infect others.
Which shows that, while the reaction of the human to the virus will probably be milder and most likely will not result in ICU care, people can still be infected, and thus infect others.Others can get vaccinated. Why aren't they? Why should vaccinated people wear masks because others refuse to get the shots and often won't wear masks either? In New Jersey where I live, you can just walk in and get your shots. No waiting; no appointments. They have more shots available than people who want them.
Others can get vaccinated. Why aren't they? Why should vaccinated people wear masks because others refuse to get the shots and often won't wear masks either? In New Jersey where I live, you can just walk in and get your shots. No waiting; no appointments. They have more shots available than people who want them.
Which shows that, while the reaction of the human to the virus will probably be milder and most likely will not result in ICU care, people can still be infected, and thus infect others.
Right! Who are the these people?Who cares?
Who cares?
a significant number of Republicans are refusing to get the vaccines available to them, threatening to prevent the U.S. from reaching herd immunity and a return to prepandemic life.
Federal, state, and local officials, and the private sector, will face the challenge of having to figure out how to increase willingness to get vaccinated among those still on the fence, and ideally among the one-fifth of adults who have consistently said they would not get vaccinated or would do so only if required.“ The authors added: “Once this happens, efforts to encourage vaccination will become much harder, presenting a challenge to reaching the levels of herd immunity that are expected to be needed.”
Perhaps unsurprisingly, given Donald Trump’s refusal to get his own shot in public, and to do the absolute bare minimum when it comes to convincing his base of the importance of getting vaccinated, “vaccine hesitancy“ among Republicans is raging.
Quote from: LesPalenik on Today at 11:58:57 amAccording to a new NPR/Marist study, 41% of self-identified Republicans, 34% of Independents, and 11% of Democrats say they do not plan on becoming vaccinated.
Right! Who are the these people?
After a lot of research, I found that a good portion of the antivaxxers are Republicans.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/04/republicans-anti-vaccine-herd-immunity
Quote from: LesPalenik on Today at 11:58:57 am
Right! Who are the these people?
After a lot of research, I found that a good portion of the antivaxxers are Republicans.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/04/republicans-anti-vaccine-herd-immunity
Below is a chart of most vaccinated countries, followed by a death curve in Israel, the most vaccinated coountry, and also the death curve worldwide.Meanwhile, Canada isn't even on the vaccine chart but Uruguay is. So what does that say about Canada?
Draw your own conclusions.
Meanwhile, Canada isn't even on the vaccine chart but Uruguay is. So what does that say about Canada?
This week alone, Canada will receive 4.5 million doses of Pfizer and Moderna vaccine (Pfizer moved up next week’s delivery because of the Victoria Day long weekend). And that has allowed provinces to open the vaccine appointment spigot even wider: As of May 18, everyone aged 18 and older in Ontario can book a time to get their shot on the provincial system.
Now, at our current pace, Canada should reach 75 per cent by June 19. In addition, 75 per cent of all eligible Canadians 12 and up could have second doses by the second week in August. There’s no sign of a slowdown yet in Canada, as provinces keep opening eligibility and supplies appear to be steady. Not counting current inventories and future announcements, Canada has enough scheduled deliveries to average 378,000 doses a day, well above its current seven-day rate of 356,904. Eventually, the pace of first dose vaccinations will plateau, as provinces focus their supplies toward second doses, but Tombe doesn’t think it will happen any point soon. Nor, in all likelihood, he believes, will Canada lose its status as the top first-dose nation in North America.
United States is struggling with the concerning issue of vaccine hesitancy. A late-April poll showed that around a quarter of adults in the U.S. don’t want to get a shot. In Canada, only nine per cent say they won’t get the vaccine compared to 88 per cent who either will or have received a dose, according to a new Angus Reid poll. Even though the United States has never had vaccine supply issues, demand has slowed dramatically. Its daily rate of first doses plunged after reaching nearly 40 per cent. So whereas it was once giving first doses to 0.6 per cent of its population daily, that rate is now down to 0.2 per cent
This is not about Canada vs USA, but about a race between life and death.But it seems that you and many others here can't wait to knock Americans as if we're some sort of boobs despite the fact 100+ million of us have had shots. You do the same thing with our former president and his Operation Warp Speed that's basically getting us herd immunity or close and many other things we do. The constant putdowns of our country get tiring. Doesn't anyone have something nice to say about us? Canada has faults. But I still think you have a pretty good country and good friends.
But since you asked, Canada now has strong supply and demand of vaccine doses and is vaccinating 0.88 per cent of the population daily. According to federal data from both countries, Canada eclipsed US in vaccination rate about 2 weeks ago, and is now administering more doses per capita each day than the U.S.
https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada-is-about-to-surpass-the-u-s-in-first-doses-of-the-covid-vaccine/
But it seems that you and many others here can't wait to knock Americans as if we're some sort of boobs despite the fact 100+ million of us have had shots. You do the same thing with our former president and his Operation Warp Speed that's basically getting us herd immunity or close and many other things we do. The constant putdowns of our country get tiring. Doesn't anyone have something nice to say about us? Canada has faults. But I still think you have a pretty good country and good friends.
Are you still peddling the nonsense that Trump did a good job?Operation Warp Speed was superb.
But it seems that you and many others here can't wait to knock Americans as if we're some sort of boobs despite the fact 100+ million of us have had shots. You do the same thing with our former president and his Operation Warp Speed that's basically getting us herd immunity or close and many other things we do. The constant putdowns of our country get tiring. Doesn't anyone have something nice to say about us? Canada has faults. But I still think you have a pretty good country and good friends.
Alan, I never wrote anything to knock Americans. I am an equal opportunity critiquer and often highlight also problems in other countries, including my own. I wish everyone was as responsible as you, keeping social distance, wearing mask, washing hands and getting vaccinations, but when it comes to covidiots, you'll find them everywhere, even in Canada.Well, as usual, I spoke too quickly. I'm sorry.
I actually like Americans, however I draw a line at Trumps, Giuliani and Cruz. And I must admit I was never crazy about Ellen Degeneres.
Thank you very much for your compliments on Canada.
Why did it take 18 months to notice it? Now it's most probably too late to do anything with that information.Knowing who and how it started allows the world to assign blame and help stop it from happening again, especially if it was man made.
Our good friend from Ajijic died yesterday. She was visiting the United States with her son. The whole family was conservative, religious, Trump voters, refused to be vaccinated, and that's how it turned out. She was only 63 years old, but overweight, diabetic, and had difficulty moving. So a vulnerable person with multiple risks. She contracted Covid and died despite medical help. Her son also had Covid, but he got out of it.
Knowing who and how it started allows the world to assign blame and help stop it from happening again, especially if it was man made.
Chinese scientists have discovered new mild, but highly transmissible strains of a deadly pig disease that has caused havoc for pork farmers across Asia.
The new variants of African Swine Fever (ASF) could complicate efforts to control the disease.
Obese pigs in China are being blamed for worsening a sudden rout in the country’s pork prices. Farmers have been fattening hogs since late last year to almost double their normal weight -- roughly the size of a pygmy hippo or a female polar bear -- in the hope the animals will generate higher returns should prices rebound.
Cao Tao, a pig trader in the northwestern province of Shaanxi, said many of the swine he’s buying weigh more than 200 kilograms, compared with their usual size of around 125 kilograms. “Some farmers are holding onto their larger pigs on hopes of a price rebound,” he said. Instead, Chinese wholesale pork prices have plunged more than 40% since mid-January amid sluggish demand, increased imports and panic selling by farmers after fresh outbreaks of African swine fever.
Received today the following email from a friend who lives now in Mexico. He and his wife travelled from Mexico to USA to get their covid shots, so they are fully protected now.Sorry to hear about your friend's friend. Could Canadians get shots in America?
I'm more concerned about Covid. If it was man-made, as seems likely, we have to re-consider developing these dangerous diseases for research.
And now there is a new pigdemic coming from China.
Sorry to hear about your friend's friend. Could Canadians get shots in America?
Knowing who and how it started allows the world to assign blame and help stop it from happening again, especially if it was man made.
The problem here Alan is that even if we find the smoking gun proving this came from a lab due to incompetence, nothing will happen. Why? Because Biden is a weak feckless president who "has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”Biden's allowing WHO to continue the investigation regarding Covid which is letting the fox back into the henhouse. Biden had America rejoin WHO. Meanwhile who knows what China is doing with viral research? Iran is going to become a real pain again in the ME once Biden re-establishes the agreement. Iran already has said no more pictures allowed by inspectors and the renewed agreement isn't even in force.
China is wining not because it is strong, but because the West, with the USA leading, has decided to give up, all for nothing but money.
For the same reasons in the 1930s, when so many outside Germany worked with the Nazi's, many people just are caving to their morals for profit, and China knows it. Actor John Cena just had to issue an apology for stating the simple fact that Taiwan is a country. Appeasement for money, that is it.
I think now though we are wondering down a very dangerous path, especially with Biden trying to re-enter the Iran deal. This past Israel-Hamas fight was almost certainly used as an information gathering campaign on the Israeli defense systems by Iran, especially given the single Iranian drone flying over Israel, which the only plausible explanation was to record information. (If it was part of a military campaign to help Hamas, many would have been sent, not one.) So Iran now is gathering defense information on Israel, and getting sanctions lifted by Biden, providing them with capital, and setting up the stage for a war between Israel and Iran.
Then, through on top of that that Iran has recently allied itself with China and Russia, and, given recent statements from, Pakistan would almost certainly help out Iran to defeat Israel if need be. Israel too has many allies, most of the West, including us, and, if Pakistan was drug into something, India would soon follow.
It very well could be springtime in 1914 again.
I'm more concerned about Covid. If it was man-made, as seems likely, we have to re-consider developing these dangerous diseases for research.
As seems likely????What don't you understand about "as seems likely"?
Please state your source...
What don't you understand about "as seems likely"?
No need to be snarky, it was a fair question. What new evidence has emerged to suggest that it "seems likely"? I haven't read that many articles but the ones I have read are short on details why the thinking on the virus origin has changed. Has someone found out something that we didn't know about before?Asking what proof is there that it occurred naturally is also a fair question. The fact is the Chinese have hidden all evidence from WHO and other investigators after hiding that there was even a virus release for something like 5 weeks at least. Frankly, I don't even believe WHO. They seem to be in bed with China. They spoent 5 pages in their reports about the lab and hundreds about animal origination although I don't believe there are any animals discovered with the virus.
But in general I agree with you about the utter stupidity of producing dangerous viruses in labs. The number of leaks of dangerous substances from top security labs is just frigging scary. As an example, the anthrax used in those mailings in the weeks/months after 9/11 came out of a US Army high security lab. If it can get out of a place like that....
That nearly 4 hour podcast on Sam Harris's podcast channel from 1 or 2 weeks ago that I gave the link to above discussed the insanity of creating new viruses at great length.
(Sometimes it seems like human history might end up being one long sad tail of arrogant stupidity on the part of empires who accumulated too much power and made their leaders drunk with it.)
There is no value whatever in making any assumptions or jumping to any conclusions until there is enough evidence and data to reach a determination. Not that it makes a difference to anyone with an unrelated agenda they wish to promote.A reasonable man can draw reasonable conclusions. After all, the Chinese buried all the evidence.
A reasonable man can draw reasonable conclusions. After all, the Chinese buried all the evidence.
Quote from: LesPalenik on Today at 11:58:57 am
Right! Who are the these people?
After a lot of research, I found that a good portion of the antivaxxers are Republicans.
China is wining not because it is strong, but because the West, with the USA leading, has decided to give up, all for nothing but money.
That problem started decades ago. China is the USA's bank and holds a huge percentage of the US national debt.
The root cause of this is greed.
Greed from C-levels at big companies that found cheap labour to make goods to sell in the USA. Greed from consumers that could buy more for less inside the USA.
It's not Biden's fault, it is America's fault. You're at fault every time you buy something that is "made in China" and you have no choice because some manufacturing company is also at fault for offshoring the production because it is cheaper in China.
China owns the USA just like your bank owns you via your mortgage.
There is a fix, that would not only solve this issue but also help out our neighbors to the south and provide a real long term border fix too.
Create better meaningful agreements that would allow for open free trade with Latin America along with providing incentives for utility companies to help power Latin America. If Latin America had the same infrastructure as the USA, it would be a manufacturing powerhouse.
Unfortunately, the great barrier to this are American Unions, who do not want their labor devalued by free trade in Latin America.
... Unfortunately, the great barrier to this are American Unions, who do not want their labor devalued by free trade in Latin America.
That may be an overstatement. American unions are a much diminished constituency that no longer hold the power that some people think they do.
In the private sector, this statement is certainly correct.
In the current White House, not so much. Just look at the fact that the National Teacher's Union got to influence what the CDC's school reopening guidelines, more so then actual scientists. Unions still have power with the correct politicians.
Maybe. It could be that the line of causation is as direct as you say.
But to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't the unions have a say? They're a legitimate constituency, as legitimate as any other. Large corporations, business groups, the military, chambers of commerce, all affect public policy at various times. Why shouldn't trade unions? What makes them unworthy? Their votes count too. Their concerns are as real as anyone else's.
“ Virus specialists said that the variant that has been spreading in humans had too many "human" markers that only develop after a number of adaptations.You're mistaken. There were three not two.
“
“ But there are researchers who had the virus
“
Alan,
Sources please.
The second statement is not what i remember reading in WSJ. Only that two researchers were sick in November 2019. No specification as to what they were ill from what i read.
Do you have a different source ?
Thanks,
Frank
I hate to say it, but that's not evidence.International relations never has absolute proof. The world doesn't work that way. The mutation situation and lab location is pretty strong evidence it came from the Wuhan lab. To stick our heads in the sand and make believe there's nothing there to see is foolish. There are millions dead and sick. Economies are in shambles. Meanwhile, labs are still fooling around with these viruses so they could get out again. What do you want to happen before the world acts to stop it from happening again? We passed treaties to stop poisonous gas munitions. It's time we did something with viruses. Don't you think so?
International relations never has absolute proof. The world doesn't work that way. The mutation situation and lab location is pretty strong evidence it came from the Wuhan lab. To stick our heads in the sand and make believe there's nothing there to see is foolish. There are millions dead and sick. Economies are in shambles. Meanwhile, labs are still fooling around with these viruses so they could get out again. What do you want to happen before the world acts to stop it from happening again? We passed treaties to stop poisonous gas munitions. It's time we did something with viruses. Don't you think so?
It could turn out to be true, it wouldn't surprise me much. Not the first time a powerful government did something dangerous and stupid out of deluded arrogance. It's sadly commonplace, even.We seem to be on the same page regarding horrid development of substances by different governments including my own. Frankly, the whole thing is going to be white-washed by Biden's 90 day investigation. The investigators will say in their final report that they don't have enough proof. Then it will be buried and we'll move on to other issues. What would Biden do if they have proof China caused the leak from the lab? What if it was deliberate?
I urge you to listen to the first hour or so of that long Sam Harris podcast I mentioned earlier. In that first segment, the interviewed guest gives many examples of dangerous substances "escaping" from high security labs. It's damn scary.
As for international treaties, the US passed an anti-nuclear treaty with Iran, but you didn't like that one. :)
... What would Biden do if they have proof China caused the leak from the lab? What if it was deliberate?
What would Biden do? Beats me. Maybe the current revival of the topic is part of a campaign to apply pressure on China, so maybe he's already doing it. Be a good plot for a spy novel, wouldn't it?
... that the corporation will get special status for doing good for the country, and start taking away those special statuses if they engage in dealings with China that threatens the country ...
What would Biden do? Beats me. Maybe the current revival of the topic is part of a campaign to apply pressure on China, so maybe he's already doing it. Be a good plot for a spy novel, wouldn't it?I agree that it doesn't make sense. Release would boomarang and infect the predator country that released it. But that begs the question. Why research and adapt these viruses to make them more dangerous in the first place if there is no logic to release them?
But I am having a hard time imagining a scenario where China would deliberately leak a virus into its own population. What would be the upside of that?
Our self interest for the most part - being better prepared for when the next one jumps species.If the Chinese were innocently studying the virus for all those positive reasons., why did they deny they were studying it? Maybe they had other ulterior reasons such as studying them for biological warfare. In the old days, attacking conquerors would throw infected human bodies over the town's defensive walls they were attacking to infect their enemy to weaken their soldiers. This could be just a modern version of it. China Communist party under Mao killed over twenty million of their own people. Do you think they care about foreigners? The fact is they hid the dangers of the disease for over five weeks, maybe since October 2019, sending infected Chinese travelers to the rest of the world while shutting down travel within China. Doesn't sound like too much concern to me.
1) understand how and why the host is not impacted by the virus,
2) understand the structure of the virus to make it easier to construct antibodies with a vaccine,
3) identify hosts that serve as reservoirs
4) understand how the virus infects humans and the impacts on different types of cells in our bodies.
5) have the possibility of earlier detection based on research above
6) reduce the human - host animal interactions to reduce the chance of virus jumping.
IF the lab workers had gotten infected by accident and unintentionally passed it on to others, while maybe incompetent recognition and mitigation, it very likely would not have been intentional. But we don't have those details and may never. Mild symptoms seem to occur in most cases and very much like the common cold from what i hear.
So they may not have known or suspected anything different until larger number of cases started turning up. By then, due to global travel, the pandemic was on.
If the Chinese were innocently studying the virus for all those positive reasons., why did they deny they were studying it? Maybe they had other ulterior reasons such as studying them for biological warfare. In the old days, attacking conquerors would throw infected human bodies over the town's defensive walls they were attacking to infect their enemy to weaken their soldiers. This could be just a modern version of it. China Communist party under Mao killed over twenty million of their own people. Do you think they care about foreigners? The fact is they hid the dangers of the disease for over five weeks, maybe since October 2019, sending infected Chinese travelers to the rest of the world while shutting down travel within China. Doesn't sound like too much concern to me.
Never mind.
Unraveling China's "sinister plan" to "unleash coronavirus"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-A_OPWa5VI
Basically, no new real information has emerged recently to revive this issue, so why is it back. There might be a good reason and there might not. Feels like I'm witnessing a propaganda war. Am I too cynical?
Outstanding find! Thanks for sharing it! I only hope everyone watches it as it is very revealing.
I think there is a fairly straightforward explanation for the revived interest in the "lab escape" theory and it is precisely because no new real information has emerged.The evidence is the opposite. There are no animals in the wild found to have the disease. The state of mutation of the virus that infected humans does not have animal markers expected at this stage of infection. That leaves development in a lab. The Chinese are lying.
Once again we have senior appointive officials in the U.S. federal government who are experienced in dealing with scientific findings and intelligence analyses. It's natural for them to ask whether there is definitive evidence for the presumed zoonotic origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The answer from the scientists is "no." The answer from the intelligence agencies reportedly is "we cannot rule out the 'lab escape' theory."
"No definitive evidence" and "can't rule out" should be interpreted literally. These are the consensus judgments of experts whose expertise consists, among other things, in being able to distinguish between what they know and what they think is probable.
Understanding the origin of this new coronavirus is an important element in developing policies for preparing for the next new pathogen. Since the pandemic is suspected to have been caused by animal-to-human transfer but the evidence is not yet definitive, rational policy-makers inevitably would request that both sets of experts continue to research the issue.
The evidence is the opposite. There are no animals in the wild found to have the disease. The state of mutation of the virus that infected humans does not have animal markers expected at this stage of infection. That leaves development in a lab. The Chinese are lying.
I think there is a fairly straightforward explanation for the revived interest in the "lab escape" theory and it is precisely because no new real information has emerged.
Once again we have senior appointive officials in the U.S. federal government who are experienced in dealing with scientific findings and intelligence analyses. It's natural for them to ask whether there is definitive evidence for the presumed zoonotic origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The answer from the scientists is "no." The answer from the intelligence agencies reportedly is "we cannot rule out the 'lab escape' theory."
"No definitive evidence" and "can't rule out" should be interpreted literally. These are the consensus judgments of experts whose expertise consists, among other things, in being able to distinguish between what they know and what they think is probable.
Understanding the origin of this new coronavirus is an important element in developing policies for preparing for the next new pathogen. Since the pandemic is suspected to have been caused by animal-to-human transfer but the evidence is not yet definitive, rational policy-makers inevitably would request that both sets of experts continue to research the issue.
Peter Hadfield (potholer54) is a science journalist who takes a methodical approach that, in this age of disinformation, is refreshing. I try to use the same methods, finding the source document. Even the conclusions of scientific papers can be misquoted in news media. It's just time-consuming, having to do the work that serious media should do.
He has already made a series of videos about Covid19, that are interesting to watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-A_OPWa5VI&list=UUljE1ODdSF7LS9xx9eWq0GQ
One of them is only too recognizable, "Another side-effect of Covid-19: Stupidity":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5inXVPS1Is
I can accept all that. Now that we seem to be on the downslope side of this, good time for a debrief, see what went wrong. Difficult to sort things out though in an environment when everyone has an axe to grind, not easy to extract a signal from the noise. I hope that the science can withstand the politics.Unfortunately, in an effort to make Trump look bad and blame him for the death and sickness because it was an election year particularly, Democrat's and the anti-Trump press ignored the real culprit - China. Because of that, there's a huge incentive to bury the truth going forward rather than embarrassing all those who blamed the victims of the pandemic rather than the cause of it. So after Biden's 90 day investigation is done, they'll come up with no conclusive evidence. After all China buried all that months ago. Then everyone can forget what really happened and move on to the 2022 elections and blame Trump again.
While actual scientists continue to research the origins of COVID-19—which may continue for years—it's certainly been interesting to watch the current uncertainty weaponized into accusations against scientists by those with an axe to grind. Here's an interesting article...
https://massivesci.com/articles/sars-cov-coronavirus-covid19-lab-leak-hypothesis (https://massivesci.com/articles/sars-cov-coronavirus-covid19-lab-leak-hypothesis/)
[...]
While actual scientists continue to research the origins of COVID-19—which may continue for years—it's certainly been interesting to watch the current uncertainty weaponized into accusations against scientists by those with an axe to grind. Here's an interesting article...It came from a Chinese lab. You're being an apologist for China. Don't be naive.
https://massivesci.com/articles/sars-cov-coronavirus-covid19-lab-leak-hypothesis (https://massivesci.com/articles/sars-cov-coronavirus-covid19-lab-leak-hypothesis/)
If the question is “are both hypotheses possible?” the answer is yes. Both are possible. If the question is “are they equally likely?” the answer is absolutely not. One hypothesis requires a colossal cover-up and the silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year. The other requires only for biology to behave as it always has, for a family of viruses that have done this before to do it again. The zoonotic spillover hypothesis is simple and explains everything. It’s scientific malpractice to pretend that one idea is equally as meritorious as the other. The lab-leak hypothesis is a scientific deus ex machina, a narrative shortcut that points a finger at a specific set of bad actors. I would be embarrassed to stand up in front of a room of scientists, lay out both hypotheses, and then pretend that one isn’t clearly, obviously better than the other.
Besides the hazy science, there is an undeniable political aspect to this argument. When violence against Asian people in the US is spiking, it’s naive at best and violent gaslighting at worst to pretend that supporting an evidence-free hypothesis that clearly adds fuel to the idea that China inflicted COVID-19 upon the world, that they did this to us, is noble scientific dispassion. There’s a choice being made here between two ideas — one that falls neatly within the world of biology, and the other that knots together conspiracy theory, political intrigue, and xenophobia.
* Deus ex machina (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina) - a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence. Its function is generally to resolve an otherwise irresolvable plot situation, to surprise the audience, to bring the tale to a happy ending, or act as a comedic device.
Outstanding find! Thanks for sharing it! I only hope everyone watches it as it is very revealing.+1!!
Unraveling China's "sinister plan" to "unleash coronavirus"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-A_OPWa5VI
Interesting report which, however, looses all credibility when Chinese accuse West from the manufacturing and weaponising of the SARS virus and importing it to China.
Same BS as when Russians initially said that the MH17 airplane was shot down by Ukraine or when Iran said that the Ukrainian Boeing 737 was shot down by Israelis.
It came from a Chinese lab. You're being an apologist for China. Don't be naive.
Why does reporting on that allegation cause the report to lose credibility? He didn't assert that it was true or that he agreed with it.When so many here blamed America and especially Trump for the disease and deaths in America, the victims, it seems politically motivated when people support arguments that the Chinese have clean hands.
Why does reporting on that allegation cause the report to lose credibility? He didn't assert that it was true or that he agreed with it.
When so many here blamed America and especially Trump for the disease and deaths in America, the victims, it seems politically motivated when people support arguments that the Chinese have clean hands.
Do you continue to think that the US did a good job managing the pandemic?We did a great job with the vaccines. We did a good job with treatment and support of ill patients. We didn't do well with the infection rates but I'm not sure how we could have done better short of locking people up like they did in China. We also did a terrible job with old age homes and protecting people there. Of course, it's a lot easier Monday morning quarterbacking.
While on the subject of Chinese credibility, how come that they stopped reporting any deaths for the worldometer.com covid stats? Did they completely erase covid in China or are they just supressing that data?I wouldn't believe their stats anyway. Why would anyone believe anything they say?
While actual scientists continue to research the origins of COVID-19—which may continue for years—it's certainly been interesting to watch the current uncertainty weaponized into accusations against scientists by those with an axe to grind.
It's also interesting to watch the current uncertainty weaponized into accusations against others posting here by those with an axe to grind.You seen to forget that people here blamed Trump for the damage caused by the virus and even calling him xenophobic and racist for stopping Chinese travelers from entering the USA.
The background story of how and why vaccines like the Nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleoside-modified_messenger_RNA) vaccines from BioNTech and Moderna were able to be developed and produced so quickly,
.
.
.
To Be Continued...
* Click on the links provided in the text above if you would like more information on any of the items highlighted.
Unfortunately, in an effort to make Trump look bad and blame him for the death and sickness because it was an election year particularly, Democrat's and the anti-Trump press ignored the real culprit - China. Because of that, there's a huge incentive to bury the truth going forward rather than embarrassing all those who blamed the victims of the pandemic rather than the cause of it. So after Biden's 90 day investigation is done, they'll come up with no conclusive evidence. After all China buried all that months ago. Then everyone can forget what really happened and move on to the 2022 elections and blame Trump again.
In the placebo-controlled, observer-blinded study randomized 2:1, NVX-CoV2373 demonstrated overall efficacy of 90.4% (95% CI: 82.9, 94.6), achieving its primary endpoint. Seventy-seven cases were observed: 63 in the placebo group and 14 in the vaccine group. All cases observed in the vaccine group were mild as defined by the trial protocol. Ten moderate cases and four severe cases were observed, all in the placebo group, yielding a vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI: 87.0, 100) against moderate or severe disease.
Efficacy endpoints were accrued from January 25 through April 30, 2021 — a time when the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant, first identified in the U.K., became the predominant strain in the U.S. Other strains, including Variants of Interest (VoI) and Variants of Concern (VoC), were also on the rise during the [third-phase clinical trial] endpoint accrual window.
Here's a sad story about the unvaccinated who are getting sick and dying in far higher numbers than the vaccinated, https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/07/us/maryland-unvaccinated-covid-deaths/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/07/us/maryland-unvaccinated-covid-deaths/index.html).
On Thursday, Pfizer’s Dr. Mikael Dolsten told The Associated Press that early data from the company’s booster study suggests people’s antibody levels jump five- to 10-fold after a third dose, compared to their second dose months earlier.
In August, Pfizer plans to ask the Food and Drug Administration for emergency authorization of a third dose, he said.
Why might that matter for fighting the delta variant? Dolsten pointed to data from Britain and Israel showing the Pfizer vaccine “neutralizes the delta variant very well.” The assumption, he said, is that when antibodies drop low enough, the delta virus eventually could cause a mild infection before the immune system kicks back in.
I suspect manufacturers of other coronavirus vaccines won't be too far behind in making similar requests.
Some stories are just too sad for words. . . . Some folks in Missouri feel the need to hide the fact that they're getting inoculated.
Figuring out exactly who is not vaccinated is more complicated; federal authorities have mainly tracked the people getting shots — not those who have not gotten them. But several surveys of adults — from the Kaiser Family Foundation, AP-NORC, Morning Consult, Civis Analytics, the Ad Council and the Census Bureau — together present a sense of the range of who the unvaccinated are, an essential set of data as health officials seek to convince reluctant Americans. . . .
I'm happy to report that I got my third Pfizer shot yesterday. :)
How about a few predictions? What will the Covid virus death total be in the US when we finally fully open, possibly next summer or fall. (Or, if you're not from the US, give us the current tool and your country, and what you think it will be at full opening.)
I'm thinking somewhere between 575,000 and 600,000 in the US.
UPDATE: By Friday morning, August 20, 2021, the Covid death total in US stood at 642,185.
According to worldometer stats, Thursday's total was 1089, Wednesday's 967.
At this rate, the total US death count by end of August will be around 650,000 and by year end over 700,000.
Yeh, but wake me up when it reaches 60,000...oh wait...
And I say it is high time we go full Assuie on this virus. Time to kill all of the dogs in shelters, and the cats, to be fair, to keep people from coming out to look at them. And I thought the MAGA people were a pain in the ass; God Damn animal lovers destroying society! >:( >:( >:(
A local government in Australia killed its impounded dogs over coronavirus fears. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/australia/covid-lockdown-dogs-killed.html) (NYTs article btw, so you know it must be true. ;))
Or ... we could just give up this mass hysteria and get back on with our lives excepting this is going to be with us forever now. Zero Covid was never a reasonable goal.
Although cases may be going up, deaths really are not, showing the Delta variant is not nearly as deadly as the original strain and evolving like all pandemic viruses do, becoming less deadly but more transmissible.
Get back at it, your life that is; I have been since last July.
Yeah, too bad about those full ICUs in various states.
What is your limiting principal for COVID to allow us to get back to normal?
I would really like to know, because from what I see the left wants Zero C-19 before we can get back to normal, which is completely unattainable. C-19 will be with us for the end of time, and all research is showing natural immunity is better then the vaccine. I for one will not be getting any buster shots, since I'd rather just catch it at this point with all of the break through cases.
So what is your limit on us getting back to normal?
Oz is completely locking down with only 4 deaths a day out of 25M people. That is insane, unless you think Zero C-19 is an attainable goal.
There's no way to answer that question, but I'm pretty sure that full ICUs and 1000 Covid deaths per day may not be exactly normal yet. Is that unreasonable? You've been more or less saying what you're saying from the start and all throughout the 600,000+ deaths, so from my point of view you have more to explain than I do. Not that either one of us owes anyone any explanations.
Besides, I look around here in Ontario, and I'd call things pretty normal, really. Businesses are running, store shelves are filled, friends are travelling, but there's enough remnant of viral loads floating around that it's still sensible to wear masks indoors where there are strangers. All and all, not really a heavy price to pay not to be sick and not to transfer the sickness to others who may be less able to cope.
And please don't say 'Life is a risk', it's a pointless cliché, and everyone is bored of hearing it. :)
Anyway, didn't you say earlier (or in another thread) that you've been living your life normally for a while now, so what are you complaining about anyway? Surely it doesn't bother you that others choose to live differently? Surely they are entitled to the freedom to do that.
Epidemiologists from the beginning said that we might be looking at 4 years of abnormality before it's all done. Being sick and tired of it will not speed anything up.
Living in a civil society can be such a burden for some.
I thought it a reasonable observation that is useful to recall from time to time.
So you did not mean it as a slight, against me or minorities that will not get vaccinated?
More of a general observation of the fact that there are people that believe personal freedom and a responsibility toward others in society are mutually exclusive, rather than an ongoing search for balance.
It is impossible to search for balance, as you put it, when you refuse to listen to those whom you are trying to find balance with.
liberals like yourself
It's only impossible with those that believe there is no balance to be had and that those are mutually exclusive (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/mutually-exclusive) concepts. If your personal freedom is your only concern, the conversation is over before it's begun.
* If two things are mutually exclusive, they are separate and very different from each other, so that it is impossible for them to exist or happen together.
So, like I said at the start, if we were left to make our own decisions, I would have no problem. But that is not good enough for many people who now are seeking mandates. It is the mandates I disagree with and do effect me.
I for one will not be getting any buster shots, since I'd rather just catch it at this point with all of the break through cases.
Now we have the Delta variant, which is a 1000 times more contagious than Alpha…
... But, you and I both know, the control freaks just cant get over mandating things, like more masks and distancing, even if you were a good little boy and got vaccinated. ...
First, in NYC
(according to the official NY state health department)
69.6% of White Not Latinos are vaccinated, but only 22.7% of Blacks, 27.9% of Asians, and 30.4% of Latinos are.
These numbers have been steady for the past few months and, even after the mandate was announced, no significant increases were seen.
For all intents and purposes, the NYC Key is going to turn one of the most diverse cities in the USA into a Whites only society
This is morally reprehensible, full stop.
You, as in you personally, are a great example of someone who is not after balance either, even though you claim otherwise. I made three observations about the soon to be enforced vaccine mandate in NYC. Instead of responding to any of them with "rational and well reasoned dialogue," you instead decided to send a quip my way.
If you truly would like to achieve balance, prove me otherwise. Provide me with criticisms to those three observations.
Provide me with criticisms to those three observations.
First, if you're quoting people or giving out statistics, it would be helpful to provide a link to your source. Some might think you're just making wild assertions otherwise.
Oh... the official NY state health department. I couldn't find an unofficial NY state health department. I did find The New York State Department of Health website and their vaccine tracker data. They only show demographic data statewide and by county.
That makes sense. Generally speaking, when I've looked at state provided data of any kind, like election statistics or health statistics, it's provided as statewide and the next level down, the counties within their jurisdiction. Just like counties provide countywide data and the next level down, the cities, municipalities, towns, and villages within their jurisdiction. New York City is of course a huge population and they have their own Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (abbreviated as NYC Health) which gathers statistics and provides data citywide and for the boroughs within their jurisdiction.
Here are NYC Health Department vaccination statistics by demographic (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.page). They are broken down by All Ages and Adults (18 years or older). Only ages 12 and older are eligible for vaccination, so there is some difference; as children and young adults weren't eligible at all for vaccination until relatively recently. Let's start with...
NYC Adults (18 years or older) - At least 1 dose: White - 58%; Black - 46%; Hispanic/Latino - 65%; Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: 89%; Native American/Alaska Native: 91%.
NYC Adults (18 years or older) - Fully vaccinated: White - 55%; Black - 40%; Hispanic/Latino - 56%; Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: 83%; Native American/Alaska Native: 81%.
NYC All Ages - At least 1 dose: White - 50%; Black - 39%; Hispanic/Latino - 53%; Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: 78%; Native American/Alaska Native: 80%.
NYC All Ages - Fully vaccinated: White - 47%; Black - 34%; Hispanic/Latino - 45%; Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: 73%; Native American/Alaska Native: 71%.
* Sorry for taking up so much space, but when it comes to statistics, the details matter. I've listed the data in the order that I feel is of most importance. I've also included the relevant data here as some people won't bother to click on a link... let alone provide one.
Really? People stopped receiving vaccines "the past few months"? That seems odd.
Based on current NYC Health Department statistical data and your "logic", it appears more likely it would become a Native American and Asian only society. Then again, I don't have any more confidence in that line of "logic" than I do in your statistics.
Your moral outrage is noted.
Seems like your stats and Joe's stats don't line up. You provided a link to your stats...Joe not so much. Wonder which set of posted stats is more credible?
The study showed that most common masks, primarily due to problems with fit, filter about 10 per cent of exhaled aerosol droplets. The remaining aerosols are redirected, mostly out the top of the mask where it fits over the nose, and escape into the ambient air unfiltered.
By contrast, higher-quality, more expensive N95 and KN95 masks filtered more than 50 per cent of the exhaled aerosols that can accumulate indoors and spread the COVID-19 virus when inhaled by other people.
a recent study from the University of Waterloo showing new never worn KN95 masks only filter out 50% of particles, and that is assuming you are wearing the correct sized mask without any facial hair. (Those blue medical masks everyone wears only filters out 10% and cloth masks filter out essentially nothing, according to the research.)
I'm happy to report that I got my third Pfizer shot yesterday. :)
"New interim data from these studies demonstrate that a booster dose of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine generated a rapid and robust increase in spike-binding antibodies, nine-fold higher than 28 days after the primary single-dose vaccination," the company said in its statement.
According to J&J, people who receive a booster 6-8 months after their initial two shots can expect their antibodies increase nine-fold higher than 28 days after the first shot.Wasn't J&J sold as a single-shot vaccine? It seems that it should have been a double-shot vaccine just like Moderna and Pfizer.
The data comes from two Phase 2 studies conducted in the United States and Europe observing 2,000 people in the studies.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/25/health/johnson-vaccine-booster-data/index.html
Wasn't J&J sold as a single-shot vaccine? It seems that it should have been a double-shot vaccine just like Moderna and Pfizer.
Now we have the Delta variant, which is a 1000 times more contagious than Alpha...
Not commenting on the rest of your post, but the above is incorrect. The Delta variant is estimated to be 1.5 times more contagious, not a 1000 times. i know you’re going to tell me you’re ’speaking’ figuratively, but there’s enough FUD around not to add to it unnecesarily.
Even if we all wore new KN95 masks, properly, how is it going to matter to a variant that is 1000 times more contagious?
Still trying to figure out the difference between efficacy and effectiveness? I tried explaining the difference to to you multiple times, but you ignored the explanation each time.You're still your obnoxious self. Nothing's changed.
A little more on Florida, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/ron-desantis-joe-biden-covid-florida (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/ron-desantis-joe-biden-covid-florida). This would be funny if it wasn't.
Alberta feed stores say they're receiving a deluge of callers asking to buy ivermectin due to misinformation that suggests the livestock dewormer can be used to treat COVID-19 in humans.
...
Different forms of ivermectin are used to treat parasites, such as intestinal worms or lice, in both animals and humans. But the livestock form of the drug should never be used on humans, and parasites are not the same as viruses. COVID-19 is caused by a virus.
This study demonstrated a significantly higher humoral immunogenicity of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna) compared with the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech), in infected as well as uninfected participants, and across age categories. The higher mRNA content in mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2 and the longer interval between priming and boosting for mRNA-12733 (4 weeks vs 3 weeks for BNT162b2) might explain this difference.
A relationship between neutralization level after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and protection against COVID-19 has been demonstrated by several studies. . . . As such, the height of the humoral response after vaccination, which correlates with neutralizing antibody titers, . . . might be clinically relevant.
This happened a week ago but I missed it at the time, https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/570221-georgia-anti-vaxxers-shut-down-mobile-vaccine-event (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/570221-georgia-anti-vaxxers-shut-down-mobile-vaccine-event).Apparently in your Canada, the anti-Vaxers might be more dangerous. You really need to clean up your own house before pointing fingers at others.
This is pretty bizarre behaviour, I find. If you don't want to have the vaccine, well ok, that's your decision. But why would you think that you have the right to interfere with others getting vaccinated? It's odd how some people think that individual right to choose only applies to themselves but not others. At best, they seem to be confused.
Apparently in your Canada, the anti-Vaxers might be more dangerous. You really need to clean up your own house before pointing fingers at others.
...
I don't understand this kind of comment. Reminds me of ten year olds in a school yard. Did I ever say that there weren't morons in Canada? (In fact I have included some examples in the past, in case you think that we're obligated to provide "equal time".)Robert. I like you. I consider Canadians friends. But you're always going out of your way to knock America and find the few oddballs who make us look bad. It would be nice if you would say something pleasant about us. Were not all ogres you know.
And why "should I have to clean up my own house" before making a comment I feel like making? I'm not under any obligation to you to clean anything up. I really don't understand what you're trying to say.
Anyway, how is throwing gravel at a politician MORE dangerous than preventing people from getting vaccinations?
Robert. I like you. I consider Canadians friends. But you're always going out of your way to knock America and find the few oddballs who make us look bad. It would be nice if you would say something pleasant about us. Were not all ogres you know.
I guess the main reason that the US gets picked on in these discussions is because although it is true that there are crazies everywhere (several in my extended family for example), the presence of a large number of nutcases in US politics is simply too target rich to pass up. I mean, how often do people get together in forums or chat rooms to say nice things about politicians? Seem almost unnatural.Sure, fools are open to criticism. It's just that it would be nice if you aimed your arrows at more Canadian fools. :)
When it comes to Covid, there's not much I can add that isn't already known. What happened is beyond the pale. The richest most advanced nation screwed the pooch. Four percent of the world's population but 20% of the deaths, and yet there are STILL people who think there's nothing to see, there are still people who deny Covid is real, etc. I mean, how is it possible to look on that and NOT point it out. Contradiction is always interesting, after all.
Anyway, I find forums such as this one pretty organic. Topics are raised and if people find them interesting they get discussed.
and yet there are STILL people who think there's nothing to see, there are still people who deny Covid is real, etc. I mean, how is it possible to look on that and NOT point it out.
There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Among those that accept the reality of COVID-19 are people that don't accept that there is any reason for any government to attempt to control the spread. It isn't necessarily a matter of intelligence, when you have a huge ideological blind spot that prevents even recognizing that there is such a thing as Public Health.As I said a year and a half ago, the whole thing got politicized right from the beginning. It became a Trump vs the Democrats thing especially because it was an American presidential election year.. So the mask got politicized, then Trump's vaccine got politicized (remember the Democrats said they wouldn't take any vaccine Trump had a hand in developing), Trump's Warp Speed got politicized, the CDC got politicized, and Covid itself got politicized. Politics is still at the forefront. People are so dug into their sides, they are making irrational medical decisions based on their politics.
It's this kind of thinking that has been rampant among antigovernment; anti-science; anti-mask; anti-restriction activists in Idaho. That state has had a large number of loud and very active extremists challenging every measure to minimize viral spread at every level of government. I doubt that the hospital crisis they now face will have much impact on their attitude. Many would rather die, or stand by while others die, than accept the notion that public health is a legitimate concern of government—even during a pandemic.
"Live free or die!" There are many that think that is a black & white choice with no other options. For them, there is no middle ground or compromise for living in a civil society that accepts there are some limitations; where the health, safety, and lives of others deserve consideration or even minimal accommodation by following common sense public health measures—unless done on a purely voluntary basis. Of course, viruses don't care about politics, ideology, or whether you're voluntarily working to minimize their spread or not. They will happily continue to spread; evolve into more contagious and deadly forms; hospitalize; leave permanent damage to peoples' bodies; and kill when given the chance to spread. Voluntary isn't a prerequisite, nor a term, that a virus understands or cares about.
For an accurate narrative of how the current vaccines used in the U.S. came to be produced so quickly, including the people and government institutions which made that possible, see the link below. Some day, I may get around to continuing that narrative.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1218623#msg1218623 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1218623#msg1218623)
Among those that accept the reality of COVID-19 are people that don't accept that there is any reason for any government to attempt to control the spread. It isn't necessarily a matter of intelligence, when you have a huge ideological blind spot that prevents even recognizing that there is such a thing as Public Health.
It's this kind of thinking that has been rampant among antigovernment; anti-science; anti-mask; anti-restriction activists in Idaho. That state has had a large number of loud and very active extremists challenging every measure to minimize viral spread at every level of government. I doubt that the hospital crisis they now face will have much impact on their attitude. Many would rather die, or stand by while others die, than accept the notion that public health is a legitimate concern of government—even during a pandemic.
"Live free or die!" There are many that think that is a black & white choice with no other options. For them, there is no middle ground or compromise for living in a civil society that accepts there are some limitations; where the health, safety, and lives of others deserve consideration or even minimal accommodation by following common sense public health measures—unless done on a purely voluntary basis. Of course, viruses don't care about politics, ideology, or whether you're voluntarily working to minimize their spread or not. They will happily continue to spread; evolve into more contagious and deadly forms; hospitalize; leave permanent damage to peoples' bodies; and kill when given the chance to spread. Voluntary isn't a prerequisite, nor a term, that a virus understands or cares about.
There are some interesting remarks about precisely that in Premonition, Michael Lewis's latest book, where some far thinking people started funding rapid vaccine development VERY early on, in the early months of 2020, long before most people became conscious of how serious things would become.
It would be nice if you would say something pleasant about us. Were not all ogres you know.
Apparently in your Canada, the anti-Vaxers might be more dangerous. You really need to clean up your own house before pointing fingers at others.
Apparently in your Canada, the anti-Vaxers might be more dangerous. You really need to clean up your own house before pointing fingers at others.
I've never understood this kind of (non) logic. You might as well say that a smoker cannot advise others not to smoke, or that an alcoholic cannot give temperance lectures.It's hollow. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. It's hypocritical and takes gall to constantly criticize other countries, over and over again, while your own country is doing the same thing, maybe worse. You're an American. Don't you find it offensive when foreigners constantly criticize the USA? Show a little pride, man.
It's hollow. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. It's hypocritical and takes gall to constantly criticize other countries, over and over again, while your own country is doing the same thing, maybe worse. You're an American. Don't you find it offensive when foreigners constantly criticize the USA? Show a little pride, man.
This is utterly beside the point.
It's hollow. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. It's hypocritical and takes gall to constantly criticize other countries, over and over again, while your own country is doing the same thing, maybe worse. You're an American. Don't you find it offensive when foreigners constantly criticize the USA? Show a little pride, man.
Show a little pride in your country. Certainly, there are things we do that are good that you can defend. No country is perfect and America has done a lot of good over the centuries. Why listen to those people who always dump on your nation?
Not if the criticisms are legitimate. And why should I be proud of simply being born here? No accomplishment on my part, just luck--good luck I believe but still luck. And too much of the "pride" I see is empty pseudo-patriotic flag waving and chest puffing by white power jerks, MAGA boneheads, and others who have contributed little if anything to our country.
Did you intentionally leave out the alternative to vaccination or did you just skim the article and miss it?
"President Joe Biden is announcing Thursday that all employers with more than 100 workers will be forced to require coronavirus vaccinations or test employees weekly.
I left it out because it is of no consequence. Think about this from the perspective of a business owner, for once.
Considering mandatory vaccination or testing from a business owner's point of view, I'd be in favor of it under the current conditions. The most valuable asset that I have are my employees—so, their health, lives, and safety are of consequence.
Due to previous posts, I assume you are an attorney.
Why? Because, I have some basic english language skills? (which aren't great, but adequate).
Not that it matters in this discussion (or is anyone's business but my own), but, all of my income from full-time work has been derived from photography for the entirety of my adult working career. There were a few summers spent bailing hay for some extra money, but I was a teenager then.
What is it with people feeling this urge to jump to conclusions about others to somehow justify their own positions? One of my first (perhaps the very first) series of interactions I had with Alan involved him repeatedly insisting that I "must be a Kurd" as part of some sort of point he was trying to make.
C'mon people. Think for yourselves and stop with this projecting, stereotyping, and assuming about others to somehow prop up whatever point you're trying to make.
You have provided us with fairly thorough legal reviews and opinions of your own, especially when it comes to supreme court cases. This is just not something most non-lawyers research in their spare time, so I made that assumption.
As someone who was originally going to become a chef, I have a much more expansive knowledge on cooking than most.
Why? Because, I have some basic english language skills? (which aren't great, but adequate).You mean you really aren't a Kurd? :)
Not that it matters in this discussion (or is anyone's business but my own), but, all of my income from full-time work has been derived from photography for the entirety of my adult working career. There were a few summers spent bailing hay for some extra money, but I was a teenager then.
What is it with people feeling this urge to jump to conclusions about others to somehow justify their own positions? One of my first (perhaps the very first) series of interactions I had with Alan involved him repeatedly insisting that I "must be a Kurd" as part of some sort of point he was trying to make.
C'mon people. Think for yourselves and stop with this projecting, stereotyping, and assuming about others to somehow prop up whatever point you're trying to make.
You have provided us with some fairly thorough legal reviews and opinions of your own, especially when it comes to supreme court cases. This is just not something most non-lawyers research in their spare time, that is way I made that assumption.Why?
As someone who was originally going to become a chef, I have a much more expansive knowledge on cooking than most. If you talked with me about cooking and started throwing around words like mirepoix or julienne (pronouncing them correctly) or, when using your chef knife, kept the fingers on your opposing hand curled, I would make the assumption you had training in a professional kitchen and not just someone who is interested in cooking.
You should not take it as an offense.
. If you talked with me about cooking and started throwing around words like mirepoix or julienne (pronouncing them correctly) or, when using your chef knife, kept the fingers on your opposing hand curled, I would make the assumption you had training in a professional kitchen and not just someone who is interested in cooking
Why?
Some good news in a preliminary report from Israel. Having covid and recovering provides better protection against (re)infection with delta than the vaccine. Having covid and recovering and then getting the vaccine provides even better protection. Small numbers and not yet peer reviewed, but promising! Reported in Science Magazine.Of course you have to live after getting Covid for it to turn out better. :)
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.
You mean 300,000 will be on Biden?
It will be largely the result of people that used to parrot the line Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness; but who now believe only the latter two are important.
You mean 300,000 will be on Biden?Biden has had the advantage of Trump's development of the vaccines in Operation Warp Speed when he started his presidency.
For an accurate narrative of how the current vaccines used in the U.S. came to be produced so quickly, including the people and government institutions which made that possible, see the links below.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1218623#msg1218623 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1218623#msg1218623)
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1223539#msg1223539 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1223539#msg1223539)
Yawn...wake me up when it reaches 60,000. :-\
Yawn...wake me up when it reaches 60,000. :-\If I recall correctly, the 60,000 was a benchmark for when the seriousness of Covid becomes worse than the ordinary flu because we've had a worse case situation when 61,000 Americans died from it in the 2017/2018 flu season. Actually, the estimated deaths were between 46,000 and 95,000. Yet no one got crazy about that substantial number. It seemed like Covid was made into a bigger deal which at the time was open to question. The numbers were much less. The argument being made at the time early in COvid to put it in perspective with other viruses we've dealt with.
If I recall correctly, the 60,000 was a benchmark for when the seriousness of Covid becomes worse than the ordinary flu because we've had a worse case situation when 61,000 Americans died from it in the 2017/2018 flu season. Actually, the estimated deaths were between 46,000 and 95,000. Yet no one got crazy about that substantial number. It seemed like Covid was made into a bigger deal which at the time was open to question. The numbers were much less. The argument being made at the time early in COvid to put it in perspective with other viruses we've dealt with.
Of course, in retrospect, Covid turned out to be worse, unfortunately. But it's easy to Monday morning quarterback. I seem to recall the CDC saying early on that masks weren't required for the general public. Now we laugh at that. Yet, you don't make fun of the CDC. Couldn't you show similar respect for fellow forum members? After all, we're all here because of our mutual appreciation of photography. Or do we always have to try to make fun of others' beliefs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_influenza_statistics_by_flu_season
Or do we always have to try to make fun of others' beliefs?
Sometimes, it's a way of gently pointing out falsehoods and mis/disinformation. (as opposed to shouting "LIAR!")Humor is fine. But some of it gets downright mean and personally insulting. That isn't necessary.
"Beliefs" are not equivalent to facts.
Bullshit....
Bullshit. It was clear early on to lots of people that the rate of illness and death was greater than usual flu. I only remember silly posts about how only xxx had died, so why worry, even though that xxx represented the number of deaths in a very short period of time and that it was more than obvious that things were accelerating. You can try to rewrite history to suit yourself but no one is buying it.I seem to recall that when Trump shut down travel from China in Jan 2020, democrats called him racist and Biden called him xenophobic. Were they "silly"? The point is everyone was guessing. How could we not? As Yogi Berra claimed, "It's hard to predict things, especially the future."
+1
No matter how much he tries to ignore it.
What is indeed bullsheet is the constant misinterpretation of what I said about the 60K figure. Since you all are native English speakers, I shouldn't need to explain what the statement "wake me up..." is supposed to mean. It doesn't mean that I think it will not surpass 60K. It contains no falsehood or misinformation. It simply means that I will start paying attention to it if/when it surpasses that threshold.
Bullshit. You were constantly down playing Covid at those times saying the flu was much worse...now you are double talking...trying to save grace. Too late...chicken has fled the coop.Are you gloating that there were more deaths than people hoped for?
You really think you said something smart?
So certain someone really went after me in months past for implying that the teacher's unions, not science, was dictating the school reopening guidance. Welp ...The whole Covid thing has been politicized from the very beginning with everyone taking up sides including many of the scientists.
Critics slam CDC after teachers union influences guidelines: 'Based in politics and not science' (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/teachers-union-american-federation-cdc-white-house-reopen-schools)
This is why people dont trust our health experts. They have given up being scientists for being politicians.
I am going to get vaccinated this week, and then I am done paying attention to the little amount of things I am still doing.
Are you gloating that there were more deaths than people hoped for?
No...just calling out someone who down played Covid at every turn he could...even going out and claiming he's not interested until we reach 60K deaths...then he'll wake up.I made similar claims. No one was recognizing that we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually. So the question was were we overstating Covid risks? It was a fair question to ask at that early time because there were demands for the shutdown of the entire economy which had dangerous problems on its own. Millions of people were going to be pout out of work with businesses failing across the country. Of course in retrospect, it turned out very bad, both healthwise and for the economy. But asking a pertinent question before you shut down an entire economy, which was being recommended at the time the point was made, is certainly valid. It should be discussed and considered. Demeaning people who made the point is wrong.
Demeaning people who made the point is wrong.
I made similar claims. No one was recognizing that we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually. So the question was were we overstating Covid risks? It was a fair question to ask at that early time because there were demands for the shutdown of the entire economy which had dangerous problems on its own. Millions of people were going to be pout out of work with businesses failing across the country. Of course in retrospect, it turned out very bad, both healthwise and for the economy. But asking a pertinent question before you shut down an entire economy, which was being recommended at the time the point was made, is certainly valid. It should be discussed and considered. Demeaning people who made the point is wrong.
I made similar claims. No one was recognizing that we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually. ...
Trump shut down travel from China in Jan 2020
But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."
On Jan. 26, Fauci gave an interview to John Catsimatidis, a syndicated radio host in New York. "What can you tell the American people about what’s been going on?" Catsimatidis asked. "Should they be scared?"
"I don’t think so," Fauci said. "The American people should not be worried or frightened by this. It’s a very, very low risk to the United States, but it’s something we, as public health officials, need to take very seriously."
Maybe the avg man on the street, including you, didn't know about annual flu deaths, but it's silly to say that the people whose job it is to monitor these things, plan for them, and look for new outlier cases didn't know. They knew almost immediately as the literature on the subject is starting to show and if you cared to read some of the articles people have posted links to or listened to podcasts that have been provided. Just because you (or others) were not aware, does NOT mean that people weren't aware. In particular, people in authority knew and had been alerted very early on, many of them just chose not to act.The point was society never shut down the economy because of the flu or wear masks like they do in Asia. The point I was making, to ask the shutdown of an economy so early, would naturally create much opposition.
we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually.
No he didn't. There were restrictions, not a shutdown. Travel continued from China at a reduced level. In any event, despite numerous self-congratulatory statements by Trump, it was too late to prevent the spread as the virus was already in the U.S.— as well as having already spread to other countries from which travel remained unrestricted.Restriction? Shutdown? A distinction without a difference. The point is Trump acted long before Biden and the Democrats. In any case, what's your point? China hid the fact about the disease for at least six weeks. They knew about it in December or November of 2019, maybe earlier. They told nobody and hid the problem from the world. It was during that time that infected Chinese circulated in their travels through Europe and Canada and the US before Trump and everyone else knew about it. How's that Trump's fault. Why aren't you blaming the Chinese?
The whole Covid thing has been politicized from the very beginning
largely the result of people that used to parrot the line Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness; but who now believe only the latter two are important.
The point is Trump acted long before Biden
Baloney. The exact opposite is true. It is precisely because of government planning and preparations made many years in advance, for a possible pandemic flu outbreak, that vaccines were available and produced so quickly for COVID.You didn;t understand my post. I never mentioned preparation. I said with 61,000 death from flu in one season, tens of thousands every year, year after year, we didn't shut down the economy or wear masks. So the idea we would do so with just a couple of thousand deaths from Covid, was not enough to seem like a shutdown was yet necessary.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pandemic-influenza-strategy-2005.pdf (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pandemic-influenza-strategy-2005.pdf)
The link above documents the planning and preparations which boosted the sped up efforts in the development of advanced vaccine technology and established BARDA to streamline and accelerate the production of vaccines.
Restriction? Shutdown? A distinction without a difference.
You didn;t understand my post. I never mentioned preparation. I said with 61,000 death from flu in one season, tens of thousands every year, year after year, we didn't shut down the economy or wear masks. So the idea we would do so with just a couple of thousand deaths from Covid, was not enough to seem like a shutdown was yet necessary.
You might not have noticed, but Trump was the President... Biden was a private citizen at the time.He was a former Vice President currently running for president.
there were demands for the shutdown of the entire economy
By whom? The CDC issued common sense public health recommendations for masks; social distancing; working from home where possible; and avoidance of large gatherings or crowded situations. State and local governments instituted restrictions which affected certain types of businesses, like restaurants with indoor dining as an example—which too many chose not to follow, unfortunately.Are you kidding? I'm a New Yorker. In Midtown, there were no cabs, buses, traffic cops, ticket cops, practically no one. I parked on the street in a no-standing zone - no parking zone, and no one even cared. All the shops were closed. Sure people worked at home, but some much was shut down. I went there for a dental appointment after dentists started to work again. He's in a high-rise office building, 60 stories or so. Here's a picture of me and the other people on the elevator. The second shot is the street by the bank around the corner.
Myself and many others stopped dining inside restaurants or going to concerts, but beyond that continued to go shopping for whatever was needed. Like others, I did learn to cut my own hair with a clipper set that I purchased in person at a store. Most other businesses continued operating within common sense guidelines.
In short, there was no "shutdown of the entire economy". Who demanded that the entire economy shutdown? Are we going to be treated to yet another "distinction without a difference"?
The point is Trump acted long before Biden
He was a former Vice President currently running for president.
Then what's your point? Biden had no office and no authority to act. He did use his voice to urge people to follow common sense public health measures; to wear a mask in public; and stay safe—even though Trump mocked Biden's mask wearing during the debates and at rallies.It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.
President Trump has said the United States is “rounding the turn” – or “corner” or “bend” – on the coronavirus pandemic with shocking consistency over the last two months, a period in which average daily cases have risen sharply.
Trump first said in a virtual Nevada tele-rally on Aug. 31 that the U.S. was “rounding the final turn” on the virus, repeating the line again at a Sep. 3 Pennsylvania rally “we are rounding that turn, and vaccines are coming along great.” The biggest gap came when Trump contracted the virus himself at the beginning of October and briefly receded from public view, though he began saying it once again on Oct. 8.
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.
Not quite, Alan. He said several times that covid is just a small flu and then even more times that US is rounding the corner on the covid. Trump said U.S. was ‘Rounding The Final Turn’ On Aug. 31 – and on 39 of the 57 days since.I was referring to Jan 2020. Then everything went south as everyone played the political game and took up sides because of the upcoming presidential election in Nov 2020. The entire Covid fiasco has been political since the beginning with the public caught in the middle.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/10/27/trump-said-us-was-rounding-the-final-turn-on-aug-31-and-on-39-of-the-57-days-since/?sh=7ed3caf37299
Alan, you're either...
Alan, you're either an absolute dead-loss idiot or the most skillful troll on LULA.
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.
Remember the time when Biden was actively campaigning against “Trump’s” vaccines? “Who’s gonna take that shot!? Who’s gonna take that shot!?”
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.
... So the idea we would do so with just a couple of thousand deaths from Covid, was not enough to seem like a shutdown was yet necessary.
... trying to pin it on Biden while he was out of office...
... people are still peddling the "nothing we could have done" ...
He has been in office the last eight months. 300,000 on his watch. Or you are trying to pin that too on Trump?
To tell you the truth, his post was one of those comments that I thought was better left to just sit and rot of its own accord without a response.
But, I do understand the response.
I see they approved the third Pfizer shot for people over 65 like me and my wife. But since we took Moderna's, we'll have to wait to see what they come up for us.
It does feel that way lately. I just took the regular Flu shot.
I see they approved the third Pfizer shot for people over 65 like me and my wife...
... But since we took Moderna's, we'll have to wait to see what they come up for us.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/moderna-we-dont-really-know-if-a-third-covid-19-shot-is-necessary-135143605.html: Research for five months thru August that shows Moderna is better at holding its effectiveness over Pfizer and J&J.
One-Third Of New Drugs Had Safety Problems After FDA Approval
: Research for five months thru August that shows Moderna is better at holding its effectiveness over Pfizer and J&J.
Over the course of five months of research, from March to August, the effectiveness of all the vaccines at keeping people out of the hospital due to COVID among people without compromising conditions was highest for Moderna recipients, at 93%. Pfizer's effectiveness was overall 88% and J&J's was 71%.
Pfizer's effectiveness decreased after 120 days of the study period, from 91% to 77%, while Moderna's effectiveness did not see a similar decline. Initial effectiveness of 93% only declined to 92% with Moderna.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/09/18/cdc-says-moderna-vaccine-staying-especially-effective-covid-updates/8380925002/
Are you gloating that there were more deaths than people hoped for?
F.U.D...
You baited people using a wildly inappropriate query that can only be deliberate. I find this despicable.
You have done this twice (that I can remember) in recent weeks. You baited people using a wildly inappropriate query that can only be deliberate. I find this despicable. It's not an excuse for some insults that have been directed your way, but let's not pretend you were innocent.My comment was in response to someone else's post, not yours. He was personally insulting another poster. I believe the Administrator even called him out with his post.
And I should know, having been recently accused of being despicable myself.
I should know, having been recently accused of being despicable myself.
He was personally insulting another poster.
There was little to reprimand given the 'either ...or' context of your post.The record shows no such thing. For five years because I voted and supported Trump, I've been called a Naxi and a racist over and over again by many posters here. So were other Trump supporters also called out personally with the same demeaning insults.
Moderator got the wrong end of the stick (not least because he quoted Slobodan) in his interjection.
And as for Slobodan's 'despicable' grand standing, the record shows that he showed no such objection to Der Kleine's defamatory interchange with jeremyrh, so I'd suggest that you view that quip in its wider context.
Nuff said.
Which might be unkind, even when it's true, but not something that I personally would classify as despicable. Despicable would be something like making up racist statements and then falsely attributing them to someone else. Now that would be despicable!Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference.
Even with that kind of despicable act, you could probably find someone willing to rationalize and dismiss your nefarious acts as merely motivated by implied inferences—while reaching for their crying towel and yelling for a moderator at an unkind remark to that same despicable, but like-minded, individual.
Hypothetically speaking of course!
By the way, your Der Kleine reference shows you still calling me a Nazi.
Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference.
Regarding Jeremyrh, I called him out for the racist comment he made of indicating that black people were apparently not intelligent ...
That is NOT what he wrote or said.
It may well be what you INFERRED, but you are no position to blatantly misquote Jeremy and then compound your buffoonery by asinine attempts to disguise what are, in all probability, your own jaundiced views.
You need to get a grip on the elementary use of English.
Improve your language skills ,
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine
'little man'
You're apparently confused with regard to whom you're replying. There's nothing in my post to which you replied that contains "Der Kleine". Please be more careful in your quotations and replies.Sorry if it seemed that I accused you of saying it. I was just pointing out to your post that someone called me that.
I don't speak German and apparently you don't either.
Regarding Jeremyrh, I called him out for the racist comment he made...
It could be because in Canada there is not such racism and inequality that strict ID requirements don't result in disenfranchisement of a specific demographic.
he said they were incapable of voting like white people do.
he says black people don't have the ability or intelligence to obtain ID's so they can vote just like white people.
So you think Black Americans are ignorant. That they're still picking cotton... Do you realize how insulting and racist your opinion of black people is?
Improve your language skills ,This is really getting insulting "little man" is an insult too. The whole use of the German Der Kleine was an attempt to associate Nazi thought with me as people have done here in the past. I don't buy your explanation. The whole LuLa is going down the drain., Why the owner puts up with the constant insults is beyond me. Pretty soon no one will be posting here.
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine
'little man'
There are people in this world who are capable of bridging absolutely incredible distances whenjumpingleaping to conclusions.
Yes, I remember that. You asked him about Canadian and U.S. voter ID requirements: "Why should your Canada and probably most other countries have ID requirements but America should waive its requirements?"—to which he responded by broadly comparing the level of racism and inequality that exists in the two countries as a possible explanation.Well if the insults against me don't stop, I'll be gone too. Others have already left because of the nastiness and personal assaults by many members.
You had some interesting responses in reply that attributed statements to him which differed substantially from what he actually said.
Although your immediate reply was to project his thoughts...
Yes. I remember that. It was less than six months ago. It caused two longtime and regular contributors to leave the forum, directly due to your comments, and who have not returned since. When others have complained about your comments, you've claimed that you're the victim of people calling you a nazi and a racist—something I don't ever recall happening.
Of course, words can be claimed to mean almost anything that anyone wants them to mean. It's one of the great barriers to communicating among people.
Others have already left because of the nastiness and personal assaults by many members.
Internet forums are well known to generate at least as much heat as they do light—regardless of what the topic might be. Some choose never to participate in them or choose to do so anonymously because of that fact; while others may leave after a time because they don't like the heat. None of which will change the nature of the internet.Regardlees of what an Administrator does or doesn't do, debating points by insulting other members personally and attacking their person is low class and childish. Additionally, this is a photo forum where we should give each other respect because of our common interests. I'm for lowering the heat and debating on substance. Do you think this is a good idea?
Owners of forums may choose to moderate commentary, whether that consists of language considered insulting; or the broadcasting of false assertions and accusations; or other criteria. It is ultimately up to them as it is their right on their forums.
Improve your language skills ,
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine
'little man'
Yours was a Nazi reference. Please do not play dumb or naive... or think we are dumb or naive.
Of course, words can be claimed to mean almost anything that anyone wants them to mean. It's one of the great barriers to communicating among people.
... And as for Slobodan's 'despicable' grand standing, the record shows that he showed no such objection to Der Kleine's defamatory interchange with jeremyrh...
Der Kleine which translates literally to a small or little man or boy—but translated to Perpetual Victimhood actually means "nazi".
So, if the intent was to call Alan Klein "a little man" (as if it isn't insulting by itself) ... why not say so in English? Why switch to German, if not for the Nazi reference?
Not to mention his last name is Klein, not Kleine.
... Ernest, not Earnest—see above for explanation.
The whole fake outrage about an inference he made is manufactured
From day one of my participation on LuLa I voiced clearly my opinion that personal attacks via name calling is not ok.
Thanks, Mr. DoubleTalk.
Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference.
By the way, your Der Kleine reference shows you still calling me a Nazi.
Looking up […] it would translate along the lines of the little man or the small boy or similar combinations—do I have that right?
So, if the intent was to call Alan Klein "a little man" (as if it isn't insulting by itself) ... why not say so in English? Why switch to German, if not for the Nazi reference? Not to mention his last name is Klein, not Kleine.
The whole fake outrage about an inference he made is manufactured so that you (rhetorical you) finally have a "justification" for a consistent barrage of insults thrown at him.
So, if the intent was to call Alan Klein "a little man" (as if it isn't insulting by itself) ... why not say so in English? Why switch to German, if not for the Nazi reference? Not to mention his last name is Klein, not Kleine.Thanks for the defense Slobodan but many people here would prefer to continue to go down the road of personal insult rather than intellectual debate. It's going to kill participation in the forums which you can see by the reduced number of threads and posts. They want to silence opposing views which seems to be a regular tactic of the left. Rather than debate points, they'd rather shut down those they disagree with using insult and accusation. Since the last moderator has left, it's gotten out of hand.
Alan Klein has been consistently one of the most polite and patient debater on this forum. And mostly correct. The whole fake outrage about an inference he made is manufactured so that you (rhetorical you) finally have a "justification" for a consistent barrage of insults thrown at him.
Thank you for making my point. Had I written Klein without the 'e' it would have been grammatically incorrect and we're past sixth grade. Referring to someone who steadfastly refuses to 'man up' as 'the little one', a generic term if ever there was one, has absolutely zilch to do with Nazism, The Third Reich or even Hitler himself.
Ok, Mr. Cannoli.
You see? When I do a play on words, I give you a compliment
... Neither political rhetoric, virtue signalling or forum semantic argument have any effect whatsoever on how a virus travels through a population.
Nor vaccinations, social distance and hygiene. Lord moves in mysterious ways... so does the virus.
Nor vaccinations, social distance and hygiene. Lord moves in mysterious ways... so does the virus.
Reading the chart from right to left, you’ll see that those countries with over 75% vaccinations go a long way to discrediting your post....
The number of post-vaccination cases declines dramatically as time from vaccination increases.
Only 13.4% of cases post-vaccination occurred 14 or more days after dose 2 administration
and are considered breakthrough cases.
The rate of COVID-19 in unvaccinated individuals is higher compared to fully vaccinated
individuals. This trend has remained consistent over time.
In the past 30 days, unvaccinated individuals were approximately 7.9 times more likely to
become a case of COVID-19 compared to fully vaccinated individuals.
Among individuals 60 years of age or older, the rate of COVID-19-related hospitalizations was
higher among unvaccinated individuals compared to fully vaccinated individuals. This trend has
remained consistent over time.
In the past 30 days, unvaccinated adults 60 years of age or older were approximately 30.3
times more likely to be hospitalized due to COVID-19 compared to fully vaccinated adults
60 years of age and older.
Alan Klein has been consistently one of the most polite and patient debater on this forum. And mostly correct.
Nor vaccinations, social distance and hygiene. Lord moves in mysterious ways... so does the virus.
What is there to discredit?
I am simply stating that the virus moves in mysterious ways... affects vaccinated and unvaccinated, affects those who socially distance and those who don't, those with masks and those without (Lollapalooza in Chicago, US Open in NY, Obama's party, Pelosi lunch, AOC gala, etc. etc.)
The "polite and patient" part is certainly true. The "mostly correct" part is egregiously wrong.
Reading the chart from right to left, you’ll see that those countries with over 75% vaccinations go a long way to discrediting your post.I don't see the infection or death rates only the vaccinations rates. Where is the former?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51431926054_222c509db4_c.jpg)
The "polite and patient" part is certainly true. The "mostly correct" part is egregiously wrong.I don't know how you can state someone's opinion is egregiously wrong? It's an opinion. Also, it would be helpful if you thought something I said that you thought differently on was explained by you so we can compare beliefs. For example, you recently asked about inflation. If you felt my explanation was "egregiously wrong", you did not explain how it was. Certainly, I would like to hear your explanation if you disagree. To say I'm wrong without a counter explanation doesn't advance the discussion.
The ability for a pandemic airborne virus to be transmitted and to subsequently reproduce itself and evolve into variants is dramatically diminished among people who are vaccinated; avoid large and/or crowded gatherings; wear masks in public places; and socially distance. Due to the preprogrammed and heightened immune response provided by vaccination, exposure to transmission causing an infection will likely result in a substantially lower viral load being produced due to the reduction in viral lifespan within the body as the prepared and boosted immune system attacks the virus to eradicate it. The reduction in viral load and lifespan limits the ability of the virus to: cause serious illness; be transmitted to others; or evolve into variants. Following the aforementioned common sense public health measures reduce both the quantity of virus spread and opportunity for viral transmission. Combining all of the above is the most effective means of combating and controlling pandemic viruses; reducing their impact on individuals and society; and saving lives.I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread. I seem to recall reading that they found both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were infected in roughly equal or high percentages. I do agree that being vaccinated however reduces the seriousness of the infection should you get it. Often symptoms are absent or very mild and hospitalization and death rare. I would recommend that anyone who hasn't gotten the shot, get them unless there is some specific medical reason when it's not recommended.
Those that choose to go unvaccinated; gather in large and/or crowded environments; go unmasked in public places; and do not socially distance themselves aid in accelerating the spread of viral transmission and the evolution of variants. They have a far greater risk of: becoming infected and spreading the virus to others; of requiring hospitalization when infected; suffering from short or long-term complications; and dying. Their ignorance and poor choices not only unnecessarily risks their own health, but increases their potential for becoming a health risk to those around them. The primary beneficiary of this type of behavior is the virus, which will enjoy: a longer life; greater liberty to spread, and enhanced pursuit of victims to host their replication and continued evolution. They become Darwinian laboratories as their failure to adapt diminishes their own population while serving as hosts for the evolution of a virus. Viruses require hosts to survive and there are an unfortunate number of friendly hosts willing to assist.
The behavior, replication, and evolution of viruses is not nearly as great a mystery to those who have devoted their lives and careers to the study, research, treatment, control, and eradication of viruses. For those unable or unwilling to listen or learn from those most knowledgeable, it will remain mysterious and will result, for some, in deadly consequences for themselves or loved ones.
How did economic theories become part of a thread whose topic is vaccines?This thread and the other one often get swapped ideas and discussions. I often forget which one I'm on. Maybe you should post the Galbraith quote on the other thread? :)
"I react pragmatically. Where the market works, I'm for that. Where the government is necessary, I'm for that. I'm deeply suspicious of somebody who says, 'I'm in favor of privatization,' or, 'I'm deeply in favor of public ownership.' I'm in favor of whatever works in the particular case." — John Kenneth Galbraith C-SPAN, November 13, 1994
Your text or a quote?
I wrote what's above your question. If I'm quoting someone else, even if it's a sentence or phrase, I acknowledge the source and prefer to provide a link, book page and number, or source when doing so.Why would you feel they were accusing you of plagiarism? They may have just wanted to read the original source.
Since you asked, I don't mind answering. A "polite" individual once posted a reply telling me that I should provide a source when quoting someone else's writing for something that I wrote myself. It almost sounded like I was being accused of plagiarism.
I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread.
A "polite" individual once posted a reply telling me that I should provide a source when quoting someone else's writing for something that I wrote myself. It almost sounded like I was being accused of plagiarism.
Why would you feel they were accusing you of plagiarism? They may have just wanted to read the original source.
I was the original source.Maybe they didn't realize it was from you so they asked for the link. Why assume they were accusing you of plagiarism?
Maybe they didn't realize it was from you so they asked for the link. Why assume they were accusing you of plagiarism?
Your text or a quote?
It's this kind of inconsistency that creates opposition to wearing masks. ...
I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread. I seem to recall reading that they found both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were infected in roughly equal or high percentages. ...
Honestly, I don't mind being asked and took no offense or thought any was intended from it...
When I saw this I wondered what you've been reading. But if by "infected" you simply mean acquire a viral load, of course vaccinated people will be infected as often as unvaccinated people. That's a function of environment and luck. Vaccinations don't create a Start Trek like force field around you. Viruses can still get into your body if you are vaccinated, why wouldn't they, but if you're vaccinated you are better at killing them off. That's the entire basis of herd immunity. If enough people in a society have the ability to kill off a virus relatively quickly after acquiring a load, then you stop a pandemic. This is old science, it was known in 1918. It's virology 101, despite some people claiming that it's a "mystery". It was known in February 2020 too, and public health officials all over the planet warned everyone because the early numbers showed how quickly Covid was spreading and how lethal it was. There was and is no mystery. The disease behaved as predicted. Some listened, some did not.
In daily informal speech, though, when people think "infected" they probably don't simply mean "to acquire a viral load", they mean "get sick". The reality is that we've been surrounded by viruses (and bacteria) every minute of our lives since we've been born, there's nothing new about acquiring a viral load. What matters is how well we fight it off.
Having said that, it appears to rely on a set of assumptions, primarily based on how vaccines work historically.
What Alan and I had in mind, is a more recent quote by the perceived expert in the field, Dr. Fauci, that the vaccinated are equally likely to be infectious as the unvaccinated. I will try to find a source of that quote.
the perceived expert in the field, Dr. Fauci
... Dr. Fauci is not only perceived as an expert in his field, he is a preeminent expert and one of the most cited scientific researchers in his field.... He's someone that should be given serious attention and listened to regarding the current pandemic.
Fauci did this interview in 2019 less than a year before COVID. Most people have never seen it. Listen to him laugh off the idea of wearing a mask to stop yourself from getting an infection.
My apologies if it was perceived as an attempt to offend (even if so by others, not you).
My question was genuine, because I heard such an explanation several times, the last from my friend, a doctor. So it sounded like a common source.
Nobody is claiming that vaccines, in general, are not useful.
Well, thank you for finding the quote I had in mind.
Your point?
Because the quote seems to confirm what I was saying, no?
So, which Dr. Fauci should we listen to?
https://www.instagram.com/p/CTyOJSUjxsG/?utm_medium=share_sheet&fbclid=IwAR3PcT9etyAs6p0TX-6xG7Lcy5MzRqbDf8qLQKfLOUkHA1XTibEPKF8KurQ
They may have just wanted to read the original source.
The problem with technical experts is when they wade into politics.
His flip-flopping on many subjects reduced his credibility among the general public (to which he is addressing his opinion, btw).
Once again, your verbosity and quoting masks the lack of point or the lack of answers to the points others raised. ...
I suspect those supporting those efforts believe they have been wildly successful.
EDIT: someone even suggested these (C19 and the flu) shouldn't even be called vaccines, but rather shots, given that they do not create immunity, just reduce the symptoms.
Which was quietly confirmed recently by CDC changing the very definition of a vaccine.
... what would be recommended by public health officials under normal conditions, a year before a deadly pandemic, are not the same recommendations they would be giving during the ongoing spread and evolution of a deadly pandemic...
It was crystal clear who wrote that post because of the very absence of a link.
Your statement attributed to Dr. Fauci was "that the vaccinated are equally likely to be infectious as the unvaccinated" which leaves out the the portion of his statement which in full said "people who are vaccinated, who get breakthrough infections" can spread the virus to others. He is not saying that everyone vaccinated is "equally likely to be infectious as the unvaccinated" as your edited version of his statement suggests. He and the CDC are only referring to vaccinated people whose immune systems were not able to eradicate contact with the virus before it has had time to replicate and become a more widely spread internal infection—a breakthrough infection....
... The definition is the same as it has always been. The language was changed to more clearly and accurately reflect what vaccines have always been and done.
There is only one Dr. Fauci ...
This isn't the first (deadly) pandemic in history. He wasn't asked about a seasonal cold. So, no I do not buy the distinction.
Definitely not. The language is substantially different. "More accurately reflect" is just weaseling out. You had 100 years to change the language, and yet... it is done now, when the "vaccines" subscribe to a subscription model.
However, just as not all vaccinated will get a breakthrough infection, not all unvaccinated are going to get infected either, and even those who do, a good portion will have such small or non-existent symptoms as to not be infectious.
However, the risk of infection remains much higher for unvaccinated than vaccinated people. Studies so far show that vaccinated people are 8 times less likely to be infected and 25 times less likely to experience hospitalization or death.
... anything less than 100 percent efficacy means they don’t work.
In truth, though, medical experts have long said that no vaccine, including the coronavirus vaccines, is 100 percent effective. If “immunity” connotes complete protection, then no vaccine actually provides it.[/i]
There is a video of him repeatedly stating, numerous times, that there should be no vaccine mandates, up until now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBtYEDMy9Bk
Science is rarely, if ever, certain in an absolute sense. It would go against the fundamental principles of science if views didn't change with new evidence or under different conditions. Unfortunately, there is always a portion of the population with an inherent deep seated fear of uncertainty who cannot understand or accept changing ideas and circumstances whether it involves science or anything else.
There is a video of him repeatedly stating, numerous times, that there should be no vaccine mandates, up until now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBtYEDMy9Bk
...So what...
Your verbosity is another example how strawmanning works: you gloriously appear to defeat the argument, although that wasn't the argument.
You talk about being infected, and Alan (and I) about being infectious.
That sums it up... when faced with an argument you can't counter ;D
Another straw man argument. No one of any significance argued it has to be 100%.
someone even suggested these (C19 and the flu) shouldn't even be called vaccines, but rather shots, given that they do not create immunity
By the same token, I do not recall ever receiving yearly shots for any of the many vaccines I got throughout my life. Except the flu shots. Hence the distinction.
Now correct me if wrong... as for immunity" and "complete protection"... say a (true) vaccine is said to provide 80% protection, which means, to layman like me, that 80% of the recipients will have a complete protection (immunity), while 20% won't have any. It does not mean that every recepient will be 80% protected. Do I get this right?
... Now correct me if wrong... as for immunity" and "complete protection"... say a(true)vaccine is said to provide 80% protection, which means, to layman like me, that 80% of the recipients will have a complete protection (immunity), while 20% won't have any. It does not mean that every recepient will be 80% protected. Do I get this right?
You (TechTalk) have not answered this simple question? In other words, explain please to me what an 80% protection means.
You (TechTalk) have not answered this simple question? In other words, explain please to me what an 80% protection means.
Vaccine efficacy/effectiveness is interpreted as the proportionate reduction in disease among the vaccinated group. So a VE of 90% indicates a 90% reduction in disease occurrence among the vaccinated group, or a 90% reduction from the number of cases you would expect if they have not been vaccinated.
... hygiene, vaccine, distancing...
So the answer to my earlier question would be "yes, Slobodan, you got it right." Meaning that 80% (in my question, and 90% in your answer) of vaccinated people would be totally protected.
80% of the recipients will have a complete protection (immunity), while 20% won't have any.
But guess what, we do not want to live our lives by permanently socially distancing and being muzzled. We gave you two weeks, you took two years and counting. You promised a true vaccine (permanent immunity), you gave us a semi-annual subscription shots, with which we still have to remain muzzled and distant. Enough!
You've got to be kidding! I was so busy typing that I missed that beauty!
Who knew, before Slobodan told us, what a "true vaccine" was? Doctors and scientists didn't even know that!
You can have that one Robert! Good luck!
Great! Then the entire population will soon be vaccinated!You avoided addressing Slobodan's concern you and didn't address his point.
There is only one Dr. Fauci and I would listen to anything that he has to say regarding infectious diseases. One common ploy used by those that want to dismiss scientific expertise is to point to changes in the advice and opinions of scientists. This is usually done by people that have very rigid views and are extremely reluctant to change them—under any circumstances.Fauci said early on that masks for the general public were not necessary. It doesn't matter if his secret and concerned rationale were to protect the small supply left for medical workers. He lied about it even if his false claim had a noble intent. His credibility from that point on became doubted by many. It seemed he was a game player, a politician.
A good example is the video to which you linked. It's eagerly lapped up by those that have a bias against "experts" and their opinions. What those people will willfully ignore and never take into consideration is that what would be recommended by public health officials under normal conditions, a year before a deadly pandemic, are not the same recommendations they would be giving during the ongoing spread and evolution of a deadly pandemic.
While changes in the recommendations under those two very different circumstances are understandable and reasonable to the majority of the population seeking to protect themselves and others during a pandemic; those with a blind spot caused by a deeply ingrained resentment of "experts" who have deep knowledge in areas which they don't posses, will latch on to any excuse not to listen and dismiss their advice as phony.
Science is rarely, if ever, certain in an absolute sense. It would go against the fundamental principles of science if views didn't change with new evidence or under different conditions. Unfortunately, there is always a portion of the population with an inherent deep seated fear of uncertainty who cannot understand or accept changing ideas and circumstances whether it involves science or anything else.
It was crystal clear who wrote that post because of the very absence of a link.Many posts quote someone else and no link is provided. So this one could have been seen as a quote without attribution.
Complete hogwash by whoever "someone" might be. "Someone" is clueless.The vaccine was advertised to protect from getting Covid. It was only months after people were getting it that "breakthrough" infections were reported. Only then was it reported that, yes, the vaccine doesn't prevent getting it. The vaccine only lessens the effect. Otherwise, why did they call it a "breakthrough". That word means that the infection occurred despite the vaccine. So who was not being upfront to us? The CDC, FDA, etc??
Conspiratorial baloney with cheese. The definition is the same as it has always been. The language was changed to more clearly and accurately reflect what vaccines have always been and done.
So who was not being upfront to us? The CDC, FDA, etc??
Fauci said early on that masks for the general public were not necessary. It doesn't matter if his secret and concerned rationale were to protect the small supply left for medical workers. He lied about it even if his false claim had a noble intent. His credibility from that point on became doubted by many. It seemed he was a game player, a politician.
There has certainly been a concerted effort to reduce "his credibility among the general public" by Trump acolytes who greatly resented interviews in which Dr. Fauci diplomatically corrected some of the inconsistent statements and incorrect assertions made by Trump regarding COVID. Of course, efforts to reduce "his credibility among the general public" have also come from the anti-mask and anti-vaccination crowd, largely made up of the previously mentioned group.
Two short paragraphs is verbosity?Scientists and the press made it seem that the vaccine would prevent you from getting the disease. Only after vaccinated people started to get Covid, although mildly or with no symptoms at all, did they acknowledge that vaccines don't prevent catching the virus. They only reduce the effect. So again, scientists were not upfront with the public, sowing doubt for many.
If it was too long for you to read, here's the simple version: Vaccines help to create herd immunity, which helps to reduce the R-naught factor to below 1, which is how you stop a pandemic. This has been understood since forever.
If what you're worried about is that vaccinated people, after having ingested a viral load, could maybe pass it onto others before their immune systems kill the little buggers off, I suppose that could be the case. So what? That's why isolation and hygiene continue to be advised even after being vaccinated. It was never going to be anything other than a multi-tiered solution, this is also nothing new and has been addressed many times here and elsewhere. I don't understand why this needs to be explained over and over again.
You avoided addressing Slobodan's concern you and didn't address his point.
Scientists and the press made it seem that the vaccine would prevent you from getting the disease. Only after vaccinated people started to get Covid, although mildly or with no symptoms at all, did they acknowledge that vaccines don't prevent catching the virus. They only reduce the effect. So again, scientists were not upfront with the public, sowing doubt for many.
You?A non-response to a point you can't argue against.
Baloney - with cheese - on stale bread.Another non-response and silly putdowns.
Another non-response and silly putdowns.
You?
A non-response to a point you can't argue against.
So who was not being upfront to [with] us? The CDC, FDA, etc??
The vaccine was advertised to protect from getting Covid. It was only months after people were getting it that "breakthrough" infections were reported. Only then was it reported that, yes, the vaccine doesn't prevent getting it. The vaccine only lessens the effect. Otherwise, why did they call it a "breakthrough". That word means that the infection occurred despite the vaccine. So who was not being upfront to us? The CDC, FDA, etc??
You (TechTalk) have not answered this simple question? In other words, explain please to me what an 80% protection means.
The vaccine does prevent covid in a large majority of people. This means it prevents any infection at all. Some people get breakthru infections and most of those have no symptoms but can still spread the virus, although they are less likely to do so. If they have symptoms they are milder and they are much less likely than the unvaxxed to need hospitalization, the ICU, or the undertaker.But it was sold as preventing getting Covid. Now the scientists are saying, well no, all or most vaccines just protect from getting the disease too severely. Which is it? Why didn't they say that in the beginning?
I really wish that people like you would not expect scientists to have all the correct answers right off the bat. And then when new information comes out accuse them of hiding facts. It's the very nature of science to change its "mind" as more information becomes available.
It means what you think, 80% of people are protected. There's no way an individual can be "80% protected," it makes no sense.Protected against what? Getting it at all? Or getting it as a mild case? Or some combination of both?
The vaccine does prevent covid in a large majority of people. This means it prevents any infection at all. Some people get breakthru infections and most of those have no symptoms but can still spread the virus, although they are less likely to do so. If they have symptoms they are milder and they are much less likely than the unvaxxed to need hospitalization, the ICU, or the undertaker.
Scientists and the press made it seem that the vaccine would prevent you from getting the disease. Only after vaccinated people started to get Covid, although mildly or with no symptoms at all, did they acknowledge that vaccines don't prevent catching the virus. They only reduce the effect. So again, scientists were not upfront with the public, sowing doubt for many.
But it was sold as preventing getting Covid. Now the scientists are saying, well no, all or most vaccines just protect from getting the disease too severely. Which is it? Why didn't they say that in the beginning?
But it was sold as preventing getting Covid. Now the scientists are saying, well no, all or most vaccines just protect from getting the disease too severely. Which is it? Why didn't they say that in the beginning?
Protected against what? Getting it at all? Or getting it as a mild case? Or some combination of both?
But it was sold as preventing getting Covid. Now the scientists are saying, well no, all or most vaccines just protect from getting the disease too severely. Which is it? Why didn't they say that in the beginning?
Vaccinated people might be exposed to a viral load, why wouldn't they?
You know what else, relativity is not true, there's no such thing as quantum mechanics or solid state physics and the computer that you're reading this on is fake, it's all done with photoshop. I mean, have you ever actually seen an electron?
Don't listen to anyone.
Many posts quote someone else and no link is provided. So this one could have been seen as a quote without attribution.
All scientists have always said that. You are setting up a fake fact and using that fake fact to imply that scientists lied to you. We have been here before with you, many times.
Here's the real truth. All the world's scientists lie to you all the time and they do it for the money, because it's such a lucrative way to make a living, and because they love driving people on forums crazy. I know because I asked them and one night one of them got drunk and admitted it. I know several virologists with condos in Vale. They sit there and count their money and laugh at people who take vaccines. My advice, don't listen to medical personnel, don't read scientific journals, don't get vaccinated again.
And all those people clogging up ICUs in Idaho, Texas and other places, it's all fake news. It's just doctors milking your insurance company. And all those insurance companies competing to keep medical costs low, they just raise premiums when they don't make enough money. In fact, they compete to see who can raise them the fastest. Got one of them drunk, they'll tell you, they love to brag about it. If you get upset, don't key his Mercedes, it's got cameras recording everything.
The reason that your surgeon wears latex gloves is to jack up the price of your appendectomy, that no-good sneak. What do you expect, he have to make the payments on his wife's Tesla, can you blame him?
You know what else, relativity is not true, there's no such thing as quantum mechanics or solid state physics and the computer that you're reading this on is fake, it's all done with photoshop. I mean, have you ever actually seen an electron?
Keep making up stuff about what the experts tell you and please keep telling us about how they lie to you and fail to deliver the promises that you invented that they made to you.
Don't listen to anyone.
Have you been authorized to reveal all this seecrit stuff in a public forum?
Many posts quote someone else and no link is provided. So this one could have been seen as a quote without attribution.
Yes, many do. But not TechTalk. He simply doesn't do that.
Which makes it all the more interesting why Slobodan chose to question him on this point.
Don't listen to anyone.
I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread. I seem to recall reading that they found both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were infected in roughly equal or high percentages. ...
When I saw this I wondered what you've been reading. But if by "infected" you simply mean acquire a viral load, of course vaccinated people will be infected as often as unvaccinated people...
Your verbosity is another example how strawmanning works: you gloriously appear to defeat the argument, although that wasn't the argument.
You talk about being infected, and Alan (and I) about being infectious.
When I saw this I wondered what you've been reading. But if by "infected" you simply mean acquire a viral load, of course vaccinated people will be infected as often as unvaccinated people. That's a function of environment and luck. Vaccinations don't create a Start Trek like force field around you. Viruses can still get into your body if you are vaccinated, why wouldn't they, but if you're vaccinated you are better at killing them off. That's the entire basis of herd immunity. If enough people in a society have the ability to kill off a virus relatively quickly after acquiring a load, then you stop a pandemic. This is old science, it was known in 1918. It's virology 101, despite some people claiming that it's a "mystery". It was known in February 2020 too, and public health officials all over the planet warned everyone because the early numbers showed how quickly Covid was spreading and how lethal it was. There was and is no mystery. The disease behaved as predicted. Some listened, some did not.My understanding of the vaccine before they started vaccinations, was that the vaccine would prevent you from getting the disease. That's what was sold early on. It was only later when "breakthrough" cases were announced after vaccinations had been done for a while and a study was completed, they found that many people who were injected caught the disease anyway although most only had mild or no symptoms. Like I said it was sold that you couldn't catch the disease if you were vaccinated.
In daily informal speech, though, when people think "infected" they probably don't simply mean "to acquire a viral load", they mean "get sick". The reality is that we've been surrounded by viruses (and bacteria) every minute of our lives since we've been born, there's nothing new about acquiring a viral load. What matters is how well we fight it off.
... Like I said it was sold that you couldn't catch the disease if you were vaccinated.
No, it wasn't. It was never "sold" as a 100% solution by anyone. No vaccine ever has. You're either making this up or deliberately misunderstanding to create controversy where none actually exists.They left the impression early on that if you got the vaccines, you were good to go. It wasn't until after so many breakthroughs came out after the vaccinations were given, that they're now pushing the point that it doesn't stop infections. It only reduces the effect.
The web is filled with good info on vaccines, go read it. And all the results of this Covid vaccine are hugely positive. You're attempting to create a false narrative, please stop.
But it was sold as preventing getting Covid. Now the scientists are saying, well no, all or most vaccines just protect from getting the disease too severely. Which is it? Why didn't they say that in the beginning?
The vaccine *DOES* prevent against getting covid. Just not in everyone, but in most people. And for the few vaxxed people who get covid it is less severe. And they didn't say it in the beginning because THEY DIDN'T KNOW!Here's an interesting first-person article from Sept 20, 2021, from a reporter who followed the whole Covid thing, who got the disease even though he was vaccinated. Doctors admit they gave a false impression to the public about its "bulletproofness". A lot of layman had the same belief.
According to the story by CNBC, Amazon gave away $100 cash bonuses and cars to a number of vaccinated warehouse workers as part of the company's running sweepstakes to help encourage employees that decide to get the vaccine. Four Whole Foods employees and Amazon warehouse workers got awarded cars that were worth as much as $40,000 when they showed proof of their COVID-19 vaccination.
This will be the most effective vaccination incentive:Are those Teslas?
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/265667/20210921/amazon-vaccination-rewards-include-100k-payouts-or-free-cars-to-warehouse-and-whole-foods-employees.htm
Are those Teslas?
You're either making this up or deliberately misunderstanding to create controversy where none actually exists.
The vaccine *DOES* prevent against getting covid. Just not in everyone, but in most people. And for the few vaxxed people who get covid it is less severe. And they didn't say it in the beginning because THEY DIDN'T KNOW!
I was surprised to read that as many people who had the vaccine subsequently got the disease as people who didn't get vaccinated
Discussed many many times in many places online. Asked and answered many times over. Why are you bringing it up AGAIN.
I put it in there to get a rise from you. Of course you took the bait...
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.
They did know. Everybody knew—including those pretending otherwise in a childish game. It was discussed months ago at endless length.Discussed where? Most people are busy going to work to feed their families. They get bits and pieces of the news online, on the radio while driving, TV news, or from their friends. As I posted, even doctors who are experts in the field acknowledge they left the wrong impression about vaccine's effectiveness. Why don't you trust this expert? You're always assuring us that experts are right and we should be listening to them.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist nor an immunologist to understand that if a vaccine at the end of clinical trials had 94% efficacy in preventing moderate disease (mild symptoms) that 6% of vaccine recipients in the trial were infected and became sick, even though they were vaccinated. A child could understand this and the childish will pretend that they can't.
https://www.who.int/coronavirus/topic-efficacy.jpg (https://www.who.int/images/default-source/health-topics/coronavirus/who-topic-12_efficacy.jpg?Status=Master&sfvrsn=efdd88c3_12)
What was unknown is what the difference would be between efficacy in limited clinical trials and effectiveness in the larger population over time. The difference between efficacy and effectiveness was also explained and discussed multiple times. Again, a child could understand the difference, but the childish will refuse to acknowledge it.
https://www.who.int/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection (https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection)
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
In the US, the vaccination rate is roughly 50%, and perhaps 5% of all serious Coronavirus cases are vaccinated. So Alan's statement is absolutely wrong for that population.When did I mention the seriousness in my point? The article I read stated that vaccinated and unvaccinated people can get Covid roughly equally and pass it on, hence one of the reasons vaccinated people should wear masks. Of course, vaccinated people get the symptoms more mildly. I never said they didn't. You misquoted me.
However, there is a big difference between these two statistics:
1) Fraction of vaccinated population who get Coronavirus
2) Fraction of Coronavirus patients who are vaccinated
For example, if 99% of some population were vaccinated, it is entirely likely that 90% of new Coronavirus cases would be among the vaccinated population. In fact, that would be a testament to a highly effective vaccine.
From a different thread at a different time, but it may, or may not, offer some insight...I didn't think you would take a portion of a quote I made a year ago out of context about something else in order to smear me. That was a cheap stunt.
Quote from: TechTalk on Today at 03:13:18 pm
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
Discussed where?
Good news if you've been vaccinated. Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way. I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective.
[quote author=TechTalk link=topic=137509.msg1224814#msg1224814 date=1632365604The average person doesn't read LuLa. I said in my post that they listen to the radio or speak to friends. Maybe they listened to the doctor I quoted who said they overplayed the efficacy of the vaccine and that the scientists and doctors are to blame for that. Why didn't you mention that part of my post instead of cherry-picking two words? Again, you skirted the point - ignore it, as you do every time facts refute yours.
Quote from: Alan Klein on Today at 10:32:12 pm
Discussed where?
Quote from: Alan Klein on March 03, 2021, 08:23:05 am
Good news if you've been vaccinated. Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way. I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective. ]
You attack me with your usual meaningless verbosity because you have no answer to the scientist's confirmation of my statement.
Results from the first trial of a new COVID-19 vaccine technology show no short-term safety concerns.
The data, from scientists at Imperial College London, suggests the technology can generate immune responses against COVID-19 in up to 87 per cent of people, even at extremely low dose levels – the lowest of any COVID-19 vaccine candidate worldwide.
The technology uses genetic code called self-amplifying RNA (saRNA). This genetic information holds instructions to make a protein found on the outside of the coronavirus, called the spike protein.
Once injected into the muscle of the arm, the cells make this spike protein, enabling the immune system to generate defences against the virus.
Professor Robin Shattock, who leads Imperial’s COVID-19 vaccine project, said: “Global demand for COVID-19 vaccines will remain high in the coming decade, given the emergence of lethal SARS-CoV-2 escape-variants, and expected requirement for booster vaccination. We have shown the saRNA technology is safe and can generate an immune response. We are now refining the Imperial saRNA platform to develop vaccines for a variety of other infectious diseases."
The ultra-low dose saRNA technology has potential to protect against a variety of other infectious diseases, such as rabies and Ebola. The researchers also believe it could be developed to treat other conditions, such as cancer.
Professor Shattock said: “The approach is emerging as one of the great scientific advances of the pandemic, with the ultra-low dose offering three key advantages. The first is the potential to manufacture a huge amount – one litre of reaction material can produce up to one million doses.
"The second advantage of a lower dose is the reduced likelihood of side effects. Finally, a low dose vaccine opens up the possibility of combining the COVID-19 vaccine with other vaccines. We may now need annual vaccines against COVID-19, and a lower dose makes combination with other vaccines, such as the flu vaccine, more feasible.”
TechTalk is not attacking you, he’s educating you or at least attempting to.The average guy doesn't read Wiki. What do think about what the doctor said about scientists over-selling vaccine's effectiveness to the general public?
I’ve suggested previously that you ‘read more, post less’ - here would be a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine
Moving on …Anything new that will help fight viruses is great.
Self-amplifying RNA COVID-19 vaccine technology safe in humans, suggests study
“The approach is emerging as one of the great scientific advances of the pandemic”
Professor Robin Shattock
Head of Imperial's COVID-19 vaccine project
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/222553/self-amplifying-rna-covid-19-vaccine-technology-safe/
What do think about what the doctor said about scientists over-selling vaccine's effectiveness to the general public?
SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), was isolated in late 2019. Its genetic sequence was published on 11 January 2020, triggering an urgent international response to prepare for an outbreak and hasten development of a preventive COVID-19 vaccine. Since 2020, vaccine development has been expedited via unprecedented research …
In February 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) said it did not expect a vaccine against SARS‑CoV‑2 to become available in less than 18 months.
On 2 December 2020, the United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) gave temporary regulatory approval for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine, becoming the first country to approve the vaccine and the first country in the Western world to approve the use of any COVID‑19 vaccine. As of 21 December 2020, many countries and the European Union had authorized or approved the Pfizer–BioNTech COVID‑19 vaccine.
The short reply is I do not believe they did. The history since December 2019 is one of record and really not open to debate. You and others may have raised your expectations too high (including your doctor) but this was a new vaccine, new technology, a scientific breakthrough and speaking for myself and those close to me, no-one believed that this was a slam-dunk on the research front. None of us changed our ‘precautions’ once we’d been vaccinated. What did become more evident through 2021 was that transmission was more commonly via aerosols rather than contact eye/mouth infection thus we continued to observe distancing and hygiene, restricting contact with others to the outdoors and preferably in a slight breeze whenever possible.He wasn't "my doctor". He was an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County, the State of Washington. Many average people believed him and similar claims from other experts in the field.
No vaccine had ever been produced in less than 8 years and there were always two questions a) how effective would the vaccine be in the real world, and b) how long would those anti-bodies last? The later discovery of the Delta variant caused more infections, spread faster than earlier forms of the virus and still causes more severe illness than previous strains in unvaccinated people.
Add to the above that the two leading vaccine candidates used different ‘tech’. AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson both used the traditional tech whereas Pfizer and Moderna were both mRNA based.
So, no, you weren’t ‘sold’ anything, nothing was a given, the FDA gave their approval for ‘emergency use’ and at no point was ‘research’ discontinued.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine
I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective.
It’s hard to keep adjusting your risk calculations. So if you’d hoped to avoid getting sick at all, even slightly, it may be time for a “reset,” Duchin said. This isn’t to be alarmist but a reminder to clear away expectations that covid is out of your life, and stay vigilant about commonsense precautions.Well, my wife and I have stopped disinfecting food from the supermarket. But now we have a gnat or fruit fly problem. :) At least they don't bite.
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
Many average people believed him and similar claims from other experts in the field.
In right-wing media circles, it may be popcorn worthy entertainment to watch people resisting vaccination and other efforts to rein in a deadly pandemic. To others, maybe not so much.
I'm more interested in watching efforts to bring sound public health information and advice to the general public.
Then, on the other, the false notion that unvaccinated people are far right Trump rubes and this will be great punishment for them, which is so popular amongst malignant white progressives and why they are in favor of it.
The history since December 2019 is one of record and really not open to debate.
From a different thread at a different time, but it may, or may not, offer some insight...
I didn't think you would take a portion of a quote I made a year ago out of context about something else in order to smear me.
That was a cheap stunt.
A 40+ year old Alabama man with cardiac problems died because 43 hospitals had no space for him due to unvaxxed covid patients.
Michael Flynn, the former national security advisor under Donald Trump, claimed during an appearance on a conservative radio program that COVID vaccines were being added to salad dressing.
“The project’s goals, made possible by a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation, are threefold: showing that DNA containing the mRNA vaccines can be successfully delivered into the part of plant cells where it will replicate, demonstrating the plants can produce enough mRNA to rival a traditional shot, and finally, determining the right dosage,” the release states.
The study is currently looking into using lettuce and spinach for the process. The key to making it work will be chloroplasts, which converts sunlight into energy for plants.
Michael Flynn said that covid vaccine is being added to the salad dressing.
...
Congratulations to Canada for doing so well in its vaccination progress. Canadian citizens fully vaccinated has reached just over 70%. There are only two states in the U.S. (Rhode Island and Vermont) plus the District of Columbia that have managed to get above 70% as of today.
The U.S. stands now at just over 55% fully vaccinated, with several states at 45% or below (Idaho, Louisiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Alabama, Wyoming) at present.
The difference in the per capita death rate for the U.S. and its neighbor to the North is more than disappointing. The per capita death rate averaged over the past 7 days is about 7x higher in the U.S. than Canada. — it's shocking!
All of Alberta’s recent COVID-19 ICU admissions and the majority of the deaths reported in the province this week had no vaccine protection at all, according to chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw.
“One hundred per cent of new ICU admissions were in Albertans who did not have any vaccine protection,” she said in Thursday’s COVID-19 update.
According to Dr. Verna Yiu, president and CEO of Alberta Health Services, that’s 45 people in the last two days. In the last five days, an average of more than 23 people have been admitted to Alberta’s ICUs each day.
“It’s tragic that we are only able to keep pace with some of these sort of numbers because, in part, some of our ICU patients have passed away.
Careful now Peter or you're going to be labeled as one of those "malignant white progressives" Joe's looking to expose.
Canada in comparison to USA is doing OK, but unfortunately the situation in the province of Alberta is critical. Almost all recent deaths occurred there.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8215655/alberta-coronavirus-update-september-23-2021/
Alberta infection and deaths rates have often been very close to Ontario's, which should have raised eyebrows all round given the difference in population (4.5 million in Alberta vs 15 million in Ontario).
Alberta is a mess thanks to its right-wing premier and other factors. A good friend of ours, a physician, works there and we have had reports.
As has been said many times on these pages, how does an economy recover if large numbers of people are getting sick and attending funerals. I realize I'm being hyperbolic...
Here's an article about how infectious vaccinated people are or are not, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/the-vaccinated-arent-just-as-likely-to-spread-covid/620161/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/the-vaccinated-arent-just-as-likely-to-spread-covid/620161/).Your article confirms my point about the confusing information we've received from the experts about the vaccines. It's one of the reasons my wife, who;s been fully vaccinated, still feels it's unsafe to be with other vaccinated people.
vaccines aren't 100% effective.
I was surprised to read that as many people who had the vaccine subsequently got the disease as people who didn't get vaccinated and that the vaccinated could spread it just as easily as the non vaccinated. I read one article that said more vaccinated people had it from their study.
Vaccinated people are not as likely to spread the coronavirus as the unvaccinated. Even in the United States, where more than half of the population is fully vaccinated, the unvaccinated are responsible for the overwhelming majority of transmission.
Within the general population, you can find some people who are genuinely confused about a given topic and you can also find some that pretend to be confused for their own purposes. The former may lack enough comprehension of the subject, while the latter may simply be looking to create controversy.First, I've argued for 1 1/2 years that the whole Covid issue has been politicized on both sides. Vaccines, masks, economy vs. disease prevention, etc. Leaving that aside, there is no simple or easy way to comprehend what's "apparent" especially when the experts themselves have been inconsistent with advice about the dangers as well as at odds with each other. So, you're expecting too much from the general public.
Vaccines are not complicated to understand. They introduce the body to an altered form or aspect of a disease-causing microorganism. The agent used in the vaccine is unable to replicate. The purpose is to prepare and prime an individual's own immune system to recognize and attack the living natural microorganism if they are exposed to it. If the immune system can recognize and attack quickly enough, infection and disease can be avoided or reduced in severity, due to the enhanced ability of the immune system to limit replication by eradicating any exposure or infection more rapidly. The immune system of each individual will respond at its own capacity and speed and the degree of individual exposure will also vary. There may also be variants of the disease-causing microorganism to which an individual may be exposed.
A vaccine does not, in and of itself, provide protection from infection and disease. It works in concert with an individual's immune system to accomplish that goal.
If someone is able to comprehend these basic facts, then they will also understand why...
So despite claims to have read mysterious articles and studies—which are not linked nor any source cited—with various assertions like...
It should be readily apparent that...
So, you're expecting too much from the general public.
The best alternative to mandates is common sense. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be enough to go around.
First, I've argued for 1 1/2 years that the whole Covid issue has been politicized on both sides. ...
there is no simple or easy way to comprehend what's "apparent" especially when the experts themselves have been inconsistent with advice
So, you're expecting too much from the general public.
I don't see it this way at all, you're misrepresenting the past, as if it were fact, to suit your agenda. I don't get why you even have an agenda. Surely the only sensible response to a disease is to try and stop it. Why did politics ever enter into it at all?I'm not misrepresenting anything. I'm telling it as it happened. It happened because we were in a presidential election year. So the issue was politicized. Do you think Afghanistan is politicized? Politics happens all the time. Why are you so surprised? Also, to state the only sensible response is to try to stop the disease does not take economics into consideration. Every state in the union is adjusting its rules to try to satisfy health and economic considerations. It's not one way or the other.
It isn't particularly difficult for those with common sense and who aren't blinded by some agenda. If you need advice regarding anything, listen to those who are qualified in their field. If you need current public health advice, listen to qualified public health officials and agencies. Public health agencies have consistently advised:I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public. You refuse to acknowledge it.
• Get vaccinated. It's your best protection from becoming infected or seriously ill and dramatically reduces transmission.
• Wear a mask in indoor public spaces or in settings where it's difficult to maintain distance. They help to reduce viral transmission thru airborne respiratory droplets.
• Distance yourself from others in public. The virus can be transmitted thru airborne particles. Distancing helps to reduce the chance of transmission and infection.
• Avoid large or crowded gatherings. The more people gathered in one space or in close contact, the greater the chance of transmission and infection.
• Get tested if you've been in close contact with someone who is infected. Quarantine if unvaccinated. Isolate if you have symptoms or test positive for infection.
• Stay up-to-date on advice from public health agencies. They have the most reliable and current information.
There are sources of information to avoid or where credibility is questionable.
• No evidence is cited
• No original source listed
• No information is provided regarding where the information was published
• No information is provided regarding the authors
• No information is provided regarding their credentials
• The information is anonymous
Also, to state the only sensible response is to try to stop the disease does not take economics into consideration.
I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public. You refuse to acknowledge it.
Within the general population, you can find some people who are genuinely confused about a given topic and you can also find some that pretend to be confused for their own purposes. The former may lack enough comprehension of the subject, while the latter may simply be looking to create controversy.
I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public. ...
How does requiring masks and vaccination affect the economy except in a positive way?I was referring to the period when the economy was shut down including stores, restaurants, schools, ships and planes, travel, theatres, entertainment, sports, shipping, and other industries. It forced the economy into a major recession when the Fed had to print trillions to bail out individuals and companies. That kicked off the inflation we're now seeing and huge debt and deficits that we all will have to pay back. Employment has not yet recovered. There are still major bottlenecks to shipping and semiconductor manufacturers hurting the auto and many other industries.
You quoted Dr. Jeff Duchin the public health officer for Seattle and King County. What he actually said was: “There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work, I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”You always pushed how we should be listening to the experts and not the politicians. But now it's interesting how you only agree with experts whose point of view you agree with. What's the poor layman supposed to do?
Facilitating an "impression" because "There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work" is NOT a "direct statement acknowledging the 'experts' were responsible for confusing the public". This is not another one of your distinctions without a difference. It is another careless reading of what was actually said, twisted into a creative interpretation in an attempt to undermine the credibility of "experts" which has been part of your agenda for months. Try looking up what the words facilitate and impression mean and compare his actual words as quoted to your direct statement, distorting what the health official, Dr. Duchin, said.
I'm not refusing to acknowledge what was actually said, I just don't find that recognizable in your twisted interpretation. The "direct statement" was yours, not the doctor's.
Facilitate [to make easier] Impression [an often indistinct or imprecise notion or remembrance] — Merriam-Webster Dictionary
You always pushed how we should be listening to the experts and not the politicians. But now it's interesting how you only agree with experts whose point of view you agree with. What's the poor layman supposed to do?
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
Another reply were it appears that you didn't read the post to which you're pretending to respond.It appears you ignored the points I was making in my posts as well as the doctors' direct acknowledgement that many experts were responsible for the confusion in the general public about how vaccines work.
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
You always pushed how we should be listening to the experts and not the politicians. But now it's interesting how you only agree with experts whose point of view you agree with. ...
Please provide some examples of experts who don't agree that vaccines, distancing, hygiene and masks are the way to go. Who is contradicting these ideas and thus confusing you?You haven't read my posts and are wasting my time.
I was referring to the period when the economy was shut down including stores, restaurants, schools, ships and planes, travel, theatres, entertainment, sports, shipping, and other industries. It forced the economy into a major recession when the Fed had to print trillions to bail out individuals and companies. That kicked off the inflation we're now seeing and huge debt and deficits that we all will have to pay back. Employment has not yet recovered. There are still major bottlenecks to shipping and semiconductor manufacturers hurting the auto and many other industries.
Covid had major negative effects on both health and the economy. Political administrators on both the Federal as well as the states had to address both issues.
it's interesting how you only agree with experts whose point of view you agree with.
I was referring to the period when the economy was shut down including stores, restaurants, schools, ships and planes, travel, theatres, entertainment, sports, shipping, and other industries. It forced the economy into a major recession when the Fed had to print trillions to bail out individuals and companies. That kicked off the inflation we're now seeing and huge debt and deficits that we all will have to pay back. Employment has not yet recovered. There are still major bottlenecks to shipping and semiconductor manufacturers hurting the auto and many other industries.
Covid had major negative effects on both health and the economy. Political administrators on both the Federal as well as the states had to address both issues.
What's the poor layman supposed to do?
• Get vaccinated. It's your best protection from becoming infected or seriously ill and dramatically reduces transmission.
• Wear a mask in indoor public spaces or in settings where it's difficult to maintain distance. They help to reduce viral transmission thru airborne respiratory droplets.
• Distance yourself from others in public. The virus can be transmitted thru airborne particles. Distancing helps to reduce the chance of transmission and infection.
• Avoid large or crowded gatherings. The more people gathered in one space or in close contact, the greater the chance of transmission and infection.
• Get tested if you've been in close contact with someone who is infected. Quarantine if unvaccinated. Isolate if you have symptoms or test positive for infection.
• Stay up-to-date on advice from public health agencies. They have the most reliable and current information.
• No evidence is cited
• No original source listed
• No information is provided regarding where the information was published
• No information is provided regarding the authors
• No information is provided regarding their credentials
• The information is anonymous
I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread. I seem to recall reading that they found both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were infected in roughly equal or high percentages.
I was surprised to read that as many people who had the vaccine subsequently got the disease as people who didn't get vaccinated and that the vaccinated could spread it just as easily as the non vaccinated. I read one article that said more vaccinated people had it from their study.
The article I read stated that vaccinated and unvaccinated people can get Covid roughly equally and pass it on
I think we beat that one to death.
Let's try something different.
Based on the official covid stats, it appears that USA didn't have enough lockdowns and restrictions (or of the wrong kind). How else could you explain over 700,000 total covid deaths, 2190 just yesterday?Ask the governors. There are fifty of them. They responded to political influence regarding health and the economies of their states. Maybe that's part of the problem. Because we're a federal republic and not a central government, each state did things the way they wanted including isolations, venues openings, restrictions, testing, etc. It would be interesting to compare to countries where a central formula was used for the entire country. We're also a country where it's hard to enforce rules for constitutional and other reasons. Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.
Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.
They should give careful consideration to the consistent common sense advice from knowledgeable public health agencies.
For example:
It appears you ignored the points I was making in my posts
You haven't read my posts and are wasting my time.
I'd stay away from "common sense" because it usually means "what I believe." Remember, common sense told us the earth was flat.
No one said that it requires officials, elected to protect the lives and safety of citizens, to stand idly by while a pandemic spreads causing death and permanent injury. George Washington was a believer in freedom and liberty and risked his life to defend it. He also ordered the first mass military inoculation campaign in order to prevent the spread of smallpox among his troops.We didn't have a constitution when Washington fort for liberty. In any case, I was in the US military. More recently, not then. :) So I can assure you that members are still required to take all shots their commanders require them to take just as Washington did. That's constitutional as the Supreme Court has ruled it's part of proper order. You can't have subordinates refusing to follow legal orders of their commanders in war when battles can be won or lost based on casualties from disease. But it's different for civilians. They're constitutionally protected in ways soldiers aren't.
https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/George Washington and the First Mass Military Inoculation (https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html)
Living in a civil society places a cost and obligation on its citizens as well. Protecting the health, lives, and safety of others may place a burden on individual citizens that isn't welcomed by all, but is necessary to achieve those goals and to maintain Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for everyone. The first duty of a government is to defend the lives of its citizens from enemies, even when the enemy is a pandemic virus.
No one said that it requires officials, elected to protect the lives and safety of citizens, to stand idly by while a pandemic spreads causing death and permanent injury.
Living in a civil society places a cost and obligation on its citizens as well. Protecting the health, lives, and safety of others may place a burden on individual citizens that isn't welcomed by all, but is necessary to achieve those goals and to maintain Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for everyone. The first duty of a government is to defend the lives of its citizens from enemies, even when the enemy is a pandemic virus.
All freedoms have limits to provide for civil order and to protect the lives and safety of its citizens.What does that mean related to Covid? How does the constitution protect or not protect? What are those limits?
How does the constitution protect or not protect? What are those limits?
What does that mean related to Covid?
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.
battles can be won or lost based on casualties from disease. But it's different for civilians.
... Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.
Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.
In my neck of the woods stores were never shut down, restaurants continued with take only, schools continued with remote classes, sports continued, but only on TV, shipping continued...but was slowed down by workers getting infected with Covid.What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?
Bottom line, if measures were not taken, the economy would still be drastically affected by Covid spreading and killing everything in its path. Tell me, if that restaurant down the street allowed you to go indoors and have a pizza, would you and your wife walk down and enjoy your dinner out when say thousands of people all around you were dieing from Covid? Do you think that production worker would go to work if his fellow employees were dropping dead around him?
The constitution allows people the freedom to be stupid.
What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?
What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?
It happens all the time. Why are you suddenly concerned this time?Because many here are nonchalant about people who have lost their jobs and businesses because of shutdowns. If you couldn't pay your rent or mortgage, and your family was facing living on the street, you'd be concerned as well. We can't ignore the economic problems and only concern ourselves with the health problems caused by Covid. It's not an either-or situation. Government officials have to make hard decisions and choices, often in conflict with each other that affect real people. It's not an intellectual exercise.
That will depend on the individual and their specific circumstances. As long as they're not sick, hospitalized, or dead; the future has a vast array of possibilities.Easy for you to say if you haven't lost your job or business.
Because many here are nonchalant about people who have lost their jobs and businesses because of shutdowns. ...
Easy for you to say if you haven't lost your job or business.
I prefer government to leave us alone. We'd be better off.
NOBODY here is nonchalant about that. Stop gaslighting. If anything, YOU are the one who does not want government support systems for people in trouble. You're in favour of tieing health care to jobs, imagine how THAT impacts those unemployed people. You are the one NOT in favour of social safety nets because it encourages sloth, so please don't bore me now by pretending you care. It doesn't wash.
I prefer government to leave us alone. We'd be better off.
At a press conference on August 12th, 1986, US President Ronald Reagan said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”
Well, of course, we need an Army and a Coast Guard. But I seem to recall the lousy job FEMA did with Katrina. Of course, it was a Republican president then so maybe that's the reason. I can't believe you used that disaster and picture to show off the government. The FED is creating an inflation nightmare with their help regarding Covid. Congress is about to add to the debt with all their new spending. Weren't you one of those who said the government had nothing to do with getting the vaccines out? Trump's Operation Warp Speed was a joke. It was the private industry that did it.
What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?
Pretty damn hard to run your business when your employees are all holed up in their basements afraid of dieing from Covid. Remember those meat processing plants that Trump had to force the workers back to work as they were scared for their lives as coworkers were dropping dead all around them. Now imagine that scenario all over the country as no Covid restrictions are put into place.I'm trying to address both issues with the disease - health and economic. A very difficult conundrum. You seem to only care about the health issue and want to ignore economic problems. The latter will be with us a long time after the health issues are gone.
It was the private industry that did it.
Well, of course, we need an Army and a Coast Guard.
I can't believe you used that disaster and picture to show off the government.
You seem to only care about the health issue and want to ignore economic problems.
You seem to only care about the health issue and want to ignore economic problems. The latter will be with us a long time after the health issues are gone.
I'm trying to address both issues with the disease - health and economic. A very difficult conundrum. You seem to only care about the health issue and want to ignore economic problems. The latter will be with us a long time after the health issues are gone.
The root cause, preventing the return of an economy and life in general to the way we knew it before COVID, isn't masks, restrictions, or mandates—it's the widening spread and evolution of COVID.
Masks, restrictions, or mandates are public health measures to address an ongoing pandemic. Yes, those measures have undesirable side effects, economic and otherwise. What the "give me liberty or give me death" proponents ignore or under estimate are the side effects of not doing those things—the economic and health tolls of a more rapidly expanding pandemic; the risk, or reality, of a crashing health care system; the long-term impacts and costs of reliance on short-term voluntary actions and behavior. Yes, personal freedom and liberty are sacred values; but when a serial killer pandemic virus can hitch a free ride and accompany you—that seems worthy of some serious consideration as well.
Voluntary measures, to reduce the spread and impact of a pandemic virus, rely on common sense. When that's a commodity in short supply, what are the alternatives they propose?
... and an air force and a navy and police and libraries and highways and bridges and flood control structures and national parks and hospitals and fire departments and rules that guarantee the food safety of your pizzas and safety regulations for the airlines that fly you to those national parks so you can take pictures of them and...The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.
Do you understand the meaning of the term "governance" ? GOVERNance?
Why? Who else is that helicopter representing? Corporate America?
=1633108926]51% of those restaurants didn't pay rent in Sept. The economy is in shambles. The Fed's printing is keeping it alive by pumping liquidity into it. Of course that causes inflation and devaluation with ever higher prices. Your paycheck and savings aren't going as far. You'll have to switch fron expensive 4x5 sheet film to cheaper 35mm film. What happens when the economy rolls over? It's too soon tp declare economic victory.
Like I said in my previous post, almost all businesses continued to function...some changed slightly like take out only restaurants...but none the less, continued to function[/b].
Can you state your balanced view of how this pendemic should have been handled so it minimized both people's health risks and their job loss. All I see from you is constant complaints...what about some solutions with hind sight even.
Can you state your balanced view of how this pandemic should have been handled so it minimized both people's health risks and their job loss. All I see from you is constant complaints...what about some solutions with hind sight even.
Easy for you to say
The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.
The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.
51% of those restaurants didn't pay rent in Sept. The economy is in shambles. The Fed's printing is keeping it alive by pumping liquidity into it. Of course that causes inflation and devaluation with ever higher prices. Your paycheck and savings aren't going as far. You'll have to switch fron expensive 4x5 sheet film to cheaper 35mm film. What happens when the economy rolls over? It's too soon tp declare economic victory.
That's a non-sensical statement. Freedom and security are opposites.Check out Venezuela. The people have lost security and freedom as government power increased.
Again Alan, would you go out to those restaurants if say 5,000 people in the states were dying every day from Covid? You keep telling us that you and your wife are holed up in your house during the pandemic...would you feel safer if there were no restrictions put in place...just let that dice roll and pray? Do you really think those restaurants would be jammed packed with people if Covid was running rampant without any measures in place?I never said that. I have said over and over that health and the economy are at odds with one another. Favoring one side or the other hurts the other side. That's what makes it such a difficult issue. Leaders have tried to find a balance to little effect. But you have ignored the economy as if or doesn't count. Well problems with it will long outlast health issues.
Come on, you are not that naive. The whole country would be in chaos with everyone locking themselves in their houses.
But you have ignored the economy as if or [it] doesn't count.
Well problems with it will long outlast health issues.
No one has ignored the economy as if it doesn't count. It just you obnoxiously repeating it for months, in an attempt to bait people.Your comments show that you still downplay the economic damage. I think someone who has lost their business and life's savings used to start that business, and don't know how they're going to pay their bills, might have a different concern. After all, with the vaccines out 6-7 months, if they've taken them, then health is a minor concern for them but feeding their family is a more important thing to worry about.
How long does death last? How long does a lung lost to COVID last?
But you have ignored the economy as if or doesn't count. Well problems with it will long outlast health issues.
Your comments show that you still downplay the economic damage. I think someone who has lost their business and life's savings used to start that business, and don't know how they're going to pay their bills, might have a different concern. After all, with the vaccines out 6-7 months, if they've taken them, then health is a minor concern for them but feeding their family is a more important thing to worry about.
Tell that to the 700,000 and counting that died a horrible death in the last year and a half.I'm sorry to hear about your cousin and neighbor. It's terrible that they died. I never said health isn't important. My wife and I still are doing much to protect ourselves. We still don't go to restaurants and most other venues. The point I'm trying to remind people COvid has two major issues, often in conflict with each other to address. Addressing them is not an either/or situation. Both have a major impact on the country and on individuals. Both have to be addressed.
Last I looked, businesses are doing pretty damn good over here...many are hurting because lack of workers. Manufacturing is going full out. Restaurants are all open. Hotels are full. Even the local candy shop has people back buying candy.
But my cousin that died from Covid won't be back. My neighbors mother is gone forever.
Again Alan, you have never answered my question. Do you believe the economy would be running full steam if no measures were taken and we'd just let Covid rip? Why don't you give us a peak at what your solution to the pendemic should have been. All we get from you is constant whining...give us your view what should have been done rather than what was done.I've stated over and over that health and the economy are at odds with each other. Acting more aggressively in one area hurts the other. If you isolate more, you help health but hurt the economy. If you open the economy more, you hurt health. It's a conundrum. There are no simple solutions. If there were, we wouldn't be where we are.
Again Alan, you have never answered my question. Do you believe the economy would be running full steam if no measures were taken and we'd just let Covid rip? Why don't you give us a peak at what your solution to the pendemic should have been. All we get from you is constant whining...give us your view what should have been done rather than what was done.
Your comments show that you still downplay the economic damage.
Can you state your balanced view of how this pandemic should have been handled so it minimized both people's health risks and their job loss? All I see from you is constant complaints...what about some solutions with hind sight even.
The point I'm trying to remind people COvid has two major issues
You're simply resurrecting another one of your repetitive circular arguments from its coma to bait people into another ride on your merry-go-round. Everyone recognizes that there are no simple solutions during a deadly pandemic. Everyone recognizes that it's a difficult balancing act trying to prevent a huge number of needless deaths and maintain a resemblance of normal life during a deadly pandemic.
No one is ignoring any of the problems that come with a deadly pandemic—No One. No one is enlightened by spinning around in circles on your favorite amusement ride—No One. You keep throwing out bait and spinning the wheel.
So, although the economy would have taken a hit regardless, the hit would be less without the restrictions without a high increase in costs/deaths.
Check out Venezuela. The people have lost security and freedom as government power increased.
You're losing it, Alan. It took you nearly 24 hours to come up with that specious retort.
Here's what I meant, illustrated by two common examples.
Motorcycling: maximum freedom, zero security
Prisons: maximum security, zero freedom.
Freedom and security are opposites.
Yah, you're right. I over-blanket statement'd it. A common problem with me.
"Freedom and security CAN be opposites" would be a better version.
Thanks for pointing out my false absolutism.
Good news in the fight against Covid for people who get the disease. They studied unvaccinated people. So I'm not sure if this medicine would be used or approved for vaccinated people who get sick.
The New York Times
What You Need to Know About Merck's New COVID Treatment Pill
Merck on Friday announced that its new pill to treat COVID-19 reduced the risk of hospitalization and death by about 50%. Merck plans to seek emergency authorization for the antiviral pills to be used in the United States.
Here’s what you need to know.
Who will get the pills?
The pills are meant for people who are sick with COVID but are not in the hospital. Merck’s Phase 3 clinical trial enrolled only unvaccinated people who were considered high risk, such as older people or those with medical conditions like diabetes or heart disease. Initially, the drug might only be available for those people, but experts expect it to eventually become more widely available.
The pills are designed to be taken as soon as possible once a person shows symptoms of having COVID — a time when the virus is replicating rapidly and the immune system has not yet mounted a defense. In Merck’s trial, volunteers had to have shown symptoms within the past five days, and some researchers think the pills must be taken even earlier to be most effective.
https://news.yahoo.com/know-mercks-covid-treatment-pill-141123589.html
From the same article.
Wait! How do we know there aren't nanobots in those pills? (Sorry, couldn't resist).
I understand that Merck is optimistic and is trying to ramp up the marketing, but does anyone know how widespread the testing has been. Is this after early trials or something more substantial?
How real men do it (Elliott Erwitt):
With the advent of vaccines, there is enough reduction in risk for some situations—such as small gatherings with friends and family who are all vaccinated—that those same people will feel a greater freedom and sense of security to engage in and enjoy those activities again.
Prior to vaccine availability, many people did not feel secure enough to engage in some public and social activities which had been part of their life prior to the pandemic. Reasonably so, because there was, and there is, a dangerous pandemic virus circulating. As a consequence, they did not feel free to engage in certain activities that they had previously enjoyed.
With the advent of vaccines, there is enough reduction in risk for some situations—such as small gatherings with friends and family who are all vaccinated—that those same people will feel a greater freedom and sense of security to engage in and enjoy those activities again.
I'm sorry, but this statement is nonsense.
C-19 is less dangerous then [than] the flu after you are vaccinated.
First, if you are vaccinated, you are golden and can return to normal life regardless of anything else.
Therefore it does not matter how many people you are with or if they are vaccinated.
Second, people who think otherwise, agreeing with your sentiment here, are mentally gone at this point...
and probably will not be engaging is any activities, regardless.
"Golden", "regardless of anything else"? I'm sorry, but this statement is nonsense.
There are multiple variants of COVID-19 circulating among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Vaccine effectiveness, while impressive, does not provide a barrier to contact with the virus or infection; it is a boost to defense against the virus and from infectious disease. How much protection is provided by that boost in immune system defense will vary greatly depending on the individual, the amount of virus with which they have contact, and the variant of the virus.
Of course, it does matter. 1) Unvaccinated individuals have a far greater likelihood of becoming infected and subsequently contagious. 2) The more unvaccinated people with which you are in close enough proximity to be subject to contact with airborne viral spread, the more likelihood there is for infection and continuation of the chain of viral spread. If you don't understand why that is so, refer back to 1).
Oh my! I guess you'll need to stock up on mops to keep up with their drooling.
My expectation is that they will engage in a variety of activities, but will exercise the kind of common sense that life during a pandemic requires.
You are as golden as you would be against any other disease after you are vaccinated, especially since these vaccines are 96% effective at preventing severe cases.
That is better than any other vaccine BTW.
If you have a condition that causes you to live you life in fear of the flu, and are still living in fear of C-19 after being vaccinated, of course your actions are justified. But other then [than] this, you have lost your sanity if you insist on not returning to normal life after being vaccinated.
each new variant is decreasing in severity, as always happens
This is supported by the fact that 99% of those currently being hospitalized are not vaccinated.
You have no more to worry about this than you do with the flu. Likewise, we, as the public, have no reason to be concerned with these mild cases since they are of no consequence to greater society, just like the average cold is of no consequence.
The only cases that matter are those that are severe enough to land people in the hospital, and we a great way to reducing those, the vaccines.
All this shows, it truly does not matter how many people you are with after being vaccinated, or at least no more then with any other disease, which the vast majority never did worry about in the past. I received the MMR vaccine, and got a 2nd booster a few years ago. If I walked into a stadium filled with neck-bloated people all suffering from mumps, I would not be concerned at all for myself. You should have the same reaction here; if not, you are being illogical.
Furthermore, the implications that we need to restrict large gatherings because the "likelihood there is for infection and continuation of the chain of viral spread" is belied...
by the fact that C-19 is never going away. No matter what we do, this is now with us forever.
The continued spread, even with all the lockdowns, proved this.
Sometimes you just need to except [accept] there is nothing you can do.
Just like a farmer can't stop it from hailing the day before harvest, we can't stop C-19 from doing what it does.
Get vaccinated and then get on with your life.
I was never locked down. Were you? There were restrictions which varied among states and communities; but even with restrictions, people still continued to shop in stores, travel, work, and move about. Some communities ignored state restrictions, where they existed, as did some businesses and individuals. Do you think that may have contributed to the continued spread somewhat? Where was anyone locked down? What is it you think was proved again?The economic impact is not over. You're getting ahead of yourself.
Why? That seems like a rather defeatist attitude. Are you content with passivity, rather than trying to solve problems or at least work toward solutions while pursuing the best current course of action?
Victories, regardless of the type of war, are usually the result of defensive and offensive actions over an extended period of time. This is just as true of wars against disease, ignorance, intolerance, and other scourges of humankind as it is wars between nations and people.
A farmer can follow the weather forecasts and get some protection thru crop insurance. During a pandemic, people can follow public health advice and get some protection thru vaccination. Doing these things can aid not only in protecting themselves, but others as well. And while you cannot stop hail, you have a good probability to "stop C-19 from doing what it does" thru vaccination.
If more people had common sense and were vaccinated it would help everyone to get on with life! As I've said before, the best alternative to vaccine mandates is common sense. When that's in short supply, what is the alternative? Well.. is your answer "Sometimes you just need to [accept] there is nothing you can do"?
The economic impact is not over. You're getting ahead of yourself.
Where did anyone say that the economic impact is over? You're not getting ahead of anyone, you're just doing the same old thing of responding to something that wasn't any part of the post to which you pretend to reply. What's the point of that?You only talk about the health issue as if there's no economic issue.
Following reasonable and common sense public health precautions during a pandemic caused by a new and evolving disease does not equate to loss of sanity.
Believing that you are a more reliable source or judge of information regarding infectious disease than public health officials would be the logical fallacy. The continuous conflating of one type of infectious disease with another would be another. Every infectious disease is unique and therefore should logically be addressed according to the specific nature and impact of a given disease such as transmissibility, severity, spread, available treatments, vaccination rate and effectiveness, available medical resources, etc.
"The mumps component of the MMR vaccine is about 88% (range: 32-95%) effective when a person gets two doses...
Before the U.S. mumps vaccination program started in 1967, mumps was a universal disease of childhood. Since the pre-vaccine era, there has been a more than 99% decrease in mumps cases in the United States. Mumps outbreaks can still occur in highly vaccinated U.S. communities, particularly in settings where people have close, prolonged contact, such as universities and close-knit communities. However, high vaccination coverage helps to limit the size, duration, and spread of mumps outbreaks. In the event of an outbreak, public health authorities may recommend that people at increased risk for mumps get a third dose of MMR or MMRV vaccine to improve their protection against the disease."
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mumps/index.html (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mumps/index.html)
The economic impact is not over. You're getting ahead of yourself.
You only talk about the health issue as if there's no economic issue.
You mean politicians? LOL.
It really is amazing how so many people on the left...
I get my information from people who actually know what they are doing and work in the private sector at places like Johns Hopkins and others.
But you, and all of the self appointed elites, are in the loosing [losing] crowd at this point.
Many photographers, especially professionals, have a policy of upgrading their software or OS with the next decimal point upgrade, i.e., not immediately with the new 1.0 or X.0 version. They want to make sure that everything they need will function properly with the new upgrade and especially that inevitable bugs and kinks will be corrected. Their livelihood often depends on that.
There are others who eagerly await anything new and immediately jump to upgrade. Some even impatiently download beta versions, risk be damned.
To each his own.
Thanks for posting this. I am curious, however. What is the fatality rate for upgrading your operating system or software? Are upgrades highly contagious? Can your upgrades be transmitted to others possibly resulting in their death or lifelong organ damage?
Just want to find out before my next software or operating system upgrade is due. Thanks for the insight.
The parallel is between new software and new vaccines, not between software and the virus.
I get my information from people who actually know what they are doing and work in the private sector at places like Johns Hopkins and others.
the Delta variant is not nearly as deadly as the original strain and evolving like all pandemic viruses do, becoming less deadly but more transmissible.
Now we have the Delta variant, which is a 1000 times more contagious than Alpha... Even if we all wore new KN95 masks, properly, how is it going to matter to a variant that is 1000 times more contagious?
if you are vaccinated, you are golden and can return to normal life regardless of anything else... C-19 is less dangerousthen[than] the flu after you are vaccinated. Therefore it does not matter how many people you are with or if they are vaccinated.
each new variant is decreasing in severity, as always happens... we, as the public, have no reason to be concerned with these mild cases since they are of no consequence to greater society, just like the average cold is of no consequence. The only cases that matter are those that are severe enough to land people in the hospital... It is going to do what it does regardless of our actions. we can't stop C-19 from doing what it does.
....Refusing to be vaccinated dramatically increases your risk of becoming infected and as a result, increases the risk of transmitting the virus to others....
... Refusing to be vaccinated dramatically increases your risk of becoming infected...
More Covid-19 boosters are on the horizon. But not everyone will need one, experts say
Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee that held the vote, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Thursday that proper expectations need to be set about what vaccines are supposed to do and how they remain effective.
"We have to define what's the goal of this vaccine. If the goal of this vaccine is protection against serious illness, meaning the kind of illness that causes you to seek medical attention or go to the hospital or the ICU, the current vaccines, as two-dose vaccines, are doing exactly that," he said. "So, you don't really need a booster dose at least as far as those data are concerned."
Offit said that although he voted to recommend half-dose booster shots for some people six months after their first two doses of Moderna's vaccine, he doesn't think everyone needs one.
"I do worry about the sort of 18- to 29-year-old because that's the group that has a higher risk of myocarditis -- that's inflammation of the heart muscle," he said. "So, without sort of clear benefit that that third dose is necessary, I think we've created this kind of 'third dose fever' in this country because of the way this has played out."
Dr. Michael Kurilla, director of the Division of Clinical Innovation at the National Center for Advancing Translation Sciences at the National Institutes of Health, agreed.
"I don't see the need for a let-it-rip campaign for boosters," Kurilla said.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/15/health/us-coronavirus-friday/index.html
... But my wife, who's also over 65, doesn't want to take it. She's legitimately concerned about negative effects down the road.
More confusing stuff from the medical community.
....
Cases and deaths are in decline. The article says it's not herd immunity, but I think it is. What do you think?
What is herd immunity, exactly?
How so? Let alone dramatically.
The risk of becoming infected is the same as for those vaccinated. There is nothing a vaccine can do to protect you from being infected. It can only help once you are infected. It is not as if it creates an invisible protection shield around you. Although I’ve seen illustrations from your ideological brethren claiming exactly that.
The article says it's not herd immunity, but I think it is. What do you think?
More confusing stuff from the medical community.
What legitimate concerns?
I'm not confused, why are you?
I saw this odd report today about people in the US suing to get access to ivermectin, https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ivermectin-lawsuits-covid-us-1.6214131 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ivermectin-lawsuits-covid-us-1.6214131).
This is is too confusing for me. Doctors won't prescribe an untested unapproved and not recommended drug so people are suing to receive it based on the say-so of fools who appear on talk shows? Is this for real?
If enough of these suits are launched then sooner or later some brain-dead judge is probably going to give the ok. I can only assume that hospitals and doctors are consulting their lawyers to obtain bullet-proof waivers in case that happens.
Ivermectin is approved for use in humans to treat "some parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea" (FDA quote). It is not approved for treating covid. But physicians can prescribe it anyway for what's called "off-label use." And anyone can hunt around and find a physician who will prescribe anything they want (such as oxycontin).
Here is a concise discussion of vaccines, the unvaccinated, and community (herd) immunity. It predates the pandemic and current politics. It's from 2017, by The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.My daughter's due next month. She has recently taken Covid, flu, and other vaccines so the antibodies she produces will flow into the fetus to protect the baby when it's born. There's also a belief that antibodies are in mother's milk as well providing additional protection.
It's so short that I've copied and pasted it in its entirety below and included their original link to a two-page Q&A sheet.
https://www.chop.edu/news/feature-article-if-vaccines-work-why-do-unvaccinated-people-pose-risk (https://www.chop.edu/news/feature-article-if-vaccines-work-why-do-unvaccinated-people-pose-risk)
Feature Article: If Vaccines Work, Why Do Unvaccinated People Pose a Risk?
Published on Sep 12, 2017
Some people ask the question, “If vaccines work, why do unvaccinated people present a risk to those who have been vaccinated?” Two simple facts contribute to this answer. First: Vaccines aren’t 100 percent effective. So even some people who are vaccinated will still be at risk. Second: The greater the number of unvaccinated people in a community, the more opportunity germs have to spread. This means outbreaks are more difficult to stem and everyone is at greater risk of exposure — including vaccinated people.
This latter concept is known as community immunity, or more commonly, herd immunity. Each member of the community contributes to the collective health of the community because the way a pathogen survives is by finding new people to infect. The fewer susceptible people in a community, the less opportunity the pathogen has to spread.
Interestingly, people often do not think about the fact that there are times when every family needs the protection of their community. New babies and infants may be too young to be vaccinated, and older adults or adults being treated for illnesses may be more susceptible to infections as well.
To read more about community immunity and to find considerations for both vaccinated and unvaccinated family members, review the Vaccine Education Center’s newest “Special Topics Q&A” sheet Vaccinated or Unvaccinated: What You Should Know. (https://media.chop.edu/data/files/pdfs/vaccine-education-center-vaccinated-unvaccinated.pdf)
According to Worldometer, the USA reached 760,000+ total Covid deaths. Both daily infections and daily deaths are decreasing, current wave is on the decline, but as of today the 7-day moving average of daily deaths is still at about 1200, which continues to be a lot of people.
Everywhere you look, dysfunction.
That's the price of freedom. Most deaths in the freest country.Well, we have more gun deaths too. I wouldn't be surprised if we have more auto and drug deaths than others as well. We get into more wars and conflicts than others. We just can't sit still like Canadians, be quiet, and mind our own business. :)
The highest rate of COVID vaccination in the United States... Puerto Rico at 73% fully vaccinated.It's a good thing for Puerto Ricans that America owns the island or they wouldn't have any vaccines. They also got bailed out after the hurricanes. If they vote for independence, then what? They'll wind up being sick and poor. That's why most of them really wink at independence. They know it's a losing proposition for them.
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049323911/puerto-rico-leads-the-us-in-covid-19-vaccine-rates-and-what-states-can-learn (https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049323911/puerto-rico-leads-the-us-in-covid-19-vaccine-rates-and-what-states-can-learn)
The highest rate of COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. is not in a liberal-leaning Northeastern or West Coast state.
It's in Puerto Rico, where more than 73% of the total population is fully vaccinated. The U.S. national average is just over 57%.
It's a good thing for Puerto Ricans that America owns the island or they wouldn't have any vaccines. They also got bailed out after the hurricanes. If they vote for independence, then what? They'll wind up being sick and poor. That's why most of them really wink at independence. They know it's a losing proposition for them.
A cheap, generically available anti-depressant may reduce the risk of severe Covid-19 disease by close to a third in people at high risk, researchers reported Wednesday.
A trial among about 1,500 patients in Brazil showed those who took the drug, known as fluvoxamine, were less likely to progress to severe disease and to require hospitalization.
Instead of taking multiple medications to treat one health problem, here is a wonder drug that fixes two problems:
The highest rate of COVID vaccination in the United States... Puerto Rico at 73% fully vaccinated.
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049323911/puerto-rico-leads-the-us-in-covid-19-vaccine-rates-and-what-states-can-learn (https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049323911/puerto-rico-leads-the-us-in-covid-19-vaccine-rates-and-what-states-can-learn)
The highest rate of COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. is not in a liberal-leaning Northeastern or West Coast state.
It's in Puerto Rico, where more than 73% of the total population is fully vaccinated. The U.S. national average is just over 57%.
Puerto Rico is liberal-leaning, however. That's why the idea of statehood horrifies the GOP.That's true but more surprising things have happened.
Is this the new Bear Pit thread now?It's been a sort of Bear Pit Junior for a while now.
Is this the new Bear Pit thread now?
Yes, but you have to put on a mask when you post to this thread.:D
Well, we have more gun deaths too. I wouldn't be surprised if we have more auto and drug deaths than others as well. We get into more wars and conflicts than others. We just can't sit still like Canadians, be quiet, and mind our own business. :)
Freedom costs.
So, Canadians, sitting quiet and minding our own business, aren't free?
Should we mandate vaccines? Are these rules constitutional?
Government decision to tighten restrictions on unvaccinated people to stem the spread of coronavirus, ruling out the possibility of a new nationwide lockdown.
Now that the vaccine is available, economic and social activity will not be shut down. The government does not want to deprive vaccinated people of rights that were granted to them after following the safety recommendations of scientists and of the state.
Those who have not yet safeguarded [their health] with the vaccine will undergo stricter monitoring, with more frequent testing, so as to protect themselves and the people around them.
* All unvaccinated people [those without a valid certificate of vaccination] will be obliged to display a recent negative test to enter all indoor public areas, including banks, most shops, government buildings and hair salons.
* The same will apply to outdoor restaurant areas and cafes. Exceptions will be made for supermarkets, shops selling food, pharmacies and places of worship.
* All public and private sector employees will also have to display negative tests twice a week to enter their workplaces, instead of once as is now the case.
Should we mandate vaccines? Are these rules constitutional?
"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is giving employers with more than 100 employees a Jan. 4 deadline to comply with President Biden's COVID-19 vaccine mandate and threatening thousands of dollars in fines for defiant businesses, according to a fact sheet released by the White House Thursday.
The OSHA rule is expected to be immediately challenged in court by Republican states and some business groups.
Separate from OSHA, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is issuing a rule to require health care workers in facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid be fully vaccinated. The CMS rule will also go into effect Jan. 4 and will cover more than 17 million workers at approximately 76,000 health care facilities nationwide.
Unlike the OSHA rule, the CMS rule affecting health care workers does not allow for a testing alternative to vaccination. The CMS rule does allow for medical and religious exemptions."
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/osha-vaccine-mandate-employers-jan-4-deadline-fines
Should we mandate vaccines? Are these rules constitutional?
Is there a prohibition on common sense in the constitution ?
With the onset of winter and a not unsurprising pick up in Covid infections, governments are stepping in to safeguard both citizens and their respective health services.QuoteGovernment decision to tighten restrictions on unvaccinated people to stem the spread of coronavirus, ruling out the possibility of a new nationwide lockdown.Sounds as though Gov doing it's duty to protect their citizens.
Now that the vaccine is available, economic and social activity will not be shut down. The government does not want to deprive vaccinated people of rights that were granted to them after following the safety recommendations of scientists and of the state.
Those who have not yet safeguarded [their health] with the vaccine will undergo stricter monitoring, with more frequent testing, so as to protect themselves and the people around them.
* All unvaccinated people [those without a valid certificate of vaccination] will be obliged to display a recent negative test to enter all indoor public areas, including banks, most shops, government buildings and hair salons.
* The same will apply to outdoor restaurant areas and cafes. Exceptions will be made for supermarkets, shops selling food, pharmacies and places of worship.
* All public and private sector employees will also have to display negative tests twice a week to enter their workplaces, instead of once as is now the case.
Reuters - Ford Motor will require most of its 32,000-strong U.S. salaried workforce to be vaccinated by Dec. 8.
I wonder why they exempted the assembly line workers.
Just so that it's clear to others, the quote that you included in your article is regarding Greece and their recently announced restrictions. The article linked below from a Greek publication matches your quote.
But I'm not sure I'm in favor of mandates. That's a slippery slope.
My own personal belief is I wish everyone would get the vaccine who's medically fit to get it. But I'm not sure I'm in favor of mandates. That's a slippery slope.
Ron Carlson, like many Americans with diabetes, got the message trumpeted in drugmakers’ unrelenting ads and reinforced by doctors: Use medications to lower your blood sugar to a specific target, and you can live a longer, healthier life. He took that message to heart, and it killed him.
One evening in July 2019, the retired software engineer arrived at Al’s Center Saloon in this lakeside town for his weekly dinner with friends. Just as Carlson was guiding his Honda motorcycle into a parking spot, the bartender at Al’s looked out the window to see him stagger and then squeeze the bike’s throttle as he tried to steady himself. The engine roared, the tires squealed, and Carlson sped 30 yards across the lot, slamming into a parked car. Carlson tumbled to the pavement. Blood pooled on the asphalt. Volunteer firefighters and then an ambulance crew tried to revive him, but he was later pronounced dead at a local hospital. He was 66 years old.
The medical examiner attributed Carlson’s death to chest trauma and hypoglycemia, or extremely low blood sugar. Hypoglycemia is a medical emergency characterized by confusion, dizziness and loss of coordination. Untreated, it can quickly lead to coma and death. And it’s almost always a side effect of diabetes treatment.
There's a big world outside of the U.S. and its always good to be informed about what's happening globally.
With regard to vaccines and vaccination efforts, I'd like to see more posts about what's happening in various countries. It's a global pandemic and a global problem to solve.
You'll have noted that the 'revised restrictions' don't impinge on freedoms, they only require increased proof that those unvaccinated are indeed covid-free. That you can't, in the majority of European countries, enter a restaurant w/out a vaccination certificate, and your 'freedom' to travel isn't curtailed but subject to limited additional scrutiny and certification is a non-issue - it's a world-wide public health crisis.You don't have to travel to my country and I don't have to travel to yours.
Your freedoms end when they begin to impinge on mine.
There is an existing mandate to report our incomes and pay taxes. IMO, the reluctance to comply with those laws is nowhere as dangerous as walking around unvaccinated or without a mask.There's no "direct" requirement for vaccines in the constitution. On the other hand, taxes aren't a mandate or an arbitrary direction. The constitution allows Congress to impose them.
Much more dangerous than possible side effects from the covid and flu vaccinations are many prescriptions for diabetes, heart problems, and numerous unnecessary surgeries and antibiotics.I take medication to lower my sugar as I have diabetes 2. I have to be careful as sometimes the sugar level gets too low down around 70 and I start shaking. So I'll eat candy or drink orange juice to add sugar into my body quickly. I ran into problems last summer in the heat when that and heat stroke combined nearly knocked me out because I wasn't drinking water and was in the sun shooting my 4x5 camera for two hours. I couldn't move. Fortunately, a woman came by walking her dog and had extra water which I drank and poured on my head to also cool off. When I got back to my car schlepping my camera equipment, I, fortunately, had some Dunkin Donuts "holes" in the car to eat for a quick sugar hit. So you guys still have to put up with me. :)
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-diabetes-overtreatment/
Well, I'm travelling tomorrow to Turkey (against my better judgement) so I'll be able to post a feedback by early next week.Since 9-11 in the US you have to report to PSA airport security to get through two hours before the flight leaves. I haven't flown since covid. SO I don;t know if any new requirements adds to the two hours. Maybe some others here know. Have fun in Turkey.
What I can already say though is that the paperwork and certification needed to board an aircraft are really detailed. PLF's (passenger locator forms), vax cerfication inc manufacturer and date, recent full 14-day travel history, next of kin, ID/passport verification (pre-boarding) - all done online and within 48 hours of departure. In the UK , one needs an additional 48 hour post-arrival PCR test, irrespective of vaccination status.
Memories of having turned up at airports 20 minutes before flight departures and the check-in desk being but a short distance to the boarding gate are fading fast.
You don't have to travel to my country and I don't have to travel to yours.
The scheduled interim analysis showed an 89% reduction in risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause compared to placebo in patients treated within three days of symptom onset (primary endpoint); 0.8% of patients who received PAXLOVID™ were hospitalized through Day 28 following randomization (3/389 hospitalized with no deaths), compared to 7.0% of patients who received placebo and were hospitalized or died (27/385 hospitalized with 7 subsequent deaths). The statistical significance of these results was high (p<0.0001). Similar reductions in COVID-19-related hospitalization or death were observed in patients treated within five days of symptom onset; 1.0% of patients who received PAXLOVID™ were hospitalized through Day 28 following randomization (6/607 hospitalized, with no deaths), compared to 6.7% of patients who received a placebo (41/612 hospitalized with 10 subsequent deaths), with high statistical significance (p<0.0001). In the overall study population through Day 28, no deaths were reported in patients who received PAXLOVID™ as compared to 10 (1.6%) deaths in patients who received placebo. . . .
The primary analysis of the interim data set evaluated data from 1219 adults who were enrolled by September 29, 2021. At the time of the decision to stop recruiting patients, enrollment was at 70% of the 3,000 planned patients from clinical trial sites across North and South America, Europe, Africa, and Asia, with 45% of patients located in the United States. Enrolled individuals had a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection within a five-day period with mild to moderate symptoms and were required to have at least one characteristic or underlying medical condition associated with an increased risk of developing severe illness from COVID-19. Each patient was randomized (1:1) to receive PAXLOVID™ or placebo orally every 12 hours for five days.
I really do not, unsurprisingly, follow your logic here.I wish everyone would get vaccinated. However, each country has different laws and culture. Heck, in the USA, each of the 50 states sets its own rules. It's hard to get a unanimous agreement.
You've been bleating about the damaging economic effects of national lockdown, 'bread-on-the-table' etc for over a year. Here are the first steps in moving away from national lockdowns without vaccinations being 'mandated' - it is still up to the individual - and you're back on the whinge ?
Edit:
Which is 'my' country ?
I'm a national of three ; UK, Italy and Greece. My interest in health isn't limited by international borders and extends across the Atlantic (even as far as NJ, you included :) )
Pfizer has announced that it has developed an antiviral medication, taken orally, that significantly reduces the need for hospitalizaton and the risk of death (https://investors.pfizer.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2021/Pfizers-Novel-COVID-19-Oral-Antiviral-Treatment-Candidate-Reduced-Risk-of-Hospitalization-or-Death-by-89-in-Interim-Analysis-of-Phase-23-EPIC-HR-Study/default.aspx) from COVID-19. The initial results of the clinical study to evaluate the drug were so promising that an independent expert review board recommended that the trial be ended early so participants infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus who had received a placebo could be given the antiviral drug.I think that's great. But will that work against more vaccinations as some people figure there's no point in taking the vaccine? They'll just take their chances and be cured with this new medicine.
Pfizer says it plans to submit data from the study to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to support a request for Emergency Use Authorization "as soon as possible."
The company is currently conducting a study of the efficacy and safety of the drug in preventing COVID-19 among adults who have been exposed to the coronavirus by an infected family member.
I think that's great. But will that work against more vaccinations as some people figure there's no point in taking the vaccine? They'll just take their chances and be cured with this new medicine.
That is such a bizarre meshing of ideas. Why would people who are hesitant about vaccines be comfortable with this anti-viral drug? Why are they worried about the one but less about the other? They are both chemical compounds for which the avg joe has NO IDEA how they accomplish what they do in the body, so why favour one over the other? Such magical thinking, it boggles the mind.Why are you asking me? Ask them. :)
Why are you asking me? Ask them. :)
Have fun in Turkey.
Should we mandate vaccines? Are these rules constitutional?The federal appeals court has just held up this Biden vaccination mandate.
"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is giving employers with more than 100 employees a Jan. 4 deadline to comply with President Biden's COVID-19 vaccine mandate and threatening thousands of dollars in fines for defiant businesses, according to a fact sheet released by the White House Thursday.
The OSHA rule is expected to be immediately challenged in court by Republican states and some business groups.
Separate from OSHA, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is issuing a rule to require health care workers in facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid be fully vaccinated. The CMS rule will also go into effect Jan. 4 and will cover more than 17 million workers at approximately 76,000 health care facilities nationwide.
Unlike the OSHA rule, the CMS rule affecting health care workers does not allow for a testing alternative to vaccination. The CMS rule does allow for medical and religious exemptions."
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/osha-vaccine-mandate-employers-jan-4-deadline-fines
Early on in this saga, in the days before Covid vaccine, I read rumours that people who had been taking flu shots over the years had some immune advantage over those that didn't. Has anyone seen any follow-up to this? Any data pointing one way or the other?
I wonder what percentage of anti vaxxers also do not take the yearly flu shot. I bet there's a high correlation.Most Americans don't get the flu shots, anti-vaxxer or not. Here are statistics for 2010 to 2017. There may be later data for more recent years. This year was the first year in about ten that I took the flu shot because my daughter is giving birth and asked that we get it for the baby. I'm scheduled for the Moderna Covid booster on Nov 17th at the Walgreens pharmacy. I can see why people skip the third shot., You have to fill out the form online, schedule an appointment and take time to go there. A lot of people just can't be bothered.
Most Americans don't get the flu shots, anti-vaxxer or not. Here are statistics for 2010 to 2017. There may be later data for more recent years. This year was the first year in about ten that I took the flu shot because my daughter is giving birth and asked that we get it for the baby. I'm scheduled for the Moderna Covid booster on Nov 17th at the Walgreens pharmacy. I can see why people skip the third shot., You have to fill out the form online, schedule an appointment and take time to go there. A lot of people just can't be bothered.
The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017, the most recent year with available data.
"Depending on the specific age groups, some are vaccinated more than others," said Dr. Pedro Piedra, a professor of molecular virology, microbiology and pediatrics at Baylor College of Medicine. "Older adults generally have high vaccination coverage compared to the general public. Likewise for young children under 5 years of age, you’ll see vaccination coverage that is generally much better than that of the general healthy adult."
Vaccination coverage among adults over 65 has ranged from a high of 66.7% in 2014 to a low of 59.6% in 2017, staying above the 50% mark for the past 10 years.
The age group with the lowest percentage receiving flu shots is those between 18 and 49. Vaccination coverage for this group ranged from a high of 33.6% in 2016 to a low of 26.9% in 2017.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/25/michael-burgess/how-many-adults-get-flu-shots-each-year/
Most Americans don't get the flu shots, anti-vaxxer or not. Here are statistics for 2010 to 2017. There may be later data for more recent years. This year was the first year in about ten that I took the flu shot because my daughter is giving birth and asked that we get it for the baby. I'm scheduled for the Moderna Covid booster on Nov 17th at the Walgreens pharmacy. I can see why people skip the third shot., You have to fill out the form online, schedule an appointment and take time to go there. A lot of people just can't be bothered.
The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017, the most recent year with available data.
"Depending on the specific age groups, some are vaccinated more than others," said Dr. Pedro Piedra, a professor of molecular virology, microbiology and pediatrics at Baylor College of Medicine. "Older adults generally have high vaccination coverage compared to the general public. Likewise for young children under 5 years of age, you’ll see vaccination coverage that is generally much better than that of the general healthy adult."
Vaccination coverage among adults over 65 has ranged from a high of 66.7% in 2014 to a low of 59.6% in 2017, staying above the 50% mark for the past 10 years.
The age group with the lowest percentage receiving flu shots is those between 18 and 49. Vaccination coverage for this group ranged from a high of 33.6% in 2016 to a low of 26.9% in 2017.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/25/michael-burgess/how-many-adults-get-flu-shots-each-year/
Should we mandate vaccines? Are these rules constitutional?The US Appeals Court has held up Biden's order for vaccinations for workers.
"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is giving employers with more than 100 employees a Jan. 4 deadline to comply with President Biden's COVID-19 vaccine mandate and threatening thousands of dollars in fines for defiant businesses, according to a fact sheet released by the White House Thursday.
The OSHA rule is expected to be immediately challenged in court by Republican states and some business groups.
Separate from OSHA, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is issuing a rule to require health care workers in facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid be fully vaccinated. The CMS rule will also go into effect Jan. 4 and will cover more than 17 million workers at approximately 76,000 health care facilities nationwide.
Unlike the OSHA rule, the CMS rule affecting health care workers does not allow for a testing alternative to vaccination. The CMS rule does allow for medical and religious exemptions."
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/osha-vaccine-mandate-employers-jan-4-deadline-fines
While DHS said there is no evidence wildlife, including white-tailed deer, are a source of COVID-19 illness for people in the U.S, the recent findings caused the agency to expand its recommendations to hunters in advance of the start of the gun deer hunting season Saturday.
The list includes three new measures: wearing a mask while field dressing deer; limit cutting into and handling the deer's lungs, throat, and mouth/nasal cavity to only what is necessary (for example, submitting a head for CWD testing); and if you are immunocompromised, consider asking for assistance with carcass processing and handling.
Wisconsin health officials recommend that hunters should wear a mask while handling deer carcass and submit deer head for covid testing.I think we should make the deer wear masks.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2021/11/16/wisconsin-hunters-mask-around-deer-due-covid/8643850002/
I think we should make the deer wear masks.And practice social distancing.
That is such a bizarre meshing of ideas. Why would people who are hesitant about vaccines be comfortable with this anti-viral drug? Why are they worried about the one but less about the other? They are both chemical compounds for which the avg joe has NO IDEA how they accomplish what they do in the body, so why favour one over the other? Such magical thinking, it boggles the mind.
There is an existing mandate to report our incomes and pay taxes. IMO, the reluctance to comply with those laws is nowhere as dangerous as walking around unvaccinated or without a mask.
I think that's great. But will that work against more vaccinations as some people figure there's no point in taking the vaccine? They'll just take their chances and be cured with this new medicine.
It seems the only people who do care that they are not vaccinated are far left wingers; all the more reason to not get vaxxed if it means pissing them off.
The problem is that the powers to [that] be, in a frantic effort to get this under control, scheduled the first and second shot too close to each other. This resulted in a much lower long term effectiveness then [than] if the two shots were spread out further apart, like every other two shot vaccine we have.
Add to that all research comparing natural immunity to vaccine immunity is showing... natural is just oh so much better!
Lockdown and pandemic fatigue is here.
It seems the only people who do care that they are not vaccinated are far left wingers; all the more reason to not get vaxxed if it means pissing them off.
They just dont care, and I dont blame them. It seems the only people who do care that they are not vaccinated are far left wingers; all the more reason to not get vaxxed if it means pissing them off.
For most, walking around without a vaccine or mask will result in a mild cold.
For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu.
Years Age Group All Deaths Involving COVID-19 All Deaths Involving Influenza
Data from CDC as of 11/17/2021 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm) |
. . . it's foolish to take a chance with such a destructive disease because of something as meaningless as politics.
It's difficult to argue with this from a rational perspective, but the opposition to vaccine requirements, mask mandates, and other commonsense precautions—as well as the often-stated insistence that contracting this new coronavirus should not be a matter of concern because most infected individuals survive an infection—is a deeply emotional issue for angry people who feel impelled to express their broader resentment against the changes that are taking place in their society because of a belief that they are being pushed around by "the elites."
???
Not paying your taxes will result in being arrested and fined and, possibly, jail time regardless of who you are (well maybe not Al Sharpen). For most, walking around without a vaccine or mask will result in a mild cold.
Only those over 65 and/or those with pre-existing conditions are really at a high enough risk to worry about getting C-19. For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu.
This is just as absurd when hear someone talk about Small Pox vaccine mandates, which killed a third of those infected regardless of anything and does not mutate to the point where the vaccine would ever not be effective.
Some statements are too asinine to merit a response.
Years Age Group All Deaths Involving COVID-19 All Deaths Involving Influenza
2020/2021 0-17 Years 605 189
2020/2021 18-29 Years 4,460 149
2020/2021 30-39 Years 13,196 325
2020/2021 40-49 Years 32,230 511
2020/2021 50-64 Years 139,761 2,246
2020/2021 65-74 Years 173,365 2,051
2020/2021 75-84 Years 198,318 2,047
2020/2021 85 and Over 203,385 1,912
2020/2021 Total All Ages 765,320 9,430
Data from CDC as of 11/17/2021
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)
Let's also not forget those Covid deaths happened even when masking rules and vaccination shots were in place. Does anyone doubt it for one minute that the Covid deaths would be at least doubled if we did nothing?
The problem is that the powers to be, in a frantic effort to get this under control, scheduled the first and second shot too close to each other. This resulted in a much lower long term effectiveness then if the two shots were spread out further apart, like every other two shot vaccine we have. So now, after 6 months of vaccinations, we are seeing the effectiveness of the vaccine drop like a rock when it comes to preventing infection. (They are still very effective at preventing death though.) Break through infections are going up and up every day, especially now that the North is entering winter.I just got my Moderna booster shot. I'm 76. My wife who's 69 doesn't want to get the booster because she had a fairly heavy reaction to her second shot.
Could this have been prevented if we did spread out the two doses? Who knows, more then likely, but it's a moot point now for those whom are not vaccinated. The drop in effectiveness at preventing infection, even if they still prevent serious infections, is all they talk about (or at least those whom I know who are not vaxxed).
Add to that all research comparing natural immunity to vaccine immunity is showing, just like with bosoms, natural is just oh so much better! The Israel study found it to be 27 times better and longer lasting too.
And now, this great new drug that you reference and ...
Good luck convincing those whom are still not vaccinated to get vaccinated. And mandates will only entrench this even for those on the fence. If you actually think otherwise, then you clearly dont know anyone who is not vaccinated. They will spit all this out before you can even get a breath, and, when you protest, you might as well be talking to a wall. They just dont care, and I dont blame them. It seems the only people who do care that they are not vaccinated are far left wingers; all the more reason to not get vaxxed if it means pissing them off.
Furthermore, good luck on getting a large portion of people on getting a booster shot.
Lockdown and pandemic fatigue is here.
Some statements are too asinine to merit a response.The problem with your chart is it gives younger people under let's say 50 the arguments against taking vaccinations for their age group. The percentages are minuscule.
Years Age Group All Deaths Involving COVID-19 All Deaths Involving Influenza
2020/2021 0-17 Years 605 189
2020/2021 18-29 Years 4,460 149
2020/2021 30-39 Years 13,196 325
2020/2021 40-49 Years 32,230 511
2020/2021 50-64 Years 139,761 2,246
2020/2021 65-74 Years 173,365 2,051
2020/2021 75-84 Years 198,318 2,047
2020/2021 85 and Over 203,385 1,912
2020/2021 Total All Ages 765,320 9,430
Data from CDC as of 11/17/2021
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
Let's also not forget those Covid deaths happened even when masking rules and vaccination shots were in place. Does anyone doubt it for one minute that the Covid deaths would be at least doubled if we did nothing?
It's difficult to argue with this from a rational perspective, but the opposition to vaccine requirements, mask mandates, and other commonsense precautions—as well as the often-stated insistence that contracting this new coronavirus should not be a matter of concern because most infected individuals survive an infection—is a deeply emotional issue for angry people who feel impelled to express their broader resentment against the changes that are taking place in their society because of a belief that they are being pushed around by "the elites."The problem as I've been saying since early 2020, is that the whole Covid disease has been politicized from the beginning. Unfortunately, the politicization started because of Trump, the democrats, and the fact that 2020 was a presidential election year. Everything went downhill from there.
Me-me-me depends on whose ox is getting gored. Many libertarians argue to legalize drugs, especially marijuana. Well, that adds to carnage on the road that maims and kills innocent people. People are driving high without their wits about them. When mountain climbers, skiers, scuba divers, etc demand access and accommodations to carry out their sports, they put rescuers in danger when they get into trouble.
"The Government" mandates we wear seat belts while driving as well. I'm very much a Midwestern guy, very Libertarian, and skeptical (if not cynical) about government. As an educated man I try to look at things objectively and let common sense prevail though. I would wear a seat no matter what"The Government" told me to do. Same for the vaccine. Same for not driving 90 mph on a snow covered highway. As for most people survive covid, yes of course. They don't seem a bit concerned about harming other, more vulnerable people such as my 97 yr. old WW2 vet dad. For these selfish people it's all about me-me-me.
Kent in SD
... Lockdown and pandemic fatigue is here.
It has been here a while, but as often happens in these matters, emotions are irrelevant. The virus doesn't give a damn if people are sick of taking special measures. I bet cancer patients get sick of their routines too.Emotions are relevant when people are running out of money to put food on their table. Stopping economic activity has its consequences too.
The Worldometer USA numbers are interesting. Although daily deaths are trending down, the 7-day moving average is still at about 1000. That's potentially 365,000 per year. That ain't no normal flu, I'd say. The pandemic certainly isn't over yet. No way can 1000 deaths per day be passed off as normal background.
The 7-day moving avg of new infections turned upward and has been increasing for about 3 weeks now. I bet people will get sick of that too. But so far, after about 3 weeks, daily deaths have not also started increasing. Let's hope that's an indication of reduced mortality and that vaccinations may be having an effect. Or it could be that those numbers will start trending up soon as well. It will be interesting to watch those two stats in the next few weeks.
The Worldometer USA numbers are interesting. Although daily deaths are trending down, the 7-day moving average is still at about 1000. That's potentially 365,000 per year. That ain't no normal flu, I'd say. The pandemic certainly isn't over yet. No way can 1000 deaths per day be passed off as normal background.
The deaths reportedly are concentrated among (1) those who are unvaccinated and (2) those with other, usually chronic, medical problems that put them at elevated risk. From what I've been reading, that's also true of hospitalizations. If you have been "fully vaccinated" and don't have another condition that would exacerbate the effects of the virus, it appears likely you will be able to ride out symptomatic illness on your own or even have no symptoms at all.One side benefit from all the masking and isolation is that the regular flu is almost non-existant, at least last winter. Also, I haven't had a cold in almost two years for the same reason. Neither has my wife. These really are all social diseases. That didn't seem obvious before because the were so common. Now we can see just how they almost disappear when human interaction and proximity shrink. It's pretty amazing.
Having said that, people who dismiss the severity of symptomatic COVID-19 as "no worse than the 'flu" probably never had influenza. It is a debilitating disease, even if you don't need to be admitted to a hospital. Nothing like a cold or other minor respiratory infection. I've had it twice, once in my early 20s and again in my early 40s. Sickest I've ever been, although I didn't need to be hospitalized on either occasion and, fortunately, it did not trigger pneumonia (a common side-effect of influenza). Full recovery from the second infection took two weeks.
One side benefit from all the masking and isolation is that the regular flu is almost non-existant, at least last winter. Also, I haven't had a cold in almost two years for the same reason. Neither has my wife. These really are all social diseases. That didn't seem obvious before because the were so common. Now we can see just how they almost disappear when human interaction and proximity shrink. It's pretty amazing.
And if the Covidiots had any brains, we’d see COVID go away just like the flu did last year…but no, their rights are more important than their lives.I wish drunk drivers wouldn't drive too. Should we lock up those not vaccinated in jail like they do in China?
I wish drunk drivers wouldn't drive too. Should we lock up those not vaccinated in jail like they do in China?
And if the Covidiots had any brains, we’d see COVID go away just like the flu did last year…but no, their rights are more important than their lives.
Even if everyone in the U.S. and even if plus Europe and Canada were vaccinated there would still be a huge pool of people who aren't likely to ever be vaccinated.
Just returned from a driving trip to/from Vancouver BC/Denver Co and thought I would post a couple observations/comments.I'm surprised that Europeans seem so much more adamant against mandates and other rules than America. Maybe we'd have more demonstrations in America if similar mandates were issued by governments.
Diligently prepared for crossing border S/B, ensuring all paperwork (proof of full vaccination etc) in order.
Arrived to the border on first day of S/B opening. Handed over Nexus cards to officer. He took a quick look, handed them back and wished us a great trip. No questions about our vaccination status. Contrast our return crossing where we not only went through the Covid first degree (which I applaud), but were given a take-home test kit for Health Canada ("randomly selected") even though we had to test positive prior to N/B crossing.
Drove through Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado. Progressing south/east, mask use and other protocols were strict in Washington, less so in Oregon and diminished the further distance travelled, to the point it was random chaos in the Denver area. There, a few places required masks/distancing, few others had protocol requirements displayed but enforcement was lax at best. And in most other places, it was as if Covid had never occurred.
The worst two places, one a children's event with hundreds of parents and children, another a Build a Bear store, both ignored all safety protocols, even though at both, employees were masked and protocols were listed. Build a Bear had a customer limit (35) and the usual 2m stand-on spots. Upon our arrival, they were almost double the limit and were so crammed, everyone was rubbing shoulders. Few customers at either location, wore a mask.
Of note, at out hotel, the staff were unmasked and, although obvious on placards about the premise, no protocols were enforced, some guests were masked. I asked one of the front desk staff about no masking. She, a 30-ish year old female, replied "It's our right not to be masked". When I asked about the rights of the as-yet vaccinated children and other vulnerable, she just looked at me with a stupid grin on her face. The conversation ended there.
Happened to flip through some channels at our hotel in Twin Falls Idaho. There were about a half dozen religious programs, most of which who were preaching anti-vax. On one, a Jewish Minister (?) and Doctor, obviously had a hate on for Anthony Faucci (sp?) and boldly stated the variants were a government induced method to control the citizens. Bizarre.
I simply do not understand how the unvaxxed/unmasked expect this issue to be solved solely by us, who vax/mask. Or maybe they don't.....
On a positive note, took my camera with me and was able to grab a couple decent shots enroute. And was able to have a super time with my 9 year old grand-daughter who I have not seen in two years (which was the sole purpose for the trip - she is my best buddy).
And, Americans are crazy drivers....but that is for another post.
Marv
The Chancellor of Austria, Alexander Schallenberg has told the BBC he is sorry that Austria has had to make Covid-19 vaccinations a legal requirement, but that the current low take-up rate is "too little, too late".
"Nobody wants the situation where you don’t get access to an intensive care unit bed because the beds are filled with people who did not get the vaccination and have Covid-19"
Austrian Chancellor: 'You don’t only have rights, you have obligations' (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-59378552)Are these Trump followers or what? Why aren't they taking vaccinations?
Austria is running at approximately 66% vaccination rate. Some states in the US are close to that , many substantially lower. Texas, barely 54%.
Happened to flip through some channels at our hotel in Twin Falls Idaho. There were about a half dozen religious programs, most of which who were preaching anti-vax. On one, a Jewish Minister (?) and Doctor, obviously had a hate on for Anthony Faucci (sp?) and boldly stated the variants were a government induced method to control the citizens. Bizarre.
I simply do not understand how the unvaxxed/unmasked expect this issue to be solved solely by us, who vax/mask. Or maybe they don't.....
Why do many Europeans have objections to taking the vax like some Americans? Are they a cult too? In any case, I still think that the long-lasting effects will be economic not health.
Wife and I drove from South Dakota to Washington state in August, and back (of course.) We had planned to spend three days in Idaho but the place was just nuts. The hospitals were full and having to send people far away. My wife, a hospital pharmacist, pointed out that if we had a car accident or I fell off a cliff and had to go to the ER there was serious question what the quality of care would be. So, we left after one day and continued west. We also didn't want to end up away from home with a breakthrough infection and be stuck for 10 days.
As for the making sense of the militantly unvaxxed, I've come to see them as members of a cult. Doing that seems to make it more understandable. They seem to be the same sort of people who in the previous decade believed 911 (Twin Towers) was an "inside" job. (The "Truthers.") Same sort of people actively seeking out conspiracies to believe no matter how irrational it may be.
Kent in SD
Why is Africa doing so well with COvid where very few people are vaccinated? One theory is that most people spend a lot of time outdoors. Others say it's the huge number of naturally-resistant young people making up their populations. Maybe malaria infections have toughened the people. It's fascinating and more research should be done.
Scientists mystified, wary, as Africa avoids COVID disaster
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/scientists-mystified-wary-africa-avoids-covid-disaster-81271647
All the more reason why no one should look to you for sensible health advice.
This statement is simply false. The non-scientific term for this is jumping to conclusions.
From a U.K. Study...
"Effectiveness of two doses remains at least as great as protection afforded by prior natural infection."
https://www.medrxiv.org/Impact of Delta on viral burden and vaccine effectiveness against new SARS-CoV-2 infections in the UK (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.18.21262237v1)
From the University of Nebraska Medical Center...
If you've had COVID-19 before, does your natural immunity work better than a vaccine?
The data is clear: Natural immunity is not better. The COVID-19 vaccines create more effective and longer-lasting immunity than natural immunity from infection.
• More than a third of COVID-19 infections result in zero protective antibodies
• Natural immunity fades faster than vaccine immunity
• Natural immunity alone is less than half as effective than natural immunity plus vaccination
The takeaway: Get vaccinated, even if you've had COVID-19. Vaccine immunity is stronger than natural immunity.
"Natural immunity can be spotty. Some people can react vigorously and get a great antibody response. Other people don't get such a great response," says infectious diseases expert Mark Rupp, MD. "Clearly, vaccine-induced immunity is more standardized and can be longer-lasting."
https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/covid-19-studies-natural-immunity-versus-vaccination (https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/covid-19-studies-natural-immunity-versus-vaccination)
The article linked above, from the University of Nebraska Medical Center, has much more information and includes links to additional information and studies that they cite within the article. There are many more studies and articles than the two that I've cited.
Online BS and ill-informed commentary fatigue is here.
That's just foolish. I don't care what politicians say about it one way or another. My degree and background is healthcare so I look at this solely as a medical issue. Are the vaccines safe? With closing in on 200M Americans now vaccinated, yes absolutely. Do the vaccinations work? Yes, and very well. Chart below was released from my former employer and my wife's (clinical pharmacist) employer of 30 years. As I said, it's foolish to take a chance with such a destructive disease because of something as meaningless as politics.
Kent in SD
Joe,
tell me it’s not you starring in that ‘Borat Subsequent Movie’ film.
You know, the part where he asks
‘What is more dangerous ? This virus or the Democrats ?
and you and your buddies answer
‘Democrats’ …
scrub to 1:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1F0CgjMbQ0
Some statements are too asinine to merit a response.
Years Age Group All Deaths Involving COVID-19 All Deaths Involving Influenza
2020/2021 0-17 Years 605 189
2020/2021 18-29 Years 4,460 149
2020/2021 30-39 Years 13,196 325
2020/2021 40-49 Years 32,230 511
2020/2021 50-64 Years 139,761 2,246
2020/2021 65-74 Years 173,365 2,051
2020/2021 75-84 Years 198,318 2,047
2020/2021 85 and Over 203,385 1,912
2020/2021 Total All Ages 765,320 9,430
Data from CDC as of 11/17/2021
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)
It seems the only people who do care that they are not vaccinated are far left wingers; all the more reason to not get vaxxed if it means pissing them off.
All the more reason why no one should look to you for sensible health advice.
Are you writing this based on your false notion I am not vaccinate even thought my post clearly implies I am?
Or are you writing this on your false notion that masks (besides KN95) and social distancing works (even though all studies are showing otherwise)?
Or are you writing this on your false notion that masks (besides KN95) and social distancing works (even though all studies are showing otherwise)?
It does not matter what you or I think, but what they (the anti-vaxxers) think.
Do you really think that you can deal with people like this by looking at their issue from your point of view? If so, good luck with that. Not to mention, it is obvious you hold contempt for them.
Add to that all research comparing natural immunity to vaccine immunity is showing... natural is just oh so much better!
This statement is simply false. The non-scientific term for this is jumping to conclusions.
I think the problem for you, is that you live in a bubble and do not look at information that does not confirm priors.
Wow, you think you're smart don't you.
Well let's break this down.
First, you're posting the total deaths of Covid through the pandemic, while the flu deaths are only for this year.
Oh! I'm wounded! Just kidding... I'm not concerned with your personal impressions of anyone, including me. I do, however, generally at least try to separate things for which there is credible evidence from things which are purely speculative.Joe's point was that 2020/2021 was an anomaly for the regular flu. There was hardly any flu because of the shutdowns. You have to use previous years of flu deaths to get a more realistic comparison to Covid deaths.
Well, let's...
What on earth prompted you to assume that? The statistics from the CDC are all listed as being for the same time period of 2020/2021. Where did you come up with your conclusion?
Joe's point was that 2020/2021 was an anomaly for the regular flu.
First, you're posting the total deaths of Covid through the pandemic, while the flu deaths are only for this year. Not a far [fair] comparison.
You stated the same error. 2020/2021 period is an anomaly regarding flu deaths. So you can't compare it Covid deaths for the same period.
You stated the same error. 2020/2021 period is an anomaly regarding flu deaths. So you can't compare it Covid deaths for the same period.
...
Happened to flip through some channels at our hotel in Twin Falls Idaho. There were about a half dozen religious programs, most of which who were preaching anti-vax. On one, a Jewish Minister (?) and Doctor, obviously had a hate on for Anthony Faucci (sp?) and boldly stated the variants were a government induced method to control the citizens. Bizarre.
...
In almost any other context, except maybe marketing and sales, this kind of public pronouncements would be the kind of thing we used to expect from village idiots. In extreme cases, depending on topic, it might even lead to legal action. Not even marketing and sales pitches can get away with everything. But because the crap is coming from the mouths of self-declared religious spokespeople, we just accept it as ok for public airwaves. It's simply amazing what those con artists can get away with. We don't put up with this elsewhere.America has a long history of protecting speech. It's in our constitution. Unlike your claim, false advertising about a product is fraud. You can sue a company and there are government sanctions as well. Saying your camera is the best is not fraud as that's an opinion. However, advertising that your camera has a 24mb sensor when it's only 16mb would be a fraud.
Maybe if people will continue wearing their masks and keep practicing the social distancing, they can eradicate the flu.The common cold too. I haven't had one since Covid started nor has my wife. We usually get a couple per year. Being a hermit is definitely healthier.
Joe's point was that 2020/2021 was an anomaly for the regular flu. There was hardly any flu because of the shutdowns. You have to use previous years of flu deaths to get a more realistic comparison to Covid deaths.
You stated the same error. 2020/2021 period is an anomaly regarding flu deaths. So you can't compare it Covid deaths for the same period.
What on earth prompted you to assume that? The statistics from the CDC are all listed as being for the same time period of 2020/2021. Where did you come up with your conclusion?
You must know by now Joe assumes everything without any real proof of anything. Joe's conclusions ( wrong as they may be ) always slant towards his obscured view of things.Your post is just an ad hominem attack. You provided no meaningful arguments.
Your post is just an ad hominem attack. You provided no meaningful arguments.
Your post is just an ad hominem attack. You provided no meaningful arguments.
Not an attack...just my observation.You attacked Joe, not his points.
Wife and I drove from South Dakota to Washington state in August, and back (of course.) We had planned to spend three days in Idaho but the place was just nuts. The hospitals were full and having to send people far away. My wife, a hospital pharmacist, pointed out that if we had a car accident or I fell off a cliff and had to go to the ER there was serious question what the quality of care would be. So, we left after one day and continued west. We also didn't want to end up away from home with a breakthrough infection and be stuck for 10 days.
...
Scientists warn of new Covid variant with high number of mutations
And it may turn out to be a serious threat. But, at least for the moment, the hyperventilating news coverage seems to be outrunning the available science. Type "B.1.1.529" into your favorite search engine and you'll see what I mean. As of 1300 UTC Thursday, other than the report of the initial genome sequence cited in the Guardian article, you'll turn up a frenzy of what appear to be derivative news stories that appear to be feeding on each other.
A new variant of the coronavirus, whose mutations display a “jump in evolution,” is driving a spike in Covid infections in South Africa.
Thursday, November 25, 2021 5:23 PM EST
So far, 22 positive cases have been identified in South Africa, according to the country’s National Institute for Communicable Diseases. The variant is displaying mutations that might resist neutralization, and scientists are still unclear how effective existing vaccines will be against it...
A new variant of the coronavirus, whose mutations display a “jump in evolution,” is driving a spike in Covid infections in South Africa. (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/11/25/world/covid-vaccine-boosters-mandates?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20211125&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline®i_id=52648921&segment_id=75376&user_id=be36115a3afae717b744deeaf0c4c88b#variant-south-africa-covid)
DOW on the NY Stock Market is down 750 points due to the new variant.
Boeing, airline stocks tumble as new Covid variant spurs travel curbs
The U.K. said it would suspend flights from South Africa and surrounding countries because of the new variant.
The European Commission recommended a pause on travel between the EU and southern Africa.
The latest rules come just as many airlines and aircraft manufacturers like Boeing were upbeat about a rebound in travel demand.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/26/boeing-airline-stocks-tumble-as-new-covid-variant-spurs-travel-curbs.html
All stocks tumbled today. Except Zoom and a few other covid-friendly companies.Dow ended down 905 points or -2 1/2%. My wife also relented and decided to get the booster shot tomorrow. :-[
Cutting through the fluff, [an update] on the new variant from one Katelyn Jetalina. Highly recommended.
. . . we can detect B.1.1.529 on a PCR test. This typically isn’t the case. Usually a swab would have to go to a special lab for genome sequencing to know which variant caused the infection. However, it looks like B.1.1.529 has a special signal like Alpha on the PCR directly. For example, when the PCR is positive it lights up two channels instead of three channels, indicating that it’s B.1.1.529. . . .
All stocks tumbled today. Except Zoom and a few other covid-friendly companies.
Maybe I just happen not to see the relevant newscasts but why are these stories about full hospitals not at the top of all media stories? Surely that kind of news has to be in the top 5 most important things that actually affect people's real daily lives. I'd want to know.
Who's going to make new vaccines if you're going to steal their inventions? What a dumb idea. Photos next?
For a full run-down on this issue read Wikipedia Deployment of COVID-19 vaccines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deployment_of_COVID-19_vaccines) and this, COVID-19 vaccine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine)Could you sum up what these two voluminous articles have to say about Biden suggesting vaccines shouldn't have intellectual property (patent) protection?
Could you sum up what these two voluminous articles have to say about Biden suggesting vaccines shouldn't have intellectual property (patent) protection?
The article is incorrect. IPP is not the reason vaccine is not reaching the poorer nations. There are numerous articles in the press and finger pointing particularly towards the ‘vaccine hoarding’ of both the UK and the EU.I'm confused. Are you saying my article was incorrect or yours? Here's another article that indicates Biden wants to waive IP on vaccines. His plan will only lead to pharmaceutical companies not producing vaccines or delaying or reducing their production. How does that help fight the new Covid variant? Everything this guy does makes things worse. Who's advising him? Instead, we should be offering an award of $50 or $100 million dollars to the first company that produces a proven vaccine that works against Omnicron.
As regards Pfizer and Moderna , Pfizer allows manufacture under licence but keeps close watch on quality control issues - something that Moderna has already had issues with within the USA. Astra Zeneca/ Oxford have already announced a ‘not-for-profit’ operation.
All the above without guarantee, I haven’t followed this issue in detail.
We are a little "tetchy" here in South Africa about "finding" the new variant... :)
There are those who feel we are being "punished" for being so quick and so open about it.
The head of Moderna today warned it will take months to develop an Omicron-fighting vaccine. Stephane Bancel, who leads the vaccine manufacturer, said another two weeks were needed for scientists to work out how effective the current jabs are against the variant, but that early signs are not encouraging. The chief executive said they were particularly concerned by 32 mutations on the spike protein — which the virus uses to invade cells — which would likely lead to a 'material drop' in jab effectiveness. Mr Bancel told the Financial Times: 'All the scientists I've talked to... are like "this is not going to be good".' Experts warn it is likely vaccines will be less effective at preventing infections with Omicron, but they should still be able to prevent hospitalisations and deaths in most cases. There are also fears the variant may be better able to infect those who got their second jab more than six months ago, after studies showed anitbody levels crashed by 80 per cent over this period.
It was all over the news in August in the Pacific Northwest.
Kent in SD
Joe's post, to which I replied, has four points which he numbered: First, Second, Third, Fourth. So far, I have replied only to his First point. Your responses to me are in regard to his Second to which I have not yet responded or written about. Given your inability to understand this fact, it is pointless to discuss this with you any further.
I have been sick for the last week, so also keeping my fingers crossed I test negative for C-19 on Sunday, which would put the kibosh on my travel plans.
So I made one clerical mistake that you did not make clear in the data you posted and you lose you [your] shit over it. How interesting.
But anyway, if those flu stats you posted are for two years (not one) that would make them an even bigger outlier and more irrelevant then I thought they were. Thanks for the correction on my clerical error and making my point even stronger in the process.
Last though, you posted that data in response to my statement that C-19 for sub-45 year olds is about as deadly as the flu in a typical year as if I was wrong. But your data, compared to the total USA population of 0 to 50 year olds, shows only slightly higher of a percentage (0.02385% vs 0.02%) of that group has died of C-19 then what we would expect in a typical flu year. Would you care to respond to this point specifically?
Fourth, and let's do some math, 0 through 49 deaths are 50,491 [This is the Total Mortality for the entire population of that group for that period], which is 6.6% percent of all of the deaths so far from Covid. Out of the entire USA population of 0 to 49 year olds (about 211.6M), that is just 0.02385% [This is the Mortality Rate (MR) for COVID-19 for the entire population of that group for that period], which is ... wait for it ... similar to the fatality rate of the flu for those under 45 of 0.02% [This is the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for flu which is always a much higher percentage than the Mortality Rate as it only includes estimated or reported cases of disease and not the entire population—taking the same number of fatalities as a percentage of a smaller number (cases of disease) rather than the total population group as a whole]. Sure, not a perfect compaison [sic] since not everyone 0 to 49 have caught C-19 [This would be the Estimated Infection Fatality Rate (IFR), deaths relative to an estimate of all infections comprising asymptomatic cases as well as severity of any level (the total estimate of all asymptomatic, mild symptomatic, severe symptomatic and fatal cases combined). IFR can only be estimated due to lack of testing for the entire population set being considered.], but all data is showing significantly more then half. [More on all of this deceptive mixing of statistics and added misinformation below.]
Last though, you posted that data in response to my statement that C-19 for sub-45 year olds is about as deadly as the flu in a typical year as if I was wrong.
But your data, compared to the total USA population of 0 to 50 year olds, shows only slightly higher of a percentage (0.02385% vs 0.02%) of that group has died of C-19 then what we would expect in a typical flu year.
Would you care to respond to this point specifically?
Covid is here to stay; we are not getting rid of it. It is going to become another common cold virus that mutates so frequently any vaccine will probably end up being about as effective as the common flu vaccine. If you lose you shit every time a new variant is found, especially after two years, several effective vaccines and therapeutics, you're going to go insane.
This may be all true, but when looking at the number of C19 deaths in USA (over 800,000 by end of November 2021 and trending to over 1 million by next spring) and compare it to other countries, it is very unfortunate that so many Americans are dying needlessly.The opposition to vaccines has also taken hold in European countries where demonstrations are more violent than in America. I guess that's because mandates over there can be enforced while Americans are still allowed to gamble with their lives. Meanwhile, I can't yet convince my wife to go to a restaurant with me. But she did finally agree to get her booster last weekend. So we're making some headway.
The opposition to vaccines has also taken hold in European countries where demonstrations are more violent than in America. I guess that's because mandates over there can be enforced while Americans are still allowed to gamble with their lives. Meanwhile, I can't yet convince my wife to go to a restaurant with me. But she did finally agree to get her booster last weekend. So we're making some headway.
Booster shot is a good idea, but going to a restaurant not. That is not essential and still risky. Recently, I read that Bryan Adams, although vaccinated twice was infected for a second with Covid.We went to see my daughter and son-in-law Tuesday in their home. They had a baby boy making us grandparents, for the first time. :) So we didn't want to eat out because of the baby. So we stopped in a deli and picked up four meals to take to their house to eat. Of course, the deli was crowded so I don't know how much safer that was. We did wear our masks, however.
So we stopped in a deli and picked up four meals to take to their house to eat. Of course, the deli was crowded so I don't know how much safer that was. We did wear our masks, however.
Reminds me of the guy who was told a KN95 mask was enough to wear to the diner and was arrested for nudity.
Booster shot is a good idea, but going to a restaurant not. That is not essential and still risky. Recently, I read that Bryan Adams, although vaccinated twice was infected for a second with Covid.
Booster shot is a good idea, but going to a restaurant not. That is not essential and still risky. Recently, I read that Bryan Adams, although vaccinated twice was infected for a second time with Covid.
Hoping your test proves Covid-19 negative and wishing you safe travels.
So, you want to shift the blame to me for your inability to understand data that was clearly labeled as being for the same time period AND for which, I provided a link so that you could review that data yourself before you went off half-cocked making false assertions. Then you assert that I "[lost my] shit over it" by pointing out your mistake. How interesting.
Also, the "clerical mistake" [?] that you made was simply not bothering to check whether the assumption you made was true or not; despite the fact that you could have easily done so with the link that I provided. Assume, then post, then check the facts may be the wrong order in which to best provide accurate information.
I have no doubt that you believe that the flu statistics for the past two years are "irrelevant" as they don't fit your narrative. You might wish to consider, however, the relevant fact that those are the only two years we have to compare two communicable diseases (COVID-19 and flu) in which they both coexisted for the same population under identical patterns of behavior for both society and that population. If you wish to compare COVID-19 deaths to flu deaths prior to the existence of COVID-19, it would be helpful to acknowledge and understand that societal interactions and population behaviors were very different in those previous years. Frankly, I don't find comparisons of COVID-19 to seasonal flu very useful, but those that want to minimize the deadly nature of COVID-19 keep grasping at the comparison for some reason.
The assertion that you shouldn't compare flu deaths over the past two years to COVID deaths over the past two years makes no sense. They are are the only two years in which flu viruses have existed under the same conditions as SARS-CoV-2 viruses. Did societal and behavioral changes such as masking, social distancing, reduced travel, gathering restrictions, etc. impact flu deaths? It would be an understatement to say that those mitigation strategies appear to have had an overwhelming impact on the extraordinary reduction in deaths involving flu which measures less than 700 for the U.S. to date in 2021 (*676 U.S. deaths involving flu in 2021 as of 12/1/2021 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)). If someone believes that those same mitigation strategies didn't also keep COVID-19 deaths from being a good deal higher than the hundreds of thousands of deaths recorded during the same period, I'd be interested in a logical explanation of why those behavioral changes and mitigation strategies affected the death toll from one disease and not the other.
Still, I don't know why you write "if those flu stats you posted are for two years (not one)"—have you still not bothered to check. I gave you, and everyone else, a link to verify for yourself. By the way, when you post information like statistics—your earlier false interpretation of statistics on NYC vaccination demographics for example—it would be helpful to provide a link.
* In the link for U.S. deaths involving flu in 2021 above, you can sort the data for annual totals by using the "Yearly" tab at the bottom of Table #1. You can also sort by selected year (2020 or 2021) by using the drop down menu in the upper right corner under "Year". This CDC table has data for all deaths that include Pneumonia, Influenza, and COVID-19 (PIC Data) during 2020 and 2021. It is the same 2020/2021 data table that I've referenced before and also in the post below. The table is regularly updated and loads separately from the text on the website, so it may take a brief amount of time to load.
CA and FL are right next to each other on death rates and they are at opposite sides of the spectrum with lockdowns.
That's where you were wrong. You don't pay attention to what the statistics that you post represent or compare them in any sort of logical manner that has any meaning. To make matters even more convoluted, messy, and wrong; you mix and mash different statistical categories and statistics together into one statistical compost pile.
California COVID-19 Deaths per Million Population = 1,895
Florida COVID-19 Deaths per Million Population = 2,865
United States Total COVID-19 Deaths per Million Population = 2,434
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/#graph-deaths-daily (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/#graph-deaths-daily)
Do you ever check any facts before you post?
LOL man. You cant make your point, just admit it. In essence you just want to show that C-19 is much more deadly then the flu to 0 through 50 year olds so you can justify the draconian measures that you wish to see reimplemented on 0 through 50 year olds...
The math is just not on your side though.
I have not checked those stats since the Spring. Thank you for bringing them to my attention. With that being said, this spreads when people go inside. In FL this happens in the summer (already past us) when it is hot. In the NE, winter (in front of us) is what brings people inside.Good to know. My wife just suggested a vacation in Florida in February. Seems safer there then. I'm desperate for a break and vacation. Stir crazy already being all cooped up for two years. We both have our boosters so we're ready to go.
LOL man. You can't make your point using math or statistics, just admit it—every time you turn to statistics, you make a mess of it. In essence you just want to show that C-19 is no more deadly than the flu to 0 through 50 year olds for no logical reason.Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating?
The math is just not on your side though. Even when compared to a well above average flu season death rate, COVID-19 kills far more people under age 50 and in 2021 COVID-19 was twice as deadly than 2020 for the under-50 population.
You're a serial spreader of misinformation regarding medical science as well as statistics. I don't take any of what you post on those topics seriously, but I use my valued time to hopefully give the gullible better resources for information with links to credible sources.
My Gawd, I really wish you had told us this last week. I was at McGillin's, an 1860s old school pub in Center City Philly, this black Friday and the house was packed. Every chair was taken, but we managed to get a hi-top. Not only that, it was the only time in my life where people at a restaurant, without a dance floor, were randomly breaking out in not just song but also dance. I'm being totally seriously on that last part, and yes, it was odd. Good times, but at what expense, oh my.
Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating?
You are right, many people are just dying to dance again. That was the main reason I went to restaurants with good music and a dance floor, not because of their food. Unfortunately, pretty much all dance events in Ontario are still suspended, so for now we tango and waltz only in our homes. The good thing about dancing in your living room or in a small studio is that you don't need masks there.Do you wear a mask when you dance at home or only when you have sex? :-[
I suspect that 2021 flu numbers will be similar to 2020. Or did it get worse?COmparing Covid in 2020/2021 should be compared to earlier flu seasons like 2018/2019. Since everyone was isolated last year in 2020/2021, flu nearly died out. S0 it would be a unique year to compare Covid to flu.
LOL man. You can't make your point using math or statistics, just admit it—every time you turn to statistics, you make a mess of it. In essence you just want to show that C-19 is no more deadly than the flu to 0 through 50 year olds for no logical reason.
The math is just not on your side though. Even when compared to a well above average flu season death rate, COVID-19 kills far more people under age 50 and in 2021 COVID-19 was twice as deadly than 2020 for the under-50 population.
You're a serial spreader of misinformation regarding medical science as well as statistics. I don't take any of what you post on those topics seriously, but I use my valued time to hopefully give the gullible better resources for information with links to credible sources.
Cutting through the fluff, a 6 hour old uopdate on the new variant from one Katelyn Jetalina. Highly recommended.
https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/new-concerning-variant-b11529
Do you wear a mask when you dance at home or only when you have sex? :-[
COmparing Covid in 2020/2021 should be compared to earlier flu seasons like 2018/2019. Since everyone was isolated last year in 2020/2021, flu nearly died out. S0 it would be a unique year to compare Covid to flu.
I suspect that 2021 flu numbers will be similar to 2020. Or did it get worse?
I'm desperate for a break and vacation.
This from a guy who's retired...
Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating?
I have no doubt that you believe that the flu statistics for the past two years are "irrelevant" as they don't fit your narrative. You might wish to consider, however, the relevant fact that those are the only two years we have to compare two communicable diseases (COVID-19 and flu) in which they both coexisted for the same population under identical patterns of behavior for both society and that population. If you wish to compare COVID-19 deaths to flu deaths prior to the existence of COVID-19, it would be helpful to acknowledge and understand that societal interactions and population behaviors were very different in those previous years. Frankly, I don't find comparisons of COVID-19 to seasonal flu very useful, but those that want to minimize the deadly nature of COVID-19 keep grasping at the comparison for some reason.
The assertion that you shouldn't compare flu deaths over the past two years to COVID deaths over the past two years makes no sense. They are are the only two years in which flu viruses have existed under the same conditions as SARS-CoV-2 viruses. Did societal and behavioral changes such as masking, social distancing, reduced travel, gathering restrictions, etc. impact flu deaths? It would be an understatement to say that those mitigation strategies appear to have had an overwhelming impact on the extraordinary reduction in deaths involving flu which measures less than 700 for the U.S. to date in 2021 (*676 U.S. deaths involving flu in 2021 as of 12/1/2021 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)). If someone believes that those same mitigation strategies didn't also keep COVID-19 deaths from being a good deal higher than the hundreds of thousands of deaths recorded during the same period, I'd be interested in a logical explanation of why those behavioral changes and mitigation strategies affected the death toll from one disease and not the other.
Explained yesterday. For those that don't like to read, I've highlighted a few key observations.it's too late to bring in Pre 2020 flu statistics in this post. Your original post left them out and used only the atypical 2020 flu figures. So it appears that you cherry-picked the statistics to make your point and put your thumb on the scale. Your point would have been good enough using pre 2020. You should have used them.
If "there was little flu because everyone was isolating" and therefore less transmission and spread, one would expect that also had an impact on transmission and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus which causes COVID-19 disease. Given that one similarity of both flu and SARS-CoV-2 is that they are transmitted and spread in the same way, with SARS-CoV-2 being even more easily transmitted, it's certainly possible that the COVID-19 death toll and damage could have been much greater.
Fortunately, we'll never know how much worse it could have been than it was. We only know what death and damage it has caused under the circumstances which have existed. Unfortunately, in the war against the pandemic, there are those that have stupidly chosen to be on the side of the pandemic—the anti-vaccination, anti-mask, anti-expert, anti-public health agencies crowd are currently the ones that will blindly continue to make things worse and prevent faster progress in controlling the pandemic.
As for the value or method of comparing COVID-19 to seasonal flu, no matter how you make the comparison, regardless of what years you choose, regardless of the age group—COVID-19 is far deadlier than seasonal flu. To make matters worse, in addition to being far deadlier it is much more easily transmitted and spread.
If someone wants to compare the COVID-19 pandemic to influenza, then I would think comparing to flu pandemics, like the 1918 flu pandemic, is more appropriate. The preparedness and infrastructure that existed for dealing with COVID-19 was created in anticipation of a possible future deadly flu pandemic. Flu can be extremely deadly, we just haven't seen it in a form as deadly as COVID-19 in a hundred years, but in the future we certainly could.
it's too late to bring in Pre 2020 flu statistics in this post. Your original post left them out and used only the atypical 2020 flu figures. So it appears that you cherry-picked the statistics to make your point and put your thumb on the scale. Your point would have been good enough using pre 2020. You should have used them.
So now, going forward, we won't trust you when you start throwing statistics at us. Your arguments will become less believable. We'lll question whether you're cherry picking them again.
it's too late to bring in Pre 2020 flu statistics in this post. Your original post left them out and used only the atypical 2020 flu figures. So it appears that you cherry-picked the statistics to make your point and put your thumb on the scale. Your point would have been good enough using pre 2020. You should have used them.
So now, going forward, we won't trust you when you start throwing statistics at us. Your arguments will become less believable. We'lll question whether you're cherry picking them again.
Wait.. what???? Using identical time periods to compare 2 viruses that are both spread in similar ways isn't cherry picking. It's eliminating a variable. Are you serious with this???
Alan, are you serious? Stop and think why 20/21 are such lower flu years. Maybe because those measures put in place to help control COVID spread also helped control the spread of the flu. So in years 20/21, both the flu and COVID deaths were reduced by the exact same measures, so looking directly at the deaths during the exact same years both viruses were present is the most realistic way of comparing the two virus deaths.Deaths from airplane accidents went down as well as flu in 2020 due to measures taken by the government. But you want to compare things to normalcy, at least in addition to current figures for 2020.
Think about it for a bit and it’ll come to you. You appear to be an intelligent person.
... The fact is he cherry-picked the statistics to make Covid look worse. ...
You and TechTalk are exactly right. You must, if possible, use identical conditions which in this case means the same time period when isolation and other factors were in play equally. And since covid has been with us for only 2 years we must use that time period.Well then, due to measures taken by the government for Covid, auto deaths and accidents are up in 2020. Another example of the incompetency of the government and its mandates.
Deaths from airplane accidents went down as well as flu in 2020 due to measures taken by the government. But you want to compare things to normalcy, at least in addition to current figures for 2020.
The fact is he cherry-picked the statistics to make Covid look worse. We all do that. We pick articles and statistics to prove our opinion and leave it to the other side to prove theirs. I'm just pointing out that he's no different than the rest of us. We have to take his arguments with a grain of salt.
No, he didn't.That's your opinion. Why do you think you only have the facts and the truth? We all just pick the facts like everyone else to support our viewpoints. DIfferent facts support different viewpoints, that's why we have opinions. No one has a monopoly on the truth. Which is a better camera? Canon or Nikon? A better film? A better way to scan?
... when the government isn't interfering ...
But you DON'T want to compare things to normalcy--when there was no covid. You want to compare one disease to another.No. In my opinion, you want to compare each disease's statistics when normal operations are done for that disease. In the case of Covid that was 2020. In the case of flu, that was prior years. Let's say there were no deaths from flu in 2020 because of measures taken for COvid. How could you even compare deaths if you only use 2020 statistics? Frankly, the best way to show the figures are to show both sets - 2020 and prior. Then everyone would have a better handle on what happened during both periods. Tell the truth but tell all the truth.
Well, at least you're not embarrassed to display your bias, I'll give you that. :)Would imposing be better than interfering? :) My point was that in prior years, the government provided flu vaccines and care for people who caught it. There were generally accepted procedures set up for inoculation and treatment. WE should use those figures to see what a "normal" flu year looked like. Similarly, in 2020, for Covid, certain similar procedures although more drastic, were taken to handle Covid. It would be interesting to see what happens with normal government activity in each case for each disease. So you really have to compare different annual periods. What the government did in 2020 was not a normal year for flu statistics.
It's usually better not to decide the outcome beforehand if you want to truly understand things.
...Why do you think you only have the facts and the truth? We all just pick the facts like everyone else to support our viewpoints. No one has a monopoly on the truth.
Deaths from airplane accidents went down as well as flu in 2020 due to measures taken by the government. But you want to compare things to normalcy, at least in addition to current figures for 2020.
The fact is he cherry-picked the statistics to make Covid look worse. We all do that. We pick articles and statistics to prove our opinion and leave it to the other side to prove theirs. I'm just pointing out that he's no different than the rest of us. We have to take his arguments with a grain of salt.
The difference in your example is that airplane deaths have nothing to do with viruses, but the flu and COVID have everything to do with viruses.I gave you my answer but you don't want to accept my opinion. Read my last post again.
Alan, why do you think the flu death totals in 20/21 are so much lower than previous years. Now think hard, do you feel the reasons the flu deaths are lower also affects COVID deaths? So you feel comparing the flu deaths of 2018 where there were no masking, no distancing…in fact no measures in place with the 2020 Covid deaths when there were a lot of measures in place…that gives you a better picture than taking data from the same years where the same measures were in place for both the flu and Covid?
I gave you my answer but you don't want to accept my opinion. Read my last post again.
We all just pick the facts like everyone else to support our viewpoints.
No. Some people ascertain the facts in order to inform a viewpoint.There are two facts. Flu deaths when flu policies are in affect. And a second statistic, a one off, when Covid policies were in effect. Both statistics are true.
There are two facts. Flu deaths when flu policies are in affect. And a second statistic, a one off, when Covid policies were in effect. Both statistics are true.
My original statement which Tech I don't believe has refuted is that he was influenced to pick the fact that made covid look worse.
No, he picked a time when isolation measures were in place for both viruses, thus an scenario that affected by viruses equally.I said he cherry picked it because it made covid look worse. I don't believe he's denied that he was influenced by the fact that the 2020 flu numbers made covid look worse. If he does, then I'll apologize to him.
I said he cherry picked it because it made covid look worse. I don't believe he's denied that he was influenced by the fact that the 2020 flu numbers made covid look worse. If he does, then I'll apologize to him.
Maybe Covid looks worse because Covid IS worse.Yes and yes.
You have not answered my question:
Do the masking / distancing etc… measures affect the flu and Covid in the same manners?
Another one for you Alan. Do you feel without these distancing / masking measures in place that both the flu deaths and Covid deaths would have been much higher in 20/21?
Yes and yes.
That wasn't my point. My point was that Tech cherry picked 2020 because the lower flu deaths made covid look worse then if he picked a normal non-covid period which had fewer deaths too but not as few.
It’s not cherry picking…those years are the only ones where both viruses were active under the exact equivalent measures. Do you feel it’s more realistic to use flu data when zero measures are in place and compare against Covid figures when everyone is masked, distanced or in fact hiding in their basements?See my last post.
See my last post.
I gave you my answer but you don't want to accept my opinion. Read my last post again.
it's too late to bring in Pre 2020 flu statistics in this post. Your original post left them out and used only the atypical 2020 flu figures. So it appears that you cherry-picked the statistics to make your point and put your thumb on the scale. Your point would have been good enough using pre 2020. You should have used them.
So now, going forward, we won't trust you when you start throwing statistics at us. Your arguments will become less believable. We'lll question whether you're cherry picking them again.
The fact is he cherry-picked the statistics to make Covid look worse.
My original statement which Tech I don't believe has refuted is that he was influenced to pick the fact that made covid look worse.
I said he cherry picked it because it made covid look worse. I don't believe he's denied that he was influenced by the fact that the 2020 flu numbers made covid look worse. If he does, then I'll apologize to him.
That wasn't my point. My point was that Tech cherry picked 2020 because the lower flu deaths made covid look worse then [than] if he picked a normal non-covid period which had fewer deaths too but not as few.
For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu.
You still have not denied my assertion.
I already supplied, multiple times, the logic and motivation for the initial choice of a single data set which encompassed the entirety of the nearly two years of COVID-19 fatality data which exists and to which I supplied a link. You can find those here (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229690#msg1229690), and here (in which I also included flu data for the worst season in a decade (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229693#msg1229693), and once again here (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229795#msg1229795).
Finally, though I don't care about your presumptions or assertions regarding my motives; I will, in a post to follow, address your assertions regarding "cherry-picking" data and your concept of what that means.
You still have not denied my assertion.He like many, understand it is pointless. When this is actually done, what often occurs multiple times a day here, it make zero difference to you. Your assertions are rarely factual expect in your head. Facts exist even if you don't like them or can accept them in your head. ;)
I said he cherry picked it because it made covid look worse.Simply because, IT IS worse. I know you are purposely trying not to understand this, and you are really struggling with it.
I don't really care enough to feel any any obligation or need to deny anything that you may assert and it certainly isn't a priority for me. You can sit on your assertion until I find time to address your concept of "cherry-picking".It appears then that you cherry-picked the data.
In the meantime, you can contemplate what I've already written...
The supply of merry-go-rounds is limitless. But, the operator of the ride always outlasts the riders as they never tire of the repetition.
Stats Canada says more than 19-thousand Canadians lost their lives during COVID-19 than would have had the pandemic never happened.
While acknowledging more than 25-thousand people have died as a direct result of contracting the virus, Stats Can notes many others have died due to delayed medical procedures. It also suggests a rise in substance abuse during the pandemic has contributed to a number of deaths.
You win. You can outlast me on this merry-go-round.
You still have not denied my assertion.
It appears then that you cherry-picked the data.
He certainly did, but it sailed straight over your head.What post did he deny it? It's not there.
Same problem, and this from the man who can't read a wiki article to save his life.
As always,
read more, post less.
What post did he deny it? It's not there.You have this odd habit of asking questions of others, when your posting history and agenda show/prove, you have no desire or ability to accept any answer. No need to ask.
It's sometimes difficult to remain polite given some of the replies that I get in response, but I try as best I'm able.
And the country's average IQ continues its upward trend as unvaccinated Trumpists continue to drop like flies. I know I shouldn't make light of this; after all, stupidity should not carry a death sentence, but still......They're definitely the deplorables.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate
They're definitely the deplorables.Less and less each day (since you didn't read the best bits):
A new NPR analysis reveals that since May of this year, people living in counties that voted for Donald Trump have been almost three times as likely to die from Covid-19 than those living in counties that Joe Biden won.+1 for evolution!
NPR published its findings on Sunday after examining the number of deaths per 100,000 people across nearly 3,000 U.S. counties since May 2021, when vaccines became widely available. They found a disturbing trend: counties that voted for Trump with a 60 percent or more majority had 2.7 times the death rates as counties that Biden won. This data can partially be explained by another troubling finding: higher margins of victory for Trump correlated with lower vaccination rates. Even when controlling for age, a risk factor for dying of Covid, Trump county residents were still more likely to die of the virus than residents of Biden-supporting counties.
And the country's average IQ continues its upward trend as unvaccinated Trumpists continue to drop like flies. I know I shouldn't make light of this; after all, stupidity should not carry a death sentence, but still......
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate
They're definitely the deplorables.
If they want to kill themselves, OK. When their actions kill others, then "deplorable" is too gentle a description.They just need to work a LOT faster. ;)
If they want to kill themselves, OK. When their actions kill others, then "deplorable" is too gentle a description.
Frankly, I don't find comparisons of COVID-19 to seasonal flu very useful
For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu.
If they want to kill themselves, OK. When their actions kill others, then "deplorable" is too gentle a description.Yes. Democrats should continue to insult these people.
Yes. Democrats should continue to insult these people."The first human being who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization." -Sigmund Freud
Yes. Democrats should continue to insult these people.
CBC reported today 1,000 new Covid cases in Ontario. Even more worrisome is the fact that half of these infections occured in vaccinated people.
So the best protection remains social distancing.
Does anyone besides me ever ever take a step back and marvel at the fact that, seemingly, in the US the response to a virus depends on political affiliation. It's ludicrous.Yes, it is. This is:
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, “Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, who represent 41 percent of adults, now make up 60 percent of the adult unvaccinated population across the country.” In fact, the foundation found, political partisanship was the strongest predictor of someone’s vaccination status. As of Dec. 2, Kaiser discovered, a staggering 91 percent of Democrats are vaccinated with at least one dose of a Covid vaccine while just 59 percent of Republicans are.https://apple.news/AmA4cqDMwQLCx6iE-YWvJ_w
This information, while unsettling, should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to the GOP. Many Republicans and conservatives at Fox News have fully embraced vaccine misinformation while also downplaying the risks of the virus — like Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who told One America News on Saturday, “The best vaccine we’ve found is Mother Nature’s vaccine. It’s contracting the virus.”
Does anyone besides me ever ever take a step back and marvel at the fact that, seemingly, in the US the response to a virus depends on political affiliation. It's ludicrous.the Democrats started it. When Trump shut down travel from China in January of 2020, Biden called him a xenophobe and the Democrats called him a racist. On the other hand when Biden shut down travel recently from 6 black nations in Africa due to Omicron, the Republican party didn't call him a racist. I blame the Democrats for starting the political fight about covid.
the Democrats started it. When Trump shut down travel from China in January of 2020, Biden called him a xenophobe and the Democrats called him a racist. On the other hand when Biden shut down travel recently from 6 black nations in Africa due to Omicron, the Republican party didn't call him a racist. I blame the Democrats for starting the political fight about covid.Absurd. Wrong. Nothing new.
the Democrats started it.
Listen kids... I'll turn this car around right now and we won't get any ice cream. Now settle down back there and leave each other alone!
CBC reported today 1,000 new Covid cases in Ontario. Even more worrisome is the fact that half of these infections occured in vaccinated people.
So the best protection remains social distancing.
Yes. Democrats should continue to insult these people.
Yes. Democrats should continue to insult these people.Better than infecting them with a deadly disease! From “The Hill” that left leaning news organization:
Former President Trump came in contact with 500 people after he tested positive for COVID-19 last year, according to a recently published Washington Post analysis. What a guy: and he does not “own it” but should.
Trump came into contact with 500 people during the seven days after he tested positive for the virus and before he was hospitalized due to COVID-19.
The analysis claims that Trump and his former chief of staff Mark Meadows took a “reckless” and “potentially dangerous” approach to dealing with the virus.
Why "Democrats?" Unless you think that informed and intelligent people are all Democrats.Yes, keep beating those chowderheads with a two-by-four until they come around and straighten up and fly right. They just aren't paying attention.
But I agree that insulting people never does any good. But when these chowderheads are immune to facts, statistics, and logic and continue fucking up my country then it is really hard to constrain the insults.
They just aren't paying attention.
Well, at least that statement is true. Now, can the political discussions move somewhere else instead of trying to hijack this thread?Good luck with your shots. I took mine a few weeks ago. We deplorable Republicans want to keep up with science, you know. :)
Now... I have to run to my appointment for my booster shot and flu vaccination... and that's true as well.
Yes, keep beating those chowderheads with a two-by-four until they come around and straighten up and fly right. They just aren't paying attention.
Yes, keep beating those chowderheads with a two-by-four until they come around and straighten up and fly right. They just aren't paying attention.No need for two-by-fours, these morons just don't get sick fast enough:
Recent polling shows that partisanship is now this single strongest identifying predictor of whether someone is vaccinated. Polling also shows that mistrust in official sources of information and exposure to misinformation, about both COVID-19 and the vaccines, run high among Republicans.And their inability to pay attention is well known here.
"An unvaccinated person is three times as likely to lean Republican as they are to lean Democrat," says Liz Hamel, vice president of public opinion and survey research at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health policy think tank that tracks attitudes toward vaccination. Political affiliation is now the strongest indicator of whether someone is vaccinated, she says: "If I wanted to guess if somebody was vaccinated or not and I could only know one thing about them, I would probably ask what their party affiliation is."
Well, NYC mayor DeBlasio who leaves office nextt month and wants to run for governor, just outdid Biden forcing all NYC employees to get vaccinated or else based on Omicron danger even though the science doesn't support him yet. Who needs scientists when political careers are on the line.Good for him! We need such people who base their political careers on listening to actual scientists and taking their advise. Unlike the last administration. Got Bleach or horse dewormer Alan? :P
Well, NYC mayor DeBlasio who leaves office nextt month and wants to run for governor, just outdid Biden forcing all NYC employees to get vaccinated or else based on Omicron danger even though the science doesn't support him yet. Who needs scientists when political careers are on the line.
Well, NYC mayor DeBlasio who leaves office nextt month and wants to run for governor, just outdid Biden forcing all NYC employees to get vaccinated or elseJust to show how out of touch this guy is (not DeBlasio):
Almost 70% of Americans want vaccine mandatesAnd:
Americans overwhelmingly support travel bans on countries where omicron has been detected, despite the open condemnation of the measure by the World Health Organization and public health experts around the world.https://qz.com/2098426/almost-70-percent-of-americans-want-vaccine-mandates/
No one is going to do the research but I wonder how many Covid anti-vaxxers happily take vaccines for tropical diseases when they go on vacation to those places.It will send many NYC small businesses out of business. He doesn't care about that. His decision was political, not scientific or economic. He wants to run for governor next year as he's leaving the mayorship. This is why so many don't trust the process and the politicians.
Honestly Alan, why all this worry about mandated vaccines. Countries requires all kinds of things from their citizens. Hell, the US sent over 50,000 to die in Vietnam, that seemed like a pretty big ask to me. A vaccine seems like small potatoes by comparison.
It will send many NYC small businesses out of business. He doesn't care about that. His decision was political, not scientific or economic. He wants to run for governor next year as he's leaving the mayorship. This is why so many don't trust the process and the politicians.
Good luck with your shots.
He doesn't care about that. His decision was political
How many small businesses are going under because people won't get vaccinated?There are 183,000 businesses affected. Mayor DeBlasio has no real plan and is to go into effect five days before he leaves office. He never coordinated it with the business community which is what every smart mayor does to keep New York's economy humming. No one really knows just how bad the damage will be as he just announced it. But if enacted and enforced, it will kill jobs, shut down businesses, chase visitors away from NYC and hurt its economy just when it's starting to reemerge from Covid 19 downturn. It's all political. Too little, too late. DeBlasio's a dope. Good riddance to him. My guess is it will be challenged in court like Bidens' OSHA employer mandates for vaccinations and dying a deserved death as well. I can't imagine the new Mayor starting in January enforcing it. He'll just let it die.
Now... Why do you keep highjacking this thread to convert it into a political forum?All that's left of the virus is politics. That's all everyone is talking about. How to enforce vaccinations, whether to have mandates, etc. How it's going to affect the economy? Look at the market. It dropped 1000 points on Omicron. Now it's gone back up again because it seems Omicron isn;t so bad. That's what all the discussions are about. Few people are talking about cases or deaths. Most everyone is talking about getting on with their lives, going on vacation, traveling, the economy, the stock market, and the politics of mandates. Did Mayor DeBlasio impose his new mandate because of health or his politics of running for governor of NY? I'm surprised Fauci hasn't yet announced running for something.
How many small businesses are going under because people won't get vaccinated?Or very sick or dead?
All that's left of the virus is politics."I doubt you can understand the magnitude of the stupidity in your statement". - Robert Jordan, The Gathering Storm
Thanks. All of my Moderna vaccinations have hit me like a ton of bricks and this is no exception. No complaints though. I'm happy to be getting the vaccinations.My first two vaccines were Pfzer, the 2nd one wasn't fun on day two but not bad. When I got my booster, I was asked which I wanted, I asked the nurse to 'pick' (I'm not longer vaccine developer <g>), she recommended Moderna. The 2nd day was worse but nothing I couldn't handle and had made time to simply lay in bed all day. Like you, no complaints though. I'm happy to be getting the vaccinations.
How many small businesses are going under because people won't get vaccinated?James, I thought we're supposed to follow the science and not politics. Omnicron has not shown the danger of earlier variants. Yet this Bozo is playing politics with this by creating the most Draconian mandates in the country, all because he's running for governor of New York. He's decided what's needed. How's that following the science?
All that's left of the virus is politics.From Alan on Earth 1.5 (waiting for arrival on Earth on someday):
James, I thought we're supposed to follow the science and not politics.Assumptions without all the data:
Omnicron has not shown the danger of earlier variants.
James, I thought we're supposed to follow the science and not politics. Omnicron has not shown the danger of earlier variants. Yet this Bozo is playing politics with this by creating the most Draconian mandates in the country, all because he's running for governor of New York. He's decided what's needed. How's that following the science?
Why do you think it's solely driven my omicron? Or politics? Vaccine mandates work. (https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20211110/covid-vaccine-mandates-working) But here we are again - a democrat does something (pretty much anything) and you automagically assume that it's driven by political self interest at the expense of their constituents. Listen, I'm all for freedom. If someone wants to take a gun into a bulletproof room and aim it at their own head, be my guest. But what's being argued for by Trumpy types is that they have the right to wander around holding a thousand-round gun with 999 blanks and one live round, and randomly pull the trigger at strangers.
Unbelievable, but that's where we are.
It's not science, it's politics.You got your degree in science or political science where? Or any degree, high school or otherwise.
... And that adds to the suspicion of many people who then don't want to take the vaccine. Now I don't agree with them. I've taken mine including the booster. And you might call them conspiracists. ...
I read one political commentary (sorry, no longer know the link or who wrote it) who separated anti-vaxxers into two broad groups.
Interviews this past week with dozens of people in 17 states presented a portrait of the unvaccinated in the United States, people driven by a wide mix of sometimes overlapping fears, conspiracy theories, concern about safety and generalized skepticism of powerful institutions tied to the vaccines, including the pharmaceutical industry and the federal government. . . .
Though some states like Missouri and Arkansas have significantly lagged the nation in vaccination rates, unvaccinated Americans are, to varying degrees, everywhere: In Cook County, Ill., which includes Chicago, 51 percent of residents are fully vaccinated. Los Angeles County is barely higher, at 53 percent. In Wake County, N.C., part of the liberal, high-tech Research Triangle area, the vaccination rate is 55 percent.
I read one political commentary (sorry, no longer know the link or who wrote it) who separated anti-vaxxers into two broad groups. The first group is from the MAGA, freedom-fetish, militia AR15-lovers crowd, and they are the ones we tend to allude to in these discussions by default. But he described a second group, people who after a lifetime of being lied to about the Gulf of Tonkin, WMD, semi-secret wars around the world, take the point of view that American governments can't be trusted about anything. It's hard not to have some sympathy for that point of view, I have to reluctantly admit. :)There are still loads of Americans who think Pres Kennedy was killed by the CIA. And then there are those who think our landing on the moon was filmed on a Hollywood stage set. Isn't Elvis still walking around? :)
I heard an even different point of view expressed by Michael Moore in the introductory remarks during a recent podcast. At first he was wary about the vaccines himself because he was worried that Trump really had helped create them, in which case Moore assumed they could easily be part of some con, like Trump University for instance. But after informing himself that the researchers and labs that had developed and tested the vaccines had been doing that work for years and that really Trump didn't have much to do with them directly at all that he decided he was ok with the vaccines.
There are still loads of Americans who think Pres Kennedy was killed by the CIA. And then there are those who think our landing on the moon was filmed on a Hollywood stage set.So your point is, there are very stuipd Americans? We (the royal we and most of your readers here) know this from extensive experience. ;)
Isn't Elvis still walking around?:)You've just proved my point!
That's probably a gross oversimplification. It's difficult to get reliable statistical information (at least here in the United States) on why some people are declining to be vaccinated, but there has been some reliable reporting (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-americans.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuonUktbfqohkT1UYAibIRp85rwebnr3SxqI1jXT_KiGJRDoHxuEYGYmL8kHWI6p_Yt95lxKqeOh8Cp59Dvpj0r0YeEV3VwijppbDxZleKXU7-dj2Vzw_hteQU71gtG-0YzT8I7YunrDi5RnZamPrS7WfhSN6XHttpJVlfFmu0HMalOySQqMuhI4Ijbp2DYt6RDwDeCGKo_Dibh14M96EZRncgRIkD6AbAXqA2I7BtM9TNVlaGlnET3tg4W0j69g6ON4fP6_3LxRIa9OAwPuW2MQyN0tLHc2E93M1&smid=url-share) that suggests many of the holdouts are not motivated by political ideology.Robert Kennedy Jr, a Democrat and liberal and nephew of the late President Kennedy, is a fervent anti-vaxxer, and not just about Covid. So yes, it doesn't necessarily follow political affiliations. I'm a Republican but wholly believe in vaccines although I had stopped taking the annual flu when I seemed to have gotten the flu afterward about twelve years ago. I took it again this year because my daughter gave birth and suggested it would be better for my grandson's protection.
The New York Times story in the link above was last updated in October, but there is at least some anecdotal evidence that the spread of the Delta variant of the coronavirus and the threat posed by the Omicron variant have motivated many of the "persuadable reluctants" to finally get at least a first dose of one of the coronavirus vaccines. And the fact that young children are now eligible for the vaccines is improving the overall vaccination rates (https://ourworldindata.org/us-states-vaccinations).
As in many other democratic countries, there are right-wing populists in the United States who claim they are refusing to be vaccinated for political reasons—their actual behavior is difficult to survey accurately and some of them may falsely be proclaiming their refusal simply to vent their anger at the "elites"—but we've always had some proportion of the population which is opposed to being vaccinated against various pathogens because of religious convictions, fear of injections, or simple ignorance. Unfortunately, because of the infectiousness of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the severity of the disease it often produces, infected "anti-vaxxers" at times have overwhelmed the hospital capacity in parts of the country—and, of course, they pose a threat to those around them.
Also, those that claim Trumpers, Republicans, conservatives, are against it can't explain why there are so many Europeans opposed to vaccination who know nothing about US politics.Because their leaders act like Trump (remember the 500 people he came into contact with when he KNEW he tested positive for Covid-19? Of course you don't):
Leaked video shows former UK aide joke about alleged party during lockdown
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson is facing fierce criticism after a leaked video obtained by CNN affiliate ITV News shows senior Downing Street staff joking about an alleged Christmas party last year, for his staff during last year's lockdown.
... can't explain why there are so many Europeans opposed to vaccination who know nothing about US politics.
Because stupidity isn't confined to America.Only 29% it appears, at least in terms of stupidity and vaccines. I'm rounding down as there are a few that can't get one for legitimate reasons.
Why do you think it's solely driven my omicron? Or politics? Vaccine mandates work. (https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20211110/covid-vaccine-mandates-working) But here we are again - a democrat does something (pretty much anything) and you automagically assume that it's driven by political self interest at the expense of their constituents. Listen, I'm all for freedom. If someone wants to take a gun into a bulletproof room and aim it at their own head, be my guest. But what's being argued for by Trumpy types is that they have the right to wander around holding a thousand-round gun with 999 blanks and one live round, and randomly pull the trigger at strangers.One other thing. NYC's constitution didn't make the mayor a king any more than the president is a king. Neither can mandate things except in certain instances.
Unbelievable, but that's where we are.
One other thing. NYC's constitution didn't make the mayor a king any more than the president is a king. Neither can mandate things except in certain instances.George Washington wasn't a king. Yet he mandated vaccines.
To counter both the fear and the actual disease itself George Washington ordered a bold move on February 6, 1777, to have the entire Continental Army inoculated. At this juncture it became a matter of policy. This act alone may have saved the Revolution. The process was simple. A physician lanced one of the infected patient’s pustules with a knife or scalpel and then inserted the infected blade under the skin of a healthy person. Generally the inoculated person contracted the disease, but in a much milder form.
The policy of inoculation was written by Washington in a directive to the Continental Army’s Medical Director, Dr. William Shippen. The directive ordered that all troops coming through Philadelphia were to be inoculated. Urgency was at stake with Washington writing, “Necessity not only authorizes but seems to require the measure, for should the disorder infect the Army . . . we should have more to dread from it, than from the Sword of the Enemy." Washington informed Congress a month later of the plan, which was carried out after that covertly, so the British were unaware of what Washington was doing. Washington chose to have his soldiers inoculated during the winter for strategic reasons. Fighting had ebbed and most campaigning took place during warmer weather. By inoculating his troops during the winter Washington adroitly gave his troops enough time to recover from the effects of inoculation before fighting commenced. Most of the inoculations took place at the Morristown, New Jersey encampment and in facilities in Philadelphia. The risk was enormous as less than a quarter of those serving at the time in the Continental Army had contracted the disease naturally.
Washington was always a better strategist than tactician. Even though he lost more battles than he won he had command of the larger picture. In this case he scored a seemingly impossible victory against an invisible enemy.
The courts have been ruling Biden's mandates illegal as well for the similar reason it requires an act of Congress, at least.Too bad 'The Hill' didn't spell out the entire story:
Pavlich: Biden gets walloped by the courts
https://thehill.com/opinion/opinion/584818-pavlich-biden-gets-walloped-by-the-courts
One other thing. NYC's constitution didn't make the mayor a king any more than the president is a king.
NY City does not have a constitution.Funneling the inner Klein:
NY City does not have a constitution.You're right. It has a charter. But the mayor still has to follow its rules. My point hasn't changed. The mayor isn't king. NYS has a constitution. Cities within its jurisdiction have to follow the state's constitution as well. Governors aren't kings either.
You're right. It has a charter. But the mayor still has to follow its rules. My point hasn't changed. The mayor isn't king. NYS has a constitution. Cities within its jurisdiction have to follow the state's constitution as well. Governors aren't kings either.You will illustrate where in the NYS Constitution it states Bloomberg can not invoke such a mandate.
Under the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions over nearly 200 years, state governments have the primary authority to control the spread of dangerous diseases within their jurisdictions. The 10th Amendment, which gives states all powers not specifically given to the federal government, allows them the authority to take public health emergency actions, such as setting quarantines and business restrictions.
NY City does not have a constitution.The question is whether the NYC mayor has the unilateral right to impose this mandate and whether it's gone too far or the opposite, too selective. A previous mayor tried to impose unilateral health rules and was shot down. Of course, the circumstances aren't exactly the same. But the question still is whether he can do it without the City council or state legislature authority.
No. But he did take a thread on vaccines and convert it into another forum for his political views... with the cooperation of others.True.
All that's left of the virus is politics.That was even more absurd than when he told us "all original prints are 300dpi". ;D
30-year-old with COVID loses arms, legs after being given choice to amputate limbs or diehttps://www.newsweek.com/30-year-old-covid-loses-arms-legs-after-being-given-choice-amputate-limbs-die-1657822?amp=1
Sen. Ron Johnson has tried to undermine public confidence in Covid vaccines, but he recommends gargling with mouthwash to help "kill the coronavirus."https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/covid-ron-johnson-touts-highly-dubious-mouthwash-strategy-n1285651
Edit: we (the US) are days away from 800,000 reported deaths from Covid-19.
Edit: this is another example of why the US is doing so poorly:https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/covid-ron-johnson-touts-highly-dubious-mouthwash-strategy-n1285651
I suppose it's safer than injecting bleach. 🤮
Be interesting to find out if he or his family have been vaccinated.He isn't and had Covid-19.
On Thursday, U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson said he had declined the vaccine because he had COVID-19 in October.https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2021/03/17/ron-johnson-declines-vaccine/
I have just heard that a good friend has died of Covid in our hospital. She has died far too young. For the last few years she has been caring for her husband who contracted cancer and then developed dementia. No-one thought he would survive her.Sorry to hear about your friend. My son-in-law just lost his 63-year-old aunt from some issue following a hip replacement. I've been triple injected also as has my wife. I've also taken the regular flu shot. I have to admit, I don't wear my mask very often. If I'm inside, I might wear it depending on how crowded it is. I try to stay away from others.
I have no desire to get Covid, and have no wish whatsoever to give it to someone else should I get it and pass it on in the interval between getting it and having a positive test. It affects different people in different ways that we cannot predict.
I will therefore try to behave responsibly, and as part of that will wear a mask whenever I should.
I am all for personal freedom, but will take it badly if someone else uses that as an excuse or reason for affecting my health or wellbeing.
Jonathan
Sorry to hear about your friend. My son-in-law just lost his 63-year-old aunt from some issue following a hip replacement. I've been triple injected also as has my wife. I've also taken the regular flu shot. I have to admit, I don't wear my mask very often. If I'm inside, I might wear it depending on how crowded it is. I try to stay away from others.
I just checked the figures. One person died of Covid in my county in New Jersey in the last week. It's been averaging about 0-2 deaths per week since June including a couple of 3's. Much higher before. So I guess it's been pretty safe here. The cases seem to be climbing, however, although the death rates stay very low. I really wonder if the masks are making any difference? I suspect the ones dying haven't had the vaccinations.
I don't know if it is greater compliance in wearing the masks or more strict social distancing in Canada, but Canadian deaths are more than 3 times lower (per 1M) as the US counts. (2443 deaths in USA vs 782 deaths in Canada - for 1 million population).Or perhaps, more Canadians (and to Jonathan's post those in his country) actually accept data and science despite their political POVs.
I don't know if it is greater compliance in wearing the masks or more strict social distancing in Canada, but Canadian deaths are more than 3 times lower (per 1M) than the US counts. (2443 deaths in USA vs 782 deaths in Canada - for 1 million population).Over what period? What is the link?
In England, it is mandatory now to wear masks in shops, cinemas, theatres, churches and anywhere there is a large number of people. There is very high compliance where I live in southern England.Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.
The scientists here believe the data are showing the Omicron doubling time is 2 to 3 days. The news this evening is that Omicron seems to be spreading much faster than Delta. 2 doses of vaccine more than 3 months ago do not seem to be very effective in preventing infection but a booster does have a mitigating effect. The First Minister in Scotland has just announced that there could be a Tsunami of Omicron infections within a week.
Jonathan
PS. Omicron is an anagram of moronic. There is a view that if people behave like that then they are more likely to get it.
Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.If only you didn't resign from your old job at the W.H.O.....
Some other variants with Greek letters do not reach those classification levels, and the W.H.O. also skipped two letters just before Omicron — “Nu” and “Xi” — leading to speculation about whether “Xi” was avoided in deference to the Chinese president, Xi Jinping.https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/world/africa/omicron-covid-greek-alphabet.html
“‘Nu’ is too easily confounded with ‘new,’” Tarik Jasarevic, a W.H.O. spokesman, said on Saturday. “And ‘Xi’ was not used because it is a common last name.”
He added that the agency’s best practices for naming diseases suggest avoiding “causing offense to any cultural, social, national, regional, professional or ethnic groups**.”
Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.Thank you sharing with us your strong opinion about a subject you’ve demonstrated you know so little about.
Over what period? What is the link?
In England, it is mandatory now to wear masks in shops, cinemas, theatres, churches and anywhere there is a large number of people. There is very high compliance where I live in southern England.
The scientists here believe the data are showing the Omicron doubling time is 2 to 3 days.
Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.
From the beginning of the pandemic. Here is the worldometer link:Wouldn't more recent statistics better reflect the current situation to determine which methods might be working the best? It might be similar to showing statistics right after Pearl Harbor as to who's winning WWII. I found this site that compares more recent trends. Things seem to be trending worse in Europe.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
You can click on any of the headings in the table and sort it by that column. Sorted by Number of deaths/1M, USA is ranked 20 and Canada 94.
Interestingly, many of the small European countries show up on in the first ten group - Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechia. Montenegro, Bosnia and Romania. The top place goes to Peru with almost 6,000 deaths/1M.
From the beginning of the pandemic. Here is the worldometer link:As you can see, it doesn't follow his conformation bias, so it's worthless and wrong and will be called out as a lie (we've seen that in the past too). Then followed with questions who's correct answer(s) will be ignored. Wash, rinse, repeat.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Wouldn't more recent statistics better reflect the current situation to determine which methods might be working the best? It might be similar to showing statistics right after Pearl Harbor as to who's winning WWII. I found this site that compares more recent trends. Things seem to be trending worse in Europe.
https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/
Or perhaps, more Canadians (and to Jonathan's post those in his country) actually accept data and science despite their political POVs.
Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.As far as I know, you are the only one calling it "Omnicron." There is no "Omni" in "Omicron," which is the Greek letter.
As far as I know, you are the only one calling it "Omnicron."Funneling my inner Klein again:
"No, everyone calls it Omnicron. Everyone knows it is called Omnicron! Nobody cares about Omicron; and it's all political anyway." ;D“The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter. ‘tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.” - Mark Twain
I thought it was a fundamental job of any government, whatever shade, to keep the population safe, whether the aggressor is human or a virus.It is indeed, sadly, not so much in the USA any more. But Covid-19 is doing it's best to reduce the population largely causing this problem. It is too bad it is taking others with it, and affecting the hero's here: hospital workers and the like. :'(
Jonathan
As far as I know, you are the only one calling it "Omnicron." There is no "Omni" in "Omicron," which is the Greek letter.You're right. It's Omicron. It's all Greek to me. In any case, Xi would have been easier and more to the point. :)
It's all Greek to me.We (and I believe with solid evidence, others) are in violent agreement on that!
Xi would have been easier and more to the pointIf Germany gets Omicron under control, is it OK to call it the Klein variant?
The latest death stats look even worse (for USA). The shown numbers are absolute, so relative figures are around 4:1 or 5:1.If it wasn't winter, I might move to Canada to be safe. :)
Dec 9 - USA 1088, Canada 24
Dec 8 - USA 1366, Canada 25
Wouldn't more recent statistics better reflect the current situation to determine which methods might be working the best? It might be similar to showing statistics right after Pearl Harbor as to who's winning WWII. I found this site that compares more recent trends. Things seem to be trending worse in Europe.
https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/
One possible explanation for the difference between USA and Canda is that USA vaccination rate is 61% and Canada's rate is 77%.The weather's been nicer and warmer lately for this time of year, at least in the US. So people are getting out more. How's it been up there? My wife's been suggesting a vacation in Florida in February. I'd hate flying with a mask. But I suppose I can do it for three hours. She must be getting really stir crazy for her to recommend it. She still hasn't joined me in eating out yet. So she must be getting desperate.
The other possibility is that in Canada there are fewer churchgoers than in USA, and consequently fewer people are exposed to others in group settings.
Also, eating out in Canada is relatively more expensive than in USA, so fewer people get compromised while going out for a dinner in a restaurant.
The weather's been nicer and warmer lately for this time of year, at least in the US. So people are getting out more. How's it been up there? My wife's been suggesting a vacation in Florida in February. I'd hate flying with a mask. Bud t I suppose I can do it for three hours. She must be getting really stir crazy for her to recommend it. She still hasn't joined me in eating out yet. So she must be getting desperate.
The last few years the winters in Ontario have been milder than in previous years, We had some snow earlier this week, but it pretty much disappeared by now. Last month, after almost two years USA allowed finally driving through the border from Canada, but it is still a hassle to travel. Not to mention the covid risk and greater expense. It might make more sense to buy thermal underwear, fur hat and a warm coat and stay here.I suggested the Bahamas rather than Florida since the latter can sometimes be cold in the winter. The Caribbean tends to stay warmer even then. But then, she said that's foreign. Who knows if we'd get stuck with some new rule to get tested to get back into the USA. We might have to divert to cold Canada. And we wouldn't have taken our fur hats.
OMICRON VARIANTMeanwhile, reality and facts:
The AP Interview: CDC Chief Says Omicron Mostly Mild So Far
Delta continues to be dominant with over 99% of COVID-19 cases in the US -- a current average of about 103,800 cases per day and 1,100 deaths per day, CDC Chief said Tuesday.
I suggested the Bahamas rather than Florida since the latter can sometimes be cold in the winter. The Caribbean tends to stay warmer even then.
¿What about México? Friendly, industrious people (you'll never encounter harder workers), generally quite conservative: I'm sure you would fit right in. ¿Or quizás Cuba? Always warm and just a short hop from Florida.Mexico's beautiful as are its people. Acapulco, Mexico City, Cozumel diving, the Pyramids outside Mexico City, Museo de Archeologico. Unfortunately, the two vacations I was there, I got Montezuma's revenge. But that's still out of the country. What will be the rules for getting back? Ditto Cuba? Maybe I can afford to buy a used American car there. Can't get one here. :)
Enlarge your horizons and open your mind.
Mexico's beautiful as are its people. Acapulco, Mexico City, Cozumel diving, the Pyramids outside Mexico City, Museo de Archeologico. Unfortunately, the two vacations I was there, I got Montezuma's revenge. But that's still out of the country. What will be the rules for getting back? Ditto Cuba? Maybe I can afford to buy a used American car there. Can't get one here. :)
Try Dukoral. Have travelled all over without any stomach problems.Thanks for the suggestion. We did Hawaii cruising for a week plus an extra 4 days in Oahu at a Waikiki Beach hotel. You might be able to get a good deal with Norwegian Cruise. I'd still be nervous about Covid. But if everyone is vaxed up, it may be pretty safe.
Heading to Mexico in Feb and was planning on Hawaii in April, but most likely cancel as costs there have sky rocketed lately. Cuba sounds like a great alternative.
Thanks for the suggestion. We did Hawaii cruising for a week plus an extra 4 days in Oahu at a Waikiki Beach hotel. You might be able to get a good deal with Norwegian Cruise. I'd still be nervous about Covid. But if everyone is vaxed up, it may be pretty safe.
Cruising is not my thing. I typically rent either a house or condo on Kauai and drive to different places. Cost of a car rental for 2 weeks is about $2,500. I rented a car in Croatia for 20 days for $245.
$2,500 for 2 weeks car rental is an obscene amount. Could be because of the democrat governor. But maybe that price was just transitory.
I wonder how much will Hertz charge there next year for Tesla.
It’s been that price for a year now. The excuse is the rental companies dumped much of their fleet when travel to Hawaii dropped because of Covid, now with the car shortage, they are having a tough time filling their fleets. That’s the official story, but my gut says greed comes into play here.
It’s been that price for a year now. The excuse is the rental companies dumped much of their fleet when travel to Hawaii dropped because of Covid, now with the car shortage, they are having a tough time filling their fleets. That’s the official story, but my gut says greed comes into play here.
Gwynne Dyer's commentary on Omicron and travel bans, https://gwynnedyer.com/2021/covid-19-digital-peasants-and-the-ignorant-rich/ (https://gwynnedyer.com/2021/covid-19-digital-peasants-and-the-ignorant-rich/).At least we didn't call Biden a bigot for banning travel from Black nations as democrats and Biden called Trump a racist and xenophobe when he banned travel from China. The Democrats made a political charge for every Trump decision and policy move.
No. But he did take a thread on vaccines and convert it into another forum for his political views... with the cooperation of others.He did it again.
At least we didn't call Biden a bigot for banning travel from Black nations as democrats and Biden called Trump a racist and xenophobe when he banned travel from China. The Democrats made a political charge for every Trump decision and policy move.Alan: Trump is a racist. Was, long before Covid-19 existed.
$2,500 for 2 weeks car rental is an obscene amount. Could be because of the democrat governor. But maybe that price was just transitory.I just checked AARP where I'm a member. For a week in February 2022, they want $105 a day for a Chrysler 300. That's not too bad considering. There are other deals going up to $200 a day or so. But what's wrong with a Chrysler 300?
I wonder how much will Hertz charge there next year for Tesla.
$2,500 for 2 weeks car rental is an obscene amount. Could be because of the democrat governor.
Seriously? The governor? I do not know that I have every heard a stupider comment.
An interesting state by state comparison of Covid responses, https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/ (https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/).I have been highlighting for two years, that there are both health and economic issues that were and are still paramount. Unfortunately, the press and Democrats pushed health issues to the detriment of economic ones. They concluded people who were concerned about economic issues were somehow evil, a political position started because it was a presidential election year. Most people who are concerned about economic problems also understood there was a balanced approach one needed in taking appropriate action for both problems.
Sadly, the Worldometer 7-day moving day average of US daily deaths is at 1200 or so at the moment and seems to be tracking new daily infections. I guess there was some hope that this new wave might show a relative decrease in daily deaths compared to daily infections, which would show lowering morbidity, but that's not happening yet. Even if the recent variant is less deadly, the lower vaccination rate in the US means that significant numbers of people are still at risk from the original Covid version(s). Future research may sort out all these numbers more accurately than we can now.From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly. Statistics soon will tell. It may turn out like the regular flu. Officials are not treating it like the flu however insisting on masking up again. The problem is many people are done with the mask. Even here in NJ, the democrat governor Murphy has indicated people have "had it" with masks.
The history of US daily deaths (7-day avg) is interesting. Its lowest level since the onset of Covid was at about 245 per day in late July 2021. 245 per day works out to about 89,000 per year, which is well above the annual number of deaths due to flu (about 35,000) and is also significantly above the worst flu year (about 60,000).
New infections in Canada are also rapidly increasing, presumably doe to the new variant, but with no corresponding increase in deaths, yet. Difficult to know how to interpret this data. It could be because of high vaccination rates in Canada but it could also mean that the new variant is less deadly. I don't know what percentage of current infections are due to the new variant.
... people have "had it" with masks.
If people go without masks, get Delta or Omicron and spread it, that could increase hospitalisations and the numbers isolating, hence off work. The worry in the UK is that more taking up beds in hospitals will affect other needs such as cancer treatments. More isolating or unwell and not at work will affect the economy.
Personal freedom or gross selfishness?
Jonathan
From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly. Statistics soon will tell.So you don't know. You assume.
The problem is many people are done with the mask. Even here in NJ, the democrat governor Murphy has indicated people have "had it" with masks.Many people are done with assuming, not following science and political stupidity and yet....more examples here of all three.
From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly.
It may turn out like the regular flu.
Officials are not treating it like the flu however...
...insisting on masking up again.
The problem is many people are done with the mask.
Who wrote that and where did you read it?
In their recent report, WHO stated that Omicron infections appear to be "less severe" than Delta, however the transmissibilty is much higher.
A few days ago, UK reported their first Omicron death. That contrasts with 146 other Covid deaths in that country just yesterday - presumably majority caused by the earlier Covid variants.
In addition, many recent deaths can be attributed to indirect effects of covid. So even if Omicron is less deadly, if it causes more hospitalizations due to a wider spread, this prevents the doctors and hospitals from treating other patients. Regardless of the covid variant, it doesn't make for cheerful Christmas.
https://fortune.com/2021/12/13/who-omicron-covid-variant-outpace-delta-uk-cases-vaccine-booster/
Not sure what that even means. Have they had with anti-biotics? Have they had it with chemo for cancer? Have they had it with stopping at red lights? It's incoherent.It means they're willing to take their chances and not wear a mask. Especially those who have been vaccinated. What's incoherent about that?
Who wrote that and where did you read it?Les said it's not as deadly, See above. ::)
I didn't ask Les where he read the statement that he made. I asked you where you read the statement that you made.Read his link.
If you won't or can't supply a source, it won't be a surprise or the first time.
It means they're willing to take their chances and not wear a mask. Especially those who have been vaccinated. What's incoherent about that?
Nothing incoherent, merely stupid.Why is it stupid? People who have been vaccinated are not the ones dying in hospitals.
Why is it stupid? People who have been vaccinated are not the ones dying in hospitals.
Why is it stupid? People who have been vaccinated are not the ones dying in hospitals.Maybe, but they can still get it though not so seriously. If they get it they can spread it. Very selfish.
I apologize. In my haste, I read it (of course, incorrectly) as unvaccinated.No problem.
Maybe, but they can still get it though not so seriously. If they get it they can spread it. Very selfish.Aren't you pointing your finger at the wrong group? Why are you calling the vaccinated selfish? I've gotten both initial shots and immediately got the booster when available as did my wife. If the unvaccinated get vaccinated, then they won't have to worry either. Very selfish of the unvaccinated to make people who went through the trouble to protect themselves and society be forced to wear a mask because they don't want to get vaccinated.
Jonathan
Alan, I was answering your point about the vaccinated who in my view should wear masks. The unvaccinated are being extremely selfish not wearing masks unless there is a medical reason. With the predictions about Omicron coming out of USA it will be interesting to see what happens. I sincerely hope there is not a surge.Johnathan, I was in NYC yesterday for the day for some medical tests. Interestingly, most New Yorkers on the street wear masks compared to more not wearing them here in Central New Jersey. NYC is dying. If they start another shutdown, it will put the final nail in the coffin for it. NYC depends on its hospitality business- theatres, museums, great restaurants, hotels. 65 million people visited it in 2019. Today, few are coming. Everyone is going broke. Retail stores, restaurants, etc have few customers even if they're fortunate to be open. Forcing masks will keep workers at home using zoom even more. It will cause the commercial real estate market to collapse as current leases end and are not renewed. MY son-in-law who had been working in a law firm in Manhattan has worked at home the entire Covid period. He was supposed to go back recently and work three days a week in the office and two at home per week. But his firm extended the 5-day stay-at-home period again until next year because of government mandates. When workers don't work in Manhattan, office space is superfluous. Restaurants close. Who needs cabs? Subways and commuter railroads lose income. Tax revenue to support social services disappear. The poor and low-income lose their jobs. It snowballs.
Jonathan
Johnathan, I was in NYC yesterday for the day for some medical tests. Interestingly, most New Yorkers on the street wear masks compared to more not wearing them here in Central New Jersey. NYC is dying. If they start another shutdown, it will put the final nail in the coffin for it. NYC depends on its hospitality business- theatres, museums, great restaurants, hotels. 65 million people visited it in 2019. Today, few are coming. Everyone is going broke. Retail stores, restaurants, etc have few customers even if they're fortunate to be open. Forcing masks will keep workers at home using zoom even more. It will cause the commercial real estate market to collapse as current leases end and are not renewed. MY son-in-law who had been working in a law firm in Manhattan has worked at home the entire Covid period. He was supposed to go back recently and work three days a week in the office and two at home per week. But his firm extended the 5-day stay-at-home period again until next year because of government mandates. When workers don't work in Manhattan, office space is superfluous. Restaurants close. Who needs cabs? Subways and commuter railroads lose income. Tax revenue to support social services disappear. The poor and low-income lose their jobs. It snowballs.
I'm sure NYC isn't alone in this.
The poor and low-income lose their jobs. It snowballs.
I'm sure NYC isn't alone in this.
From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly. Statistics soon will tell. It may turn out like the regular flu. Officials are not treating it like the flu however insisting on masking up again. The problem is many people are done with the mask. Even here in NJ, the democrat governor Murphy has indicated people have "had it" with masks.And now we move away from the armchair virologist, director of the Center for misinformation, to those who actually understand the science:
The coronavirus will hit millions of Americans in a "viral blizzard" within a few weeks as infections from the Omicron variant pile on top of Delta, an expert predicts.
Already, hospitalizations are rising as the holiday season gets into full swing. Long lines for Covid-19 testing formed Thursday in metro areas, including New York, Boston and Miami.
The Delta variant remains a problem. And Omicron, with its high transmissibility, could strike millions more soon, said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.
"We're really just about to experience a viral blizzard," Osterholm told CNN's Erin Burnett on Thursday. "In the next three to eight weeks, we're going to see millions of Americans are going to be infected with this virus, and that will be overlaid on top of Delta, and we're not yet sure exactly how that's going to work out."
So now that Covid is on the way out,we're left with the economic damage.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced on Friday that he has mobilized 1,050 members of the National Guard to assist with COVID-related staffing issues in hospitals across the state.
Businesses, schools, venues shuttering as U.S. Covid cases rise
Southwest CEO tests positive for Covid days after unmasked Senate hearing with other airline chiefs
New York state reports highest number of daily Covid cases of entire pandemic at more than 21,000
So now that Covid is on the way out,we're left with the economic damage.
A Biden administration rule — that requires workers at companies with 100 or more employees to be vaccinated against Covid or undergo weekly testing, starting Jan. 4 — is back on.Speculation, like “now that Covid is on the way out”.🤮
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a stay on the rule Friday evening.
A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit found these injuries asserted by the petitioners to be "entirely speculative," and the costs of delaying implementation of the rule to be comparatively high.
"Fundamentally, the [rule] is an important step in curtailing the transmission of a deadly virus that has killed over 800,000 people in the United States, brought our healthcare system to its knees, forced businesses to shut down for months on end, and cost hundreds of thousands of workers their jobs," wrote Circuit Judge Jane B. Stranch, an Obama appointee.Don't miss this:
New data analysis has revealed that if US Democratic voters were to make up their own country, it would have one of the world’s most vaccinated populations, with more than 91% of adults having received at least one shot.Same day:
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey reissues executive order banning local vaccine mandatesSadly, you can't make this up.😢
Here is a very good report on Omicron by Kevin Paffrath. 13 minutes long, well worth watching.I don't know if I should take a guy with pink hair as an expert about Covid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkormdO6m5M
How many people are dying from Omicron? Hospitalized? Which groups? (vaccinated or not; with or without booster)?You have this odd habit of asking questions of others, when your posting history and agenda show/prove, you have no desire or ability to accept any answer. No need to ask.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.”A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding.” -Marshall McLuhan
Coronavirus cases are surging in London as the Omicron variant has officially replaced Delta — a sign of what's likely just around the corner for parts of the U.S.https://www.axios.com/omicron-coronavirus-cases-christmas-london-5ef22bcc-34e2-4b31-9d4e-534c9f395d00.html
The bottom line: The ratio of deaths to cases will be lower than spring 2020, simply because so many Americans are either vaccinated or have already been infected. But it's still unclear if the variant itself is less severe, and how many people are vulnerable to it.
Driving the news: South Africa and the UK are regularly releasing data that help predict what the coming days and weeks will bring the U.S.
Both places have made it clear that the virus spreads at a faster rate than we've seen during the pandemic, and it's able to escape at least some of the immunity provided by vaccines or previous infections.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
I don't know if I should take a guy with pink hair as an expert about Covid.
Trust me! Spend 13 minutes, listen to his report, and then make a judgment. That will be a much better investment than arguing with me or others.Impossible request. Super reasonable request. The conformation bias will not allow for it.
Never mind his orange hair. Last month it was green.I like Kevin and have watched him until after the election when he decided to color his hair green, pink or chartreuse. It seems to be a way of him getting attention. He lost me after that. Regardless of his money-making investments, he's not an expert on viral infections and is just pulling out articles to highlight as we all do.
This is a guy who makes $5M per month from his Youtube reports. What he makes additionally in stocks and real estate could keep lights going in all homes in NJ (Almost).
He was the highest ranking democrat challenging Gavin Newsom in the last CA recall election. He may win the next election.
Trust me! Spend 13 minutes, listen to his report, and then make a judgment. That will be a much better investment than arguing with me or others.
Impossible request. Super reasonable request. The conformation bias will not allow for it.Sorry. I'm following the science, not like you who's following a real estate and stock investor for advice on Covid.
Sorry. I'm following the science, not like you who's following a real estate and stock investor for advice on Covid.Sure you do, but not on our planet:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.Do show us the science from our planet where Covid-19 is on the way out.
I like Kevin and have watched him until after the election when he decided to color his hair green, pink or chartreuse.Yes, hair color is such an important criteria for acceptance.
Yes, hair color is such an important criteria for acceptance.He's a real estate and stock adviser, not a scientist. But you can get your Covid information from whom you like. For a guy who says he follows the science, you seem to have a real confirmation-biased attitude. I question just how much knowledge you really have on subjects you claim to be an expert on.
He's a real estate and stock adviser, not a scientist.What are you?
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.What science from planet Earth states Covid-19 is on the way out?
Sorry. I'm following the science...Truth or lie???
I like Kevin and have watched him until after the election when he decided to color his hair green, pink or chartreuse. It seems to be a way of him getting attention. He lost me after that. Regardless of his money-making investments, he's not an expert on viral infections and is just pulling out articles to highlight as we all do.
The one thing I found interesting that he mentioned is how J&J has been downgraded. People have died from it. It causes blood clots? It's also nowhere as effective as Moderna or Pfizer. When I said a year ago that people should not use J&J but rather Moderna or Pfizer, all the people here on the left told me I was nuts and biased. J&J was equally as good. Funny thing is that I was following the science. They weren't. They were arguing for J&J on political grounds as many of their other arguments. So now that I've been proven right, none of those early naysayers have spoken up to acknowledge their error. Figures.
I agree that dying his hair in those extreme colors is silly. He mentioned something that he did it to show others that he didn't care what they think of him.He is smart but still young and hasn't developed the wisdom we all get, hopefully, from age. He's also been very successful but has only operated a few years in a very bull market in real estate and stocks. When everything is going up, it's a lot easier to pick winners.
Regardless, he is much smarter than you and me combined.
He is smart but still young and hasn't developed the wisdom we all get, hopefully, from age. He's also been very successful but has only operated a few years in a very bull market in real estate and stocks. When everything is going up, it's a lot easier to pick winners.
One area I disagree with him is cryptocurrency. I don't think he understands that it has no intrinsic value from what I have heard him discuss about it. Now, you could make money from it working on the "greater fool" concept, that there's always another person willing to pay more than you did. But in the end, crypto is valueless, and you run out of fools to buy it like investors did in Beanie Babies. At least with fiat currency like the dollar, you can make wallpaper out of it. And you can always give your Beanie Babies to your grandkids. :)
Sorry. I'm following the science,You are not following the science. Or the facts. Nothing new.not like you who's following a real estate and stock investor for advice on Covid.
So now that Covid is on the way out...
He's a real estate and stock adviser, not a scientist. But you can get your Covid information from whom you like. For a guy who says he follows the science, you seem to have a real confirmation-biased attitude. I question just how much knowledge you really have on subjects you claim to be an expert on.
I never claimed to be an expert, where did you get the impression? But I like to learn new facts and it just happens that I can get more accurate information from some of the well known and reputable youtubers than from less credible sources somewhere else.If you check, you'll see I didn't respond to your post but to Andrew's.
As to the covid information, I found Kevin's presentation on Omicron more comprehensive and more valuable than the oversimplified and incomplete bits you supplied.
If you check, you'll see I didn't respond to your post but to Andrew's.You did not. You typed something, but of course, you didn't respond.
What are you?All evidence points to the latter.
Again, you can't answer a simple question to back up this rubbish:
Quote from: Alan Klein on December 16, 2021, 07:37:05 am
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
What science from planet Earth states Covid-19 is on the way out?
Put up or shut up.
Quote
Sorry. I'm following the science...
Truth or lie???
If you check, you'll see I didn't respond to your post but to Andrew's.
It means they're willing to take their chances and not wear a mask. Especially those who have been vaccinated. What's incoherent about that?
I question just how much knowledge you really have on subjects you claim to be an expert on.Your inability to understand and accept text, data, facts, from experts on many subjects is very well established here.
You wear a mask to prevent you from infecting others. So we are talking social responsibility. Mask wearing cuts transmission of the virus by 50%.
When I said a year ago that people should not use J&J but rather Moderna or Pfizer, all the people here on the left told me I was nuts and biased. J&J was equally as good. Funny thing is that I was following the science. They weren't. They were arguing for J&J on political grounds as many of their other arguments. So now that I've been proven right, none of those early naysayers have spoken up to acknowledge their error. Figures.
When I said a year ago that people should not use J&J but rather Moderna or Pfizer, all the people here on the left told me I was nuts and biased.I never said that, but you are correct, I think you're nuts and biased.
... all the people here on the left told me I was nuts and biased...
Mea culpa. I guess that I saw red when I read that one shouldn't trust the youtuber Kevin. I still think that he discovers and presents information on many subjects much better than some doctors, stock analysts or engineers.
And how do you know this?
I don't get it. I don't have any reason to "trust the youtuber Kevin" on medical topics nor understand why anyone would care, let alone "[see] red", if someone does or doesn't trust him or his rambling review of current COVID-19 related news snippets.
Maybe I'm biased because every time he tried to pronounce thrombosis, it made me wonder if my hearing was getting worse than it is already.
Your inability to understand and accept text, data, facts, from experts on many subjects is very well established here.Common sense.
Begging the question again, one you appear very afraid to answer: your expertise is in what field sir? ???
Whatever you say Les. If you run into Kevin, let him know that there is an h in thrombosis.
Aside from that, I'm not into hero worship or care much about YouTube celebrities and their views.
Despite your self-congratulatory statement, nothing that you said above is true. When the current vaccines were newly available and in high demand and short supply and clinical trial efficacy data was all that was available, the suggestion that people might want to wait until an mRNA vaccine was available rather than take whatever the first vaccine might be that was available to them was stupid and dangerous and in no way following science—or even simple common sense for that matter.Photography experts came out and rated three cameras as 93%, 94% and 78% effective for capturing the right exposure in Auto mode. But then they said, it really doesn't matter which you choose. All will work well. Which camera would you not choose?
COVID-19 was a new, deadly, and highly transmissible viral disease when the vaccines arrived. ALL of the vaccines had proven in clinical trials to be extremely effective at preventing severe disease and death, the mRNA vaccines had somewhat higher efficacy in preventing mild cases. Suggesting that someone risk hospitalization or death while waiting for a preferred vaccine brand is highly illustrative of why no one should give any weight to online comments when looking for medical advice.
Also, at that time, the only data available was efficacy from clinical trials. No one had any idea what the long-term real world effectiveness might be for any of the vaccines or what type of rare side effects might surface over time among a larger population. Time and again, when the difference between known clinical trial efficacy and the unknown of real world effectiveness was pointed out, you deliberately and stubbornly refused to acknowledge that there was any difference and ignored the science. You had the same response to others pointing out the difficulty of comparing clinical trials conducted at different times and places with different variants of the disease.
There was NOTHING political about the discussion—nothing whatever. The discussion was about the risk of contracting a disease which could cause hospitalization or death versus the benefit of being vaccinated at the earliest opportunity. You didn't suggest that people should avoid the J&J vaccine due to extremely rare side effects which is the why the CDC has recommended mRNA vaccines in addition to noting they're in plentiful supply now. So, what is your claim of following and being vindicated by science based on?—absolutely nothing.
At the time of the discussion you refer to, there was no discussion of rare side effects with any of the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S., including the J&J vaccine, as none were known. There is now evidence, after millions of doses have been administered across a broad spectrum of the population, of extremely rare side effects (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019-ncov%2Fvaccines%2Fsafety%2FJJUpdate.html)—blood clots with viral vector vaccines (J&J and AstraZeneca) and Myocarditis and Pericarditis with mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna). The benefits of all of these vaccines far outweigh any risk from very rare side effects which is why they all remain available to the public.
The new CDC recommendation is for individuals to take one of the mRNA vaccines due to extremely rare blood clot events. They still continue to recommend (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s1216-covid-19-vaccines.html) the J&J vaccine to those who, for whatever reason, do not want to take an mRNA vaccine. "Given the current state of the pandemic both here and around the world, the ACIP reaffirmed that receiving any vaccine is better than being unvaccinated. Individuals who are unable or unwilling to receive an mRNA vaccine will continue to have access to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine." That's the CDC recommendation and risk/benefit analysis based on science, reason, and simple common sense.
Your self-satisfaction aside, you didn't follow or attempt to understand the science then and you've consistently attacked scientific experts and public health agencies that do follow and understand the science. Your self-proclaimed victory of being "proven right" is as hollow as your comprehension and knowledge of basic science. "Figures."
He is not my hero, just one of the information channels I follow. He may well have more typos in his titles than me in my LuLa posts.The irony is really that Warren as a senator made tax law so he can pay less taxes. He's just following her rules. On top of that, it was Warren and the others in Congress who gave the rebates to Tesla to help them sell so many cars and make Musk a billionaire.
Speaking about celebrities, Elizabeth Warren reached a new low. After Time magazine featured Elon Musk on their cover, she went into a rage and posted six hateful Facebook ads about him, calling him names and lying about him not paying his share of taxes. That's in a year when he paid more taxes any other US citizen. She called him a freeloader and then she had the audacity to ask her Facebook followers to send her $10 to pay for those ads.
Photography experts came out and rated three cameras as 93%, 94% and 78% effective for capturing the right exposure in Auto mode. But then they said, it really doesn't matter which you choose. All will work well. Which camera would you not choose?
Well, that was J&J. They were rated around 78% efficacious during trials while Moderna and Pfizer were at 93% and 94%. Yet the scientists tried to convince everyone it didn't matter, again lying to the public for political reasons and to fool us into accepting a sub-standard vaccine, adding to the mistrust of scientists. Les made a good point that you would be better off listening to a stock picker. Many here believed the lie because they were "scientists" rather than using their own common sense. Of course, J&J's efficacy also subsequently waned the fastest and became a harmful vaccine that killed many people, which makes sense considering how poorly it did during the original trials.
Recently, the CDC has finally recommended Moderna and Pfizer over J&J. How many people did the CDC kill and infect in their rush to get a bad vaccine out and phony arguments to make it seem harmless?
https://www.prevention.com/health/a35227295/johnson-and-johnson-covid-19-vaccine/
As with vaccines, I would choose whichever was available at the critical moment I needed to take the shot rather than miss it and be sorry later.
I'm guessing that few wonder why my advice is never to trust anything posted by online attention seekers with an agenda regarding matters affecting your health. People with any reasonable amount of judgement or common sense listen to people with knowledge and experience in their field.The scientists argued that it didn't matter. That wasn't true and they knew it.
Funny thing is that I was following the science.
Common sense.That would make perfect sense if you suspend all rational thought.
That would be a funny statement were the subject not so deadly serious.I was following the science. I read the trial results and picked Moderna and not J&J. Others here listened to the scientist's and politicians' BS and agreed with them that J&J was just as good.
He may well have more typos in his titles than me in my LuLa posts.
...it's hard to argue against their feelings that scientists and politicians...
Others here listened to the scientist's and politicians' BS and agreed with them that J&J was just as good.
Photography experts came out and rated three cameras as 93%, 94% and 78% effective for capturing the right exposure in Auto mode. But then they said, it really doesn't matter which you choose. All will work well. Which camera would you not choose?If only you listened to experts on any subject including photographic exposure, (78% or more), you would be able to expose your film without clipping image detail and then producing an awful scan from that inability to expose film: as you admitted to your audience today!
The scans are clipped but I don;t know if the originals are. I haven't checked.Then...
On the farm shot, I deliberately clipped the sky completely out for effect because some of it was originally clipped in the film.https://www.photo.net/discuss/goto/post?id=5932729#post-5932729
It isn't hard to argue that when your feelings toward scientists override your judgment and common sense in critical health considerations, you run a potentially catastrophic risk. As for politicians, this isn't a political thread, no matter how many times you try to hijack it for your own agenda.You can't discuss this disease and what the public should do unless you include policy recommendations by scientists and politicians. When you have the Federal court system deciding on whether a presidential declaration through OSHA requires 80 million people to take vaccines based on "science", well, that's politics and policy as well as science. When governors shut down venues because scientists recommend it, well, that's a political decision made by politicians. Scientists don't make policy. Politicians do.
If only you listened to experts on any subject including photographic exposure, (78% or more), you would be able to expose your film without clipping image detail and then producing an awful scan from that inability to expose film: as you admitted to your audience today!https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/best-software-for-b-w-images.5527492/More of your personal attacks and condescending insults. Posts pulled from other threads that have nothing to do with Covid and this thread. Back on my ignore list.
Let's add exposure and scanning to the increasing list of strong opinions you have about subjects you’ve demonstrated you know very little about.
More of your personal attacks and condescending insults. Posts pulled from other threads that have nothing to do with Covid and this thread.Ah, great excuse to avoid this again:Back on my ignore list.
Begging the question again, one you appear very afraid to answer: your expertise is in what field sir? ???Clearly nothing to do Virology, epidemiology, anything with "ology" or photography. ;)
Posts pulled from other threads that have nothing to do with Covid and this thread. Back on my ignore list.More items, “ripped from today's headlines” that have to do with Covid-19 the guy who told us:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.can ignore:
The research is still early on the virulence of the Omicron coronavirus variant -- but what's abundantly clear, according to experts, is that it's poised to spread rapidly across the US and will likely overwhelm a battered US health care system.
California COVID-19 hospitalizations rise, new L.A. County cases double amid Omicron spread
COVID-19 hospitalizations are on the rise in California as the Omicron variant spreads, combining with a holiday wave of the Delta strain to spark concerns of yet another surge that could strain the state’s healthcare system.
There were 3,589 COVID-19 patients in the state’s hospitals as of Friday, an increase of roughly 12% from two weeks before, according to The Times’ hospitalization tracker.
COVID-19 cases on the rise across the U.S. as Americans get ready to travel for the holidays One week before Christmas, spiking COVID-19 cases are raising concerns about holiday travel.
Businesses, schools step up precautions amid new COVID surgeDr. Amesh Adalja joins “CBS Saturday Morning” to talk about the latest COVID-19 case numbers and how they could impact businesses, schools and the holiday travel rush.
"Saturday Night Live" will be live from New York on Saturday, but without its usual studio audience and its musical guest.
The NBC variety show said late Saturday afternoon it will not have a live audience in the studio because of the recent rise in cases of the Omicron variant.
I was following the science. I read the trial results and picked Moderna and not J&J.
Aside from that, I'm not into hero worship or care much about YouTube celebrities and their views.
He [Kevin Paffrath] is not my hero, just one of the information channels I follow...
...After Time magazine featured Elon Musk on their cover
He's someone that I thought fit the description of YouTube celebrity, not hero.
Based on frequency of comments and the heat of reactions, here's where the hero worship might be found to be in play.
Excuse me Mr. I was following the Science, but your equation is incomplete. It ends at the beginning and goes nowhere. It doesn't factor in the daily death and hospitalization rates at the time. It disregards the limited availability of any and all vaccines at the time. It doesn't account for the risks associated with waiting. It ignores the supply vs the demand vs the need to vaccinate as many as possible as quickly as possible at the time. It fails to recognize the time, materials, facilities, capacity, and capabilities required to produce enough supply of any one type of vaccine. It discounts the fact that multiple vaccine candidates were selected, funded, and produced for clinical trials because of the advantages that each of the different platform types offered. The evaluation of vaccines required a symphony of data and you're stuck playing one endless note.The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. They deceived the public about its effectiveness. Their oversight was deficient. They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people.
Science provided a complete set of available data and accounted for the full range of factors which had to be considered in any honest risk/benefit analysis. Your "analysis" looked narrowly at benefit while ignoring the risks and supply at the time, rendering it myopic and incomplete to an absurd degree.
When it comes to a choice of whose data was complete and honest in forming an equation for analysis, I'll go with the scientists that you ironically accuse of being dishonest and incomplete. Yours fails the test. Your assault on the trustworthiness and integrity of scientists rings very hollow.
Thanks for your version of science, but no thanks... I for one will pass.
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. They deceived the public about its effectiveness. Their oversight was deficient. They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people.The bottom line is once again, Alan doesn't have a bloody clue what he writes* and jerks his knee here as exercise, deliberate deficient oversight and factual deficient ignorance:
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a total of 57 J&J patients have developed a rare blood clot disorder.Alan: STOP! the deliberate lies and malpractice.
Nine people are known so far to have died: seven women and two men.
A total of 16 million US residents have received the single-dose J&J vaccine.
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. ...
Alan: STOP!
Fat chance of that happening—unless, perhaps, he can think up some other way to use his time. Maybe a hobby? He could take up photography, for example.I've complained to the site owners. I suggest others do the same. Now the burden is on them too. It is simply irresponsible for a forum or similar platform to allow dangerous lies and misinformation about vaccines, and Covid-19 during a deadly pandemic to continue. This isn't Facebook (of which I have never been and never will be a member), but social media or forums like this have to conduct some oversight into blatant lies and deadly misinformation during this pandemic.
The bottom line is once again, Alan doesn't have a bloody clue what he writes* and jerks his knee here as exercise, deliberate deficient oversight and factual deficient ignorance:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59692776
Alan: STOP! the deliberate lies and malpractice.
* "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters." -Frank Lloyd Wright
In this case a keyboard.
I wish the web site owners felt the same about these dangers and stopped this misinformation campaign.
We get many deliberate lies and misinformation also from Biden. I wish he stopped that.You can petition the White House, I'm petitioning LuLa owners.
I was following the science.
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. They deceived the public about its effectiveness. Their oversight was deficient. They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
I've complained to the site owners. I suggest others do the same. Now the burden is on them too. It is simply irresponsible for a forum or similar platform to allow dangerous lies and misinformation about vaccines, and Covid-19 during a deadly pandemic to continue. This isn't Facebook (of which I have never been and never will be a member), but social media or forums like this have to conduct some oversight into blatant lies and deadly misinformation during this pandemic.Opinions are not a reason to be banned from this site. But personal attacks like you make are and I've complained to the owners about your continuing personal attacks and insults.
He needs a hobby indeed. Photography was a fail. This is a photography web site and forum. If shutting this fool up means shutting down all discussions that don't have to do with photography, so be it. There are other avenues where Alan (and others) can regurgitate lies that have nothing to do with photography. The site owners here should consider that as well.
Opinions are not a reason to be banned from this site. But personal attacks like you make are and I've complained to the owners about your continuing personal attacks and insults.I'm no longer on your ignore list, another lie?
More of your personal attacks and condescending insults. Posts pulled from other threads that have nothing to do with Covid and this thread. Back on my ignore list.
If shutting this fool up means shutting down all discussions that don't have to do with photography, so be it.
I don't want to keep going down this road of correcting dangerous misinformation and advise endlessly, but it is important to call it out when you see it. I'd rather discuss the advances in medicine and public health and the hard work that research scientists and medical professionals do every day in an effort to save lives and protect our health.A study of a few dozen people from a single Boston Hospital doesn't sound like a conclusive finding. In addition, I don't understand why anyone would continue to defend J&J when people are dying from it. Three days ago, the ACIP recommended using Moderna and Pfizer over J&J. While the CDC hasn't yet acted on their recommendation, it's a pretty serious situation.
I would like to shed light, however, on one other accusation made regarding the J&J vaccine with regard to its durability. I came across a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine on that topic and an easier to read summary in the Boston Globe.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/10/15/business/study-says-johnson-johnson-vaccine-immune-response-is-more-durable-than-pfizer-moderna (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/10/15/business/study-says-johnson-johnson-vaccine-immune-response-is-more-durable-than-pfizer-moderna/)
Study says Johnson & Johnson vaccine immune response is lower but more durable than Pfizer and Moderna
By Anissa Gardizy Globe Staff, Updated October 15, 2021
As the US Food and Drug Administration’s advisory panel discussed Friday whether to recommend a Johnson & Johnson booster dose, new research suggested the one-shot vaccine produces a lower but more durable immune response than the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna shots, which have been found to wane over time.
The findings, published Friday in the New England Journal of Medicine, come from a study of a few dozen people at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, which analyzed blood samples of fully vaccinated people two to four weeks after vaccination, and then eight months later.
As was also suggested by previous studies, antibody responses from the two-shot Pfizer and Moderna messenger RNA vaccines peaked after full vaccination, and then began to decline six months later. The researchers found the decline continued after eight months. But while Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot vaccine produced a much lower initial antibody response, it remained “relatively stable” for the eight months observed, with “minimal-to-no evidence of decline,” according to the study.
Dr. Dan Barouch, who runs the virology center at Beth Israel and led the study, presented the data to the FDA’s scientific advisory committee on Friday morning, hours before the panel voted to recommend J&J’s booster for all adults at least two months after their primary dose of the vaccine.
“I think the data should be reassuring for people who received the J&J vaccine, that immune responses are stable over time,” he said. “After about eight months, the antibody responses are relatively similar among the three vaccines.”...
...Johnson & Johnson released data in September from a large clinical trial that showed a booster given two months after the first shot led to 94 percent protection against COVID-19 in the US.
You can petition the White House, I'm petitioning LuLa owners.
FWIW, I'm not aware of any lies from Biden that unlike some before him in the White House, lead to thousands or more deaths from Covid-19 lies.
Les, do you believe any of the following is a lie?
Lies, inaccuracies or poorly chosen words, both are equally guilty of them.You at least answered my question about Alan and this discussion of Covid-19, thank you.
Lies, inaccuracies or poorly chosen words, both are equally guilty of them.I'm sorry Les. You're incorrect. I haven't lied. And I'm disappointed in your accusation and agreement with Andrew a man whose every other post smears someone, not only me. Like everyone else here, I present evidence to support my point of view. And others present their evidence to support theirs. Just like opposing sides in court. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder. It;'s up to others to draw conclusion of what they heard and make up their own minds.
The difference is that Alan's posts are read and scrutinized by a few dozens of sharp and skeptical old farts on LuLa, but Biden's speeches are transmitted on National TV and through global youtube clips to millions of naive and gullible MSM consumers. On top of it, I have corrected Alan quite a few times myself, but lack an effective way to confront the WH politicians. Ignore button is also a good way to filter out unwanted content (regrettably only on Lula).
The bottom line is once again, Alan doesn't have a bloody clue what he writes* and jerks his knee here as exercise, deliberate deficient oversight and factual deficient ignorance:I presented evidence that shows J&J vaccine killed 9 people and made dozens more very sick with blood clots. Telling me to "STOP IT" is not evidence that my facts are in error or a lie. Stop lying to people here on LuLa on the dangers of J&J vaccine. You're spreading misinformation that's dangerous to the people here. You should not cover up for J&J.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59692776
Alan: STOP! the deliberate lies and malpractice.
* "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters." -Frank Lloyd Wright
In this case a keyboard.
I wish the web site owners felt the same about these dangers and stopped this misinformation campaign.
I presented evidence that shows J&J vaccine killed 9 people and made dozens more very sick with blood clots. Telling me to "STOP IT" is not evidence that my facts are in error or a lie. Stop lying to people here on LuLa on the dangers of J&J vaccine. You're spreading misinformation that's dangerous to the people here. You should not cover up for J&J.You've lost it man, get a grip and at least look at what you wrote and exactly when! Indeed Alan, you should:Stop lying to people here on LuLa on the dangers of J&J vaccine. You're spreading misinformation that's dangerous to the people here. "STOP IT".
I'm sorry Les. You're incorrect. I haven't lied.
You've lost it man, get a grip and at least look at what you wrote and exactly when! Indeed Alan, you should:Stop lying to people here on LuLa on the dangers of J&J vaccine. You're spreading misinformation that's dangerous to the people here. "STOP IT".People are smart enough here to make their own judgments. If they have a choice between the three, why would anyone take J&J? Telling them to ignore what I say is not how to do it. You present counterarguments of why they should take J&J over the others. Calling me names isn't the way to do it.
I don’t know if you are purposely trying not to understand this, or if you simply cannot understand it.
I have to support Alan here. To "lie" is to intentionally say something that you know is false. I don't think Alan does that. Of course, many of the things he says are factually false, but he believes them--so, no lies. I also do not recall him ever making a personal attack.Thanks. I think. ;)
I'm sorry Les. You're incorrect. I haven't lied. And I'm disappointed in your accusation and agreement with Andrew a man whose every other post smears someone, not only me. Like everyone else here, I present evidence to support my point of view. And others present their evidence to support theirs. Just like opposing sides in court. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder. It;'s up to others to draw conclusion of what they heard and make up their own minds.
Of course, everyone makes errors on facts. There's no way anyone has a monopoly on them. We can't know everything. Plus facts change from day to day. What was understood to be true yesterday may be untrue today and vice versa.
I was accused of lying about how J&J vaccine killed people. That's the truth and you can see my article above. So Andrew lied. Yet you don't seem concerned about his lies, distortion,s and personal attacks. You don't seem to acknowledge your poorly chosen and inaccurate comments but only see them in others. It's very disappointing to hear this from you.
People are smart enough here to make their own judgments.People are stupid enough to post judgments that make them yell fire in a crowed theater, recommend injecting bleach and posting lies about both the safely of vaccines and the underlying goal of the scientists who produce them. Plenty of examples of this stupidy, I don't know why more examples have to follow.
If they have a choice between the three, why would anyone take J&J?
"They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people."
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J.It isn't the bottom line, you lie about scientists deliberately 'crooked hands" with J&J; this is a figment of your imagination and a danger to post. Anyone unvaccinated and can only get J&J should do so! Until such a time the actual scientists say otherwise, NOT you. It is dangerous to suggest otherwise. 800K have died, and many more unvaccinated will die. 9 out of 16 million is a sound bet to take.
Alan,So your initial answer to this is now different?
I didn't say that you lied, but in my reply to Andrew's question I grouped lies, inaccuracies and poorly chosen words together. That was my way to say that there is a difference between outright lies and incorrectly stated facts, although some readers won't make such a distinction.
*Since it really is a single and simple yes or no question, Yes or no is all I ask again.We get many deliberate lies and misinformation also from Biden. I wish he stopped that.You can petition the White House, I'm petitioning LuLa owners.
FWIW, I'm not aware of any lies from Biden that unlike some before him in the White House, lead to thousands or more deaths from Covid-19 lies.
*Les, do you believe any of the following is a lie?I was following the science.The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. They deceived the public about its effectiveness. Their oversight was deficient. They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people.So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
So your initial answer to this is now different?
You can petition the White House, I'm petitioning LuLa owners.
FWIW, I'm not aware of any lies from Biden that unlike some before him in the White House, lead to thousands or more deaths from Covid-19 lies.
*Les, do you believe any of the following is a lie?
*Since it really is a single and simple yes or no question, Yes or no is all I ask again.
My answer was no different, but explained it in more detail. There is nothing more I could say about Alan's posts. Anything more on this subject is a waste of time.Agreed to a small degree (yes or no answer refusal noted) although the same is true, more so with Biden; the topic isn't the handling of Afghanistan exit or GM, but Covid-19 and vaccines! There is another forum topic where you can go on and on about the handling of the Afghanistan exit. Got anything to say about Covid-19 inside Afghanistan? Or GM?
As to Biden, as I wondered in one of my earlier posts, I don't know if he lied about GM intentionally or if he is so disinformed.
I wouldn't accuse him of causing any deaths by his handling of covid, but unfortunately that can't be said about his handling of Afghanistan exit.
Agreed to a small degree (yes or no answer refusal noted) although the same is true, more so with Biden; the topic isn't the handling of Afghanistan exit or GM, but Covid-19 and vaccines! There is another forum topic where you can go on and on about the handling of the Afghanistan exit. Got anything to say about Covid-19 inside Afghanistan? Or GM?
People are stupid enough to post judgments that make them yell fire in a crowed theater, recommend injecting bleach and posting lies about both the safely of vaccines and the underlying goal of the scientists who produce them. Plenty of examples of this stupidy, I don't know why more examples have to follow.You're welcome to take J&J if you wish even though it isn't as safe or effective as Moderna or Pfizer. May you live long and prosper.
The question is yet another obvious attempt to digress from the first point I made above.
You have this odd, regular habit of asking questions of others, when your posting history and agenda show/prove, you have no desire or ability to accept any answer. No need to ask. The question has zero to do about how you lied about J&J and those who developed and approved it.
Here it is AGAIN for you to ignore but hopefully for the site owners and others to see WHY you were called out and WHY you should stop talking about this. No matter how the factual history of your posts and mine are provied, you'll ignore them; there is no way you can accept them as they were provide:
Alan Klein on December 19, 2021, 04:49:37 am
Three hours later, I called you out for his rubbish by showing an article that factually stated that nine out of 16 MILLION residents in the US died from this vaccine. I'd ask you to do the math and examine the percentage of 9 deaths from 16 million (further, all having underlying conditions, outlined in the URL you didn't read or did and didn't understand) who received the J&J vaccine. Asking you to examine the math would likely make your head explode but one is more likely to be struck by lightening sir. The U.S. has averaged 43 reported lightning fatalities per year. It kills a lot of people; idiotic FUD.
Of course the number in that 16 million protected from a deadly vaccine, you have no idea nor care to even consider.
Equally absurd and a lie: Alan Klein on December 19, 2021, 04:49:37 amIt isn't the bottom line, you lie about scientists deliberately 'crooked hands" with J&J; this is a figment of your imagination and a danger to post. Anyone unvaccinated and can only get J&J should do so! Until such a time the actual scientists say otherwise, NOT you. It is dangerous to suggest otherwise. 800K have died, and many more unvaccinated will die. 9 out of 16 million is a sound bet to take.
December 19, 2021, 05:49:15 pm: you post the SAME URL I provided before you, showing that only 9 people died, you of course decided to cherry pick that 9 out of 16 million, then make up a statement ("I don't understand why anyone would continue to defend J&J when people are dying from it") when no one, NO ONE defended J&J! It appears yes, you do not understand. That providing facts that don't fit your confirmation bias is a defense of said facts.
"Facts are facts and will not disappear on account of your likes." -Jawaharlal Nehru
Nothing more about your absurd deliberate mistruths need to be said here; the record stands. A record you will ignore and digress from.
Nothing more about your absurd deliberate mistruths need to be said here; the record stands. A record you will ignore and digress from.
You're welcome to take J&J if you wish even though it isn't as safe or effective as Moderna or Pfizer. May you live long and prosper.
I said at one time that I'm not here to engage in any pissing contests and I don't derive pleasure in arguing with others just to win an argument or scoring brownie points.Too late. You took his bait. Now, like me, you're on his sh!t list. :o
When I post something, it's usually information which I find interesting and useful and maybe of interest to some others. Or trying to correct some misleading posts.
Nothing more about your absurd deliberate mistruths need to be said here; the record stands. A record you will ignore and digress from.
Too late. You took his bait. Now, like me, you're on his sh!t list. :o
I'm not sure who this pleases the most. :)
I'm not sure who this pleases the most. :)
Trump reveals he got COVID-19 booster shot; crowd boos him
Former President Donald Trump has revealed he received a booster shot of the COVID-19 vaccine, drawing boos from a crowd in Dallas
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/trump-reveals-covid-19-booster-shot-crowd-boos-81860432
What...he's stop drinking bleach?Please, facts! ;D He was suggesting injecting disinfectant (and light). But bleach fits in that large group of products.
April 23, 2020, 5:18 PM MDT / Updated April 24, 2020, 8:31 AM MDT
By Dartunorro Clark
President Donald Trump suggested the possibility of an "injection" of disinfectant into a person infected with the coronavirus as a deterrent to the virus during his daily briefing Thursday.
What Refutes Science
• Better science based on new data
What Does NOT Refute Science
• Your feelings
• Your politics
• Your religion
• Your assumptions
• Your assertions based on your assumptions
• Your opinion
• Your half-baked opinion after watching a YouTube video made by someone that doesn't understand science
• Your half-baked opinion after reading online commentary made by someone that doesn't understand science
• Facts pulled out of yourassimagination which aren't facts
• Data or statistics acquired by the method described above
Wow, that's a keeper that needs repeating with your permission. Brilliant. Succinct. Quote worthy.
New York state reported a record number of Covid-19 infections for the fourth consecutive day on Monday, when officials said 23,391 people had tested positive for the virus. Just over 4,000 people were hospitalized around the state, compared with peak levels of almost 19,000 in April of 2020.
The CDC’s updated data showed Omicron had caused some 13% of recent infections in the week through Dec. 11.
The variant has spread rapidly in the U.S. and has reached at least 89 nations around the world since being identified in southern Africa last month.
The Omicron variant is causing Covid-19 cases to double every 1.5 to 3 days in places with community transmission, the World Health Organization said over the weekend.
Today, 7:55EST The Wall Street Journal
A NY state resident recently reported on December 16th that ”Covid is on the way out”. 🤔
"Predictions are hard, especially about the future."- Yogi Berra
Yes, it seems that the Covid Classic is on the way out.Speaking of classic:
Sperm quality is impaired for months for some people after recovery from COVID-19, researchers have found.
The semen itself was not infectious, the researchers found. But among 35 men who provided samples within a month after recovery from symptomatic infection, reductions in sperm motility were evident in 60% and sperm counts were reduced in 37%. As reported on Monday in Fertility and Sterility, semen samples were obtained from 120 Belgian men with an average age of 35 years, at an average of 52 days after their COVID-19 symptoms had resolved. Among 51 men tested between one and two months after recovery, 37% had reduced sperm motility and 29% had low sperm counts. Among 34 men who provided semen samples at least two months after recovery, sperm motility was impaired in 28% and sperm counts were low in 6%. The severity of COVID-19 infection was not correlated with sperm characteristics.
"Couples with a desire for pregnancy should be warned that sperm quality after COVID-19 infection can be suboptimal," the researchers concluded. "The estimated recovery time is 3 months, but further follow-up studies are under way to confirm this and to determine if permanent damage occurred in a minority of men."
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J. They deceived the public about its effectiveness. Their oversight was deficient. They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant public killing a lot of people.
The triumph of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine
Despite setbacks, the jab has probably saved more lives than any other.
... The surge of deliveries in the second half of 2021 is the flipside of AstraZeneca’s struggles in the first. The firm worked with partners to establish 25 manufacturing facilities in 15 countries. Its vaccines are made to a formula detailing just about everything that can be controlled in a production facility. ...
J&J and AstraZeneca are essentially the same vaccine.
Are you confident that characterization is accurate? I understand that both the Janssen and AstraZeneca vaccines use an adenovirus vector, but are their genetic payloads really the same?
No, I'm not which is why I wrote 'essentially'. They J&J and AstraZeneca are, for practical purposes, grouped in the same family as are the Moderna and Pfizer, mRNA vaccines. For the general public (and I include myself in that group) they'll differentiate between J&J/AZ and Pfizer/Moderna but seldom within the 'family', albeit that Moderna is currently the preferred booster for combatting Omicron.Here in the USA, nationwide pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens are giving appts within a week. You schedule them on-line. I called my local independent pharmacy here in central New Jersey and walked in to get the Moderna shot to match my first two shots. No appt necessary. It all took about 15 minutes including filling out the forms. They made me wait ten minutes though before leaving in case I passed out, a pleasant caution. :o They were offering Pfizer as well. Not sure about others.
My companion has just returned from the UK where she had to fly to to get her booster shot - she expected Pfizer, got Moderna - all outside her control, and that on top of an initial 2-jab AZ.
The walk-in vaccination centres are full to the brink , queues extending around several blocks, waiting times (in the cold, fog and rain) often exceeding 4/5 hours and many being told at the end of the day to 'go home, try again tomorrow'. It really is pot luck.
Another update from Your Local Epidemiologist website (https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com) run by epidemiologist Katelyn Jetelina. Well worth reading in its entirety. A number of graphs and a great deal of good information.Good report. Just some added information about the guy who died of Omicron in Texas.
https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/omicron-update-dec-22 (https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/omicron-update-dec-22)
Just a few excerpts below:
Omicron Update: Dec 22
Well, Omicron continues to show its colors across the globe with case rates surging far beyond what we've seen with any previous waves, like in Denmark and the UK. Other countries, like France, the United States, and Canada have a recent explosion of cases pointing to the beginning of their Omicron wave. Places that put in country-wide restrictions, like the Netherlands and Germany, have altered their Omicron path thus far...
...Omicron became the dominant variant in just two short weeks and now accounts for more than 73% of cases in the United States now. By next week Omicron could easily account for 100% of cases. Will Omicron completely overtake Delta or will Delta continue its path among some groups? We should get clarity on this soon.
With more Omicron will come more cases. The Northeast has, by far, the most cases right now. Washington DC is the leader (134 cases per 100,000) in which cases have increased 440% in the past two weeks. This is followed by New York City with 121 cases per 100K and a 342% increase...
...Nationwide hospitalizations are only up a modest 13% and deaths continue to remain “low” at 1,351 deaths per day. But severe disease patterns lag cases 3-4 weeks, so we will see what happens in a few weeks. While I expect an uptick, I certainly don’t think we will reach levels like we saw in the past thanks to our vaccines and adaptive immune systems. It’s noteworthy, though, that the first Omicron death was reported this week in Houston among a male aged 50-60 years old who previously recovered from COVID19. Do not rely on previous infections to get you through this Omicron wave.
See the link above to read more.
1 hr 47 min ago:Covid is on the way out. No one really cares anymore. Sure, there are places that have shut down some venues. But people are just moving on expecting their lives to continue; not isolating. Omicron does not seem that dangerous to most. We'll probably all get it, or at least most of us. Air travel is up to two million the same as it was before the pandemic. People are getting on with the holidays, Christmas and New Year. We are not going to repeat the isolation we did before, so yes, Covid is on its way out.
UK reports more than 100,000 daily Covid-19 cases for the first time since pandemic began.
What a relief that the LuLa virologist (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1230740#msg1230740) has confirmed that "now that Covid is on the way out..."
Covid is on the way out. No one really cares anymore.Worth pointing out again:
Air travel is up to two million the same as it was before the pandemic. People are getting on with the holidays, Christmas and New Year. We are not going to repeat the isolation we did before, so yes, Covid is on its way out."If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."-Bertrand Russell
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."-Bertrand RussellThe Atlantic, a liberal magazine, seems to agree with me, not you. It feels strange having the left on my right side. But it's nice they're coming around to my way of thinking. :)
This is true for those who may be doing follish things like traveling and those saying Covid is on the way out.
You are of course entitled to your uninformed opinions on this subject. As I am entitled to my fact based data points.
Today: UK reports more than 100,000 daily Covid-19 cases for the first time since pandemic began. NO. Covid is NOT on its way out.
Also from The Atlantic article linked above...So what's your point? Meanwhile, 2 million people are flying daily and tens of millions the most in years are travelling for the holidays according to the Automobile Association of America AAA. Americans are basically thumbing their noses at Omicron and taking their chances. They've had it.
"Reality may force some adjustments to this strategy over the next weeks and months. If Omicron starts to send patients to ICUs in the tens of thousands, bringing hospitals to the brink of collapse, both politicians and citizens are going to respond. But if the goal had once been to stop an emergency from arising, serious restrictions like shutdowns are now thinkable only if we get into a situation in which the emergency is already plain for all to see."
The Atlantic, a liberal magazine, seems to agree with me, not you.If one person and one magazine say a stupid thing, it's still stupid.
Omicron Is the Beginning of the End
So what's your point? Meanwhile, 2 million people are flying daily and tens of millions the most in years are travelling for the holidays according to the Automobile Association of America AAA. Americans are basically thumbing their noses at Omicron and taking their chances. They've had it.
Omicron Is the Beginning of the End
Despite skyrocketing caseloads, few pundits or politicians are proposing strict measures to slow the virus’s spread. The appetite for shutdowns or other large-scale social interventions simply isn’t there. This means that we have effectively given up on “slowing the spread” or “flattening the curve.” To a much greater degree than during previous waves, we have quietly decided to throw up our hands.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/omicron-end-of-pandemic/621089/
It feels strange having the left on my right side.Science Is Not A Liberal Conspiracy.
Reading this over, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it?I'm only reporting how it seems people feel about Omicron. Sometimes people just get on with things despite the danger. The being locked up, losing jobs, inflation, as well as Covid, reaches a point where people throw up their hands and say enough is enough. And move on with all the risk. It could be OK or it could be terrible. It's just that a lot of people have had it. Maybe they're playing the odds.
People are still dying from the original virus, you know, it's not only Omicron out there. Don't get me wrong, I hope the Omicron variant is less lethal, be nice to have some good news for a change. But US daily deaths are still very high, this isn't over yet. I don't quite understand why you insist that it is. What's the upside?
I'm only reporting how it seems people feel about Omicron.You know how they feel do you.
The being locked up, losing jobs, inflation, as well as Covid, reaches a point where people throw up their hands and say enough is enough.And as the numbers show, a lot of them die from Covid-19. Again, natural selection.
It's just that a lot of people have had itAnd died from it; and yet we hear: Covid is on the way out. Wishful ignorance will not solve this pandemic.
So what's your point? Meanwhile, 2 million people are flying daily and tens of millions the most in years are travelling for the holidays according to the Automobile Association of America AAA. Americans are basically thumbing their noses at Omicron and taking their chances. They've had it.
Moving on with all the risk is foolish. Moving forward with some risk, while taking precautions like vaccination, masks, and other common sense public health measures makes sense.I agree. But a large percentage of Americans are vaccinated. So why shouldn't they be feeling more secure? Especially when it seems Omicron is not as dangerous as the earlier strains?
Well, 2 million people travelling at this time is not something to rejoice over or be proud of. Also not very wise. Many of the people who had it and are now taking chances may end in ICU's or even worse. I hear from my friends and acquintances more and more stories about their relatives contracting Omicron.Yesterday they announced the first death from Omicron in Texas, a man who had other medical issues as well and was unvaccinated. Considering 73% of cases nationally are Omicron vs 27% Delta as of Dec 18th, that's a tiny percentage. (On Dec 4th there were no cases of Omicron and the rest were 100% Delta). It appears that Omicron is really not as deadly even though is highly transmissible. As well, although the cases are increasing exponentially, hospitalizations are decreasing. Let's hope it remains that way.
Who says Omicron will be the last variant to come out? And what if the next variant is as contagious as Omicron but much more lethal. Let’s not forget in the majority of the population, this virus is running without having to deal with vaccines. Just a month ago we didn’t even hear about Omicron…now it’s infecting without stopping at the vaccinated. We might be lucky that Omicron is not as deadly as other variants…but it’s think it’s highly premature to celebrate and dance like it’s 1999.Celebrate and dance like it's 1999. What did I miss in 1999?
Celebrate and dance like it's 1999. What did I miss in 1999?
So how did NYC get to 90% Omicron in just a couple of weeks since discovered unless the masks aren't working? It can't be just the non-vaccinated since vaccinated are getting infected too. I think Omicron is re-defining measures we may have thought to be effective.Now that (according to you) Covid is on the way out, why ask? Forget the mask Alan, go enjoy yourself; breathe free.
Considering the highly contagious nature of Omicron, are the pathogens bypassing mask protection?
When I was in NYC the other day, most people are walking around the streets with masks on.
I agree. But a large percentage of Americans are vaccinated. So why shouldn't they be feeling more secure? Especially when it seems Omicron is not as dangerous as the earlier strains?
Covid-19 cases are surging upward again in the United States, and public health experts are warning the fast-spreading omicron variant may push the number of infections to their highest level yet. Whether this surge will be followed by an unprecedented level of hospitalization and death is uncertain, but researchers say it’s possible the most devastating phase of the pandemic is yet to come.
Already, countries like South Africa, the United Kingdom, and Denmark have seen sharp spikes in new Covid-19 cases, with some areas reaching record highs. South Africa has reported far fewer hospitalizations from omicron compared to previous waves, but the UK is is in the midst of a sharp rise in hospitalizations, about 30 percent higher week over week.
...
In one of the most comprehensive forecasts to date, researchers from the Covid-19 Modeling Consortium at the University of Texas at Austin on Friday chalked out 18 different scenarios for omicron. Their study was not peer-reviewed, but the findings show that the US is facing yet another dangerous variant while the conditions for spreading it — the holiday season — are at their most favorable.
Amazon.com Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Pinterest Inc., Twitter Inc. and several news outlets have canceled plans to attend the annual CES technology conference in Las Vegas, a response to surging Covid-19 cases around the world.
You obviously don't appreciate the late great musician, Prince.Purple Rain - good movie and music.
The booster shot should lower the covid infection rate, but not by 100% and not for everyone.The article is four days old, too old for how fast Omicron is moving to conclude effectively. The data is changing that quickly. I have a suspicion that this variant is so contagious, it's going to go through populations like sh!t through a goose. Stay at home, masks, nothing is going to hold it back. In two weeks (Dec 4th to Dec 18th) it went from 0% to 73% dominant variant; 90% in NYC. It has tripled out here in NJ where I live.
https://www.vox.com/22839742/omicron-covid-19-winter-surge-vaccine-booster-forecast
Some dummies may feel secure and will travel, but many corporations are extending work-at-home plans, cancelling their participation at trade shows and laying off employees. So, indirectly the exploding omicron wave is hurting badly businesses, hospitals, and many innocent bystanders.
My wife and I use KN95 and N95 masks. But I wonder just how more effective they are and will be against Omicron?
Stay at home, masks, nothing is going to hold it back.
Frankly, I don't know if cities and countries will ever recover.
Assuming they have been properly fitted to your face, respirator-style masks (the Chinese-standard KN95, American-standard N95, and European-standard FFP2) should be as effective in protecting you (https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1791500O/comparison-ffp2-kn95-n95-filtering-facepiece-respirator-classes-tb.pdf) against the omicron variant as they would against any other of the SARS-CoV-2 mutations. I haven't seen any reports of evidence that the size of aerosols or other droplets emitted by infected individuals varies with the particular strain of the coronavirus that infected them.if the load requirements for Omicron for transmission is less than the other variants, then the masks won't work as efficiently. It has nothing to do with the size of the virus. Those could all be the same. But the quantity becomes a factor. So masks may not be as effective with the Omicron variant.
Given the history of cities and countries recovering from past plagues, pandemics, and the devastation from wars; it's a bit premature to worry that the sky is falling.If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.
if the load requirements for Omicron for transmission is less than the other variants, then the masks won't work as efficiently.But they still work far better than NO mask!
So masks may not be as effective with the Omicron variant.But they still work far better than NO mask!
If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.Did you ever have your own business or is this another assumption based on no experience?
If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.
Losing your business may be a heartbreaking disappointment or a financial disaster, but it is not the end of the world. Even in non-pandemic times, businesses fail or go bankrupt with regularity and the investors or owners salvage what they can and move forward. Many successful entrepreneurs have had multiple business failures before achieving lasting success.Easy for you to say. Meanwhile, it's cold comfort for the thousands who invested their life savings and lost everything.
Bad news: Omicron has exploded in the U.S., weeks before we thought it would. As recently as 2 weeks ago, most experts thought this would be a January issue, not a December one. The rapid uptick nationally, particularly in cities like NYC, Miami, & Houston, is jaw-dropping
Good news: What goes up must come down, in life & Covid. The new data that Omicron cases in South Africa have peaked and are now falling is comforting. https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/586968-south-africa-ground-zero-for-omicron-now-seeing…
Omicron may turn out to be a 6-8 week hurricane, doing a lot of damage but moving through quickly.
More good news: evidence for lower severity is increasingly persuasive, incl. new data from UK.
https://reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/hospital-stay-risk-omicron-is-40-45-lower-than-delta-uk-study-2021-12-22/…
How much less severe is not yet clear – I’m going with a 30-50% lower rate of hospitalization as my governing assumption, subject to change w/ more data.
More good news #2: In late '21, we have tools to “rescue” people, particularly those at-risk, if they get Covid. The main evidence-based tools are monoclonal antibodies and, as of today, the Pfizer drug Paxlovid. The MAbs reduce hospitalization by ~70%, Paxlovid by nearly 90%..
Bad news: The MAbs that your hospital has stocked (likely Regeneron or Lilly) no longer work against Omicron. The one that will work (GSK's Sotrovimab) is in massively short supply. Moreover, lab tests show some loss in GSK's efficacy as well.
https://nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03829-0….
Paxlovid, which got EUA today, is a true game-changer: a 5d pill that reduces risk of hospitalization by 89%.
https://cnbc.com/2021/12/22/fda-authorizes-pfizers-covid-treatment-pill-the-first-oral-antiviral-drug-cleared-during-the-pandemic.html…
But here too there are problems: you’ll need to get diagnosed quickly, & tests (whether PCR or antigen) are incredibly hard to come by and then you’ll need access to the drug. Pfizer anticipates having 180K doses by January 1 – there were 190,000 Americans dxed w/ Covid YESTERDAY! So as Covid cases soar, we'll see real bottlenecks in access to the meds (MAbs & Paxlovid mostly) that can truly lower risk.
Bad news: old incubation period rules (5d) aren’t right anymore. At least from Norway X-Mas party study, it looks shorter than that: 2-3d.
https://eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.50.2101147…
This’ll put a premium on earlier testing & faster tracing, both hard to do. We still don’t know what Omicron does to the infectious period – maybe you get sick sooner but clear it faster? Dunno. We need to sort this out stat – if every infected MD/RN is forced to stay home for 7-10 days, I don’t see how we can staff our hospitals & clinics. By report, ( @nyulangone ) has gone to 5 days of isolation for asymptomatic vaccinated healthcare workers (w/ neg rapid tests days 4-5), which seems logical to me, though many will wait for CDC to bless this strategy. Fauci raised this yesterday as a crucial issue, and he’s right.
https://beckershospitalreview.com/infection-control/us-may-trim-isolation-period-for-asymptomatic-healthcare-workers-fauci-says.html… (
Good news: vax (& booster) still works for Omi. Bad news: you really need boost for real protection – 1 or 2 shots won’t cut it, & prior infection is of limited help. And we may end up needing a 4th shot, as Israel has begun for high-risk people.
https://nytimes.com/2021/12/22/world/middleeast/vaccine-booster-israel-covid.html… (1
And more bad news: 40% of our fellow citizens have made the foolish choice not to get a remarkably effective and safe vaccine that has saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the U.S. And if they haven’t taken it yet, I can’t imagine many will do it now, particularly as the “less severe” narrative takes hold (largely without the nuance and caveats it requires). These unvaccinated folks will almost certainly get Omicron. Luckily, the vast majority will survive. But tens of thousands will die unnecessarily, compounding the tragedy.
More bad news: After 2 yrs, we don’t understand much about Long Covid, & don’t know its prevalence w/ Omicron, after vax, etc. It remains a hardship for millions, and a lingering concern for me as I think about the prospect of getting even a “mild” case of Omicron.
Good news: it's possible that – when dust settles from this Omicron surge – we’ll find ourselves in a fairly good place: with a dominant virus that is, in fact, milder than Delta, with virtually everybody having some immunity from either infection or vaccination, and with ready access to testing and oral antivirals to help us manage a small number of ongoing cases – leading to lower rates of transmission and fewer bad outcomes.
Easy for you to say. Meanwhile, it's cold comfort for the thousands who invested their life savings and lost everything.
We've heard the complaint. What's your solution?You posited that the sky hasn't fallen yet. I was only pointing out that the sky has fallen already for many people.
What do people normally do when their business fails?Well, let's hope they have a better year next year.
"According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as reported by Fundera, approximately 20 percent of small businesses fail within the first year. By the end of the second year, 30 percent of businesses will have failed. By the end of the fifth year, about half will have failed. And by the end of the decade, only 30 percent of businesses will remain — a 70 percent failure rate."
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/The True Failure Rate of Small Businesses (https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/361350)
Frankly, I don't know if cities and countries will ever recover.
Given the history of cities and countries recovering from past plagues, pandemics, and the devastation from wars; it's a bit premature to worry that the sky is falling.
One last question, my original reply was to your concern that...I was just trying to point out that a lot of people have suffered much financially. It's not just a matter of losing a business but feeding your family, paying rent or a mortgage, etc. Of course, life goes on. But some of us, myself included, have done OK, so far, through these troubled times. I'm sure you agree that we shouldn't forget those who haven't, especially in this holiday season.
When I replied that...
You immediately changed the subject from your concern over whether "cities and countries will ever recover" to individuals losing businesses instead. Why did you deflect to another topic?
* By the way, I did acknowledge that: "Losing your business may be a heartbreaking disappointment or a financial disaster". Did you deflect because you didn't want to acknowledge "the history of cities and countries recovering from past plagues, pandemics, and the devastation from wars"?
*The power of R()*I have a feeling that Omicron is going through the populations so quickly, we won't have time to do much about it.
Considering the Omicron variant was first reported at the end of November in but a handful of cases in the UK, was there ever a better example of the need to be both pre-emptive and proactive ?
• In England around 1.2 million people were infected with Covid last week, or one in 45 of the population – a pandemic record. London estimated one in 30 people were infected last week. Active cases are currently guesstimated at circa double that.
And a postscript to Alan Klein on the J&J/AZ vaccine:
• An Oxford University lab study on AstraZeneca’s vaccine, Vaxzevria, showed that after a three-dose course of the vaccine, neutralising levels against Omicron were broadly similar to those against the Delta variant after two doses.
Stay at home, masks, nothing is going to hold it back... Frankly, I don't know if cities and countries will ever recover.
If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.
Meanwhile, it's cold comfort for the thousands who invested their life savings and lost everything.
the sky has fallen already for many people.
I have a feeling that Omicron is going through the populations so quickly, we won't have time to do much about it.
We've heard the complaint. What's your solution?
So, how do you suggest that people should respond? What action should government take at the local, state, and federal level?
Send some pictures, Joe.
So, how do you suggest that people should respond? What action should government take at the local, state, and federal level?Nothing much. The government won't change anything. It's so viral and so many are traveling for the holidays. By the time they all get back home, everyone will have it.
Next year, we need to strive to rise above the clouds!Nice shot. Aren't cell phones amazing! You can instantaneously transmit voice and pictures across the world. When I think of my old Kodak box camera when I was a kid.
Glad to see nothing has changed here.
Nope. You still drop in to spread misinformation and wild assertions from time to time.That's strange. I thought you were the wild one. :)
Glad that you're doing well.
If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.
Easy for you to say. Meanwhile, it's cold comfort for the thousands who invested their life savings and lost everything.
What about those that lost much more...like their lives. Do they count in your view.Of course they count. But can't we walk and chew gum at the same time? I've always argued that Covid is hitting us in two ways - our health and our economy. Can't we also have compassion for those who lost their livelihood and can't feed their families? Unfortunately, this whole thing has gotten political from day one. Democrats for health and Republicans for jobs. It's just silly. The election is over.
I have a feeling that Omicron is going through the populations so quickly, we won't have time to do much about it.
I've always argued that Covid is hitting us in two ways - our health and our economy.
Can't we also have compassion for those who lost their livelihood and can't feed their families?
Next year, we need to strive to rise above the clouds!
The top of the Burj Khalifa is over 200 metres above the highest point reached by the building’s elevators, which reach the 160th floor at speeds of some 10 metres per second. The tower’s public observation deck is on the 124th floor and the journey to the pinnacle involves a steep ladder climb within the 200-meter spire that crowns the building.
Of course Covid is hitting both health and the economy. The longer Covid is around the greater the hit on the economy, if for no other reason than those who get Covid are not contributing. Surely we should be concentrating on getting rid of Covid quicker by stopping its spread and severity. Data from many places are showing that the most ill are often unvaccinated. Masks slow the spread.Is it possible that the way to defeat Omicron is to allow it to infect everyone, run its course, to get it behind us?
Whatever political leaning people have it would seem to be in everyone’s interest to do all they can to defeat Covid then we can return to a normal life and economy minimising the damage to both.
Jonathan
Is it possible that the way to defeat Omicron is to allow it to infect everyone, run its course, to get it behind us?Do get infected and let us then know how it works for you.
The research may help explain why people who are overweight and obese have been at higher risk of severe illness and death from Covid.
"Why you should upgrade your mask as the Omicron variant spreads":
"Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations. There's no place for them in light of Omicron," said CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, on CNN Newsroom Tuesday".
This is the cure.
Data from South Africa is showing that it is spreading faster amongst the vaccinated than the un-vaxxed. Turns out, looks like natural immunity is better, so this will burn through the population (even recent triple vaxed are getting it), and hopefully large amounts of natural immunity will finally end it.
...
Just to add, Omicold is 80% less deadly then Delta, which was less deadly then Alpha, and there is no spike in hospitalizations and deaths in countries that have already peaked, like South Africa. This is going to be nothing but a case of the common cold, for nearly all, and what Covid is going to be now that it is endemic.
But anyway, yes, you will most likely get it and spread it at this point. It is 70 times more transmissible that Delta, which was 40 times more then Alpha, which was very transmissible to begin with. So 2800 times easier to spread that the first strain. However we are not seeing many deaths from this.
...
This is the cure.
Turns out, looks like natural immunity is better, so this will burn through the population (even recent triple vaxed are getting it), and hopefully large amounts of natural immunity will finally end it.
Utterly incorrect.Yes, and from the same folks who will tell you, just get infected, survive, (don't suffer long Covid-19), don't worry about the tax on the healthcare system and all the other nonesense. Meanwhile:
First Omicron Death in U.S. Was Reinfection** This is a cure too; natural seleciton. :'(
Dec. 24. 2021 -- The first confirmed death from the Omicron variant in the U.S. was a reinfection.
The man, who was in his 50s and lived in Harris County, Texas, was unvaccinated and had previously been infected with COVID-19. He recently contracted the virus again, and it was confirmed as the Omicron variant.
Harris County health officials also said he faced a higher risk for severe complications because of underlying health conditions and being unvaccinated**.
“This is a reminder of the severity of COVID-19 and its variants. We urge all residents who qualify to get vaccinated and get their booster shot if they have not already,” Barbie Robinson, executive director of Harris County Public Health, said in a statement.
Yes, and from the same folks who will tell you, just get infected, survive, (don't suffer long Covid-19), don't worry about the tax on the healthcare system and all the other nonesense. Meanwhile:** This is a cure too; natural seleciton. :'(
Utterly incorrect.
Anti-Vax Podcaster Reportedly On Ventilator For COVID After Attending Right-Wing Rallyhttps://www.huffpost.com/entry/doug-kuzma-covid-ventilator-reawaken-america_n_61c7c6e4e4b0bb04a6308680?ncid=APPLENEWS00001
Doug Kuzma posed with supplies of the dewormer medicine Ivermectin, which the FDA and CDC have warned against using to treat COVID-19. As of Saturday, Kuzma was “sedated and on a ventilator;” he is “not conscious,” noted a Frog News message. “Doug needs heavy, heavy prayers,” the message added.
A number of individuals who fell ill with COVID-like symptoms after attending the same Dallas event have claimed without evidence that they were somehow poisoned with anthrax— rather than contracting COVID because few were likely vaccinated or wearing masks at the large, crowded event.
Of course it is incorrect. Look whom it's from!That's a personal attack. Just state your opinion on the matter.
That's a personal attack. Just state your opinion on the matter.
That's a personal attack.And like so many others, you'll report him. How's that working out for you?
That's a personal attack. Just state your opinion on the matter.
Fauci's getting too pushy, I think, even for Biden.No, you really are not.
He's forcing Biden to make decisions he doesn't want to make. Let's see if Fauci backs off or gets fired.Make up your minds sir, Fauci's forcing the CEO?
So now President Biden gets blamed for BARDA dragging their feet. That's how blame works. The CEO takes the heat.The absurd is the last refuge of a pundit without an argument.
Fauci's getting too pushy, I think, even for Biden. He's forcing Biden to make decisions he doesn't want to make. Let's see if Fauci backs off or gets fired.
Fauci: US should consider vaccine mandate for US air travel
https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-travel-lifestyle-health-d0fa7cf5afa770984339f6370c5f1608
In fact, simply wearing a high-filtration mask (*) can buy you significant time if exposed to infectious individuals. Analysis and studies suggest that with cloth or surgical masks, the risk of infection may increase within minutes of being around others with either no mask or low-performing masks. However with the use of well fitting, high-filtration masks, this same level of exposure would now take hours to become dangerous. However, it should be noted that being around a contagious person always carries some risk.
[...]
These masks feature a high-tech material called electrostatically charged meltblown polypropylene (quite a mouthful). It features tightly spaced micron-sized fibres – about 1/50th the diameter of a human hair – that have an electrostatic charge applied to them to catch even smaller particles. This material can filter particles that are a just a few nanometres in size.
[...]
Not all masks are created equal, so it’s time to make sure everyone knows about high-filtration masks. These simple, inexpensive and super-effective masks can make a significant difference in our fight against Covid. If you wear a mask, you might as well make it count by wearing the best.
Interesting op-ed in The Guardian, extracted below.
In fact, simply wearing a high-filtration mask can buy you significant time if exposed to infectious individuals.
Watch Fauci back off too as Biden puts pressure on him to shut up regarding mandatory vaccinations to fly.More assumptions and fictional 'thinking'.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Monday shortened the recommended times that people should isolate when they've tested positive for Covid-19 from 10 days to five days if they don't have symptoms -- and if they wear a mask around others for at least five more days. "Given what we currently know about COVID-19 and the Omicron variant, CDC is shortening the recommended time for isolation from 10 days for people with COVID-19 to five days, if asymptomatic, followed by five days of wearing a mask when around others," the CDC said in a statement.Further, this is the science they study, you don't:
"The change is motivated by science demonstrating that the majority of SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurs early in the course of illness, generally in the 1-2 days prior to onset of symptoms and the 2-3 days after.
Besides masks like the N95, 3M Corporation also makes HVAC filters called Filtrete.Get the bluetooth optional version.
Undoubtedly true, but a respirator only achieves its full protective potential if the product has been fit-tested on a particular individual—a procedure the user should repeat each time he puts on a new type of mask. Execute a search on "face mask fit [training|testing]" to find articles and videos that attempt to explain the proper end-user procedures. Some masks fit better on some faces than others; it's useful to try several different products and standardize on one that works well for you.
The immune response of people infected with omicron appears to increase protection against delta more than fourfold, according to a study from South Africa.
Omicron could displace delta as a consequence, the team of scientists found.
If omicron also proves less severe, Covid infections could prove less disruptive to society, they wrote.
However, the study has not been peer reviewed, current data on severity is preliminary, and epidemiologists have warned omicron could still strain hospitals.
Not peer-reviewed but a initial hopeful sign:
The immune response of people infected with omicron appears to increase protection against delta more than fourfold, according to a study from South Africa.
83 The ability of one variant to elicit immunity which can cross-neutralize another variant varies by
84 variant. Immunity elicited by Delta infection does not cross-neutralize Beta virus and Beta elicited
85 immunity does not cross-neutralize Delta well. However, participants in this study have likely been
86 previously infected, and more than half were vaccinated. Therefore, it is unclear if what we observe
87 is effective cross-neutralization of Delta virus by Omicron elicited antibodies, or activation of antibody
88 immunity from previous infection and/or vaccination.
89 These results are consistent with Omicron displacing the Delta variant, since it can elicit immunity
90 which neutralizes Delta making re-infection with Delta less likely. In contrast, Omicron escapes
91 neutralizing immunity elicited by Delta and therefore may re-infect Delta infected individuals. The
92 implications of such displacement would depend on whether Omicron is indeed less pathogenic than
93 Delta. If so, then the incidence of Covid-19 severe disease would be reduced and the infection may
94 shift to become less disruptive to individuals and society.
One wonders how much the CDC is telling us now is way off?Translation: Alan Klein wonders. He has no training in this subject and told us awhile back something that since then has been proven to be wrong as the days progress. This is far more untrue today than when this fellow who told us here:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.To show how far off he is:
54 min ago: US hits record average number of new Covid-19 cases
The US reached a seven-day average of 254,496 new cases on Tuesday, the highest this number has ever been over the course of the pandemic, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Tuesday’s number beat the previous record of 251,989 new cases, set on Jan. 11, 2021.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt". -Bertrand Russel
... The news is being biased to scare people. This is why there's so much distrust about politicians, scientists, and the media. They're being dishonest in the way they report the news. ...
News reporting is biased, so people distrust scientists, is that the logic here?Why ask the logic impaired?
News reporting is biased, so people distrust scientists, is that the logic here? Is this similar to when Hannity (or was it Tucker) said that the Jan 6 insurrection was a false flag operation, you mean that kind of fake sensationalism or do you only count the kind you don't like.Well, of course, Fox or CNN would be expected to bias their reporting. But the article I selected was from the newspaper of record - the New York Times that is used throughout the world as an important and credible source of news.
According to Worldometer, it's not clear that deaths are decreasing, they seem to be pretty stable these days, although they may be decreasing relative to the number of infections, or so it appears at the moment. I hope this is the case. There may be a lag in deaths though, the next few weeks should show that. Presumably, not all those new infections are due to Omicron, so the non-Omicron new infections should show similar death rates as in the past.
It seems to me that this little post of yours is a pretty good example of biased reporting. You're trying to push an agenda, are you.
Aside from that, I hope the non-lethal nature of Omicron is real and holds up.
Well, of course, Fox or CNN would be expected to bias their reporting.Well of course you have watched both and can provide specific examples...
The news is being biased to scare people.
Well of course you have watched both and can provide specific examples...Allow me to start Alan:
Or this is another set of knee jerk assumptions. Of course. 🤫
During a Fox News appearance this week, the Republican lawmaker called the vaccines "divisive" — which apparently means many on the right don't like them — before sharing these words of wisdom:What a dangerous moron.
“Listen, we all hoped and prayed the vaccines would be 100 percent effective, 100 percent safe, but they're not. We now know that fully vaccinated individuals can catch Covid, they can transmit Covid. So what's the point?"
Now we have the Delta variant, which is a 1000 times more contagious than Alpha
Glad to see nothing has changed here.
Just to add, Omicold [Omicron]...
But anyway, yes, you will most likely get it and spread it at this point. It is 70 times more transmissible that [than] Delta, which was 40 times more then [than] Alpha, which was very transmissible to begin with. So 2800 times easier to spread that the first strain.
Looking for wild-ass claims regarding COVID-19? You'll find them here. Looking for reliable information? Look to those with knowledge and education on the subject and not BS spread thru social media or online forums by people completely ignorant on the topic, that jump to rash conclusions, and want to share their misinformation with others.Well that begs the question, why does the LuLa owners allow this, when all kinds of other sites and social media attempt, repeat attempt, to police dangerous misinformation about this pandemic? Even "Nextdoor" where I live does a half decent job of deleting dangerous posts recommending Ivermectin, regurgitanting anti-vaccine and anti-mask lies. Of course, the same idiots who post this garbage then tell us, incorrectly, it is their first amendment right to speak these dangerous lies. It isn't. They know as little about the first amendment as they do about masks and vaccines.
Doesn't anyone care how many died?
That's the question I asked you when all you could talk about are the people that had to scale back their businesses in order to control Covid spread.The biased media slanted the news then as well. They downplayed the impact on the economy only talking about how bad deaths and spreading were. As was pointed out then, they were not covering economic problems due to the shutdown. They should have raised the twin effects of Covid on health and the economy.
The biased media slanted the news then as well. They downplayed the impact on the economy only talking about how bad deaths and spreading were. As was pointed out then, they were not covering economic problems due to the shutdown. They should have raised the twin effects of Covid on health and the economy.Worth repeating, no doubt about it either:
Now they're downplaying deaths because those are going down. They rather focus on higher rates of infections, again slanting the news to the public. Bad news sells.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.Often wrong but never in doubt!
The biased media slanted the news then as well. They downplayed the impact on the economy only talking about how bad deaths and spreading were. As was pointed out then, they were not covering economic problems due to the shutdown. They should have raised the twin effects of Covid on health and the economy.
Now they're downplaying deaths because those are going down. They rather focus on higher rates of infections, again slanting the news to the public. Bad news sells.
It appears that omicron is not as deadly as the previous variants, but it is still causing high number of hospitalizations and overfilled ICUs. That causes indirectly many deaths, burnout of medical professionals, increased healthcare costs and many other complications.Exactly!
People Without COVID Are Dying Because Hospitals Are Full of Unvaxxed PatientsThe selfish unvaccinated are killing others.
The daughter of an Iowa man who died after waiting two weeks for a hospital bed blames unvaccinated COVID patients for “clogging” hospitals.
High number of infections can cause other problems and deaths. People with compromised health can die even from common cold.That's a good point about more hospitalizations.
It appears that omicron is not as deadly as the previous variants, but it is still causing high number of hospitalizations and overfilled ICUs. That causes indirectly many deaths, burnout of medical professionals, increased healthcare costs and many other complications.
That's a good point about more hospitalizations.Facts always are.
The biased media slanted the news then as well. They downplayed the impact on the economy only talking about how bad deaths and spreading were. As was pointed out then, they were not covering economic problems due to the shutdown. They should have raised the twin effects of Covid on health and the economy.
Now they're downplaying deaths because those are going down. They rather focus on higher rates of infections, again slanting the news to the public. Bad news sells.
Dept. of Health and Human Services - U.S. Hospital and ICU Bed Utilization - Updated December 29, 2019It seems like there are still plenty of beds available for other uses. Of course, these numbers are deceptive because they're averages. It could be worse in some states and areas than others.
Hospital Inpatient Beds in Use - 75.33%
Hospital Inpatient Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 12.17%
ICU Beds in Use - 77.77%
ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 22.43%
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization (https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization)
Les says filled up hospitals there are aggravating care for other medical issues. Do we have recent figures for Canadian hospital bed utilization for comparison?He should supply actual data so you can dismiss and question it?
It seems like there are still plenty of beds available for other uses. Of course, these numbers are deceptive because they're averages. It could be worse in some states and areas than others.They are not deceptive. In specific locations, they are far worse. Specifics, of which you usually don't care about, in my state:
Of course, these numbers are deceptive because they're averages.
It could be worse in some states and areas than others.
It seems like there are still plenty of beds available for other uses. Of course, these numbers are deceptive because they're averages. It could be worse in some states and areas than others.
I'm curious about Canada. Les says filled up hospitals there are aggravating care for other medical issues. Do we have recent figures for Canadian hospital bed utilization for comparison?
I don't have the officlal Canadians stats, but can share some of my personal experiences.I'm sorry you're going through such long delays in tests. It's stressful enough to just have to take them. My personal experience here in NYC is that last year, because many doctors were not even in hospitals, there were a lot of backlogs for just regular doctor appts. I also canceled a couple to avoid exposure to Covid at the hospital where I had doctor appts. I waited a few weeks until the number of COvid cases dropped and things seemed better. That seems to have cleared up for regular visits for the last few months.
Earlier this year, my doctor wanted me to see another specialist and take some extra tests. One of the tests is MRI. It is scheduled for March 2022 which is 10 months from my initial consultation (on phone). The delay is due to limited number of MRI equipment and staff in the nearby hospitals, most probably to many more patients and required tests, but also due to the heavy load of the medical professionals which causes mixups, incompetencies, sick staff and other inefficiences.
They are not deceptive and they are not averages.Well, the media keeps telling us how hospital beds are all loaded up due to Omicron. Your statistics show otherwise. 75% is not full up. And 12.17% of hospital beds for Covid patients is a small percentage. Even 22.43% for ICU beds for Covid patients is a relatively small number. So where's the problem? So the question is just how prevalent are hospitals actually filled up? If it's just a few out of thousands of hospitals, that doesn't prove much. It's not really that bad. It would seem media is just scaring everyone. Bad news sells.
The statistics do vary depending on state, county, or city. That should be obvious.
I don't have the officlal Canadians stats, but can share some of my personal experiences.
Earlier this year, my doctor wanted me to see another specialist and take some extra tests. One of the tests is MRI. It is scheduled for March 2022 which is 10 months from my initial consultation (on phone). The delay is due to limited number of MRI equipment and staff in the nearby hospitals, most probably to many more patients and required tests, but also due to the heavy load of the medical professionals which causes mixups, incompetencies, sick staff and other inefficiences.
This last year in small town BC, I had 35 doctor or hospital visits to deal with multiple issues ranging from a very painful abdomen to double hernia to fluttering heart to melanoma. I've had multiple MRI scans, multiple heart scans using different techniques and 2 bone scans. I've had surgery on my melanoma .I'm sorry you're going through so many problems. I wish you well with your surgeries and for speedy recoveries with them all. For whatever it's worth, I had a triple bypass 3 years ago and my heart is fine today. I had surgery for cancer twenty years ago and I'm still here. Keep the faith. You've been through a lot already. God isn't going to drop you now.
I am currently awaiting surgery on my heart to kill parts of the heart that are causing the heart to flutter...after which I'll be scheduled for my hernia surgery. Surgeries have been delayed to make room for anticipated Covid surge in the next couple months.
Well, the media keeps telling us how hospital beds are all loaded up due to Omicron.Which media said all beds are loaded up due to Omicron? Attempt to be specific or your audience here will have to again believe you're making stuff up to comment here. Your failure to provide specifics will prove this is again the case.
They are not deceptive and they are not averages.
The statistics do vary depending on state, county, or city. That should be obvious.
Well, the media...
The Tuesday numbers got even worse at the end of the day - almost 313,000 new cases and over 1,800 deaths in USA. Canada reached also record numbers (over 27,000 new infections today), and it is very likely that those numbers in the next days due to Christmas travel will climb even higher.
Well, the media keeps telling us how hospital beds are all loaded up due to Omicron.
Coronavirus cases are soaring across the United States as the more transmissible omicron variant spreads, but hospitalizations remain “comparatively low,” Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told reporters Wednesday.
The number of daily pediatric covid hospital admissions in the United States surpassed 1,200 on Wednesday, according to Washington Post data, approaching highs last seen in the summer. However, doctors have said that despite seeing record positive results from children’s coronavirus tests, the vast majority of cases so far have been mild.
Today at 4:23 a.m. EST|Updated today at 10:15 a.m. EST: Media: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/12/30/covid-omicron-variant-live-updates/
Some welcome good news. I'm surprised the awful media didn't try to cover it up. ;)You'll likely be told by one fellow, again, it's a cover up or worse nonsense.
God isn't going to drop you now."There is no God. No one directs the universe." -Stephen Hawking
Wow! 562,000 new infections today. And that doesn't include 5 states, and also not the positives amongst untested. The real number could be conceivably 1 million.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
Wow! 562,000 new infections today. And that doesn't include 5 states, and also not the positives amongst untested. The real number could be conceivably 1 million.Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta. My own state of New Jersey is one of the 16 worst states. It seems like it will leave as quickly as it hit. News from South Africa seem to support this outcome. Let's hope this is the last hurrah from Covid.
Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta. My own state of New Jersey is one of the 16 worst states. It seems like it will leave as quickly as it hit. News from South Africa seem to support this outcome. Let's hope this is the last hurrah from Covid.Your new prediction is as absurd and created without a lick of expertise as the last one before it and as equally untrue as how you tell us you form them:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
Sorry. I'm following the science, not like you who's following a real estate and stock investor for advice on Covid.Nope!
Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown has pointed out that the ICU capacity in Brampton remains strong, and noted that the focus simply on case counts doesn’t make sense.
Additionally, Brown talked about how many are being listed as ‘admitted with covid’ while actually having come to the hospital for other reasons:
“We need to focus on the severity of Omicron cases and not just case counts. The hospital capacity at Brampton Civic is strong. We are down to only 2 in ICU and only 20 in the hospital with COVID19. There is reason for cautious optimism and hopefully better days ahead in 2022!”
https://twitter.com/patrickbrownont/status/1476212340022464521
“Further, it needs to be noted that over the past week, more than 50% of #COVID19 positive patients at @OslerHealth were admitted due to the virus or respiratory illness, while the remainder came to the hospital for other reasons but were also admitted with COVID-19. Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown is now looking to draw attention to this under-reported issue, which is only getting bigger. “I’ve been told it’s about 50% of cases,” Brown said in a phone interview with the Sun, referring specifically to Brampton hospitals.This means the actual number of people in hospital with COVID-19 throughout Ontario may be half of what the official numbers indicate.“It speaks to the fact that the hospitalization numbers are better than we think they are,”
Brown said, echoing comments he made at a televised press conference Tuesday morning.“If you’re looking at case counts higher than we’ve ever seen before but hospitalizations that haven’t really budged, that’s a really powerful insight into what we’re dealing with.”Brown said in Brampton, the hospital and ICU numbers are actually slightly declining. “That’s a very encouraging trend,” Brown said. “You turn on the news and see doom and gloom, and that’s not what I’m seeing.”
Mayor of Brampton, a medium-sized town northwest of Toronto, just sent out a Happy New Year tweet about Omicron. No wonder people are confused, not knowing whom to trust.Bad news sells. Instead of making a calm and reasoned analysis of the data like your Major apparently did, the media, politicians, and many scientists just paint the worse picture possible to force people to do things rather than allow them to use their own judgment.
Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta. ...
Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta. . . . It seems like it will leave as quickly as it hit.
I could see this guy easily beating an incompetent Biden in the Democratic primary.You are a poor judge of competence.
Bad news sells.Another example of a fellow who never let's facts and his ignorant generalizations get in the way of posting strong opinions:
A pandemic-scarred year ends in darkness -- but with hope on the horizon
Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN
Updated 3:50 AM ET, Fri December 31, 2021
Just a clarification. I wouldn't vote for him...
Bad news sells.
Data from South Africa is showing that it is spreading faster amongst the vaccinated than the un-vaxxed.
Turns out, looks like natural immunity is better...
So, how do they explain the high infection rate despite the 85% vaccination? Maybe people felt overconfident and stopped wearing masks? Or maybe the Puerto Ricans, being such friendly and warm people, hug and kiss too much?The article mentioned the decreasing effectiveness of the vaccines, as well.
So, how do they explain the high infection rate despite the 85% vaccination? Maybe people felt overconfident and stopped wearing masks?That is part of it yes. And 85% is for ONE shot, not two. Plus a newer, very infectious variant, and the fact that vaccines alone do not and have never guaranteed you will not get Covid-19. One person in the article summed it up:
“We followed the mask mandate. Our vaccination rate was so high that we let our guard down. The second Christmas came, we were like, ‘We’re going to party!’”And in part:
The superspreader concert helped usher in an explosion of Covid-19 cases in Puerto Rico...There is nothing surprising here, other than Alan posting a URL that provides nothing new to those who've paid attention to this topic and shows he actually didn't read the article he posted (or understood it, or understood; nothing new here. Another call for attention which worked unfortunately). Had he read the piece, he'd have maybe (maybe?) seen and understood that this country has only a 75 percent full vaccination meaning only 2 shots. In my state, we are above that a little for full vaccination and in my state, cases are way up too; nothing new.
While the Omicron variant has besieged the entire country, it is especially worrisome in Puerto Ricoa U.S. territory already overwhelmed by government bankruptcy, an exodus of health professionals and a fragile health care system
“What I am so worried about over the next month or so is that our economy is going to shut down -- not because of policies from the federal government or from the state governments, but rather because so many of us are ill," Ranney said
In New York, staffing issues led to the suspension of several subway lines, New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced last week.
In Ohio, the mayor of Cincinnati declared a state of emergency after a spike in Covid-19 infections led to staffing shortages in the city's fire department.
The mayor said if the problem goes unaddressed, it would "substantially undermine" first responders' readiness levels.
And thousands of flights have been canceled or delayed as staff and crew call out sick.
Vast majority of patients are unvaccinated, experts say
While Americans who have been fully vaccinated and boosted might get infected with Omicron, they are unlikely to get seriously ill, health experts say.
But doctors across the country say most people hospitalized for Covid-19 are unvaccinated.
"What we're seeing is that our vaccinated patients aren't getting sick, and our frail, multiple comorbidities-vaccinated patients do need admission, but their admissions are shorter and they're able to leave the hospital after several days," said Dr. Catherine O'Neal, chief medical officer at Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a Quebec television station people who do not get vaccinated against COVID-19 are often racist and misogynistic extremists.
https://youtu.be/5I0tk6OO5sw (in French)
The death rate for those aged 18-64 has risen an astonishing 40% over pre-pandemic levels, according to the CEO of Indianapolis-based insurance company OneAmerica.
"We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica," said Scott Davison, head of the $100 billion insurance company that's been in operation since 1877 and has approximately 2,400 employees.
Where must he be getting his information to believe something that crazy.Well we were told "Now that Covid is on the way out" (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1230740#msg1230740), maybe he heard it from the same fellow?
The neighbour of a friend near Hamilton, Ontario, told my friend that there are more hospitalizations due to vaccinations than due to Covid. Where must he be getting his information to believe something that crazy.
From March 2020 to the beginning of September 2021, there were an estimated 20,994 excess deaths in Canada, or 5.0% more deaths than what would be expected were there no pandemic, after accounting for changes in the population, such as aging. Over this same period, 26,065 deaths were directly attributed to COVID-19.
While COVID-19 claimed the lives of 5,930 Canadians from the beginning of February 2021 to the beginning of September 2021, significant excess mortality was not observed nationally during this time. However, some provinces, including Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, experienced periods of excess mortality, generally coinciding with a higher number of deaths attributable to COVID-19 over the same period.
In addition, British Columbia and Alberta saw periods of higher-than-expected mortality at the end of June 2021 and into July, when a heat wave gripped the two provinces. Excess mortality was also observed in the two westernmost provinces in August and September.
While the sharp increase in deaths in British Columbia associated with the heat wave affected those aged 40 years and older, the more recent increase in the number of deaths appears to be driven by those under 40, specifically males. There were 145 (67%) more deaths than expected among males under the age of 40 through the months of August and September.
Stats Canada reports similar numbers in some provinces.The figures are terrible. But this may be the beginning of the end of the pandemic as we move into an endemic end-game like the seasonal flu. Maybe with the larger cases and more vaccinations, we'll finally reach some sort of herd immunity and allow Covid to fade out.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/211206/dq211206a-eng.htm
The figures are terrible. But this may be the beginning of the end of the pandemic as we move into an endemic end-game like the seasonal flu. Maybe with the larger cases and more vaccinations, we'll finally reach some sort of herd immunity and allow Covid to fade out.
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.Often very wrong but never in doubt.
Stats Canada reports similar numbers in some provinces.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/211206/dq211206a-eng.htm
I get the impression everyone's winging it...
Winging it is what people do when all they have are impressions without knowledge and evidence. Everyone is not winging it, only some.CDC knowledge and advice seems to be changing daily. It was better before when they were focused only on health. Now they've been told by Biden that we have to think about the economy and getting kids back into schools. So they're winging it too. You would think they joined the Republican party.
Endless, relentless, mind-numbing repetition of the same theme songs over and over and over. Response is pointless as it only starts the same tune all over again.
Endless, relentless, mind-numbing repetition of the same theme songs over and over and over. Response is pointless as it only starts the same tune all over again.His endless, relentless, mind-numbing repetition is his energy source.
That's unfortunate.
“I really want to piss off the unvaccinated,” Mr. Macron said in an interview with the newspaper Le Parisien.If you are allowed to piss off the intelligent, he should be allowed to piss off the unvaccinated.
The U.S. blew through global records on Monday, reporting more than 1 million diagnosed COVID-19 cases as the Omicron variant continues to drive surges.
Monday’s unfortunate tally is almost double the previous domestic record of 590,000 set just 4 days ago, which doubled case numbers from the week before, according to Bloomberg News. The number is also more than twice the case count reported by any other country at any time during the pandemic. The previous record was set by India, which reported more than 414,000 cases during a surge of the Delta variant in May 2021, the news outlet reported.
New infections reported globally are up 83% over the previous week, and more than 11 million cases are being logged each week worldwide, USA Today reported.
COVID-19 hospitalizations have surpassed 100,000 patients again, according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Nearly 113,000 people are hospitalized across the country for the coronavirus, which marks an increase of 26% from the week before. About the same number of patients were hospitalized during the peak of the Delta variant, USA Today reported.
“Hospitalizations are where the rubber meets the road,” Noymer said. “It’s a more objective measure." He added: "If I had to choose one metric, I would choose the hospitalization data.”
Why such a variance between those the Worldometer and the other 2 sources?
With more and more self testing not always being officially reported, accuracy iffy, keeping an eye on hospital numbers may be a better indication of how bad we are..
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/wireStory/covid-case-counts-losing-importance-amid-omicron-82071670
So the question is just how prevalent are hospitals actually filled up? If it's just a few out of thousands of hospitals, that doesn't prove much. It's not really that bad. It would seem media is just scaring everyone. Bad news sells.
Getting a booster shot decreases Covid-19 mortality by 90% compared to being fully vaccinated.
A study in England examined the vaccines’ effectiveness against the Delta variant over time. It found that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is about 90 percent effective at preventing symptomatic infection two weeks after the second dose but drops to 70 percent effective after five months.
The definition of "fully vaccinated" may have been correct a year ago, but by now the protective effect of two vaccine shots is fading, and to maintain the body immunity you increasingly need a third and soon a fourth shot.Sure, the science changes. It is quite likely 3 or 4 shots will be the definition going forward.
As it happens, last week one of my acquaintances mentioned to me that she is not getting the booster shot, because she feels safe with her one shot received in 2020.The stupidity will not change even if the science will.
Hospital systems in nearly half of U.S. states including Maryland, Virginia and Ohio have announced they would postpone elective surgeries, a Reuters review of public statements and local media reports found, and at least three state governments; New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts, have implemented or recommended state-wide delays.
Most of the areas where hospitals are suspending surgeries have seen either a peak or surge in daily COVID-19 hospitalization rates during December or January, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
The Omicron surge has also forced the National Institutes of Health to postpone elective surgeries at the largest hospital in the United States devoted to clinical research, Reuters reported. Suspending elective surgeries can create a backlog of cases, cause millions of dollars in lost revenue for hospitals, and in some cases lead to serious illness or deaths.
U.S. hospitals lost an estimated $22.3 billion between March and May of 2020 as a result of those cancellations, according to a January 2021 study published in the Annals of Surgery. And now there are even fewer staff to handle both COVID patients and those needing elective surgery. Around 450,000 healthcare workers, or 3% of the industry's workforce, quit between February 2020 and November 2021, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data show.
Worldometer reports 751K new cases on Thursday in USA and CDC adds that the country hasn't reached the peak yet.
Many hospitals are postponing elective surgeries due to high number of hospitalizations.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/overwhelmed-by-omicron-surge-us-hospitals-delay-surgeries-2022-01-07/
For those confused about in which thread they are posting, this is not the political thread.Confused posting agenda indeed.
For those confused about in which thread they are posting, this is not the political thread.I'm posting about vaccinations, test kits, and Covid. How they're distributed, where we are in distribution, and the problems we face because some of those responsible for our health are derelict in handling these things. These ideas are pertinent to the discussion. To split the discussion up makes no sense.
You're not consistent. You just want to silence those you disagree with.
I've regularly suggested that members posting in this thread not hijack the thread for other purposes and to move the political posts to the political thread. I've never suggested that anyone be silenced. Now... here's your crying towel.Why didn't you object to Peter's post? You seem to be a fair man.
Any trace of sympathy I have for the willfully unvaccinated vanishes when I read about the people with non-Covid illnesses who have died because they needed an ICU bed but none was available due to unvaxxed covid patients. Here's one account: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/13/1036593269/coronavirus-alabama-43-icus-at-capacity-ray-demonia
Because it isn't political.When Peter expresses his opinion and sympathy about someone;s opinions and actions, that's politics. How does that differ from my points. I'm criticizing the administration for screwing up Covid test kits. Isn't that about this topic. What else are you going to discuss?
Where is the politics in that? You sound like a child trying to spread blame for being too rowdy the backseat of the car.
Because it isn't political.I suspect it's signs of his Dementia:
Where is the politics in that? You sound like a child trying to spread blame for being too rowdy the backseat of the car.
A senior who is afraid, confused, frustrated and/or unable to communicate effectively can be easily agitated. They may rely on confabulation or “lies” to fill the gaps in their memory, and they may demonstrate childlike behaviors such as emotional outbursts and downright noncompliance with instructions and requests. To caregivers, this behavior may come across as intentionally manipulative, but this is rarely the case. “Dementia patients lose cognitive skills like logic, reasoning, problem-solving and decision-making,” explains Poiley.
What else are you going to discuss?
Any trace of sympathy I have for the willfully unvaccinated vanishes when I read about the people with non-Covid illnesses who have died because they needed an ICU bed but none was available due to unvaxxed covid patients. Here's one account: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/13/1036593269/coronavirus-alabama-43-icus-at-capacity-ray-demonia
Infectious diseases don't spread uniformly. Spikes, surges, and waves of infection vary in time, place, and severity.maybe the figures wouldn't be as bad if we had test kits. Why is the president holding them up?
These are the six states in the U.S. where current hospital ICU occupancy is highest...
• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use - 91.52%
• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 28.79%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.3
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.82%
• Missouri ICU Beds in Use - 90.94%
• Missouri ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 38.25%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.5
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.49%
• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use - 90.33%
• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 34.87%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.2
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 66.85%
• Texas ICU Beds in Use - 89.92%
• Texas ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 27.82%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.6
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 58.91%
• Alabama ICU Beds in Use - 89.74%
• Alabama ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 20.44%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.9
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 48.28%
• New Hampshire ICU Beds in Use - 89.45%
• New Hampshire Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 32.07%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 1.9
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 68.09%
* U.S. National Average ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.7
** U.S. Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 63.20%
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization (https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization)
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region)
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/icu-beds (https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/icu-beds/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D)
Been there—done that. I'm moving on.
An interesting statistic about Omicron. Where does that leave people who don't have four comorbidities? Should the government keep the economy open more? Why is she revealing this information? What does she mean it's "really encouraging news"?
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky Tweets After Backlash Over Omicron Death Comments
"The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75 per cent, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities," she said.
"So really these are people who were unwell to begin with and yes, really encouraging news in the context of Omicron."
https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-rochelle-walensky-tweets-backlash-comments-omicron-death-comorbidities-1667329
The post was just bait for a circular political debate. (https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/716++EoIeRL._AC_SL1010_.jpg)
https://youtu.be/GMA Interview New Study Vaccines Prevent Severe Disease Omicron (https://youtu.be/gxZT7ra-oxs?t=152)
Most probably she meant that for majority of people omicron is not fatal, but the choice of words was unfortunate and not very compassionate. Somebody in her position should know better and think twice before opening the mouth. It also means that quite a few non-compromised omicron carriers will feel inconvincible and will contribute to unnecessary infections and deaths of many people with comorbidities.That was a point I was trying to make. That the administration is currently letting out statistics kept quiet before to their turnabout regarding keeping the economy open more than before. The rationale being that 75% of the population that died had four co-morbidities.
https://youtu.be/GMA Interview New Study Vaccines Prevent Severe Disease Omicron (https://youtu.be/gxZT7ra-oxs?t=152)
That was a point I was trying to make. That the administration is currently letting out statistics kept quiet before to their turnabout regarding keeping the economy open more than before. The rationale being that 75% of the population that died had four co-morbidities.
Previously, she mentioned the statistic that 600000 of the 800,000 Americans who died were 65 and over. If you combine those two statistics, young people seem to get through this okay. So why shut the economy for the young and healthy? Just keep the old and ill isolated.
The spread of the Omicron variant is causing widespread disruption across the US as hospitalizations reach a level not seen since the 2020-21 holiday surge.
More than 141,000 Americans were hospitalized with Covid-19 as of Monday, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services, nearing the record of 142,246 hospitalizations on January 14, 2021.
The burden is straining health care networks as hospitals juggle staffing issues caused by the increased demand coupled with employees, who are at a higher risk of infection, having to isolate and recover after testing positive.
"Omicron continues to burn through the commonwealth, growing at levels we have never seen before. Omicron is significantly more contagious than even the Delta variant," said Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, noting the earlier variant that spurred a surge of cases in the summer and fall months. "If it spreads at the rate we are seeing, it is certainly going to fill up our hospitals," he said, and Kentucky is "down to 134 adult ICU beds available."
fm the comments below the link,
'Comorbidity' in medicine sounds much scarier than it is, it literally means ANY condition. This seriously needs a fact check before people run with it. How was comorbidity defined in this percentage? Someone’s 4 comorbidities could be depression, anxiety, a UTI, and a sprained ankle. A pregnancy could be a comorbidity- it’s a medical condition. Acne or a mole or skin cancer could be a comorbidity. Hyper flexibility. Migraines. Iron deficiency. Insomnia. I would say probably most people have 4 comorbidities whether they’re in their medical chart or not.
Jan 11 (Reuters) - The United States reported 1.35 million new coronavirus infections on Monday, according to a Reuters tally, the highest daily total for any country in the world as the spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant showed no signs of slowing. The previous record was 1.03 million cases on Jan. 3. A large number of cases are reported each Monday due to many states not reporting over the weekend. The seven-day average for new cases has tripled in two weeks to over 700,000 new infections a day.
Meanwhile, Covid-19 hospitalizations reach levels not seen since last winter.Meanwhile, folks are paying attention to the fool who wrote this, less than a month ago:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
LONDON, Jan 10 (Reuters) - High levels of T-cells from common cold coronaviruses can provide protection against COVID-19, an Imperial College London study published on Monday has found, which could inform approaches for second-generation vaccines.
The study, which began in September 2020, looked at levels of cross-reactive T-cells generated by previous common colds in 52 household contacts of positive COVID-19 cases shortly after exposure, to see if they went on to develop infection. It found that the 26 who did not develop infection had significantly higher levels of those T-cells than people who did get infected. Imperial did not say how long protection from the T-cells would last.
Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/t-cells-common-colds-can-provide-protection-against-covid-19-study-2022-01-10/
Meanwhile, Covid-19 hospitalizations reach levels not seen since last winter.And...?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html
Reuters reports 1.35 million new cases in USA just in one day. As Trump said 18 months ago, "rounding the corner".Who cares about Trump? He was the last president. Another distraction from what Biden is not doing. You can't blame the last guy for the problems now. The current president has to solve them.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/us-reports-least-11-mln-covid-cases-day-shattering-global-record-2022-01-11/
Canada reporting also record number of new cases.
(http://)
from the WP:How effective are Sinopharm and Sinovac?
The spread of the omicron variant has hit the world of coronavirus vaccine diplomacy hard. And the impact will be felt most keenly in Beijing and Moscow, as Chinese and Russian vaccines struggle with data showing they are less effective against the fast-spreading variant, dimming hopes for wider global uptake of their product.
The two most widely available Chinese coronavirus vaccines use technology that uses an inactivated version of the virus to produce an immune response — an older though more established technology than the messenger RNA platform used by vaccines widely available in the United States and Europe.
However, some studies now suggest that two doses of these vaccines, which are produced by Sinopharm and Sinovac, may provide relatively lower protection against omicron. The Post’s Eva Dou and Lyric Li reported Monday that China is facing the looming question of how to administer booster shots to its population of 1.4 billion, of whom more than 80 percent have been vaccinated, mostly with Sinopharm and Sinovac.
Bait Shop — Now Open (https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/716++EoIeRL._AC_SL1010_.jpg)No bait. The point is Biden is more concerned with the polls than science. The polls tell him the science is a losing position now. More people want things to get back to normal so they're willing to take chances. So he's backing off shutting everything down as he once promised. Now for example he's all in favor of opening Chicago schools because that's what more parents want. Science be damned.
Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid.Due to isolation and masks, I haven't had a cold in two years. Neither has my wife.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/t-cells-common-colds-can-provide-protection-against-covid-19-study-2022-01-10/
I'm not saying it's a trap... but it's a trap. (https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/55989311/im-not-saying-its-a-trap-but-its-a-trap.jpg)Is there anyone here besides Alan that doesn’t know he has a habit of asking (stupid) questions without any desire to hear any answers? Of course, it is a trap.
Due to isolation and masks, I haven't had a cold in two years. Neither has my wife.
And...?
A short article about why it's a bad idea to deliberately catch Covid/Omicron with the aim of acquiring "natural" immunity . . .
...and preventative measures like masks and isolation work against transmittable airborne diseases. That's why I've done that for two years. Aside from that, my point was I can't use colds against COvid as someone suggested because I haven't gotten any in two years because I've been careful.
Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid.QuoteLONDON, Jan 10 (Reuters) - High levels of T-cells from common cold coronaviruses can provide protection against COVID-19, an Imperial College London study published on Monday has found, which could inform approaches for second-generation vaccines.
The study, which began in September 2020, looked at levels of cross-reactive T-cells generated by previous common colds in 52 household contacts of positive COVID-19 cases shortly after exposure, to see if they went on to develop infection. It found that the 26 who did not develop infection had significantly higher levels of those T-cells than people who did get infected. Imperial did not say how long protection from the T-cells would last.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/t-cells-common-colds-can-provide-protection-against-covid-19-study-2022-01-10/
It would be interesting to know if regular flu shots also provide some protection. We've been getting annual flu shots since forever and we've noticed that we're far less bothered by colds (not to mention flus) than people we know who do not receive flu shots. Makes me wonder if this seeming resistance doesn't carry over to other infections more generally.
And...Lucrative for the pharma companies but not for the rest of the economy which has lost trillions, caused inflation, raised the debt, and put millions of people out of work. Never mind the million killed and sick. That kind of wealth we can do without.
https://www.biospace.com/article/pfizer-triple-partners-for-future-mrna-vaccines-and-genetic-medicines (https://www.biospace.com/article/pfizer-triple-partners-for-future-mrna-vaccines-and-genetic-medicines-/)
Pfizer Triple-Partners for Future mRNA Vaccines and Genetic Medicines - Published: January 10, 2022
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light the incredible power of collaboration in the life science industry. Together, we get more done. Around 40% of Pfizer’s portfolio was realized through partnerships, and Monday, the pharma giant announced three more collaborative deals.
Pfizer’s current spotlight, of course, is from its mRNA vaccine in the fight against the novel coronavirus. Developed in collaboration with Germany’s BioNTech, Comirnaty was the very first COVID-19 vaccine approved by the FDA.
The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine already uses Acuitas Therapeutics’ lipid nanoparticle technology. With a new agreement struck between the companies, Pfizer will “harness the power of the mRNA-LNP technology and deliver potential new breakthrough vaccines and therapeutics that address significant unmet needs for patients,” CSO and President of Worldwide R&D Mikael Dolsten said. The company plans to explore more projects in its existing vaccine areas and expand to new areas using the tech...
Historically, Pfizer played a pivotal role in eradicating polio and smallpox. Current programs focus on preventing pneumococcal disease, influenza, RSV, Lyme disease, and more childhood, adolescent, and adult infections. The company shows 17 vaccine projects in the pipeline.
Vaccines, once thought of as the red-headed stepchild compared to more lucrative drugs that require daily doses, have shot up in recent years with a few blockbuster vaccines like the one administered to prevent HPV. COVID-19 has swung the numbers wildly to the other side, with Pfizer expecting to make nearly as much from its vaccines in 2021 as it earned in total in 2020. Indeed, vaccines have become a lucrative industry, thanks to a global pandemic.
Been there—done that.
US anti-vaxxers are now urging people to drink their own urine to fight coronavirus. Over the weekend, Christopher Key, the leader of an anti-Covid-19 vaccine group called the “Vaccine Police”, posted videos online extolling the health benefits of what he described as “urine therapy”. According to the wizard of wee, there is “tons and tons of research … [and] peer-reviewed published papers on urine”; so if you do your own pee-search you will discover it is God’s own antidote to Covid-19. “This vaccine is the worst bioweapon I have ever seen,” Key said. “I drink my own urine!”
Now, along with urine, the right seems to be fixated on Viagra and colloidal silver. Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, who has repeatedly questioned the efficacy and safety of Covid vaccines, recently dedicated a portion of his show to hyping the potential of Viagra as a potential cure. Carlson seized on the story of a British nurse reportedly recovering from a Covid-19 coma, after being given a dose of Viagra, to sing the little blue pill’s praises. “Is there anything [Viagra] doesn’t cure?” Carlson joked. Yes, I am afraid it does not appear to cure stupidity.
Lucrative for the pharma companies but not for the rest of the economy which has lost trillions, caused inflation, raised the debt, and put millions of people out of work. Never mind the million killed and sick. That kind of wealth we can do without.
When the next and possibly more lethal virus shows up, we might be really grateful for the advances in vaccine tech.I agree with you. Vaccines are great. I was just pointing out that what is lucrative for the vaccine manufacturers means that the rest of the country is probably suffering. Such is the case with Covid.
Lucrative for the pharma companies but not for the rest of the economy which has lost trillions, caused inflation, raised the debt, and put millions of people out of work. Never mind the million killed and sick. That kind of wealth we can do without.
I was just pointing out that what is lucrative for the vaccine manufacturers means that the rest of the country is probably suffering.
I, for one, hope they get filthy rich from their endeavours. That way, they'll have lots of money to do more research to bail out our collective ass again and maybe stop millions of kids from dying of malaria. Every year.No one's arguing they shouldn't earn money. Yet, it's the Democrats who want to control their profits by law which will mean less research and fewer drugs. Biden already proposed they should be forced to develop vaccines for no or little profit. Who's side is he on? (As an aside, you and other Canadians pay less for the same drugs we get here in America for a lot more. They really stick it to us.)
Better money goes to them than Zuckerberg or Fox News.
No one's arguing they shouldn't earn money. Yet, it's the Democrats who want to control their profits by law which will mean less research and fewer drugs. Biden already proposed they should be forced to develop vaccines for no or little profit. Who's side is he on? (As an aside, you and other Canadians pay less for the same drugs we get here in America for a lot more. They really stick it to us.)
Ann Lovell had never owned a passport before last year. Now, the 62-year-old teacher is a frequent flier, traveling every few months to Tijuana, Mexico, to buy medication for rheumatoid arthritis — with tickets paid for by the state of Utah’s public insurer. Lovell is one of about 10 state workers participating in a year-old program to lower prescription drug costs by having public employees buy their medication in Mexico at a steep discount compared to U.S. prices. The program appears to be the first of its kind, and is a dramatic example of steps states are taking to alleviate the high cost of prescription drugs.
The cost difference is so large that the state's insurance program for public employees can pay for each patient’s flight, give them a $500-per-trip bonus and still save tens of thousands of dollars.
The drugs are even cheaper in Mexico. So are the dental procedures. The government of Utah is now paying public employees to travel to Mexico to fill their prescription medications in a program aimed at reducing the high cost of prescription drugsHere's an interesting take on reducing costs. It's basically a fine for causing higher costs in Canadian hospitals for the unvaccinated. But that begs the question. Why not impose penalties on people who smoke, are fat, who drink, who used toxic chemicals to develop film, etc.? Do we want the government to penalize us for our social habits? Where does it end?
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/utah-sends-employees-mexico-lower-prescription-prices-68861516
You're not alone in asking that question...
The Journal of Infectious Diseases - Published: January 5, 2022
Effect of influenza vaccination on risk of COVID-19 – A prospective cohort study of 46,000 health care workers
Summary
This cohort study of 46,112 health care workers examined the effect of influenza vaccination on hospitalization and symptoms due to COVID-19, and development of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Influenza vaccination had no effect on the specified outcomes.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/Effect of influenza vaccination on risk of COVID-19 (https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiac001/6497955)
The government's flip-flopping on what to do, how it works, what's the best regarding Covid, isolation, testing, vaccinations, etc. is getting more confusing day by day. It seems they're following the economics and polling rather than the science. There's no clear message going out? Even Democrats are complaining. What are the rest of us supposed to think and do?
...
Please stop.Your request will be denied. Just as the sun will set in the west.
Please stop.Apparently, you didn't read the rest of my post. Even Democrats agree with me. You have to keep up.
Senators on Tuesday demanded clear answers from the Biden administration health officials on the state of the resurging pandemic and the government's short- and long-term plans for combating it. They mostly got jargon.
In contrast to previous oversight hearings on the Biden administration's Covid-19 response, Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee raised sharp questions and complaints about widespread “confusion and frustration” around who should isolate and for how long after a Covid exposure or diagnosis, or where and when to get tested.
“We want the Biden team to take advantage of the opportunity to speak directly to those frustrations and anxieties,” a senior Democratic aide told POLITICO heading into the hearing.
The senators might as well ask Biden to clarify the confusion who is the leader in the electric vehicles.They should check with Fauci.
You're not alone in asking that question...
The Journal of Infectious Diseases - Published: January 5, 2022
Effect of influenza vaccination on risk of COVID-19 – A prospective cohort study of 46,000 health care workers
Summary
This cohort study of 46,112 health care workers examined the effect of influenza vaccination on hospitalization and symptoms due to COVID-19, and development of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Influenza vaccination had no effect on the specified outcomes.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/Effect of influenza vaccination on risk of COVID-19 (https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiac001/6497955)
Thanks very much.
I like to slip in a little science once in awhile.
The government is flip-flopping on this virus because as life always finds a way to exist, even where no one ever thought possible, so does a virulent virus. This virus will mutate and continue to do so either in a manner in which it eventually renders itself neutered or it will infect everyone in the world, and only the fittest will survive. Natural selection, as it were but all this blathering on about the government having some effect on the virus, or the government being right or wrong is just wagging tongues with nothing profound to say. Me thinks you all need to go back to bed, because unless you are a virologist, immunologist or infections medicine specialist you really have nothing to add.
So now what?
The highly contagious Omicron variant will 'find just about everybody,' Fauci says
https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/most-people-are-going-to-get-covid-19-says-acting-fda-head-as-omicron-surge-continues-pandemic-coronavirus-health-safety-vaccine-vaccination-mandates-hospitalizations-medical-children
"Those who have been vaccinated ... and boosted would get exposed. Some, maybe a lot of them, will get infected but will very likely, with some exceptions, do reasonably well in the sense of not having hospitalization and death."But Fauci said everyone's going to get it. I gave you his quote. If we're all going to get it, sure the vaccine might help from getting too sick. But what is the purpose of the mask, social distancing, etc. if it's going to spread anyway?
There is a difference between being exposed and being infected. Vaccination along with booster shots reduce the chances of an exposure resulting in an infection. So does taking common sense measures to avoid or reduce the risk of exposure, N95 or KN95 masks, social distancing, limiting indoor gatherings, etc.
"The CDC says the risk of hospitalization is now 17 times higher for unvaccinated people than for fully vaccinated."
So now what? Get vaccinated, boosted, and use your common sense to minimize your risk of exposure or infection.
Full transcript available here...
https://www.csis.org/analysis/fireside-chat-dr-anthony-fauci-pandemic-transition (https://www.csis.org/analysis/fireside-chat-dr-anthony-fauci-pandemic-transition)
The key is not to infect everyone at the same time and bring humanity to a standstill.They're estimating the whole Omicron will go through in two months. The high case number shows that. Meanwhile, I can't get through to my doctors' offices in most cases. I called Verizon Wireless and they told me I had to wait 40 minutes to get a live person. Never was like that before. And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.
But Fauci said everyone's going to get it. I gave you his quote.
They're estimating the whole Omicron will go through in two months. The high case number shows that. Meanwhile, I can't get through to my doctors' offices in most cases. I called Verizon Wireless and they told me I had to wait 40 minutes to get a live person. Never was like that before. And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.
And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.
In-between the merry-go-round of repetitious talking points and the occasional Elon Musk worship service, I like to slip in a little science once in awhile.
"I think, in many respects, Omicron, with its extraordinary, unprecedented degree of efficiency of transmissibility, will, ultimately, find just about everybody. Those who have been vaccinated and vaccinated and boosted would get exposed. Some, maybe a lot of them, will get infected but will very likely, with some exceptions, do reasonably well in the sense of not having hospitalization and death."He said, "Maybe a lot of them." will get infected. What does that mean? What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected? Sounds like a distinction without a difference.
Exposure and infection are not the same thing.
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected? Sounds like a distinction without a difference.
Not this "distinction without a difference" crap again. Do your own Google search for the difference between exposure and infection. This isn't your personal research service.What did Fauci mean when he said "Maybe a lot of them" will get infected?
It's already been throughly discussed before in this thread. Try paying attention once in awhile! Maybe you could at least get a quote right then.
For a film or a person?
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected?
As a brief followup to my post above with my layman's explanation of the timeline between transmission and exposure to a virus (pathogen) and becoming infectious to others, below is a link to a simple diagram of disease progression (pathogenesis) from exposure, thru incubation, to communicable infectious disease and transmission to others.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Key-time-periods-of-COVID-19-infection-the-latent-or-exposed-period-before-the-onset-of-communicability (https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Key-time-periods-of-COVID-19-infection-the-latent-or-exposed-period-before-the-onset-of_fig2_346194172)
For a concise and easy to understand explanation of the difference between exposure and infection which is better than my own, see the link below.
https://health-desk.org/articles/what-is-the-difference-between-exposure-and-infection-to-a-virus (https://health-desk.org/articles/what-is-the-difference-between-exposure-and-infection-to-a-virus)
For those that want a deeper dive into the microbiology, see the link below. About halfway down the page you'll find the section titled "Stages of Pathogenesis" which describes the stages of disease development as: Exposure (pathogen enters the body), Adhesion (attachment to cells), Invasion (localized or systemic spread in the body), Infection (successful multiplication of pathogen leading to infection), Transmission (continuing persistence of disease by transmission to a new host).
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/microbiology/chapter/how-pathogens-cause-disease/ (https://courses.lumenlearning.com/microbiology/chapter/how-pathogens-cause-disease/)
Here is an additional diagram which shows the relationship between the timeline of exposure of one individual to the infection of another. It is following the latent period of incubation when infection begins leading to transmission of the virus.
It is during the latent period of incubation, following exposure, when the immune system of vaccinated individuals targets the virus for destruction to prevent infection and transmission.
https://wiki.ecdc.europa.eu/Images/Incubation-infection-transmission (https://wiki.ecdc.europa.eu/fem/PublishingImages/4454.Incubation.png)
Do your own Google search for the difference between exposure and infection.That would require a tiny bit of effort on his part. Too complicated.
And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected? Sounds like a distinction without a difference.
"A distinction without a difference." You keeping trotting out that same old line as cover for your carelessness with words.
Your inability to recognize differences doesn't mean they do not exist in the real world outside of your mind.
This from a guy who also eats cream cheese bagels, pizza and has heart problems.Such a diet is bad for dementia. That explains a lot. 🤮
According to existing research, diabetes, obesity, and heart disease, which can increase the risk of developing dementia, are all rising in number.
The quantity of the pathogen, if any, that enters the host's body, and how rapidly and effectively the host's immune reaction is able to interdict or subsequently control the propagation of whatever amount of the pathogen has entered the host.That's not the issue I stated, Chris. Vaccines are good. I get that. However, Fauci said that everyone is going to get infected or exposed, or meant that. Then, what is the point of masks and social distancing? Fauci needs to explain what he meant by "or maybe a lot of them" means.
... what is the point of masks and social distancing?
The point, Alan, is, even though you may have been exposed, to avoid becoming infected from that exposure.But Peter, if you have been exposed, then the mask failed. It doesn't matter if the exposure gets worse or not. Fauci said everyone was going to get exposed, or "maybe a lot of them", whatever that means.
Or, if you are infected, to avoid or at least minimize exposing and infecting OTHERS.
Oh, wait. There's a chance that could affect the economy.
So fuck it. Muh rights, right? I ain't wearing no face diaper and I'll stand as close to you as I like. It's a free country.
The point, Alan, is,...
The point is that there is no point in responding to someone that is unwilling to understand what they do not wish to understand.A non-answer to explain the apparent failure of masks.
The point is that there is no point in responding to someone that is unwilling to understand what they do not wish to understand. It falls on deaf ears and simply provides them with attention—which was the whole point from the beginning.
The point is that there is no point in responding to someone that is unwilling to understand what they do not wish to understand.So true. He doesn’t know what he doesn’t know but has a strong opinion anyway. And there will be a continuation to respond to this narrow-minded fool, it is a vicious cycle. He stops when everyone else ignores his foolishness. He feeds off this. He takes up far too much psychic space, like a vampire, a troll.
They're estimating the whole Omicron will go through in two months. The high case number shows that. Meanwhile, I can't get through to my doctors' offices in most cases. I called Verizon Wireless and they told me I had to wait 40 minutes to get a live person. Never was like that before. And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.
But Peter, if you have been exposed, then the mask failed.
"But Alan", if you walk through a room and there's an infected person present and you're wearing a mask and you're social distanced, you've been EXPOSED but not necessarily INFECTED.My understanding from previous posts from TechTalk was that exposed meant you took in the pathogens but the body has held off getting infected to show symptoms. If exposed just means being in the same room or nearby, then you're right, the masks would help blocking the pathogens in the first place. Thanks for making the point clear.
Your recreational ignorance is showing again.
It's not becoming.
As a matter of fact, it's downright horrifying. Especially when we realize there are seventy million of you.
My understanding from previous posts from TechTalk was that exposed meant you took in the pathogens but the body has held off getting infected to show symptoms. If exposed just means being in the same room or nearby, then you're right, the masks would help blocking the pathogens in the first place. Thanks for making the point clear.
It still would be nice to know what Fauci meant by "maybe a lot of them".
At this time of year, exposure in a warm room is much safer than doing it outside.Well, outside, you have to wear a warm mask.
Alan reminds me of the farmer who was interviewed on TV. He'd been using noenicitinoids on his cornfield to increase his yield.
"My yield is up 15%", he said.
"But all the bees are dying", said the interviewer.
To which he replied: "But my yield is up 15%"
Nineteen states have less than 15% remaining capacity in their ICUs. Four of them have less than 10%: Kentucky, Alabama, Indiana and New Hampshire, according to data Wednesday from the US Department of Health and Human Services.What a relief that the LuLa virologist (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1230740#msg1230740) has confirmed that "now that Covid is on the way out..."
The other states are: Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont, according to HHS.
Cases and deaths are in decline. The article says it's not herd immunity, but I think it is. What do you think?
‘Lurching Between Crisis and Complacency’: Was This Our Last Covid Surge?
Rising immunity and modest changes in behavior may explain why cases are declining, but much remains unknown, scientists say.
...“Delta is running out of people to infect,” said Jeffrey Shaman, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Columbia University.
The fact that case numbers are falling does not mean that the country has reached herd immunity, a goal that many scientists now believe is unattainable. But the rising levels of vaccination and infection, combined with more modest behavioral changes, may have been enough to bring the surge to an end.
“It’s a combination of immunity, but also people being careful,” said Joshua Salomon, an infectious disease expert and modeler at Stanford University...
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/14/health/coronavirus-delta-surge.html
Three months ago, as the Delta surge was slowing, Alan said that he thought that we had reached herd immunity.What you are pointing out with Alan’s comments is his herd mentality.
Herd immunity? I think not.
Three months ago, as the Delta surge was slowing, Alan said that he thought that we had reached herd immunity. What do those pesky epidemiologists know.Three months ago, the CDC epidemiologists had different conclusions about things as well. I'm in good company.
Herd immunity? I think not.
Three months ago, the CDC epidemiologists had different conclusions about things as well. I'm in good company.
In any case, the article stipulates a kind of herd immunity or natural immunity. One can dispute when natural immunity becomes herd immunity. My point was that higher rates of infection helped end the virus or in this case one of the variants, Delta.
Quote: Although neither vaccination nor prior infection provides perfect protection against the virus, they dramatically reduce the odds of catching it. So by September, the virus had a substantially harder time finding hospitable hosts.
“Delta is running out of people to infect,” said Jeffrey Shaman, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Columbia University.
The fact that case numbers are falling does not mean that the country has reached herd immunity, a goal that many scientists now believe is unattainable. But the rising levels of vaccination and infection, combined with more modest behavioral changes, may have been enough to bring the surge to an end.
My understanding from previous posts from TechTalk was that exposed meant you took in the pathogens but the body has held off getting infected to show symptoms.
It won't make one whit of difference to someone that doesn't want to understand, but just wants to keep the wheel turning until everyone is exhausted. Then it starts all over again.
Surely the real point here is that your personal opinion (or mine) on whether herd immunity has(had) been reached is worthless. No insult to you is intended, but what do you know about it? Would you consider my opinion on fighter jets worth listening to, because I don't.No it's not worthless any more than your opinion is worthless. None of us here are epidemiologists. However, everyone is giving their opinion. We all make decisions based on our opinion on things base on what we read and our experience. We're not stupid. You don't need to go to college to have common sense. How do you discuss things with your family and friends? Are they and you experts on everything. You must have little to discuss. :)
If you want to discuss something, it makes the discussion a great deal more worthwhile if you have some basic understanding of what you're discussing. It's important to understand what words mean before you start tossing them out in conversation or you just confuse the issues.That's just a put down. You have no more knowledge than I do on viruses. We both read stuff on the web and draw our own conclusions based on common sense, experience, a good judgment. The idea that you know herd immunity doesn't work or becasue masks are great because you read it from a doctor on the web may mean your research has been limited or the doctor is wrong. It's why people get second opinions from doctors. Also, as you know well, people bias what they read, including you.
Exposure and infection are not the same thing. Herd immunity and natural immunity are not the same thing.
Sometimes it's better to listen and learn. It's OK to say, I don't know, but I'll find out and learn something new in the process.
Having an opinion on every topic is unnecessary and unrealistic.
You have no more knowledge than I do on viruses.
Finally, even if someone uses only his feelings, they're entitled to their opinion.Absolutely. That's why Trump usually hedges his statements with prevarications. ie "people are saying.." or "It might be true that..."
You present your opinions as facts. Usually erroneous.Often erroneous, never in doubt.
Frankly, I didn't think that there was anything very controversial about what I wrote. I've found that when, for instance, I've told a client or someone that I report to — I don't know, but I'll find out — that I've received a favorable response. They seem to appreciate the honesty and I've done my best to promptly find out and return with an answer. Over time, it has been a trust builder with people.Almost everything people post here are preconceptions, cherry-picking, and/or influenced by politics. I don't think anyone ever changes someone else's mind. We're all like lawyers at a trial. :)
Knowing what words mean before you use them also seems to be simple common sense. It avoids appearing foolish. And, you look ridiculously stubborn to argue over what a word means when you haven't bothered to check.
Not being so insecure as to believe that you need an opinion on every topic is another way to avoid looking foolish—people that are knowledgeable about a topic can quickly detect someone trying to bluff their way thru a discussion of it. So, it's best not to exceed your limits on a subject or you will lose respect rather than gain it. People will generally be happy to share with you what they know, if you're open about what you know and what you don't know.
Listening (or reading) to learn seems to be obvious. It's hard to learn very much with an open mouth and a closed mind. Of course, choosing a knowledgeable and credible source is the key to obtaining good information.
Of course, the OSHA mandate pushed by Biden requiring 84 million Americans to be vaccinated was rejected as unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.
Actually, the Supreme Court has made no ruling on the substance of the the challenge to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) mandate. It ordered a stay (delay) in the implementation of the mandate while its legality is being litigated. In addition, the issue regarding the mandate is statutory, not constitutional. It is whether Congress has granted OSHA the authority to promulgate a mandate of this type.
Actually, the Supreme Court has made no ruling on the substance of the the challenge to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) mandate. It ordered a stay (delay) in the implementation of the mandate while its legality is being litigated. In addition, the issue regarding the mandate is statutory, not constitutional. It is whether Congress has granted OSHA the authority to promulgate a mandate of this type.Ok Thanks for the clarification. The bottom line is Biden can't implement the vaccinations he wanted that OSHA mandated. Litigation will change nothing. It's over. He could go back to Congress to ask for approval through new legislation. But he won't get the votes. If he could have, he would have done that earlier instead of trying to use OSHA which he knew beforehand would be rejected by the courts.
Also, from the Supreme Court's majority opinion in the case...This is very similar to the Muslim Ban. Trump overreached and was slapped down. He came back with a more reasoned plan that the courts accepted. I suppose Biden (OSHA) could do the same if they limited the vaccination mandate in a more directed and limited way. Or go to Congress for legislation if he wants the same comprehensive plan.
"That is not to say OSHA lacks authority to regulate occupation-specific risks related to COVID–19. Where the virus poses a special danger because of the particular features of an employee’s job or workplace, targeted regulations are plainly permissible... So too could OSHA regulate risks associated with working in particularly crowded or cramped environments."
Good news:
Omicron 91 percent less likely to be fatal compared to Delta: CDC study
.
.
“We may see deaths from Omicron but I suspect that the deaths that we’re seeing now are still from Delta,” Walensky revealed.]
Good news, indeed - only 2,000 combined Delta and Omicron deaths yesterday in USI'm looking at the glass half full. While more people are getting it, they have a much larger chance of surviving. Also, the article says that many who die might be those from Delta. Also, there was no analysis of how many died who were vaccinated which could reduce the death rate even more. It will be interesting to see the results soon of that analysis.
Biden finally woke up.
President Biden announced Thursday that the administration will buy another 500 million at-home COVID-19 tests for Americans in addition to his plans to order 500 million announced last month.
Biden announces new medical teams to help overwhelmed hospitals
Biden also said six new federal medical teams will be dispatched to aid overwhelmed hospitals in six states.
The White House will distribute 10 million more COVID tests per month to schools
The medical teams are being sent to the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio; Coney Island Hospital in Brooklyn; Rhode Island Hospital in Providence; Henry Ford Hospital just outside Detroit; University of New Mexico Hospital in Albuquerque; and University Hospital in Newark, N.J.
Facing criticism over its response to the highly contagious omicron variant, the White House says that since Thanksgiving, over 800 military and other federal personnel have been deployed to 24 states and that 14,000 National Guard members have been activated in 49 states to help with everything from clinical care to administering vaccines. The deployments have been paid for by the federal government with funds from the American Rescue Plan.
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/13/1072730868/biden-announces-plans-to-buy-500-million-more-covid-tests-and-to-offer-free-mask
Is this really a thing; are people really testing at home regularly?Try finding a test kit locally; boom, question answered.
Boom.
As more patients need care, many people with possible Covid-19 symptoms have been left wanting as tests remain hard to find, and doctors have asked those who suspect they are positive to isolate at home with or without confirmation of infection.https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/08/health/us-coronavirus-saturday/index.html
Is this really a thing; are people really testing at home regularly? I've been away for a while and just cant fathom non-sick healthy people are really going out of their way to get tests.Hi Joe. My wife and I ordered and received test kits that we holding onto in case one of us suspects we got Omicron, just to distinguish a cold from Covid. That's safer than having to go to the hospital to get tested where you can catch Covid. ;)
Maybe if this was contained in one area of the US with only a few (relatively speaking) cases testing en mass would make sense. It does not make any sense now, especially with how transmissible and board this new variant is. We are not going to stop this virus from going viral at this point.
The actual message should be, "if you dont feel sick, dont test. If you do feel sick, but it is mild, stay home but dont worry about testing. If you have a severe illness, go to the hospital and you will get tested."
Boom, testing shortage solved.
Hi Joe. My wife and I ordered and received test kits that we holding onto in case one of us suspects we got Omicron, just to distinguish a cold from Covid. That's safer than having to go to the hospital to get tested where you can catch Covid. ;)
But we're not going to use it just to use it. I agree that makes no sense.
Well that is reasonable, especially given your age, and who likes to go hospitals unless you have to.I don't know if you saw it, but recently I posted that you were the one who had the foresight to say in 2020 that we're all going to get Covid. I think Slobo said it also. I don't think I misquoted you. Did I?
However younger people getting tested just to get tested has really got me quite perplexed. Before I left the country my wife and I had to get tested. While getting tested, a young guy came in saying he thought he has bronchitis but just wanted to be sure it was not Covid. I had bronchitis once and I coughed non-stop for 5 days and ended up with a hernia afterwards (probably had it before but the coughing made it worse). He did not cough once in the 15 minute timeframe I saw him; he did not have bronchitis. But there he was ready to waste $150 on a rapid test with no obvious symptoms.
The whole thing is strange. If you have a mild case of Covid, the treatments are the same regardless if you know it or not. Stay home, rest in bed, consume lots of liquids and in five days you'll be better. This whole emphasis on testing should only apply to those with severe illness or the at risk groups.
I fear this non-stop hysteria around Covid have broken the brains of a relatively large amount of the population along with damaging purely innocent children, much like the Great Depression did, and we will have to deal with the consequences of for the next 50 years or so. The longer we keep ourselves from accepting the truth that we all have a rendezvous with Covid, the worse these effects will be.
But hey, truth is like poetry and most people f*#king hate poetry.
I fear this non-stop hysteria around Covid have broken the brains of a relatively large amount of the population along with damaging purely innocent children, much like the Great Depression did, and we will have to deal with the consequences of for the next 50 years or so. The longer we keep ourselves from accepting the truth that we all have a rendezvous with Covid, the worse these effects will be.But hey, the truth, 846 thousand counted dead Americans this far: indeed why the non-stop hysteria.
But hey, truth is like poetry and most people f*#king hate poetry.
I don't know if you saw it, but recently I posted that you were the one who had the foresight to say in 2020 that we're all going to get Covid. I think Slobo said it also. I don't think I misquoted you. Did I?
And so has everyone else, including every virologist and a public health official in every country on earth. It was never about elimination.What? You got to be kidding. You just moved the goalposts. It was all about stopping it. What public official or virologist said that we're all going to get Covid? The only one who's come close was former NYS Gov Cuomo who said candidly in early 2020 that 80% of the people were going to be infected. Then he shut up and never said it again joining the rest of the Democrats who wanted to keep everyone safe by isolating them and having them wear masks.
What? You got to be kidding. You just moved the goalposts. It was all about stopping it. What public official or virologist said that we're all going to get Covid? The only one who's come close was former NYS Gov Cuomo who said candidly in early 2020 that 80% of the people were going to be infected. Then he shut up and never said it again joining the rest of the Democrats who wanted to keep everyone safe by isolating them and having them wear masks.
We're not talking about just spreading. The vaccines, masks and isolation were pushed as ways to not get infected. Politicians and scientists never pushed the idea we all were going to get sick in some form. They were and still are trying to save us from getting it. Your reversal is why many people just don't trust the politicians and scientists because they've recently flipped-flopped. Now they're arguing that well, it's not so bad anymore. We have to keep the economy open while insisting everyone get vaccinated. They're bipolar, manic-depressive in their ideas.
We should make a list of all the topics of Alan's proclaimed expertise.There are hundreds of pages of his nonsense. Making a list, when he posts multiple times a day would be nearly a full-time job. He may be bipolar and manic depressive in addition to suffering from dementia.
A friend in Florida was this week in the hospital and reported that several nurses there were diagnosed with covid. His unvaccinated son and his daughter in law tested also positive. Viva La Libre!I hope they get well. I know a few more people who were sick up here in NJ. Fortunately, it was like a bad cold for them and now they're better.
The best protection is still avoiding all non-essential trips, keeping the sufficient distance from others, and not getting overconfident that the mask will fully protect you.I've put off haircuts and going to the doctor for regular checkups for now. Also, cut back on going into stores and with other people. The cases seem to have peaked out a week or ten days ago in NY and NJ. So hopefully, this will be over soon as long as there aren't other variants still out there. I thought that would be by the end of February. Now it looks like it might be sooner.
So far, you and me have been careful, and we have managed to avoid the plague.
There are hundreds of pages of his nonsense. Making a list, when he posts multiple times a day would be nearly a full-time job. He may be bipolar and manic depressive in addition to suffering from dementia.Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/15/health/mrna-vaccine.html
For those with access, this is a superb article outlining how the mRNA process was developed over decades. Big Science at its best.
According to Worldometer, the US is at over 870,000 Covid deaths and has been at close to 2000 or above daily deaths all this week. Those numbers are still grim. I hope it's a post-Christmas period effect.
I see some people are pinning their hopes on Omicron being less lethal than previous variants. It is good news that it is. But some postings read like the pandemic is over because of that. But the previous variants haven't gone away, have they?
Does anyone know how the Omicron-only death rate compares to average flu deaths (using 35,000 per year as an assumed yearly average for flu, as per previous postings)?
Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate.
Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate."It is only because of their stupidity that they are able to be so sure of themselves". -Franz Kafka
Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate.Yes, there's a lot of that going on here.
Yes, there's a lot of that going on here.
Your personal attacks on other members being no exception.If I've done it then I was wrong and I apologize. But the personal attacks on me have been vicious and continuous.
There aren't any studies of that specifically of which I'm aware. I think it's likely too early to have enough data. I've never felt that comparison of the two diseases is of much value as they are different diseases with different characteristics. I realize that the comparison is of interest and has been made several times here, likely due to the fact that one characteristic they share is that they are both airborne viruses and exposure occurs in that manner. Also, either is capable of causing serious deadly pandemics.
I've posted statistics before on flu and COVID-19. Now that CDC has data on two complete years of COVID-19, I may post an update of those. I compiled those only because of the dangerous assertion made that, for those in their 40s or younger, COVID-19 was of no more concern than the flu. No doubt, there are some that still believe this notion.
Yours was a valuable question to ask. Maybe some progress has been made. Let's continue to hope we won't see more of that kind of dangerous misinformation spread here.I don't recall the original comparisons made as being dangerous, certainly not deliberately. It was early in the disease. There were honest differences in opinions on how bad Covid would become. Comparing to the regular flu was a reasonable thing to do when you consider that we've had some seasons when 50-60K people died from it. No one ever shut down communities or made people wear masks because of it. Did the CDC recommend no masks required in the beginning although we now know it was because they were trying to reserve them for the medical community?
As the statistics at the bottom of the previous page show, there is a great deal of variation from year to year with viruses that continually mutate like influenza or SARS-CoV-2 which causes COVID-19 disease. Over the ten years prior to the appearance of COVID-19, annual U.S. estimated flu deaths ranged from 12,447 to 51,646. The percentage of flu deaths comprised of those in the age range of 0-49 varied from 3.5% to 15.3%.This is the Coffee Corner section of a photo forum website. People give their opinions on all sorts of topics they are inexperienced in. Frankly, I would be suspect of most opinions here given on photography. :)
For the flu season 2010-2011, the 36,656 total flu season deaths were close to the average of 34,152; but for ages 0-49, this age group comprised 15.3% of all flu deaths, more than double the average of 7.6%. In 2014-2015, with a well above average number of total deaths at 51,376, ages 0-49 comprised just 3.5% of all flu deaths. This is why I stated that you can average flu statistics, but no flu year is typical. The variations from year-to-year are unpredictable and widespread.
While epidemiologists create models for infectious diseases to forecast trends, they do so with the knowledge and understanding that a model's forecast is limited by variables which are unpredictable and over which they have no control. Three major variables are the pathogen (how a virus may mutate and evolve in virulence or transmission), the host (level of immunity to existing or emerging virus variants thru acquired active immunity, induced by vaccination or previous exposure, or innate immune response), and environment (level of community immunity, availability and uptake of effective vaccines, public health interventions, public response, etc.).
It comes with the territory that statistical modeling is limited by variables which are unpredictable. Modeling by experts in their field; whether those are epidemiologists, meteorologists, or some other discipline are nonetheless valuable in advising planning and responses to events.
Predictions made by those without the knowledge, experience, or expertise to do so—such as those you find online or from commentators elsewhere—are of little to no informative or useful value to anyone but themselves. As always—buyer beware of the goods being offered.
I don't recall the original comparisons made as being dangerous, certainly not deliberately. It was early in the disease.
Your photography or advice on photography is not a serious health liability to others—so, far as I know.Well, my point is we're all photographers. Who's making serious health decisions on what posters you don't really know say here? In any case we hear all sorts of stuff on the news and from friends and family and strangers as well. We all have to sort through the chatter. If you only limit posts by people with degrees in the subject, there would be few posts. And what we've seen from the medical community has not given me much application what many of them recommend in any case.
I was referring to comments made less than two months ago like, "For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu". The fatality rate of COVID-19 is nothing like seasonal flu.Everyone here makes mistakes or present things out of context regarding certain facts and figures or reads things that might not be clear and repeats them here. We all have been selective in the figures we present. How is that killing anyone? Who operated differently based on what they read on LuLa? How many people did Fauci kill when he told everyone masks aren't required? I think there's a little bit of blaming the victims who are only trying to live and get on with their lives. Blame China. They started it.
...Who's making serious health decisions on what posters you don't really know say here? In any case we hear all sorts of stuff on the news and from friends and family and strangers as well. We all have to sort through the chatter. If you only limit posts by people with degrees in the subject, there would be few posts...
Your photography or advice on photography is not a serious health liability to others—so, far as I know.Only a serious health liability of pixels (https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/sets/) from highlights clipping from a misunderstanding of basic photographic exposure. 😝
If I've done it then I was wrong and I apologize. But the personal attacks on me have been vicious and continuous.
but as far as direct insults to other forum members?
Well documented with other forum members on multiple occasions, myself included. They range from calling other members liars, a coward, attributing ugly racist thoughts to others, and a false attribution of a racist statement that was never made. Any sympathy has been eroded by these acts.
I'm not saying anyone is free of blame. I'm asking if a reset might be in order :)Based on the hundreds of comments well summarized by TechTalk, impossible and pointless. Attempted without any degree of success nearly a year ago. Go to the “bear pit” and examples of empty-headedness, massive confirmation bias, mistruths, posting hijacks and racial dog whistles are there for anyone who can slog through it to witness.
I'm not saying anyone is free of blame. I'm asking if a reset might be in order :)
Well documented with other forum members on multiple occasions, myself included. They range from calling other members liars, a coward, attributing ugly racist thoughts to others, and a false attribution of a racist statement that was never made. Any sympathy has been eroded by these acts.
Based on the hundreds of comments well summarized by TechTalk, impossible and pointless. Attempted without any degree of success nearly a year ago. Go to the “bear pit” and examples of empty-headedness, massive confirmation bias, mistruths, posting hijacks and racial dog whistles are there for anyone who can slog through it to witness.
Honestly, Im forced to agree with Alan here. I understand that he moves goalposts and is next to impossible to pin down (sorry, Alan), but as far as direct insults to other forum members? Alan takes far more than he gives out. As frustrating as it may be to argue here, we would all do well to chill out a little, and cut down on the contempt, myself included.That was nice of you to say James. I appreciate it. The thing is I'm kind of a contrarian. I enjoy playing Devil's Advocate. It's challenging and makes me and you think. Plus if everybody thought the same here and had the same opinion, there really wouldn't be anything to discuss. How boring that would be. It would be like 6 photographers lining up on Inspiration Point to get the same shot of Yosemite.
I'm not saying anyone is free of blame. I'm asking if a reset might be in order :)I'm for a reset. That's a good idea.
Perhaps you should address that suggestion to the, now ex-members, egregiously and erroneously insulted by der Kleine’s antics.I already apologized for any insults i made a few posts ago. If you missed it, I'll say it again. I apologize for any insults I may have said on this forum to any person for any reason.
All the 'little one' had to do was retract and proffer, at the very least, a desultory apology and the matter would have probably faded away. Instead, he took to taking a leaf out of the Trump playbook and persist in abject foolishness.
Alan,I contacted both of them by LuLa messaging and apologized for any and all insults I made and asked them to return to LuLa. Thanks for letting me know and encouraging me. And have a Happy and Healthy New Year to you and your family as well.
I have nothing against you personally, nor am I judge and jury but you're addressing this to the wrong person.
I'd suggest you turn your attention to both
jeremyrh, and
fberryman.
Particularly Jeremy who I know was really quite 'upset' by what happened between you. They both log in and a PM between you all and a retraction could hopefully put the past well behind us.
Let's hope we see them back soon.
In the meantime, it's the start of a New Year, and I wish you and Janet well and hope that the 'discussions' both on LuLa and elsewhere can continue in a more positive and fruitful tone.
Particularly Jeremy who I know was really quite 'upset' by what happened between you. They both log in and a PM between you all and a retraction could hopefully put the past well behind us.Based on the private messages I got from Jeremy, you will never see him on this site or forum again. I will not go into details because again, his message to me was private but he was super pissed off and can now be found on the other photographic website that actually dedicates its forums to photographers and topics of photography, PhotoPXL.
Let's hope we see them back soon.
Based on the private messages I got from Jeremy, you will never see him on this site or forum again. I will not go into details becuase again, his message to me was private but he was super pissed off and can now be found on the other photographic website that actually dedicates its forums to photographers and topics of photography, PhotoPXL.Andrew, First let me say that if there is anything I have said at any time to you that has embarrassed or insulted you in any way, then I apologize to you as well. In this New Year, I want to start with a new slate. I hope you have a great, healthy, and successful year and your family stays safe as well.
I’d provide the URL but someone Jeremy would hate to see might show up so if you don’t know the location, goggle that name (so and so can’t figure out that process so he’s safe).
Based on the private messages I got from Jeremy, you will never see him on this site or forum again.
... the other photographic website that actually dedicates its forums to photographers and topics of photography, PhotoPXL.
That was nice of you to say James. I appreciate it. The thing is I'm kind of a contrarian. I enjoy playing Devil's Advocate. It's challenging and makes me and you think. Plus if everybody thought the same here and had the same opinion, there really wouldn't be anything to discuss. How boring that would be. It would be like 6 photographers lining up on Inspiration Point to get the same shot of Yosemite.
I've seen this play before and the final act is always the same. I know the lines from memory. It ends with half of an apology that doesn't actually acknowledge having done or said anything—like calling others a racist, coward, or liar. "If I've done it", "if there is anything I have said", "I apologize for any insults I may have said". That being said, I'm done with the topic.I'm glad you're giving it a shot. You're a tough adversary and challenging to debate. But I think we agree on more issues than we realize. I'm sure we'll have an issue or two in the future. After all, politics can get very competitive and feathers can get ruffled. If anyone regresses, there's nothing wrong with catching it, correcting it, and moving on again in a non-aggressive, more friendly way.
Personally, I come here for the many members that post excellent information and share their knowledge. In return, I try to post useful information and share what I have learned. I have no other personal interest or emotional investment here. My personal and social life is entirely and intentionally conducted off-line. That being said, I'll do my best to ignore or avoid the emotional traps which are always found in online conversations and stick to the purpose for which I actually come here to engage.
Moving on...
... the inexplicable rancor on my Sprinter van forum ...
I'd be irritable too if I spent all my time in a van ;)
"I apologize for any insults I may have said".
You're right. It does get lonely sometimes. :)Pretty scene. Why are you in a van all the time?
I believe James was joking.
. . . politics can get very competitive and feathers can get ruffled.
But this is a thread that is supposed to be about the coronavirus, not politics.+1. I hope explaining this to someone who often resorts to a political posting agenda understands this but I'm not holding my breath based on the history here.
What doesn't make sense is turning it into a forum for political arguments.
Guilty as charged. Poorly-written, me.
For some of the political posts here; I've hit quote, then copied the quote, and then pasted and replied to it in the political thread. It's easy enough to do. I'll try to do that with all of my replies to posts which don't meet the purpose of this thread.
But this is a thread that is supposed to be about the coronavirus, not politics. I started it almost exactly a year ago ...
This week, Quebec Premier François Legault announced a plan to introduce a tax on people who refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19. It would be a considerable step beyond what any jurisdiction in Canada has done to this point and it's unclear how it would work. But there are other places around the world that have tried similar things.Les, I think that would be a political post you just made.
But this is a thread that is supposed to be about the coronavirus, not politics. I started it almost exactly a year ago with the idea that participants (including, at the time, two medical doctors who both, unfortunately, no longer participate) could share information and discuss the vaccines that were then beginning to appear—but its expansion into other factual submissions relating to the virus is certainly reasonable; we all know that Internet forums tend to evolve.First, I acknowledge I have made political comments here. So have most other posters. While I think the idea, Chris, of keeping politics out of this is interesting, I don't see any practical way to do that. How do you discuss the distribution of vaccines without referring to political decisions as to how and why it's being done one way or the other? How can you discuss the shortage of test kits without discussing how politicians handle the ordering of them? How can you discuss the percentage of people who have been vaccinated without discussing why the numbers are the way they are. That's politics. Les's last post about the implementation of a tax is a fact, yet it's also political. How do you say it without it becoming political? It's like discussing the features of a new Nikon without adding comments about your preferences for one feature over another. it's just not practical.
What doesn't make sense is turning it into a forum for political arguments. There is another forum thread expressly for that. I've considered locking this one—as the originator, I'm under the impression it is my prerogative to do that—but in addition to my disinclination to shut down discussion, I still occasionally find some useful information here and I presume others do as well.
As photographers, amateurs like me as well as the pros, many of us probably are accustomed to traveling frequently, and this once-in-a-lifetime pandemic has really put a crimp in our plans. I hoped when I started this thread that it could help all of us figure out how safely to best resume our pre-pandemic activities.
I applaud the latest offers to cool down the rhetoric, but in addition to that I would encourage those who use this thread to instigate political debate or who can't resist the urge to respond to opinions which obviously have no arguable basis in fact to move their comments to the thread intended for that purpose.
I think what's going to happen is that all comments are going to wind up in the other thread.
Les, I think that would be a political post you just made.
I think that news item is more about the covid virus and a method how to mitigate its effects than about any political angle, liberal or conservative.I agree with you. Discuss it with Chris.
Let's not get too silly about the minutia. What about virus stats and corresponding charts? Are they also political statements?
And where would you report a death of a senator who died because of covid? Reflecting the fact that the virus was stronger than the senator.
Les, I think that would be a political post you just made.
I think that news item is more about the covid virus and a method how to mitigate its effects than about any political angle, liberal or conservative.
Let's not get too silly about the minutia. What about virus stats and corresponding charts? Are they also political statements?
And where would you report a death of a senator who died because of covid? Reflecting the fact that the virus was stronger than the senator.
I've been following this thread since it started, and I agree that it would be hard to separate the simple "news" from any political issues, and I would prefer to get all commentary in one thread without having to go looking for a related "political" thread for commentary.Your wish is granted. Having a single place for all makes sense to me as well.
This thread seems to me to be an excellent place for news, discussion, policy, and political commentary on the Corona virus and on vaccination,
I've been following this thread since it started, and I agree that it would be hard to separate the simple "news" from any political issues, and I would prefer to get all commentary in one thread without having to go looking for a related "political" thread for commentary.I too would prefer to get all commentary in one thread. Here.
This thread seems to me to be an excellent place for news, discussion, policy, and political commentary on the Corona virus and on vaccination,
A combined Covid-19 and flu booster shot from Moderna could be available in some countries by fall 2023 at the earliest, CEO Stéphane Bancel said Monday.
Speaking at the Davos Agenda, a virtual event being held this week by the World Economic Forum, Bancel said this date was a “best case scenario,” but that he believed it was possible for some countries next year.
He explained it was a goal for the company to have a single annual booster shot available to avoid “compliance issues” where people are wary about getting multiple shots every winter.
Getting back on topic, specifically vaccines:
Moderna: Combined Covid-19 and flu booster could be available by fall 2023
I too would prefer to get all commentary in one thread. Here.I've given people a choice. It will avoid disagreements on this thread about what is political and what isn't.
As you can see, Alan completely missed the points above.
Since he can't seem to wrap his head around this established thred about Coronavirus san's overt political posting, he's started a new thread where he promises not to do what he's done here. Go figure.
He has one thread where he can overtly post about politics that's hundreds of pages long, filled with a massive degree of (his) political BS, that apparently isn't enough for him, again, go figure.
I've given people a choice. It will avoid disagreements on this thread about what is political and what isn't.Ridiculous. It didn't work here, you think it will change there? Prove it.
The other thread will give a person the ability to discuss all aspects of covid.Ridiculous. It didn't work here, you think it will change there? Prove it.
It's 4th November (2020). From now, this thread is the only place at The Luminous Landscape in which political discussion (including discussion of climate change) is permitted: see here (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136535.0) for more information.https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1193523#msg1193523
Those who enter this thread do so at their own risk. I may read it myself, or I may look merely at complaints submitted to the moderators by outraged members who have strayed into it, accidentally or otherwise. I have closed down political discussion here because it was occupying too much of my time; if this thread intrudes similarly, it will not survive.
Jeremy
Ridiculous. It didn't work here, you think it will change there? Prove it. Ridiculous. It didn't work here, you think it will change there? Prove it.First off, Jeremy was fired years ago and is no longer in charge. If the new moderator objects, he can let us know. Second, there are not suppose to be personal attacks either as part of the general rules of LuLa. But those were occurring frequently; hopefully those have ended. Third, I didn't start a specific second political thread. I started a thread on general Covid issues that's open to all discussions. These include masks, testing, economy, jobs, mandates, and policy. This thread is titled for vaccinations ("Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine"), apparently statistics only. That's very limiting.
You are clearly unaware of the one forum for political discussions or this fact from the fellow who left due to abuse:https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1193523#msg1193523
For better or worse, the corona virus and related things (vaccines, masks) have become politicized. It's beyond me how the right wing has so firmly come down on the side of anti-science and anti-public health and used the mantras of "freedom" and "rights" as excuses for selfishness and stupidity. So yes, covid and politics are inextricably linked.Peter your post is political and doesn't belong in this thread. You'll have to take this comment to my thread.
First of all, as usual, you don't know what the f&*k you're talking about and that's utterly wrong.I'm glad you agreed to stay off my thread. It's better that way.
2nd, being this is MLK day and you've shown us your stupidity and racist dog whistles, this is perfect for you:
“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King
You are dangeriously ignorant.
Your are conscientiously stupid.
You don't tell the truth but accuse others of speaking lies. That makes you a hypocrate on top of being dangeriously stupid and ignorant.
You break the rules here then tell others the rules*. That makes you a hypocrate on top of being dangeriously stupid and ignorant.
You're not taken seriously here.
You're not respected here.
As such, you started your own new Covid-19 thread, have fun there. You'll continue to add political nonsense here and there; you can't help yourself.
You are a dangeriously stupid, ingorant Troll.
None of this is a surprise to anyone here who's followed you over the last year plus.
The only person who doesn't understand what a troll is, how a troll behaves is you Alan.
Now go off to your new thread and have at it, anyone with any sense will stay away from your dangeriously stupid and ignorant trolling there.
I'm glad you agreed to stay off my thread. It's better that way.I have no intention of aiding you in your masterbation there. You're on your own bud.
I have no intention of aiding you in your masterbation there. You're on your own bud.I think that's a great idea. So you see, we can come to agreements about things.
Perhaps you'll agree to stay off this thread. It's way better that way.
Of couse you can't.
Moderna: Combined Covid-19 and flu booster could be available by fall 2023
Our goal is to be able to have a single annual booster, so that we don’t have compliance issues where people don’t want to get two to three shots a winter, but to get one dose where they get a booster for Corona and a booster for flu and RSV.
Out of respect for the OP Chris who stated he wants to keep this thread non-political, I will no longer post here but on the other Covid site.In celebration of Alan's promose to never post here again, how about a Dr Anthony Fauci (and 'friends') joke:
In celebration of Alan's promose to never post here again, how about a Dr Anthony Fauci (and 'friends') joke:
That joke is getting really old (I heard it first 60 years ago about Nikita Khrushchev)...I didn't post it solely for your entertainment.
I didn't post it solely for your entertainment.
Since I'm not humor impaired, let me ask: In your version, from 60 years ago, who jumped out with the little girls school backpack and who got parachutes?
That joke is getting really old (I heard it first 60 years ago about Nikita Khrushchev)...
I remember only the airplane (most probably a Tupolev) and Khrushchev. He was the one who grabbed the backpack. Two other passengers could have been presidents of East Germany and Czechoslovakia. That was usually the typical crew in the Radio Yerevan or Prague underground jokes.Well now you can recall the new joke just posted that is getting “really old for you” <g>.
Well now you can recall the new joke just posted that is getting “really old for you” <g>.
60 years ago the jokes were the only way for the oppressed masses to get back at the political elite and oppressors Consider yourself lucky not to have lived through it.You seem very sure I didn't. Or that either (or neither of us) were “oppressed”.
You'll have to take this comment to my thread.
One obvious advantage of migrating seasonal 'flu vaccines to mRNA technology would be lower latency in the development of each year's formula—allowing the vaccine manufacturers to respond quickly to later-developing mutations.Discussed in more detail here:
Existing flu shots, whether built around inactivated viruses or recombinant proteins, typically offer only 40–60% protection from infection. In theory, mRNA might make for a better product: elicited immune responses may be broader, expressed proteins should have better sequence fidelity, strain selection may be more accurate and the technology makes it easy to incorporate large numbers of antigens. All of these features could translate into greater immune protection.
Because mRNA vaccines are manufactured synthetically, by encoding a target antigen sequence into a plasmid template, they offer high fidelity: encoded antigens exactly match the flu strains selected for each year’s vaccine. By contrast, inactivated virus vaccines that are made in egg- and cell-based systems often suffer from sequence mutations that weaken their effectiveness.
FOGO fear of going outFear Of Getting Omicron? 🤔
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a request to block a federal mask mandate for air travel.
The emergency application was filed by a father on behalf of himself and his 4-year-old autistic son, both of whom claim to be medically incapable of wearing masks for extended periods.
Their request was filed to Justice Neil Gorsuch, who handles emergency applications arising in several Western states, and he referred the matter to the full court. The justices denied the request without comment or noted dissent.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki confirmed Tuesday that the government website to order free Covid-19 tests is up and running as part of a "beta phase" ahead of the government website's formal rollout Wednesday morning.
"COVIDtests.gov is in the beta phase right now, which is a standard part of the process typically as it's being kind of tested in the early stages of being rolled out," Psaki told reporters at the White House. "It will officially launch tomorrow morning."
Any beta testers?
This hour:
White House press secretary Jen Psaki confirmed Tuesday that the government website to order free Covid-19 tests is up and running as part of a "beta phase" ahead of the government website's formal rollout Wednesday morning.
"COVIDtests.gov is in the beta phase right now, which is a standard part of the process typically as it's being kind of tested in the early stages of being rolled out," Psaki told reporters at the White House. "It will officially launch tomorrow morning."
From this week's "The Week" magazine:
Good week for: Getting the jab, after British doctors treating men who've had Covid reported that the virus sometimes damages blood vessels in the penis, causes impotence and a permanent reduction in its size.
Maybe someone here will post this to that 'other' forum post on Covid-19 for its author too see and consider.... ;D
You should post part of this study on bold. And then tweet it to a wider audience.Be my guest, I'm not on Twitter (or Facebook).
As the Omicron variant rips across the U.S., in early January almost 9 million Americans said they were not working because they had COVID-19 or were caring for someone with the virus — triple the number from a month ago. The surge in sick workers is impacting industries ranging from hospitals to airlines, adding to the nation's labor crunch.Worth a reminder from last month:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
A popular Czech folk singer who deliberately caught COVID-19 has died, her son says. Hanka Horka, who was not vaccinated, caught the virus from her son and husband, who are vaccinated but still caught it over the holidays, according to BBC News.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60050996
The 57-year-old purposefully did not stay away from them and exposed herself the virus, which she caught. Horka posted on social media January 14 that she had recovered from the virus – but her son told BBC News she died two days later.
The number of Covid cases in the Czech Republic reached a new daily high on Wednesday, with 28,469 cases reported in a population of 10.7m people.
JANUARY 20, 2022 / 11:59 AM / MONEYWATCHWorth a reminder from last month:
As the Omicron variant rips across the U.S., in early January almost 9 million Americans said they were not working because they had COVID-19 or were caring for someone with the virus — triple the number from a month ago. The surge in sick workers is impacting industries ranging from hospitals to airlines, adding to the nation's labor crunch.
Weekly new jobless claims unexpectedly jumped last week by the most since October, with some renewed virus-related disruptions at least temporarily impeding the labor market's recovery.
The Labor Department released its latest weekly jobless claims report Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:
Initial jobless claims, week ended Jan. 15: 286,000 vs. 225,000 expected and a revised 231,000 during prior week
Continuing claims, week ended Jan. 8: 1.635 million vs. 1.563 million expected and a revised 1.551 million during prior week
Initial unemployment claims rose for a third straight week, coming in near the 300,000 level. This represented some backsliding from recent progress in the trajectory of jobless claims. Claims had reached a 52-year low of 188,000 in December, as many employers attempted to keep their existing workforces in the face of widespread labor shortages.
Continuing claims also came in higher-than-expected in the most recent data. These claims, which tracks filers still collecting regular state unemployment benefits, rose by more than 1.6 million in mid-January.
The late rocker Meat Loaf was outspokenly anti-vaccine mandate and anti-mask before his death — once telling a reporter, “If I die, I die, but I’m not going to be controlled,” according to reports Friday.
The 74-year-old “Bat Out of Hell” singer — who was reportedly critically ill with COVID-19 before he passed away Thursday — was opposed to pandemic restrictions, slamming lockdowns and mask mandates during an interview last summer.
The guy who had several underlying health conditions killed himself:
Rubbish. He was exposed to a danger which resulted in his death, possibly because he elected not to take precautions which might have prevented it.Substitute anti-vax, overweight, underlying medical conditions for Texans:
The concept is wholly different from suicide.
S
“Omicron has three main [subvariants]—BA.1, BA.2, and BA.3—according to the World Health Organization (WHO),” Dr. Donald C. Vinh, associate professor in the Department of Medicine at McGill University, Canada, told [Medical News Today]. . . . It is important to mention that there are very limited data on clinical differences between BA.2 and BA.1. Specifically, we have no firm data to know if BA.2 is more contagious, results in more severe disease, or can evade immunity better than BA.1. Nonetheless, early data from Denmark and the U.K. suggest that BA.2 may be more contagious than BA.1.”
Why do some people get Covid when others don't? Here’s what we know so farhttps://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/03/why-do-some-people-get-covid-while-others-dont.html
The world surpassed 400 million known coronavirus cases on Tuesday, just one month after reaching 300 million, a staggering increase driven by the highly transmissible Omicron variant as governments and individuals worldwide wrestle with how to confront the next stage of the pandemic.
It took more than a year for the world to reach 100 million confirmed infections: The first cases were identified in late 2019, and the 100 millionth in January 2021. It took only seven months to double that number, and now six months to double it again. Daily case counts have begun to decline, but there have been an average of more than 2.7 million infections reported every day, according to the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University.
And the coronavirus continues to take a devastating toll, including in the United States, where the virus has killed at far higher rates than in other wealthy nations.
ore than 5.7 million people worldwide have died of the virus, including more than 900,000 in the United States alone. On average, the United States is reporting 2,598 new deaths a day, the equivalent of a disaster worse than Pearl Harbor every day. Globally, 10,900 people a day are dying from Covid-19.
Took only one month to go from 300 to 400 million reported infections.
Good synopsis here:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/09/world/covid-test-vaccine-cases
The 3rd dose of mRNA vaccines boosts plasma antibody responses to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants including Omicron, but the levels are insufficient to prevent breakthrough infection in many individuals. The 3rd dose also elicits increased number of memory B cells that express more potent and broader antibodies. These cells do not appear to contribute to circulating plasma antibody levels, but upon challenge with antigen in the form of a vaccine or infection, they produce large amounts of antibodies within 3-5 days. . . . . Thus, rapid recall by a diversified and expanded memory B cell compartment is likely to be one of the key mechanisms that contribute to the enhanced protection against severe disease by a 3rd mRNA vaccine dose. [citations omitted]
The highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has been shown to evade a substantial fraction of neutralizing antibody responses elicited by current vaccines that encode the WA1/2020 Spike1. Cellular immune responses, particularly CD8+ T cell responses, likely contribute to protection against severe SARS-CoV-2 disease2–6. [The] cellular immunity induced by current SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is highly conserved to the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Spike. Individuals who received Ad26.COV2.S or BNT162b2 vaccines demonstrated durable Spike-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T cell responses, which showed extensive cross-reactivity against both the Delta and Omicron variants, including in central and effector memory cellular subpopulations. Median Omicron Spike-specific CD8+ T cell responses were 82-84% of WA1/2020 Spike-specific CD8+ T cell responses. These data provide immunologic context for the observation that current vaccines still show robust protection against severe disease with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant despite the substantially reduced neutralizing antibody responses. [citations omitted]
Ivermectin doesn't work:
The antiparasitic ivermectin-touted as a wonder drug by many Republicans is entirely ineffective in treating severe cases of Covid-19, a new study shows.
Researchers in Malaysia looked at 490 Covid patients 50 and older, all of whom were considered high risk because of their age and underlying health. Half were put
on ivermectin for five days, while the other half received fever-reducing medications and other routine treatment for symptoms. The researchers found that there was little
difference in outcomes between the two groups, reports UPI.com. About 2 percent of the ivermectin group was admitted to ICU compared with 3 percent of the control group, a difference not statistically significant. But the ivermectin takers had more side effects, including heart attacks and anemia. The study is considered the most rigorous examination of the drug's impact on Covid thus far. "People infected with Covid-19 should not resort to self-medication with ivermectin," says study
co-author Steven Lim. from the Raja Permaisuri Bainun Hospital in Malaysia. The drug, he says, *does not reduce their risk of deterioration to severe disease.
From last week's "The Week Magazine":
In Germany, the number of cases in the last 24 hours shot up suddenly to 245,000. That's much higher than anytime since the beginning of the pandemic,
In at least Quebec and Ontario we are entering the 6th wave. . . . The city of Ottawa monitors Covid viruses in sewage water and has set daily records for 5-6 days in a row now. Hospitalizations have increased but daily deaths are still in single figures for the province. Anybody with any sense is watching those numbers closely. Ontario has just recommended a 4th vaccine shot for those 60 and over.
The omicron variant is genetically divergent from the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain for which the BNT162b2 vaccine was tailored. The results presented here indicate that as compared with three vaccine doses given at least 4 months earlier, a fourth dose provides added short-term protection against confirmed infections and severe illness caused by the omicron variant. The incidence rate for confirmed infection was lower by a factor of 2 and the rate of severe disease lower by a factor of 3 among persons in the fourth week after receiving the fourth dose than among eligible persons who did not receive the fourth dose.
Comparing the rate ratio over time since the fourth dose . . . suggests that the protection against confirmed infection with the omicron variant reaches a maximum in the fourth week after vaccination, after which the rate ratio decreases to approximately 1.1 by the eighth week; these findings suggest that protection against confirmed infection wanes quickly. In contrast, protection against severe illness did not appear to decrease by the sixth week after receipt of the fourth dose. More follow-up is needed in order to evaluate the protection of the fourth dose against severe illness over longer periods.