Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Chris Kern on January 28, 2021, 06:10:30 pm

Title: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 28, 2021, 06:10:30 pm
Novavax today announced (https://ir.novavax.com/node/15506/pdf) that the Phase 2b and 3 trials of its protein-based COVID-19 vaccine produced good results against coronavirus infections, significantly including both the more aggressive U.K. and South Africa variants:

Quote
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.

Also significant, from the perspective of deployment: it remains stable at modest levels of refrigeration:

Quote
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 for participants in this forum, there is even a photography industry angle to the new vaccine: it is manufactured at Fujifilm's Diosynth Biotechnologies’s facilities in Billingham, Stockton-on-Tees, England.

No regulatory approval yet.  I presume the first review will take place in the United Kingdom and that one in the United States won't be far behind.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 28, 2021, 06:15:50 pm
It's very promising. And as lagniappe for me, I've learned a completely new word!

Jeremy
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 28, 2021, 06:18:46 pm
As lagniappe...

Thank you for using the word lagnilappe. At the risk of showing my ignorance, I have never heard it used before and don't recall having ever seen it in print. Naturally, I looked it up:

"A lagniappe is "a small gift given to a customer by a merchant at the time of a purchase", or more broadly, "something given or obtained gratuitously or by way of good measure."

Anyway, I probably will never use the word, but at least I will now know what it means if I run across it reading.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 28, 2021, 06:32:19 pm
And as lagniappe for me, I've learned a completely new word!

If aging memory serves, I first encountered it many years ago when my wife and I were served a couple more beignets than we ordered at a coffee stand in in N'Awlins (http://www.experienceneworleans.com/glossary.html).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 28, 2021, 06:40:35 pm
...beignets...

An Obi Wan moment: "Now there's name I haven't heard in a long, long time."  I used to get beignets regularly at this place in the Latin Quarter when I was a student in Paris. I have had a few over the years over here, but they were never the same.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 28, 2021, 06:56:57 pm
The good news is that many here have a new word!

The bad news is that the effectiveness of a lagniappe in protecting you from Covid is untested.
The same, unfortunately, also applies to beignets.

 :(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 29, 2021, 04:06:51 am
... 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: William Walker on January 29, 2021, 04:20:00 am
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?

I am pretty sure you could politicise either in two seconds... ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: athegn on January 29, 2021, 07:47:40 am
Watch it! We British are proud to have our own virus. We don't want you Johnny foreigners trying to take it away from us.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 29, 2021, 07:52:18 am
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?

I think that may be because no national leader has accused the UK or South Africa of creating the variants in a lab and deliberately spreading them throughout the world as a form of biologic and economic warfare, and claimed a right to reparations from them for having done so. Unlike the terms UK variant and South African variant, the terms Chinese flu, kung flu, and the like are used as shorthand for J'accuse....

Of course, I am no expert, so that is only a guess.
Title: Yet Another Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 29, 2021, 10:53:28 am
Johnson & Johnson has also announced (https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson-announces-single-shot-janssen-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-met-primary-endpoints-in-interim-analysis-of-its-phase-3-ensemble-trial) that a large, multinational trial of its non-replicating viral vector vaccine produced acceptable results against all major variants of the coronavirus:

Quote
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


Although the clinical trials of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine did not achieve the remarkable results of the mRNA vaccines that are currently being administered in many countries, the fact that it only requires a single dose and can be stored for an extended period at normal refrigerated temperatures makes it an attractive candidate for arresting the rapid spread of severe disease and the consequent overburdening of hospital capacity and medical staff.

The information about the vaccine is from a company press release; the full clinical trial data required to support applications for regulatory approval apparently haven't been published yet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: marvpelkey on January 29, 2021, 07:32:00 pm
Happened to watch part (paying attention to two things at the same time, so could be wrong on some of the details) of a CNN interview today in which an expert was saying the test results of the J and J vaccine is from trials in South Africa and Brazil (?) and they are now in trials in the US.

Of interest though, is the expert believed that the US trials are with two doses and opined the double dose may prove more effective (similar to a Pfizer/Moderna 1st dose is not as effective as two doses). Here's hoping.

Marv
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 07:17:53 am
Interesting...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 30, 2021, 10:49:15 am
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.
 ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 30, 2021, 01:32:42 pm
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).

Jeremy
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 30, 2021, 01:38:24 pm
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).

No. Really?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on January 30, 2021, 02:25:20 pm
The same, unfortunately, also applies to beignets.

 :(

You say that but my intensive research on the subject is not complete.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 03:08:17 pm
Slobodan is being somewhat selective in the data he has chosen to show, removing a few countries with higher vaccination rates from the display...

I didn't do anything, except pilfering the chart from the Internet. It seemed to me the chart represents a geographical Europe.

What are "a few countries with higher vaccination rate"?

P.S. A similar info comes from this Turkish site:

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/serbia-europes-2nd-fastest-covid-19-vaccine-rollout/2126629
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 03:09:11 pm
No. Really?

What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying I have a habit of posting doctored information?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 30, 2021, 03:37:55 pm
What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying I have a habit of posting doctored information?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 03:44:15 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 30, 2021, 04:21:34 pm
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 information from another angle by definition means that it must be selective. In addition, let's look at your chart. 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. The chart did, however, show information only from the countries you selected. So it was selective information presented in a standard way.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 04:40:18 pm
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, and it appears to be representing geographic European countries. I didn't take any position regarding the chart, other than find it interesting that Serbia is so high up (given how much the media here, internally, criticizes everything the government does). Also interesting is such a huge disparity between countries.

You made a general statement about how I often post "selective info." I responded in a similar, general manner. That is, nothing to do with the chart in question.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 30, 2021, 04:57:04 pm
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. My apologies.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 30, 2021, 05:20:26 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on January 30, 2021, 05:42:03 pm
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.

You rely on the information you want to. If social media is your reality, you are welcome to it.

I thought you actually looked up the information and generated the chart from the website. I obviously gave you way more credit than you deserve. I looked at the image and noticed there was an "Add Country" button so alarm bells went off. I wondered what countries were left out and why? I went to the original source. I looked around and couldn't find that exact chart. I found another chart with vaccinations per hundred by country in x/y format, and the numbers were different, so I said selective countries, different numbers, screw it. I am not going to waste any more time on this. Then Jeremy posted his comment and I said no kidding.

Like I said, if you are just going to post stuff from your social media feeds, I'll disregard it as unreliable and move on. Slobodan=Social Media=Unreliable.

Hey, look at this. Sasquatch is alive!

[insert image of Sasquatch from social media here]

Not only that, Sasquatch is an alien!

[insert image of Sasquatch in a flying saucer from social media here]

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 30, 2021, 07:05:05 pm
Here is yet another source of data by Euronews listing vaccinations by country. These numbers show the total counts of vaccinations, not per capita, but the chart is laid out much more generously and is using some negative space between the individual countries, unlike the other two. To some, the narrow white lines may seem like a wasted space, but the experts say that whitespace is one of the most valuable parts of your composition whether it is a coffee table book or a pandemic chart.

Quote
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.

https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/29/covid-19-vaccinations-in-europe-which-countries-are-leading-the-way

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: BobShaw on January 30, 2021, 10:32:09 pm
Here is yet another source of data by Euronews listing vaccinations by country.
Vaccinations by country can also be described as degree of panic.
The UK is panicking because they now have 25% the deaths of USA and that is a cause for panic.
You may kill some but, you may save some.
If you are not panicking then you can sit back and watch the rest stuff up and learn the best approach.
There have been no vaccinations in Australia and many other countries for that reason.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on January 30, 2021, 10:50:54 pm
What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying I have a habit of posting doctored information?

Let's just call it selective.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 03:23:33 am
Let's just call it selective.

I am still waiting for Jeremy to tell us which countries with higher vaccination rates were not selected.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 31, 2021, 04:22:12 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 04:44:49 am
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

Even Americans, with their dismal knowledge of geography, would recognize that the chart I posted shows only European countries. Let alone a distinguished English gentleman, like yourself :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 05:32:10 am
Anyway...

The very high UK placement in those charts... first benefit of Brexit?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on January 31, 2021, 06:13:28 am
Anyway...

The very high UK placement in those charts... first benefit of Brexit?

Nothng to do with Brexit - the deals were done last year when EU rules still applied.  Partly a result of a strong local expertise in gene stuff, partly from the large sums of money splashed around and partly due to panic having messed up every other way out of the crisis.

It is, as you say, interesting to see that Serbia has high vaccination rates - never mentioned in the news. Which vaccine is being used?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: rabanito on January 31, 2021, 06:43:50 am


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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on January 31, 2021, 06:51:19 am
Pfizer, Sputnik V and Sinopharm

Good opportunity to compare effectiveness.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 31, 2021, 07:01:30 am
The very high UK placement in those charts... first benefit of Brexit?

The answer is possibly, if indirectly. 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.

It is true to say that our ability of our regulator (the MHRA) to authorise use of the vaccines independently of the EU's regulator (the EMA), while perhaps made easier by Brexit, would have been an option even had we still be members of the EU, there being exemptions in emergencies.

Anyway, we're straying into politics and since three contributors are currently suspended for that very offence, I suggest we stop.

Jeremy
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 07:34:17 am
Pfizer, Sputnik V and Sinopharm

And Moderna. With the option to choose between the four (as a preference in advance, during an online registration of interest - not sure if realistic at the time when my turn comes).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 31, 2021, 07:39:33 am
And Moderna.
not to forget Slivovitza
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 07:49:14 am
not to forget Slivovitza

Indeed. Since I have a dual nationality, I will have a different second shot. Hope they are compatible.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 31, 2021, 08:03:07 am
... It is, as you say, interesting to see that Serbia has high vaccination rates - never mentioned in the news...

I am equally surprised when we do something well ;)

A picture of a vaccination site at a huge trade-fair hall. Seems well organized. They even bothered to arrange chairs for waiting in flag colors (red-blue-white).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on February 01, 2021, 10:28:05 am
Interesting 'side-bar' to the ongoing vaccine discussion, (UK based).


Quote
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.”

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on February 01, 2021, 10:57:49 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 01, 2021, 11:42:33 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on February 01, 2021, 12:49:50 pm
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.

Indeed, but there is a risk of reducing the effectiveness of the vaccine, when increasing the number of days between first and second doses. Also, there is a breach of trust between authorities and people who got the first dose initially; they were expecting to get the second dose after 21 days, and now that is not going to happen. How will they feel about it? The only data we know is from the trials: the effectiveness from Pfizer is >90% when two doses are separated by 21 days.

Here in Portugal, where we are now the number 1 country in deaths per 1 million people, the pressure is increasing to take a similar approach, but thus far the health authorities are resisting the government and adhering to lab recommendations.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on February 01, 2021, 02:00:00 pm
The only data we know is from the trials: the effectiveness from Pfizer is >90% when two doses are separated by 21 days.

That's true, but it's known from other vaccines and from understanding of immunology that it is likely that a longer interval between doses will not diminish the efficacy and may even increase it, and it's known that a single dose confers a substantial degree of immunity, albeit not as great as two doses and for a more uncertain time. We don't know how Pfizer alighted on three weeks for their trial.

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. That latter doesn't require everyone to have been given a first dose, of course.

Jeremy
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on February 01, 2021, 03:45:28 pm
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 emerging consensus here in the States seems to be for providers using two-dose vaccines (1) not to sequester second doses—i.e., they should use all the doses at their disposal for individuals who are currently eligible for vaccination under national and local guidelines* (medical staff, the elderly, etc.); (2) when administering current inventory, to give priority to those ready for second doses under the manufacturer's clinical trial protocol.

My impression is that few experts here are overly concerned about "late" administration of second doses, believing they are likely to be as effective as second doses that are given in accordance with intervals used in the respective clinical trials.

———
*The federal government provides advisory national guidelines, but each of the states currently has independent authority to interpret them and to allocate vaccine doses in accordance with its own priorities.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 02, 2021, 04:57:42 am
... 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...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on February 02, 2021, 10:09:35 am
There are still concerns about how effective a single dose of vaccine will be against the South African strain. So far Pfizer and Moderna's studies have only looked at how people given two doses react to the SA variant.

Studies into how well Oxford University/AstraZeneca's jab will work against the South African strain are still ongoing. Johnson & Johnson actually trialled its jab in South Africa while the variant was circulating and confirmed that it blocked 57 per cent of coronavirus infections in South Africa, which meets the WHO’s 50 per cent efficacy threshold.

IIRC, both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were said by the companies to be no more than 50% effective in single jab mode. Pfizer has developed a booster shot to counteract the SA strain and Moderna announced that one is under development. 

Furthermore there is a growing body of research indicating that antibodies in those previously seriously infected with Covid-19 are, in many cases, proving ineffective in protecting against the SA virus.  Today, SKY News broadcast that testing at Cambridge University shows the Pfizer vaccine is proving ineffective in combatting the SA virus in the over 80's - so another note of caution here. (*)

My personal POV, is that "vaccine nationalism" be damned. The supplies should be adequate to cope with high vaccination rates throughout the European continent within the next 8-10 weeks.  In the British case, vaccines are something of a 'Hail Mary' given the tragically high death toll. So far it's going well - long may it continue.


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50901741312_ba241a7503_z.jpg)

(*) In the chart, Sanofi-GSK are manufacturing the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine under licence.
(*) https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/pfizer-biontech-vaccine-likely-to-be-effective-against-b117-strain-of-sars-cov-2

The preliminary data, which have yet to be to peer-reviewed and relate to only a small number of patients, also suggest that a significant proportion of over-eighty olds may not be sufficiently protected against infection until they have received their second dose of the vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 02, 2021, 11:43:58 am
...which meets the WHO’s 50 per cent efficacy threshold.

"Heads you catch it, tails you don't" sounds like a pretty low bar to me, but every little bit helps. If we had had the vaccine last March, we might have saved 200,000+ of the 400,000+ deaths, so driving over to get your shot does make sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 03, 2021, 10:57:53 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on February 03, 2021, 02:53:51 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: rabanito on February 03, 2021, 04:42:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 03, 2021, 07:06:18 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: rabanito on February 04, 2021, 05:02:44 am
In other words, one should wait with the first shot until he gets the second?

It seems that the covid vaccines are time-symmetric  ;)
Alice in Wonderland II (unpublished)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on February 04, 2021, 09:27:20 am
Yes. I got my second shot a couple of weeks ago, and I'll get my first shot soon...    8)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: rabanito on February 04, 2021, 09:37:01 am
Yes. I got my second shot a couple of weeks ago, and I'll get my first shot soon...    8)

I've read that from one to two weeks after the second shot you are protected. I'd skip the first one then
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 04, 2021, 12:38:01 pm
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=content&utm_content=covidtracker2021&fbclid=IwAR0Bl9v1tmpTFLv4Fs-DDUGL76k2y5AExrjhstbqYSjV3ORt0sMmbnxXCbA

"More Than 108 Million Shots Given: Covid-19 Tracker"

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on February 04, 2021, 01:05:01 pm
Does anybody have any idea at all about what's going on in Africa? It strikes me that it's possible that Africa could become a big pool of covid strains mixing with each other, then migrating to other areas, since it doesn't look like much is being done in the way of remediation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on February 04, 2021, 06:09:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 05, 2021, 07:08:56 am
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!?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: rabanito on February 05, 2021, 10:04:18 am
;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!?

HAHAHA
Depends on what you understand by "saving the world". You mean the Economy or the Human Species? Well, that's part of it :-)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 05, 2021, 10:21:42 am
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!?

The chart appears to show that as of the date of the undated chart, 108 million doses of vaccine had been administered in the world, and that the rate of vaccinations had been higher in the United States and Europe. That strikes me as a fun fact to know and tell, but not much more. Is there anything else that you think I should takeaway from the chart?

I don't recall anyone (except maybe Alan) arguing "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes". Perhaps you are being hyperbolic about what others have said. Most economies have been open since last April or May with some restrictions which differ from location to location and from time to time. I do recall some people saying that things won't get back to normal until most people are vaccinated, which is something quite different and not particularly controversial.

I also don't recall anyone (not even Alan) arguing "shots are going to save the world" or "it is not important at all how fast the vaccine is distributed". Perhaps you are being hyperbolic about what others have said there too. Have you been drinking a lot of coffee lately?

My experience is that, when making an argument, misstating what others have said generally does not enhance one's credibility. In each of these three instances doing so constitutes a strawman, which of course is a logical fallacy. Three strawmen in one sentence is quite an accomplishment.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 05, 2021, 04:30:51 pm
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.

Not to forget the millions of people who will die while waiting for the vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 05, 2021, 05:11:55 pm
... I don't recall anyone (except maybe Alan) arguing "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes"....

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 05, 2021, 05:15:12 pm
... Most economies have been open since last April or May with some restrictions which differ from location to location and from time to time....


 ;D ;D ;D

You are a funny guy. Ever tried a stand up?

In some locations, you can't even walk.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 05, 2021, 05:43:36 pm
Thanks for posting those images.

I don't think any of the three articles, the titles of which you posted here as images, were written by anyone around here.

Perhaps I misunderstood. I thought when you said "you (collective)", you meant "you" meaning specifically Peter to whose post you were responding, and "(collective)" meaning others participating in the discussion here.

If you intended "you (collective)" to mean that someone somewhere said "we can't reopen the economy until a vaccine comes", "shots are going to save the world", and "it is not important at all how fast the vaccine is distributed", then I would concede the point. I don't doubt someone somewhere said those things, just not around here.

I also think you may be confusing the words "recover" and "grow[th]" which are used in the article titles you posted, with the word "reopen" which you attributed to "you (collective)".

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 further 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. It goes without saying that you would actually have to read the article to find all that out.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 05, 2021, 07:08:18 pm

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on February 05, 2021, 07:10:01 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 06, 2021, 06:49:20 am
In my book, going to church or to a street protest happening are the most blatant examples of non-essential activities.

It's that pesky First Amendment. I don't know why God didn't give his followers the good sense not to go to church in a pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 06, 2021, 10:27:35 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on February 06, 2021, 02:56:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on February 06, 2021, 09:54:58 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on February 07, 2021, 03:57:18 pm
Quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 08, 2021, 09:34:45 am
Source: NYT

For some more detailed information see this twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/mugecevik/status/1358539975122419712

Bottom line is that the SA study was extremely small and the results have huge confidence bounds, so don't draw too many conclusions from it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 08, 2021, 09:50:43 am
In my book, going to church or to a street protest happening are the most blatant examples of non-essential activities.
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.
The First Amendment to our Consitution protectss free speech and religious expression, not shoe repair stores.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 08, 2021, 09:53:07 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 08, 2021, 09:54:44 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 12, 2021, 12:02:30 pm
Had my first shot today (Pfizer) No side effects so far except a strange compulsion to buy Microsoft products ... :-(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 08:02:15 am
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. 

Interesting article on herd immunity.

Just what some of us have been observing here; the Swedes too.  It may turn out that those who will get the shots late, they might not need it.

The brutal COVID-19 surge that killed so many is now helping to create herd immunity
https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2021/02/21/the-brutal-covid-19-surge-that-killed-so-many-is-now-helping-to-create-herd-immunity/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 08:10:54 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 21, 2021, 09:41:03 am
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

Not so much complicated, as false. That myth has been dispelled a long time ago.

Quote
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

https://intermountainhealthcare.org/blogs/topics/covid-19/2020/11/debunking-the-myth-of-non-vaccine-herd-immunity-in-covid-19/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 21, 2021, 10:01:50 am
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/

As one epidemilogist explained it:

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 10:19:35 am
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/
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 10:22:29 am
As one epidemilogist explained it:

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?
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 10:27:32 am
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 last two paragraphs from their article provide positive news about vaccines and would provide herd immunity.  So actually, their beliefs are better considering we now have effective vaccines.  The article was published before the vaccines came out in Nov.

The goal of vaccines is to stimulate long-lasting immunity without the collateral damage of natural infection. We don’t yet know how long lasting the immunity from the vaccine candidates will be, but if they prove to have a good safety profile, they will represent the only viable way of achieving herd immunity, even if it means yearly vaccination.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 10:59:08 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 21, 2021, 12:32:44 pm
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.

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.

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
 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 21, 2021, 12:36:46 pm
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]

That's the right approach. This is something Trump should have ordered a year ago instead of ridiculing mask wearing and denying the covid pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 21, 2021, 12:41:17 pm
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

Could be due also to mandatory mask wearing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 01:23:19 pm
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.

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
 
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 21, 2021, 01:41:52 pm
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:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 21, 2021, 01:54:08 pm
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:

Wearing a mask is a sound precaution at that stage. Once they move closer, they might need other protective device. Not-mandatory, but highly recommended.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 21, 2021, 02:16:10 pm
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:
How do you flirt when you wear a mask?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on February 21, 2021, 04:58:03 pm
You let your hands do the talking...age old technology still works
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on February 21, 2021, 05:23:46 pm
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:

You may have missed it, but I think the guy who would have banned you has been...banned.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 22, 2021, 06:38:54 am
That's exactly what's happening with COvid.
It's not, because:

Quote
we're also vaccinating the population.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 22, 2021, 06:41:23 am
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.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n394

"Covid-19: Is Manaus the final nail in the coffin for natural herd immunity?"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 22, 2021, 08:37:43 am
But that percentage is very high. If you rely on it happening naturally you will get huge numbers of dead people.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n394

"Covid-19: Is Manaus the final nail in the coffin for natural herd immunity?"
I never advocated not using vaccines.  Anything that gets us up to herd immunity faster is better.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 22, 2021, 11:49:40 am
In case anyone is interested in learning about the virus and how vaccines can help, this seems to be a good article:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n05/rupert-beale/eeek
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on February 22, 2021, 02:17:16 pm
In case anyone is interested in learning about the virus and how vaccines can help, this seems to be a good article . . .

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:

Quote
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. . . .
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 22, 2021, 02:25:53 pm
What I find interesting, is that neither my wife nor I have had a common cold in the last year, an unusual circumstance.  Probably due to isolation and masks.  I wonder if there have been any studies on this yet? 

Also, are there any theories yet that Cornovirus will just reduce the danger to that of the common cold or the seasonal flu?  The latter has many deaths, not nearly as bad as Covid, but still significant, probably in the order of tens of thousands per year.  IF it follows seasonal flu in danger and deaths, how best to respond to it?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on February 22, 2021, 02:29:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Dale Villeponteaux on February 24, 2021, 11:47:26 am
Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.

Gratefully,
Dale
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 24, 2021, 10:56:06 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 25, 2021, 12:40:19 pm
Good news.

Nursing Homes, Once Hotspots, Far Outpace U.S. in Covid Declines
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/02/25/us/nursing-home-covid-vaccine.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 25, 2021, 01:08:47 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EvFC-NXXEAI7qmD?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 25, 2021, 03:22:58 pm
"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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: EricV on February 25, 2021, 04:48:46 pm
Lower "percentage of tests that are positive" most certainly does not justify "cases have fallen more sharply".   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 25, 2021, 05:38:30 pm
Recent Sloan research examined Covid-19 death rates and mobility data in more than 100 countries from June to December of 2020, to analyze the severity of the pandemic relative to the change in economic activity. The researchers used the Google stats from daily visits to retail, recreational and workplace locations and compared to death numbers.
 
Quote
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.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/one-big-myth-that-botched-the-us-covid-response-183546860.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 26, 2021, 10:37:18 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 26, 2021, 10:58:38 am
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

In other news, thanks to Operation It Will Magically Go Away, the current number deaths in the US due to COVID stands at 520,980.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

Let us bow our heads for a moment of silence in remembrance of our fallen citizens who gave their lives so that our former President could live in denial.

"One of the more common responses to disaster is the psychological defense of denial—the problem doesn’t exist. COVID-19 demonstrates that denial is more than protean; it can provide (for some) pleasant and profitable experiences."

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-rest/202005/covid-19-and-the-pleasures-denial
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on February 26, 2021, 11:09:07 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 26, 2021, 11:50:30 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 26, 2021, 12:04:28 pm
Here we go again.

Here we go again indeed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 26, 2021, 12:38:54 pm
"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.

Including all that information in a subtitle would make for a pretty turgid piece of copy!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 05:31:35 am
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 05:44:02 am
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.

Actually, there has been a remarkable decrease of covid cases in USA since Biden assumed the office. That's quite an accomplishment, indeed.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 06:01:30 am
A senior from Alsace was harassed by the police on his way to the corona vaccination.

Quote
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.

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/grand-est/bas-rhin-flashe-a-191km-heure-un-automobiliste-explique-qu-il-etait-en-retard-pour-le-vaccin-anti-covid-1972849.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 07:25:34 am
Actually, there has been a remarkable decrease of covid cases in USA since Biden assumed the office. That's quite an accomplishment, indeed

 ;D ;D ;D

Due to which measure of his?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 07:28:48 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 10:13:12 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 10:17:39 am
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.

... therefore, the drop after the holidays is NOT Biden's accomplishment. Pure logic, my friend. You can't have it both ways.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 10:21:16 am
To put things into perspective...

A staggering 93% of all deaths from/with Covid are in the 55-85+ age group (in America).

A staggering 93% of all media reports concentrates on cases that otherwise are just 7% (this stat I invented, but not far from the truth).

Source: https://www.heritage.org/.../publ.../covid-19-deaths-by-age/

Spreadsheet mine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 27, 2021, 12:00:16 pm
;D ;D ;D

Due to which measure of his?

He's using the same people who counted the votes for Trump.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 12:56:10 pm
... 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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 27, 2021, 01:07:01 pm
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.
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?   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 01:27:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 27, 2021, 01:34:11 pm
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?   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 02:23:13 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 27, 2021, 02:42:05 pm
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.

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.
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on February 27, 2021, 03:33:21 pm
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.

+1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 07:09:03 pm
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.

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.

It is a freaking natural event that is going to run its course no matter what we do. For that very reason the numbers are similar in the free Florida as in the fascist California. Austria and Serbia, to name a few examples.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 07:12:04 pm
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.

You keep bouncing between “it was the holidays” and “it is Trump’s fault.” Make up your mind and stick to it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 07:22:29 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 27, 2021, 07:45:25 pm
... BTW, are you posting from free Florida or from Serbia?

From free Serbia.

Got my first Pfizer in Thursday. No major reaction, just a bit tired the day after.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 27, 2021, 07:49:06 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on February 27, 2021, 08:19:17 pm
Why isn't anyone blaming China?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 27, 2021, 10:45:33 pm
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.

Most definitely, China is the culprit. But they don't want to argue.
Interestingly, they stopped reporting new cases and deaths. Did they reach herd immunity or how do you explain that?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: BobShaw on February 28, 2021, 01:37:32 am
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.

I guess maybe if you tell people to stay inside and they do because a soldier is outside with a gun and you spray the street with disinfectant from drones and by soldiers walking in a straight row down the road and nobody comes in or out then after after a couple of weeks it stops.

Most countries have have very few recent cases with much less severe approaches.
We have had two deaths in Australia since October.
Then there is the US which had more deaths today than most countries have had in total.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 28, 2021, 03:06:51 am
Savage! 😂
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 28, 2021, 04:52:46 am
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on February 28, 2021, 07:32:33 am
New study on hydroxychloroquine:

"HCQ and HCQ/AZ are not effective therapies for outpatient treatment of SARV-CoV-2 infection"

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00053-5/fulltext
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 28, 2021, 07:42:13 am
Savage! 😂

Mostly just looks ignorant.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 28, 2021, 07:47:07 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 09:49:09 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 09:52:26 am
Most definitely, China is the culprit. But they don't want to argue.
Interestingly, they stopped reporting new cases and deaths. Did they reach herd immunity or how do you explain 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 09:55:11 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 09:58:25 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 28, 2021, 10:08:46 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 28, 2021, 10:30:54 am
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?

Do they really beat people? Maybe it's just sexual role playing. Or did they send out a dominatrix brigade?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 10:32:11 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on February 28, 2021, 12:41:45 pm
...  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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 01:11:30 pm
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. 

We have to make decisions as a country on how we deal with other countries.  Did Salman order the death of Khashoggi? He denies it.  The CIA says they believe he was responsible although they also have no conclusive evidence, just strong reasoned judgment.  Most international affairs decisions are not based on evidence being represented in a court of law.  We have to make reasoned judgments.  Even if it was naturally released in a market, they still lied to the world about it and continued to send infected Chinese to travel to infect the rest of the world.  The lab is just part of the issue with them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on February 28, 2021, 01:20:23 pm
Is this a true fact or a made-up fact?

It's an Alan fact.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on February 28, 2021, 01:40:34 pm
It's an Alan fact.
What's your fact? That Trump killed half a million people?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on February 28, 2021, 01:46:22 pm
We all make decisions based on available information and logic.

Oh, how I wish that was actually a fact.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on February 28, 2021, 01:48:21 pm
You could believe whatever you want. 

Now that's a well proven fact!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on February 28, 2021, 02:06:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on February 28, 2021, 02:42:09 pm
A recent and fairly lengthy article on the new Johnson & Johnson vaccine with some comparison to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

Full article link

https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-vaccines-developed-by-pfizer-moderna-and-johnson-johnson (https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-vaccines-developed-by-pfizer-moderna-and-johnson-johnson/)

Selected excerpts below

On Feb. 27, the Food and Drug Administration announced it had issued an emergency use authorization for Johnson & Johnson’s one-dose Covid vaccine. Developed by J&J’s vaccines division, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, it was shown to be 66% protective against moderate to severe Covid infection in a multi-country study. Importantly, it was 85% effective in protecting against severe disease. And there were no hospitalizations or deaths among people in the vaccine arm of a large clinical trial.

Overall efficacy varied a bit geographically, especially in South Africa, where a new variant appears to evade to some degree the immunity induced both by infection and by Covid vaccines, which were designed to target earlier strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are made using messenger RNA, or mRNA, a technology that delivers a bit of genetic code to cells — in effect, a recipe to make the surface protein (known as spike) on the SARS-2 virus. The proteins made with the mRNA instructions activate the immune system, teaching it to see the spike protein as foreign and develop antibodies and other immunity weapons with which to fight it.

The J&J vaccine uses a different approach to instruct human cells to make the SARS-2 spike protein, which then triggers an immune response. It is what’s known as a viral vectored vaccine. A harmless adenovirus — from a large family of viruses, some of which cause common colds — has been engineered to carry the genetic code for the SARS-2 spike protein. Once the adenovirus enters cells, they use that code to make spike proteins.  J&J employed this same approach to make an Ebola vaccine that has been authorized for use by the European Medicines Agency.

Because of the difference in the trials, making direct comparisons is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Additionally, Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines were tested before the emergence of troubling new variants in Britain, South Africa, and Brazil. It’s not entirely clear how well they will work against these mutated viruses.

The J&J vaccine was still being tested when the variants were making the rounds. Much of the data generated in the South African arm of the J&J trial involved people who were infected with the variant first seen in South Africa, called B.1.351.

The J&J one-dose vaccine was shown to be 66% protective against moderate to severe Covid infections overall from 28 days after injection, though there was variability based on geographic locations. The vaccine was 72% protective in the United States, 66% protective in South America, and 57% protective in South Africa.

But the vaccine was shown to be 85% protective against severe disease, with no differences across the eight countries or three regions in the study, nor across age groups among trial participants. And there were no hospitalizations or deaths in the vaccine arm of the trial after the 28-day period in which immunity developed.

It’s not yet known if any of these vaccines prevent asymptomatic infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Nor is it known if vaccinated people can transmit the virus if they do become infected but don’t show symptoms.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: 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. 

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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 03, 2021, 08:59:50 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. 

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/


The Israelis have released a few studies on the vaccine and have found that the vaccine decrease morbidity by 95.8%.  Just to give you an idea of what this means, the aggregate infection fatality rate in high-income countries for the entire population is 1.15%.  By lowering this by 95.8%, the new IFR is 0.048%. 

They also have found you are 98.9% less likely to have to be hospitalized if vaccinated, and ~95% less likely to spread it if you are vaccinated, albeit that last stat is hard to determine. 

So, at this point, all of this continued fear mongering in the USA from Fauci (and others) I am writing off as some kind of continued power grab and to convince us for the need of that $1.9T "relief" package.  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. 

That is the only thing that makes sense right now.  There is no reason to continue this after being vaccinated, and no reason to continue this after the majority of those over 65 are. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 03, 2021, 09:53:21 am
... 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...

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 03, 2021, 06:26:49 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 03, 2021, 11:07:55 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 03:14:17 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 04, 2021, 03:40:27 am
...but who cares about others, right?...

Right.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 07:32:05 am
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.

At this point in time, after all of the good news about the vaccine, if you are of the opinion that you still need to quarantine after getting vaccinated, you are either a sheep or a chicken.  I kind of feel like if Fauci told us wearing tighty-whities on our head would help stop the spread, half the country would do so. 

What is the point in living if we are to live miserable lives as hermits. 

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. 

The Implications of COVID-19 for Mental Health and Substance Use (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/the-implications-of-covid-19-for-mental-health-and-substance-use/)

There is no reason to continue this after you get vaccinated, and reports from Israel are showing there really is no reason to continue this after just the elderly get vaccinated. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 07:59:52 am
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? 

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..."  He's been in the government for so long he speaks like a politician out of both sides of his mouth.  His undecidedness confuses people.  When he's done talking, you're more confused than ever. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 08:04:15 am
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. 

One positive thing about the social restrictions and mask wearing has been a huge decline in flu cases.

Quote
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.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-flu-number-covid-cdc-b1809609.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 08:08:14 am
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
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 08:37:45 am
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 can remember many on the right saying this would happen, and, as usual, many liberals were like, "come on, stop it with the slippery slope stuff." 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 08:44:48 am
Street photography looks like hell with masks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 04, 2021, 08:45:19 am
Life is safe in a lockdown, but that is not what life is for.

(SB)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 09:10:22 am
Yeah, and now "experts" are calling for us to wear mask every flu season. 


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 09:21:03 am
This is fine - letting private enterprises and individual people in Texas make up their own minds.  We don't need the government to coerce us. 

Kroger, Costco and other big and small retailers stick with required masks
Retailers aren’t ready to expose their employees and customers to added risk while the pandemic continues.
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/retail/2021/03/03/kroger-and-other-big-and-small-retailers-stick-with-required-masks/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 09:40:41 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 09:52:15 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 11:02:03 am
They figured out why America has such high Covid death rates.  We're fat! All those McDonalds, Pizzas, and Dunkin' Donuts.

Covid-19 death rates 10 times higher in countries where most adults are overweight, report finds
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/04/health/obesity-covid-death-rate-intl/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 11:15:33 am
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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 11:22:37 am
If you are for continuing to wear a mask until the day you die, go for it.  I'm not. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 11:31:59 am
You could take up bank robbing.

Actually, I prefer lemon juice!

“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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2021, 11:36:34 am


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..."  ...

"...it's most likely" is a political weasel word?  Sometimes all we have are probabilities, not certainties, is this really so difficult to understand.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2021, 11:38:37 am
Yeah, and now "experts" are calling for us to wear mask every flu season. 


Maybe some are, but others are not. The jury is out on how the tail end of the pandemic will proceed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2021, 11:39:51 am


...  I am not going to destroy my humanity by covering half my face ...

That might be a little over the top.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 11:43:48 am
Actually, I prefer lemon juice!

“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. 
He probably forgot to pull the polaroid tab. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 04, 2021, 11:46:49 am
Merck Will Help Manufacture Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 Vaccine

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 11:53:28 am
"...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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 11:54:39 am
That might be a little over the top.

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.) 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 04, 2021, 12:07:08 pm
Novavax expects FDA clearance for Covid vaccine as early as May, CEO says

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/01/covid-vaccine-novavax-expects-fda-clearance-for-covid-vaccine-as-early-as-may (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/01/covid-vaccine-novavax-expects-fda-clearance-for-covid-vaccine-as-early-as-may.html)

The Food and Drug Administration could authorize Novavax’s Covid-19 vaccine for emergency use as early as May, the company’s CEO, Stanley Erck, told CNBC on Monday.

Novavax’s phase three trial in the U.S. is still ongoing, with 30,000 participants, Erck said. The company hopes the FDA will allow it to use data from its clinical trial conducted in the U.K. when it files its emergency use application later this year, he added.

In late January, Novavax released results from its phase three trial data in the U.K., showing the vaccine was 89.3% effective overall, though slightly less effective against B.1.1.7, the strain first discovered in the U.K., and B.1.351, the strain first discovered in South Africa.

The company said the vaccine was well tolerated, adding that “severe, serious, and medically attended adverse events occurred at low levels and were balanced between vaccine and placebo groups.”

U.K. health regulators will likely review the vaccine in April, followed by the FDA “probably a month after that,” he told CNBC’s “Closing Bell” in an interview.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 04, 2021, 12:32:25 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 12:58:36 pm
We smile; it's part of our humanity.

What an old softy-pants. Whatever happened to Low-Empathy Libertard Joe ?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 04, 2021, 01:11:17 pm
I must be posting in the wrong thread. I thought I was in the Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine thread. Apparently, this is the dental health thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 01:26:25 pm
Merck Will Help Manufacture Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 Vaccine

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.
Merck 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 01:28:54 pm
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.) 

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. 
Sounds like Botox Nancy.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 01:31:04 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 04, 2021, 01:47:24 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 01:56:41 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 02:20:37 pm
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?

You know what they say - if you're not the client, you're the product.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 02:35:50 pm
What an old softy-pants. Whatever happened to Low-Empathy Libertard Joe ?

I never said I was without empathy, just without when policy decisions are being made. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 02:48:22 pm
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 02:52:34 pm
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.

There is a very big difference between making someone feel comfortable over legitimate concerns vs. non-legitimate, something that I must admit appears that the entirety of the left no longer understands. 

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. 

We do not stop driving just because someone on the block is concerned about dying in a car accident, even though they are 30 times more likely then to die from C-19, yet we are suppose to change the entire way we live over something that is a lot less dangerous then driving. 

This idea that we must sooth anyone over any concern while not only not taking the time to see if the concern is warranted, but insisting that if you even consider this notion then there is something morally wrong with you, is ridiculous.  It is what leads some to make such stupid comments like intent does not matter or insist that micro-aggressions are ruining society even if the person does not realize he/she is engaging in them. 

This is nothing more then overly empathetic persons giving too much into their feelings just so they can say that they are morally good while throwing their logic out the window.   In the end though, no matter how morally supreme you think you are, not following logic and reason will end hurting the people you are trying to help more then to be empathetically defunct yet logically sound. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 03:12:50 pm
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.

EDIT: Today it was reported that there were 28.7M cases (instead of 9M). If 10% of those survivors experience long term lasting covid effects, that would translate to 2.98M people (instead of 900,000) as reported earlier.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 03:28:24 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 03:34:20 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 03:36:01 pm
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.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 03:39:07 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 03:39:33 pm
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
What's wrong, wrong, wrong?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 04, 2021, 04:04:12 pm
Who's post were you referring to? Although there are 40K deaths, no one stops driving because of it.

Of course they do - even though the driving test in the US is very easy.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 04, 2021, 04:26:00 pm
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.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no, sometimes a lot of things, sometimes not so much. Empathy is just a tool in the toolbox.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 04, 2021, 04:28:16 pm
Who's post were you referring to? Although there are 40K deaths, no one stops driving because of it.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 04, 2021, 04:38:11 pm
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....

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 05:07:25 pm
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.

Was it a Tesla car? The capabilities of their Autopilot or FSD modes are incredible and apparently very safe. Driving on Autopilot may be in some situations safer than driving manually by some folks. Last week an aquaintance of mine fell asleep while driving at night on a city street, and his car jumped on the traffic island in the middle of the street. He took down a couple of the metal posts with traffic signs, and ruined his left front bumper wheel housing, but fortunately that woke him up so he didn't get onto the oncoming lanes on the other side of the street.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 05:32:12 pm
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.

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. I read somewhere that these days 75 years is the new 50. So, including all real and new 50's the death stats would approach 50% of the total toll.

Hard to imagine those numbers. You wouldn't believe but only a year ago some people thought that the total count of covid deaths would never exceed 50,000. Today, the actual toll is 10X of that estimate and by end of 2021 it may approach 15X or even 20X.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 04, 2021, 06:00:27 pm
Statistics may count people, however, people are not statistics. They are people with family and friends that worry or mourn when they become included in some statistics.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2021, 06:13:48 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 04, 2021, 07:07:19 pm
7% of 500,000 is 35,000, not like it's negligible.

7% is 7%.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 04, 2021, 07:11:22 pm
7% is 7%.

You must have been reading up on your Wittgenstein.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 07:11:52 pm
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.

What's the rate for those under 140?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 04, 2021, 07:22:08 pm
7% of 500,000 is 35,000, not like it's negligible.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 04, 2021, 07:27:40 pm
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%.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 04, 2021, 07:44:07 pm
Based on a 100% rate for under 100 years, we could interpolate the rate for 140 years as 140%.

You think way too linear. 

Be logistic. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 04, 2021, 07:54:14 pm
That’ll put the gimme cap on it  ::)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 04, 2021, 07:56:10 pm
So, 35,000 in 220 million is 0.016 percent. And THAT is negligible.

"He's got 'em on the list,
"He's got 'em on the list;
"And they'll none of 'em be missed,
"They'll none of them be missed."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 04, 2021, 09:17:03 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2021, 09:55:45 pm
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? Back in March and April, I was reading comments from people about how almost no own up to that point had died of Covid, so what was the point of worrying about it?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 05:29:54 am
Wouldn't you need to know the population of those under 55 who were infected to figure out how dangerous it is for them?...

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%.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 06:02:45 am
Whether you consider 35000 deaths - 10 x 9/11 - negligible or not, remember that that is the toll WITH lockdowns, masks, social distancing and full hospitals.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 06:18:45 am
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 06:56:46 am
Not really. Places with or without those fared more or less the same.

Clearly false.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 07:20:15 am
Clearly false.

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. 

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 05, 2021, 07:40:43 am
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%.

My point was that the number 0.016 does not mean much. The only number we sort of "know" is approx 7% of 500,000 or 35,000 deaths of under 55s. The ratio of 35,000 to 220 million means nothing. You need to know the total number of under 55s that have been infected, and that's not 220 million. 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.)

According to Worldometer, the US has had 29.5 million cases in total as of this morning. I'm not confident that number is very accurate since it probably doesn't count all the folks who had it with no symptoms at all and so were never tested. As a ballpark though it's nowhere near 220 million yet.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 07:53:40 am
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. 



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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 08:41:15 am
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. 

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
Hmmm.  New Jersey is #1.  I live in New Jersey.   :(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 08:48:20 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 05, 2021, 08:57:16 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 09:15:01 am
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. 

So if there are some people who don't get shots, either because they don't want to or they're in the final group that extends past the herd immunity number, it won't matter. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 09:30:44 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 09:44:40 am
... The ratio of 35,000 to 220 million means nothing...

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.

Quote
... 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.)

Sure. But we are talking about something 12-14 months from patient zero.

Quote
... 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 is exactly the proof that it was negligible enough not to kill the economy and end life as we know it because of it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 09:47:36 am
That's the feeblest excuse for an analysis I've seen....

 ;D ;D ;D

You don't like facts, do you?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 09:47:57 am
I suppose you also think vaccines cause Autism, since Autism is diagnosed shortly after infants get their shots.  Makes sense, right? 

Nope, makes no sense at all, but I don't see that stopping you.

Quote

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.

Absolute rubbish - what mechanism can you imagine for the infection "burning out"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 09:49:20 am
;D ;D ;D

You don't like facts, do you?

Sure I do. And what I like better is an honest analysis of the data and not just cherry picked BS
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 09:53:10 am
... just cherry picked BS

 ;D ;D ;D

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?

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 09:57:02 am
;D ;D ;D

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?


A 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 10:02:16 am
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"?

Well great, we are in agreement that just because something happens around the same time an action is taken, like Autism being detected after an infant gets his shots, the two are not necessarily connected.  Very similar to the notion that just because lockdowns went into effect around the same time C-19 started to decrease that the two are not necessarily connected. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 10:03:51 am

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.

It should if every other characteristic of Florida was the same as every other state, and there was no travel between states.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 10:08:02 am
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 10:19:27 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 10:22:37 am
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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 10:25:25 am
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?

Sure.

Viruses ebb and flow over time for reasons that are not fully understood.  The Flu does this, and it does not disappear because we all suddenly wear masks and lockdown.  It is just a natural thing that happens, just like with C-19. 

FYI, in logic you only need one counter example to disprove a statement.  FL is my counter to your above statement.  They did not lockdown last summer and the same ebb and flow occurred. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 10:26:08 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 10:31:01 am
I think trying to make judgments about cause and effect at this point is fraught with unreliability.  As I said many times, let's wait until the virus has passed, the fat lady has sung, and we can add up numbers and analyze all the statistics.  I think we're going to find some strange relationships as well as very obvious logical cause and effect.  Just yesterday, I was reading that countries with high rates of obesity raise the numbers substantially.  So maybe, we should have shut down all the MacDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts across the country. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 10:51:46 am
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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 10:58:23 am
You are quoting lifetime odds, comparing with one year of risk from Covid...

I am not sure that is correct. Such stats are usually obtained by comparing annual deaths.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 10:58:45 am
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.
Is my choice of either a leper colony or staying locked up with my wife for a whole year?

Hmmm.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 05, 2021, 11:02:13 am
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.

I would like to respond, but you are piling up so many stupid statements in a single post that I can't keep up  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 11:11:30 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 05, 2021, 11:18:49 am
If you move to Cambodia or Greenland, you'll eliminate C-19 dangers altogether. They haven't had any C-19 deaths.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 11:30:48 am

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.

You are not helping your position with hyperbolic statements like:

...we are suppose to shut down the world.

...just hole up for all of time.

So, lets just lockdown all of society...

Beyond just sounding dumb, you are employing two logical fallacies: straw man and reduction to absurdity.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 12:11:05 pm
I think we all judge risk differently, even with other things beside Covid.  And those change as we age or circumstances change.

For example, now that my wife and I have both shots, and it's been two weeks, we stopped waiting a day before handling mail.  I don't wipe off packages like food anymore.  I don't wash my hands as often.  I'm feeling safer although I'm not ready to get together with anyone other than my wife right now.  (Not sure if that sounded right.)  But I'm sure, the first time I do, well, that will open the doors to feel safer to get together with others.  Sort of like jumping into a cold pool.  Once you do it the water's fine. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 05, 2021, 12:15:16 pm

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.

"end life as we know it"?  A bit much but ok.


35,000 is, more or less, the accepted avg number of yearly deaths in the entire US population from flu. In the past year, 35,000 under-55s died from one virus, but you continue to refuse to address that as a special case requiring special action. I know you take some kind of pride in not following the "crowd" as if that action has some kind of merit in and of itself, but that tendency may be leading you astray.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 12:34:59 pm
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.


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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 12:38:39 pm


Beyond just sounding dumb, you are employing two logical fallacies: straw man and reduction to absurdity.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 05, 2021, 12:45:04 pm
anyone for getting back to the vaccine topic ?
Surely there are some learned opinions ?  ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 05, 2021, 12:57:29 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 12:59:30 pm
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.

That's not how I read Jeremy's posts, but I'll leave it to you to sort it out with him.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 01:00:24 pm

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?
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 01:01:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 01:10:20 pm
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.
 
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 01:17:04 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 01:28:18 pm
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?

What are you currently unable to do as a result of local, state, and federal government restrictions?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 01:42:49 pm
Maybe Jeremy can send you half his paycheck?  Would you accept British Sterlings?  :)

Naah - I'm sure Joe doesn't want that - he is opposed to outside economic interference.  The more substantive point is that this pandemic has shown up the difference between countries with strong social systems and those with Devil-take-the-hindmost philosophies. Sweden was able to keep relatively few restrictions, at least for a while, because they could rely on people staying home if they tested positive.

Quote

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.

Absolutely not. I am very well aware that the stupidity displayed by some Americans is not representative of the population and I have great respect for many aspects of the US, but at the end of the day it is you who have chosen to not have proper support for the poor - those policies have been chosen by you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 01:50:50 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 01:53:20 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 01:57:15 pm
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 05, 2021, 02:00:23 pm
Moving to Greenland has some attractions, at least for a while!

Much cleaner air, for sure.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 05, 2021, 02:02:00 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 02:12:32 pm
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.

Let's leave it there :-)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:20:13 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:30:12 pm
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.
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.

Don't you see the conflict in your demands?  You're doing what you accuse others of doing.  Caring more for yourself and your family than you do for them and their loved ones.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 02:33:45 pm
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.

So nothing for small businesses, schools and colleges, renters and landlords, vaccine development and distribution, state and local governments, etc.?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:36:28 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:37:12 pm
Much cleaner air, for sure.
A girl behind every tree.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 02:37:52 pm
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.

Who hasn't left their couch?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 05, 2021, 02:44:01 pm
anyone for getting back to the vaccine topic ?

It appears not. If you've been to enough parties or events, it's not unusual to find individuals that are disrespectful to polite requests from the host.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:49:26 pm
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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 05, 2021, 02:50:08 pm
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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 05, 2021, 02:52:51 pm
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 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.
Isn't the J&J vaccine less effective than the other two?  I believe around 85% vs. 95%. Which would you rather take?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 05, 2021, 02:58:06 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 05, 2021, 03:03:28 pm
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.

It's not an "excuse". There is nothing to "excuse".  I don't have any sort of dog in a fight. I'm just telling you the reasons why it's sensible to take things slowly. You can believe it ir not.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 05, 2021, 03:08:27 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 05, 2021, 03:32:08 pm
Health Canada approves Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine as Pfizer bumps deliveries

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-health-canada-to-reportedly-announce-approval-of-johnson-johnsons (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-health-canada-to-reportedly-announce-approval-of-johnson-johnsons/)

Excerpts - More at link above

The addition of another COVID-19 vaccine to Canada’s arsenal and accelerated deliveries for another had government officials taking an optimistic tone Friday about the path of the pandemic in Canada.

Health Canada announced the approval of the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson, saying regulators have evidence showing the vaccine is both safe and effective against the novel coronavirus that causes the disease.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also said Canada will get 1.5 million more doses of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine delivered this month, and another two million doses that were set to arrive in the summer will now come in April and May.

“We are expecting far more doses by September than there are Canadians, even given that we’re only talking about doses from four different approved companies right now,” Trudeau said Friday.

“We have reasons to be optimistic.”

Health Canada has now approved four distinct COVID-19 vaccines, with the others being from Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca. The regulator includes a fifth on its list of authorized shots: Covishield, which is a separate brand name for doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine produced at the Serum Institute of India.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 05, 2021, 03:55:56 pm
A Q&A report from The BMJ (British Medical Journal) published by the British Medical Association on vaccines and variants.

Covid-19: Where are we on vaccines and variants?

BMJ (Published 02 March 2021)

https://www.bmj.com/content/Covid-19: Where are we on vaccines and variants? (https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n597)

Nearly a year after WHO declared the covid-19 pandemic, Elisabeth Mahase reports on the latest developments in vaccines, variants, and diplomacy
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 06, 2021, 12:19:43 am
I would follow the advice in the article and take whatever is available to me first.

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.

Double-speak from experts. They;re afraid if they ackowledged there is a difference in effectiveness, no one would take J&J's vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 06, 2021, 11:25:12 am
No double speak. Just factual details. Any of the three will go a long way in reducing the number of cases that require hospitalization. Get the first one offered. If it makes someone feel better, ask if there is an option and pick the one you want. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 06, 2021, 01:30:30 pm
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.

I wouldn't be surprised if we wound up needing multiple vaccinations before this coronavirus is under control, or at least additional doses beyond the initial one(s) we receive, due to mutations of the virus, reductions over time in the immune response elicited by our initial vaccinations, or the introduction of new vaccines that produce sterilizing immunity or other significant improvements over the ones currently available.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on March 06, 2021, 02:04:28 pm
My wife and I just got our second Moderna shots on Wednesday. Neither one of us hurt much after the first one -- sore arms -- but my wife really got knocked down but the second one. She couldn't get out of bed the day after, and had strong joint pain which went away with a couple of Tylenol (CDC says it's okay to take Tylenol if you have pain after the shot, but not to take it before, as a preventative.) The day after, she was in bed until six o'clock in the evening, got up for a couple hours, then slept through the night. The next day, she was almost back to normal, and on the third day, she's out riding her horse. Said it was like one day of the flu.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 07, 2021, 05:18:50 am
In Prague, they served now cakes with a vaccine. I suspect the syringe is filled with a white rum.

Prague virus and vaccine cakes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmDMINuELAA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 07, 2021, 06:38:51 pm
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.

There is no doublespeak. None. They not only acknowledge the differences in effectiveness exhibited in clinical trials in detail, they also provide details in the differences in time and place of those trials needed to better comprehend the results. At least, they do for those with the ability to comprehend.

Those not suffering from an excess of paranoia or lacking enough ability to comprehend simple concepts like — "The longer you go unvaccinated, the longer you're at risk of contracting a COVID-19 infection that potentially could kill you." — will gladly "Get whichever vaccine you can as soon as you're eligible" as "infectious disease experts urge" because not doing so would defy the simplest logic and common sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 07, 2021, 07:09:36 pm
Because as long as there are a lot of infected people there is a good risk of new variants emerging

That is exactly right. It requires only the most basic understanding of how viruses replicate and mutate to understand that fact and why getting as many people vaccinated as soon as possible is so important.

https://health.clevelandclinic.org/what-does-it-mean-that-the-coronavirus-is-mutating (https://health.clevelandclinic.org/what-does-it-mean-that-the-coronavirus-is-mutating/)

However, the contagiousness of the newer variants is all the more reason to stay careful and follow public health measures for preventing the spread of the virus – like wearing a mask, washing your hands, limiting close contact with others and getting vaccinated when you’re able.

That's a weak excuse.

Wrong.

Let's wait for the variants to hit, if they will.

Here's a better idea. Let's not wait for variants to hit as they have tended to be more readily transmissible and spread faster than the virus from which they mutated and can accelerate and prolong the pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 07, 2021, 11:00:32 pm
I would follow the advice in the article and take whatever is available to me first.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 08, 2021, 03:42:37 am
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.

On this occasion, it seems that the UK got it right.  Well, you can't be wrong ALL the time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 08:56:29 am
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.

On this occasion, it seems that the UK got it right.  Well, you can't be wrong ALL the time.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 08, 2021, 01:01:49 pm
Here are the new CDC Guidelines for fully vaccinated people.  They are really going to set Joe's hair on fire.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 08, 2021, 01:03:13 pm
Czech Republic went from best to worst in just one year.

Quote
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.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/czech-republic-europe-covid-19-1.5938504
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 01:47:18 pm
The Germans disagreed with you.  They seemed very concerned with efficacies. Their concern about Astra zeneca put them behind the eightball.

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 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 as a result reducing deaths.

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".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 08, 2021, 01:52:36 pm
Here are the new CDC Guidelines for fully vaccinated people.

An accompanying background article (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/fully-vaccinated-people.html#print) summarizes the rationale and evidence for the guidance:

Quote
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.

While the scientific understanding of SARS-CoV-2 is evolving, so is the virus.  We're in a worldwide race between the effort to get the pandemic under control by achieving mass immunity and the spread of mutated variants that appear at least partly to evade the protective effects of the vaccines.  And, ominously,

Quote
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.]

So in addition to the race between mass immunity and the mutations, there's a parallel contest taking place between the empirical evidence and the personal emotional reactions people are experiencing to the protracted restrictions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 03:05:15 pm
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 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".
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 03:13:21 pm
New CDC recommendations for Americans who have been vaccinated.

Given the current state of research, the C.D.C. advised:

-Fully vaccinated Americans may gather indoors in private homes in small groups without masks or distancing. Vaccinated people may gather in a private residence without masks or distancing with unvaccinated people, so long as they are from a single household and are at low risk for developing severe disease should they contract the coronavirus.

-Vaccinated Americans need not quarantine or get tested if they have a known exposure to the virus, as long as they do not develop symptoms of infection. If they do develop symptoms, they must isolate themselves, get tested and speak with their doctors.

-In public, vaccinated people must continue to wear masks, maintain social distance and take other precautions, such as avoiding poorly ventilated spaces, covering coughs and sneezes, washing hands often and following any other protocols that are in place.

-Vaccinated people should avoid gatherings with multiple households, as well as large and medium-sized gatherings. (The agency did not specify what size constitutes a medium or large gathering.)

The C.D.C. did not revise its travel recommendations, continuing to advise that all Americans stay home unless necessary. Dr. Walensky noted that virus cases have surged every time there has been an increase in travel.

“We are really trying to restrain travel,” she said. “And we’re hopeful that our next set of guidance will have more science around what vaccinated people can do, perhaps travel being among them.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/03/08/world/covid-19-coronavirus#covid-vaccine-cdc-guidelines
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 08, 2021, 03:23:17 pm
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 08, 2021, 03:28:30 pm
New CDC recommendations for Americans who have been vaccinated...

I guess Alan has me on ignore, since I posted a link to the new CDC guidelines an hour or so ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 03:32:48 pm
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!
Switzerland just voted against masks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 03:33:52 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 08, 2021, 03:36:39 pm
Damn.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 08, 2021, 03:42:34 pm
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!

They are guidelines. You don't have to follow them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 08, 2021, 03:49:37 pm
Switzerland just voted against masks.

Nothing to do with C-19. To clarify, the Swiss voted against wearing burkas by Muslim women in public.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56314173
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 03:51:58 pm
I'm just stating that J&J's vaccine is not as effective as the other two.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 03:54:25 pm
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!

Down with ignorance of science and rigid ideology!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 08, 2021, 03:55:38 pm
Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!

Actually, it should be worded as - live free AND die!
As pointed out in my previous post, Czech Republic went from best place to worst place in C-19 spread simply by lifting the lockdown restrictions and stopping the mask wearing starting in summer 2020.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 07:08:17 pm
Nothing to do with C-19. To clarify, the Swiss voted against wearing burkas by Muslim women in public.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56314173
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 07:17:34 pm
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.

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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 07:34:35 pm
that is how you are interpreting it. We understand that.
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 ?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 07:55:49 pm
that is how you are interpreting it. We understand that.
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?
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.

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.  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.  No one knows.  But so-called "experts" are trying to game the system, again losing the general public who knows doublespeak when they hear it. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 08:14:33 pm
The article is doublespeak.

That is obviously not true for anyone with average comprehension.

J&J vaccine is not as effective.

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.

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.

Ignorance combined with paranoia create a poisonous cocktail for the mind.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 08:24:37 pm
That is obviously not true for anyone with average comprehension.

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.
Thanks Dr. TeckTalk.  But I'll trust myself regarding my health rather than you. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 08:27:00 pm

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.

 “ ... 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.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 08:27:50 pm
It's this kind of doublespeak they presented that makes people wary of experts.

Baloney

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.

They did... and more. You were unable or unwilling to comprehend it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 08:41:26 pm

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.



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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 08:44:43 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 08:48:35 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 08:50:50 pm
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.

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 .
 ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 08:54:53 pm
Exactly.   I trust the recommendations of the pharmaceutical companies that developed the vaccines.  They say take both shots.

Why ?
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 08:58:18 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 08:59:59 pm
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.

When we got our first shots, I was concerned they would give our second ones away.  The nurse said we had nothing to worry about.  They were reserving all second shots for their patients who got the first one and we got them on time four weeks later.  Fortunately, the nurse didn't read those expert opinions and articles about skipping the second dose. So I have to admit, getting the two shots does make me feel safer although we're still wearing masks for the most part and aren't getting together with anyone else yet. 

I hope you and everyone else can get their shots as soon as possible.  It does give a lot of confidence that you can get on with your life relatively normally; hopefully not too much.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 09:05:25 pm
You know that the shot only reduces your chances down to about 1 in 20 , at best, of getting a serious case or hospitalization from something close to 1in 1 if infected, all other things being equal ?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 09:06:37 pm
Why ?
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.
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.

Plus, their recommendation jives with their studies.  How could they legitimately say it's OK to skip the second shot when their whole studies were with two shots and that's what the results concluded.  It would be malpractice for them to say skip the second.  Of course, some governmental guy who knows little about the research work done can theorize whatever he wants without doing any research at all.  He won't be sued.  But why would anyone trust him?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 08, 2021, 09:09:29 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 08, 2021, 09:14:13 pm
First one available
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 09:18:46 pm
Exactly.   I trust the recommendations of the pharmaceutical companies that developed the vaccines.  They say take both shots.

Who advised you not to do so? It certainly wasn't me. The article that I linked, which began your tirade against "experts" and their suspicious (to you) motives, doesn't advise you not to "take both shots" either. If that's what you want to talk about make your own post about it; you don't need to do it by pretending that your replying to me about something that I never advocated.

Of course, that's one major advantage of the J&J vaccine. It's one and done. It's twice as fast at getting a large number of people fully vaccinated. It requires half the number of syringes, half the amount of vaccine, and the same number of personnel can vaccinate twice the number of people in a given period, reducing the load and burden on them by half as well, over time.

In fairness to those who have recommended lengthening intervals between administration of both doses of other vaccines, the recommendation from vaccine makers for dosage intervals — and the decision by some countries to extend those intervals by a certain number of days in order to deliver more first round doses to affect some degree of protective immunity in a larger set of the population more rapidly — is a calculation made on a limited set of data in both instances. Until studies on the relative effectiveness of individual vaccines given at varying intervals have been made thru acquisition of more data, the optimum effective intervals and the affect on overall containment and reduction of severity will remain uncertain for some time.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/clinical-considerations (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/clinical-considerations.html)

Interval between mRNA doses

The second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines should be administered as close to the recommended interval as possible, but not earlier than recommended (i.e., 3 weeks [Pfizer-BioNTech] or 1 month [Moderna]). However, second doses administered within a grace period of 4 days earlier than the recommended date for the second dose are still considered valid. If it is not feasible to adhere to the recommended interval and a delay in vaccination is unavoidable, the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines may be administered up to 6 weeks (42 days) after the first dose. Currently, only limited data are available on efficacy of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered beyond this window.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 08, 2021, 09:29:45 pm
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?

You already asked me three days ago and I responded then. We've been thru this. Why pose your question again as if it's a reply to a later post of mine which is unrelated? If you want to start a poll, start a poll. You don't need my involvement.

First one available

Of course. As I told Alan the first time he asked, "I would follow the advice in the article and take whatever is available to me first." There's no reason to wait when the known risk far exceeds any uncertain potential benefit in waiting.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 09, 2021, 01:20:34 am
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.

I haven't made any "analysis as to the efficacy of the J&J vaccines". I linked to an article with the actual clinical trial data and quoted sections from its Q&A. The only thought I expressed was that the advice to take the first vaccine that became available to someone was sensible, based on simple common sense regarding risk. If that's what you regard as "analysis", it sets the bar for that word awfully low.

I have never thought or suggested that anyone should "skip the second dose of Moderna". That's your false assertion about me, which you first attributed to "They", and which frankly, I am failing to appreciate. Of course, "They" are always suspicious and up to nefarious deeds.

I gave facts about the difference between efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines, which you ignore. I also provided information regarding how variants can have an impact on efficacy in clinical trial data and on the longer term overall effectiveness of various vaccines, which you ignore. If you don't want to acknowledge basic facts and information regarding vaccines, that's your decision. You can then focus your attention on how suspicious and untrustworthy "experts" (or those you sometimes simply refer to as "they") are instead.

As for your false or misleading statements regarding anything that I have or have not advocated, I'd like to say... "Gee thanks, but no thanks."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 08:59:39 am
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 09, 2021, 09:10:54 am
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.
 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 09:16:53 am
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.

We might need a booster to offset the new variants.  I hope not.  But it could happen. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 09, 2021, 09:44:20 am
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)

Stay safe, stay in shape, and stay of appropriate weight.  Time to head to the gym. 

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 10:14:12 am
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)

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 09, 2021, 12:22:36 pm
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). 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 02:40:55 pm
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). 

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. 
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: EricV on March 09, 2021, 02:50:13 pm
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.

https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/new-cdc-report-shows-94-of-covid-19-deaths-in-us-had-underlying-medical-conditions/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 02:59:02 pm
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.

https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/new-cdc-report-shows-94-of-covid-19-deaths-in-us-had-underlying-medical-conditions/
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 09, 2021, 03:16:57 pm
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?

Clue - the linked article is from the Daily Mail which is a piece of garbage that I wouldn’t insult my arse by using it to wipe with. If you look at the graphs, which were copied from elsewhere and not invented by the half-witted journalist, they show a correlation between BMI and rate of hospitalisation, which different from the story you get from just comparing percentages.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 09, 2021, 04:06:58 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 04:09:47 pm
In my experience, that has not been true.

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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 09, 2021, 04:15:59 pm
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.  :)

First, who is "they"? Second, what does that have to do with your assertion that:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 09, 2021, 04:22:22 pm
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. 

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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 09, 2021, 04:27:25 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 12:41:25 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 10, 2021, 12:58:47 am
What did people do before Google search? 

They were playing cards and ping pong.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 10, 2021, 01:58:53 am
What did people do before Google search?

An encyclopedia set at home, a good public library, and new and used book stores. I still love shopping in used book stores. There were also great magazines for a wide range of interests.

The encyclopedias that I read growing up had additional articles suggested at the bottom of each article, similar to the links to related information which web pages often contain. The public library was great; if you could also get access to a college library, all the better. At the used book stores I've shopped, you can take books in for credit toward other books; though, I've generally donated the books I need to clear out in order to make room for recent purchases.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 10, 2021, 02:09:59 am
Being able to read between the lines is often more important then the words themselves.

A good dictionary was also helpful then. There were also compact dictionaries which were more convenient to carry than the full-sized editions.

Don't you you need to read the words themselves first and then read between the lines?

* Now then... what's happening with vaccines?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 10, 2021, 07:42:18 am
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 a wild ass guess, and then expect to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 08:38:54 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 10, 2021, 08:50:20 am
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.   

You are, of course, free to believe anything you want.

Challenging assumptions like I do and thinking out of the box is intellectual curiosity, not laziness.

Making stuff up is not challenging assumptions and thinking outside the box.

It's the people who always believe what they read who are lazy.

But not as lazy as those who don't bother reading at all.

Let's revisit how this conversation started:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 10, 2021, 09:56:29 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 10, 2021, 10:22:20 am
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.

+1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 10:56:42 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 10, 2021, 11:19:31 am
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 11:25:11 am
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 10, 2021, 12:00:19 pm
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?

Read my comment and you'll find out.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 10, 2021, 12:35:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 01:01:06 pm
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 10, 2021, 01:12:28 pm
The obesity is only a symptom of an unhealthy life style, the real cause is a wrong diet or lack of essential nutrients, contributing to a reduced immunity.

Quote
(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.

https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/obesity-second-greatest-predictor-of-hospitalization-for-covid-19-report-says/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 10, 2021, 01:18:48 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 10, 2021, 01:58:38 pm
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?

One more time - read what I wrote !!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 10, 2021, 02:16:06 pm
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?

I've got an idea. Instead of spending time trying to reconcile the figures in the Daily Mail article, which several here have mentioned may not be the most reliable source for that sort of data, why don't you go over to the CDC and get the figures straight from the horse's mouth. Once you have the figures in hand, you can analyze them, and share your conclusions with the group.  This is where you can put your vaunted intellectual curiosity to the test.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 10, 2021, 03:06:54 pm
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...

Can you explain what you mean by "seems like there's no relation between weight and death." How did you come to that conclusion?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 10, 2021, 03:09:38 pm
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?

I gave you a clue. So let me paste a highly simplified version that may be easier to understand.

"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"

Am I missing something?

Looks like it. I'd rather not speculate as to what it might be.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 04:55:12 pm
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

I believe most of the people were elderly people who went to the hospital.  These people are often overweight, I believe.  Have your analysis and the article's analysis taken into account that because so many of the 78% are old, they would have died of old age anyway, not necessarily due to their overweight? Their weight was just coincidental.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 05:06:11 pm
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:
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...

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 05:09:31 pm
I gave you a clue. So let me paste a highly simplified version that may be easier to understand.

"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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 10, 2021, 05:20:19 pm
... 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?...

I get it now, makes sense, thanks.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 10, 2021, 05:41:53 pm
Maybe I should go eat dinner.  I'm just not getting it.

I am not sure eating dinner will help. But perhaps it will.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 05:55:34 pm
I get it now, makes sense, thanks.

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 agree.  You have two strikes against you.  Old and sick to begin with. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 05:56:36 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: EricV on March 10, 2021, 07:36:51 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 10, 2021, 08:15:03 pm
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

What I meant was that obesity contributes to reduced immunity which among other things leads to an increase of inflammation and that creates other problems.

Quote
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.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22429824/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 10:01:08 pm
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
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

NOTE: Empty data cells represent counts between 1-9 that have been suppressed in accordance with NCHS confidentiality standards. Conditions contributing to the death were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD–10). Deaths involving more than one condition (e.g., deaths involving both diabetes and respiratory arrest) were counted in both totals. To avoid counting the same death multiple times, the numbers for different conditions should not be summated. Some deaths involve more than one of the same condition category (e.g. deaths involving unintentional and intentional injury often include two or more injury ICD-10 codes), the number of mentions presented on the table above represents the number of instances where the condition was cited on the death certificate. Number of deaths and number of mentions reported in this table are tabulated from deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period. Data for this table are derived from a cut of the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) database taken at a particular time, separate from other surveillance tables on this page which are tabulated on the date of update. As a result, the total number of COVID-19 deaths in this table may not match other surveillance tables on this page. Data during recent periods are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction and cause of death. United States death counts include the 50 states, plus the District of Columbia and New York City. New York state estimates exclude New York City.

[1] Deaths with confirmed or presumed COVID-19, coded to ICD–10 code U07.1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 10, 2021, 10:07:53 pm
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 11, 2021, 03:06:48 am
Link to charts from the article Joe quoted:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9338761/More-73-Americans-die-COVID-obese-CDC-data-show.html#i-a5c3c3ca1d755ff6
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 11, 2021, 07:59:38 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 11, 2021, 08:03:38 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 11, 2021, 08:46:40 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 11, 2021, 08:56:32 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 11, 2021, 08:59:20 am
welcome to dealing with the real data behind science.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 11, 2021, 10:06:15 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 11, 2021, 10:28:09 am
It's just bar talk.... ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 11, 2021, 11:13:10 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 11, 2021, 11:29:27 am
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 have never heard anyone here state that "there is no herd immunity" or that "America will never reach it."

A few days ago I mentioned that there might be a problem reaching herd immunity by the end of summer given that polls indicate nearly half of Republicans have said that they don’t plan on getting vaccinated and that the vaccine has not yet been approved for people 16 and under. That is a lay opinion and I would defer to Dr. Fauci’s analysis. He certainly has access to better data than I do. I just know what I read in the news. Who knows, maybe approval of the vaccine for people 16 and under is imminent, and the Republicans who say they are not going to get vaccinated are lying to the pollsters.  I hope both of those things are true. The sooner we get everyone vaccinated the better.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 12, 2021, 03:17:48 pm
There are many here who have stated over and over that either there is no herd immunity or America would never reach it.

What utter nonsense. The negative comments regarding "herd immunity" were regarding suggestions to forget about restrictions and just let the virus spread in order to achieve herd immunity instead of waiting on vaccines to accomplish that goal. Achieving immunity in a portion of the herd thru infection, as opposed to waiting for the herd to be immunized thru vaccination, results in greater thinning of the herd—and in this case the herd is people.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 12, 2021, 04:22:26 pm
With all this talk about herds, I think I'm going to Bar B Q steak tonight for dinner. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 12, 2021, 04:34:25 pm
With all this talk about herds, I think I'm going to Bar B Q steak tonight for dinner.

That's one way to forget about making a ridiculous false accusation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 12, 2021, 05:25:00 pm
With all this talk about herds, I think I'm going to Bar B Q steak tonight for dinner.

Much healthier than a pizza.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 12, 2021, 06:00:23 pm
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.  :)

https://www.whitehouse.gov/2021/03/10/press-briefing-by-white-house-covid-19-response-team (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2021/03/10/press-briefing-by-white-house-covid-19-response-team-and-public-health-officials-13/)

DR. FAUCI: We anticipate — and again, it’s purely a speculation — that the herd immunity level will be about 70 to 85 percent.  And that’s the time that we believe, if you look at the planned rollout of the vaccines, that we would hopefully get to that point somewhere by the end of the summer and the early fall.

You’re absolutely correct: If a significant number of people do not get vaccinated, then that would — that would delay where we would get to that endpoint, which is the reason that I underscore what Dr. Walensky said about the importance, in every aspect of what we do, of getting more people vaccinated — just as many people as we possibly can.

I want to also mention that we don’t want to get too hung up on reaching this endgame of herd immunity because every day that you put 2 million to 3 million vaccinations into people makes society be more and more protected.  So you don’t have to wait until you get full herd immunity to get a really profound effect on what you could do.

For example, as Dr. Walensky said, she keeps her eye on that very carefully as they reevaluate the guidelines, so you can get 20, 30, 40, 50 percent of the people vaccinated and not yet quite meet the empiric number that we’re talking about and still get a very favorable effect from vaccines.

DR. WALENSKY:  Maybe I’ll just add that the point of — incredibly important that these are local rates as well, so if you have a population rate that is 85 percent protected across the country but a community that’s only 50 percent protected, you can have outbreaks in that community.  And so really we need this level of protection pervasive across all communities across the country.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 12, 2021, 07:33:26 pm
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.

** The current vaccines will hopefully not only reduce the number of deaths and serious illness, but may also reduce transmission. The new J&J vaccine has important advantages in that it can be easily stored and transported at normal refrigeration temperatures and requires only one dose, making it easier to vaccinate populations that are more remote or have less access to standard medical care for other reasons.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-vaccines-may-help-stop-virus-transmission-heres-what-we-know (https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-vaccines-may-help-stop-virus-transmission-heres-what-we-know)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 04:25:46 am
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.

I think to be fair that Joe walked back from that comparison.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 13, 2021, 05:40:21 am
From the Economist magazine:

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/03/13/our-covid-19-model-estimates-odds-of-hospitalisation-and-death

"Death rates depend mostly on age, whereas comorbidities sharply raise chances of hospitalisation in young people"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 13, 2021, 05:47:41 am
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 08:45:07 am
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.

That's a lot of points to miss in such a short post!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 13, 2021, 11:21:45 am
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 11:33:32 am
Unfortunately, Covid is not a one-time event. It could take years to completely eradicate it.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 11:35:19 am
Of course, China could start another one too.

As could the US. Your point being?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 11:37:08 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 13, 2021, 11:39:41 am
Of course, China could start another one too.

Why to start another one if the first one works so well?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 11:58:25 am
Why to start another one if the first one works so well?
I agree.  They won't need too.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 12:02:40 pm
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 communist bats and pangolins?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 12:04:48 pm
When you say "they", do you mean the communists bat and pangolins?
We've argued that before.  Enough already.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 12:07:59 pm
We've argued that before.  Enough already.

If you keep saying silly things, people will keep calling you out on them. Simples.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 12:18:09 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 01:25:30 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 01:33:01 pm
You're being naive.

So I guess that means you got nothing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 01:46:11 pm
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?   ::)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 01:59:47 pm
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?

What do you got? Pangolins?

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


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 02:01:53 pm
Well I know the virus was being worked on in a lab in Wuhan the city where the virus started?

You don't know that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 13, 2021, 02:17:56 pm
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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 02:34:15 pm
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.

So you don't "know" that the COVID-19 virus was being "worked on" in the Wuhan lab at the time of the outbreak. You are just making that up. And then, after you made that up, you guessed that a researcher "probably" carried the virus out of the lab to a food market when he went out to lunch. What a load of crap. You've been caught yet again trying to pass off a complete fabrication on your part as a fact.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 02:39:37 pm
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

SARS is not Covid-19. So you are just making stuff up.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 13, 2021, 03:52:01 pm
Unfortunately, Covid is not a one-time event. It could take years to completely eradicate it....

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 13, 2021, 03:54:24 pm
Knock it off.

Everybody knows O.J. Simpson did it, just as everybody knows the Chinese did it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 04:45:17 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 13, 2021, 05:39:02 pm
What exactly is the "it" that everybody knows the Chinese did?

Released the virus, of course. Or, as a minimum, responsible for the virus.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 13, 2021, 06:00:35 pm
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.

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".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 13, 2021, 06:04:40 pm
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.

Not so long since you were asking to be woken up when 60k people died. Now it’s over half a million. Not sure I trust your powers of prediction on this subject!!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 13, 2021, 07:30:10 pm
Like the flu, it is going to take 30-50K every year and we won't even notice.

It could turn out that way, and hopefully will.  But it's too early even for people with expertise in virology or epidemiology to make predictions with any confidence.  The SARS-CoV-2 virus only recently made the jump from animals to humans; we've probably been living with influenza for close to 2500 years and the 'flu has learned to coexist with us.  "Smart" viruses don't kill their hosts because they can't propagate to a dead person.  This new coronavirus currently does.  If the most survivable mutations are smart, the dominant variants of the virus will become less lethal without becoming so much less infectious that they are eradicated by vaccines, and your scenario will become our new reality.  But I'm not aware of any empirical data which suggest that is happening yet.

Stay tuned, and until then, get vaccinated, stay masked, maintain physical distancing, and keep washing your hands.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on March 14, 2021, 09:03:25 am
Stay tuned, and until then, get vaccinated, stay masked, maintain physical distancing, and keep washing your hands.

Keep on telling them, Chris - it can't be repeated often enough.
Yesterday a good friend of mine passed away, aged 66.
It took but 10 days.

... then I think of the clowns who, in this and other threads, advocate not wearing masks in the name of their personal 'freedoms' and ' li mando nel loro paese'

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51034906943_7845b2a057_c.jpg)

Corriere Della Sera (https://www.corriere.it/moda/21_marzo_13/giovanni-gastel-morto-covid-scompare-grande-fotografia-dc195a4c-8415-11eb-ae38-084646f2f8da.shtml)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 14, 2021, 11:39:24 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 14, 2021, 12:33:18 pm
Ok, Hairsplitter-In-Chief.

Just trying to work out what you actually are claiming - can you explain?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 14, 2021, 05:40:06 pm
Who cares?

People

When you are dead, you are dead,

Something most people are generally trying to avoid and which the current vaccines help in reducing — as do masks, social distancing, and avoidance of large or crowded gatherings.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 14, 2021, 06:04:18 pm
the fascists (aka Democrats)... idiotic masks and catastrophic lockdowns

Naturally, you are free to make whatever hyperbolic comments you choose, regardless of their relationship to reality or the current topic. As a courtesy to your host, who has politely requested —

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.

— do you think that this is the best place to do so?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 14, 2021, 06:22:21 pm
How do you discuss policies without discussing politics? They go together
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 14, 2021, 06:23:10 pm
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.

For the half a million dead, that was indeed a one-time event. Hopefully, by summer the vaccines will reduce the need for masks and lockdowns.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 14, 2021, 06:40:10 pm
How do you discuss policies without discussing politics? They go together

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 15, 2021, 03:59:43 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 15, 2021, 04:01:45 am
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.

Ah, OK, I see - just paranoid fantasy then.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on March 15, 2021, 05:59:16 am
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.

If by fascism you mean far-right wing parties/factions rising in importance in the West and Europe, they were doing so well before Covid and any paranoid theories you might have about the Chinese.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 15, 2021, 06:20:35 am
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.

Fascist? I thought we were all leftie communist "libtards". Somebody better tell Alan, he's going to need new sound bite cassettes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 15, 2021, 08:20:34 am
German health experts warned on Saturday against any further easing of coronavirus lockdown measures as the number of cases dramatically increased.

Quote
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.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/world/german-experts-warn-against-lockdown-easing-as-cases-jump-563142/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 15, 2021, 08:47:59 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 15, 2021, 09:37:19 am
Why would we ease up at the start of the vaccination process?

That was in Germany, but Ontario eased up on store closures as well. Unfortunately, for many stores the re-opening came too late, they had to close permanently,

Quote
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.

https://www.styledemocracy.com/the-running-list-of-retail-store-closures-and-bankruptcies-in-2021/

Dr. Fauci is also concerned about rise of C19 cases in Europe.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/fauci-concerned-over-surge-european-133805663.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 15, 2021, 11:38:59 am
Fascist? I thought we were all leftie communist "libtards". ...

Same difference. China is a fascist state now. America slowly growing into.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 15, 2021, 06:14:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 07:16:53 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 16, 2021, 09:59:58 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 12:32:05 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 16, 2021, 12:45:27 pm
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 of the term. You butted in and said the definition of fascism was beside the point. Then you provided a link to different definitions of fascism.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 01:10:23 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 16, 2021, 01:22:12 pm
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.

You should take that up with Slobodan. He was using names and not effects.  Also, I think it would be better if you let Slobodan explain the point he is making rather than you explain the point you think he is making. He is perfectly capable of expressing himself when he wants to, and there might be less confusion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 16, 2021, 03:02:02 pm
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.

Frank,

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).

America is moving in that direction, toward a one-party system via political correctness and cancel culture, while retaining private property and control over major corporations (again, via PC and cancel culture, not formally).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 16, 2021, 03:25:12 pm
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.

Perhaps the best approach, to the rude and childish individuals that continue to insist on diverting a discussion on promising new vaccines into a political debate, would be to either ignore their diversions or copy and paste their comments and reply to them in the other thread, where the host of this party has requested those discussions be held. If they then want to continue lying on the floor and kicking their heels in a tantrum to keep their political discussions in this thread — where it makes no sense — let them do it amongst themselves. Meanwhile, we can continue to discuss the recent developments in vaccines.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 16, 2021, 03:55:27 pm
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).

I don't completely disagree with your position and understand how you arrived at it; however, I think by focusing on the characteristics that historical fascism has in common with the current political and economic situation in China, you may be overlooking ways in which they differ. I approach it more from a logical perspective. For example, if I say men have ten toes and women have ten toes, therefore men and women are the same, I would have erred. You can add ankles and knees and hips and fingers and wrists and elbows and all the rest that both men and women have in common, and if you say since men and women have all of these characteristics in common, men and women are the same, and again you would have erred. So I think it is important to look at not only the similarities but also at the differences. I am not going to get in a discussion with you about all the ways in which historical fascism differs from the current political and economic situation in China. I really don't have the level of interest to do so. Even so, it might be that, if we did have that discussion, you would be able to convince me in the end that the only significant difference between historical fascism and current political and economic system in China is that historical fascism was right wing and China is left wing. Isn't that enough? Frankly, I think there is so much current disagreement among academics about the essential elements of fascism that we would be better off leaving the term fascism to its historic context and coming up with something else.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 04:11:51 pm
We were discussing this recently.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 04:15:54 pm
We were discussing this recently.

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
Just to clarify a point that had some heated arguments.

Other countries, such as the United Kingdom, have stretched the time period between doses to months rather than weeks in order to vaccinate more people as they deal with supply shortfalls. U.S. public health officials have said they do not intend to make any changes in their recommendations.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 16, 2021, 04:37:24 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 16, 2021, 08:04:14 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 17, 2021, 03:53:16 am
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.

Yes that really contrasts with the total fiasco in the EU
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 17, 2021, 04:42:56 am
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.

Sorry - nothing to do with Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 17, 2021, 06:22:11 am
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...

Gee, you start sounding like me  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 17, 2021, 07:15:25 am
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.

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"? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 17, 2021, 07:44:22 am
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"?

I wish :-(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 17, 2021, 01:47:53 pm
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.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 17, 2021, 01:55:10 pm
Will this new law apply to posters who annoy you on the web?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 17, 2021, 05:24:34 pm
Excerpts from an article and interview with Dr. Gregory Glenn, president of research and development at Novavax. There is also an audio interview in article linked below.

Gregory Glenn on next steps for Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine

March 15, 2021

Novavax has proposed FDA accept final data from U.K., South African Trials

Novavax has proposed that FDA accept final data from a U.K. Phase III study of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, supplemented by data from a Phase II study conducted in South Africa, as the basis for an emergency use authorization, the company’s president for R&D, Gregory Glenn, told BioCentury.

The lack of demographic diversity in the U.K. trial may lead FDA to wait for results from the Prevent-19 Phase III trial Novavax is conducting in the U.S. and Mexico, Glenn said. The endpoint is event-driven, so it isn’t possible to give a precise date to expect interim data. Results will be released after 72 participants are diagnosed with COVID-19, making them likely to be available by mid-April.

In the U.K. trial, “efficacy was 96.4% (95% CI: 73.8, 99.5) against the original virus strain and 86.3% (95% CI: 71.3, 93.5) against the B.1.1.7/501Y.V1 variant circulating in the U.K.,” the company said. “Five severe cases were observed in the study, and all occurred in the placebo group. Four of the five severe cases were attributed to the B.1.1.7/501Y.V1 variant.”

In a complete analysis of the Phase IIb South African study, the vaccine was 55.4% effective in HIV-negative participants in a region where the majority of strains are B.1.351 variants first identified in the country.

In both studies, the vaccine was 100% effective against severe COVID-19.

The U.K. and the South Africa data are signals “that the vaccine is working and working very well,” Glenn said. “We’ll just have to see how that goes with FDA and timing” of the EUA application.

Although three COVID-19 vaccines have been authorized in the U.S. and multiple vaccines are on the market in other regions, Novavax anticipates robust demand for its vaccine, both as a booster in countries where vaccination campaigns have reached much of the population and as an initial vaccination in parts of the world that haven’t had broad access to vaccines.

“We know immunity wanes on every vaccine, and it is likely that [COVID-19] will be no exception,” Glenn said. He added that Novavax expects that its vaccine, a protein-based product adjuvanted with the company’s proprietary saponin-based Matrix-M, could be used as a booster following immunization with vaccines manufactured using mRNA, viral vector or other technologies.

Novavax has launched animal studies of a vaccine targeted against the SARS-CoV-2 variant that is dominant in South Africa and expects FDA and EMA to accept applications based on immunological data.

Novavax could have a booster based on the new vaccine, or more likely a bivalent vaccine targeting both the original virus and a variant, in production in the fall, he said. The company expects that vaccine to be effective against a similar variant that has been identified in New York.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 17, 2021, 05:25:00 pm
The maximum sentence is proposed to be 10 years in prison. The maximum sentence for rape is life in prison.

S
My mistake. The average sentence for rape may be 8 years. I'm not sure that makes things much better.

https://fullfact.org/news/five-years-average-prison-sentence-rape/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 17, 2021, 05:27:59 pm
Sorry - nothing to do with Covid.

It's up to you whether you want to take the bait from those that want to turn every discussion thread into a platform for their political ideology.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 17, 2021, 05:53:40 pm
Another good article on the Novavax vaccine from yesterday written by William A. Haseltine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Haseltine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Haseltine)

Novavax Covid-19 Vaccine Performs Well In Clinical Trials, But Variants Remain A Threat

March 16, 2021 - Excerpt below...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/16/novavax-covid-19-vaccine-performs-well-in-clinical-trials-but-variants-remain-a-threat (https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/16/novavax-covid-19-vaccine-performs-well-in-clinical-trials-but-variants-remain-a-threat/?sh=2e5f882c4a7f)

The new candidate uses a mechanism to prompt immune responses that is different from vaccines already in circulation, but remains effective against non-variant forms of the virus. Here I discuss the results and implications of the Novavax trials and the vaccine’s performance against surging variants of SARS-CoV-2...

The Novavax vaccine works by combining a purified spike protein with an adjuvant, or a substance designed to enhance a given immune response. In 1984, I used essentially the same formula — adjuvant, envelope, and the equivalent of a spike — to create a vaccine that prevents cats from contracting leukemia. It is an old technology, but arguably the most direct line of attack we can mount against a virus. Other FDA-approved Covid-19 vaccines employ methods that are certainly innovative and still effective, but on the whole more roundabout approaches to hitting the same target. These include the messenger RNA in the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, which instruct human cells to make spike proteins, and the adenovirus vectors in the Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines, which carry instructions for creating anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

That the clinical trials for the Novavax vaccine have yielded such promising results is a great sign, especially given the rise of new variants. Many pharmaceutical companies have already announced that they are developing second-generation vaccines tailored directly for these new variants. The only hesitations to note are which ones are they tailoring towards, and what if new ones arise in the time it takes to develop, test, and distribute? The illustration below shows some of the many variants that have branched off from the wild-type of SARS-CoV-2.

Regardless, these hesitations should not take away from the positive news regarding this story. A new vaccine will soon be available that posts high efficacy towards the wild-type and one of the most prolific variants. Here’s hoping this vaccine will help reign in case numbers as new vaccines are developed in the coming months.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 19, 2021, 11:29:01 am
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.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 11:56:47 am
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.

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. You are free to include or discard such information in your analysis of an issue.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 12:48:46 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 19, 2021, 12:53:32 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 12:59:31 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 19, 2021, 01:00:57 pm
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.

He compared the proposed penalty with data from ten years ago. How does that help?

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 01:01:23 pm
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

Ask your wife. I understand that she was a teacher before retiring. She may suggest the possibility that if you only have to space the desks three feet apart instead of six feet apart, you can fit more desks, and therefore more students, in a classroom. It is at least a possibility.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 19, 2021, 01:06:12 pm
Don't kids sit closer than 3 feet?  I don't see how that changes anything.

What?

Do they sit closer than 3 feet?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 01:06:33 pm
He compared the proposed penalty with data from ten years ago. How does that help?

S
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 01:08:47 pm
What?

Do they sit closer than 3 feet?
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 19, 2021, 01:09:14 pm
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 01:09:59 pm
He compared the proposed penalty with data from ten years ago. How does that help?

Help what?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 01:14:03 pm
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
I'm Mr. Klein to you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 19, 2021, 01:19:49 pm
Who the fuck is "sf" to come here anonymously and pontificate?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 19, 2021, 01:26:56 pm
just another "Q" from the other thread. ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 19, 2021, 01:31:00 pm
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

6ft or 2 m distance has been recommended from the beginning of the pandemic as the gold standard.
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 01:39:55 pm
How does this change anything, really?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 02:12:46 pm
6ft or 2 m distance has been recommended from the beginning of the pandemic as the gold standard.
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/
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 02:16:23 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 19, 2021, 02:17:45 pm
just another "Q" from the other thread. ;D

James Bond Q? Something else?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 02:22:42 pm
This is exactly what this thread is about.  Discussing the benefits of different suggestions to help eliminate the spread.

The topic of the thread is "Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine". The initial post was about the Novavax vaccine, the "Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine" in question. We have strayed far from the topic. TechTalk has listened to Josh's request and is trying to steer us back on topic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 02:57:23 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 19, 2021, 03:00:34 pm
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

I suspect Alan and I are in (rare) agreement that a prison sentence of any sort for protest or demonstration is not compatible with a free society. The comparison with rape is relevant, as you are perfectly well aware, because of the discussion in the UK recently about the right to demonstrate against male violence following the murder of Sarah Everard.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 03:26:16 pm
Why Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot Covid-19 vaccine is a game changer

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 03:59:49 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:08:15 pm
James Bond Q? Something else?
That's what I was hoping for.  But I think it's someone more sinister.  Someone like Dr. No.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:13:02 pm
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.

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 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:16:11 pm
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
It'll be OK if they don't give them back.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 04:22:57 pm
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

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:28:54 pm
Why Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot Covid-19 vaccine is a game changer

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.
This 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.

Second, the argument that so many people aren't;lt getting their second shot is not true.  I'm in a group of old people, the more vulnerable, and no one that I know is not getting their second shot.  Old people are particularly getting their shots because of the danger.  They're fighting to get in line.

Here's an extract from the article you linked to of people taking the two-shot versions. Also, Moderna and Pfizer with just the first of two doses are more effective than J&J's one dose.  The first two are at 95% while J&J is somewhere between 10-20% less effective.  So, I think some balance should be included in your post.

In the first analysis, 88% had completed the series, 8.6% had not received the second dose but remained within the allowable interval, and 3.4% had missed the second dose. The percentage of people who missed the second dose was highest among American Indian/Alaska Natives (5.1%) and people aged 16 to 44 years (4%), according to CDC researcher Jennifer Kriss, and colleagues.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:31:39 pm
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 04:44:36 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 04:52:09 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 05:08:13 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 05:36:55 pm
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

Also of note from the article that you linked is that the AstraZeneca vaccine is not authorized for use in the United States.

"The Biden administration has come under pressure from countries around the world to share vaccines, particularly its stock of AstraZeneca’s vaccine, which is authorized for use elsewhere but not yet in the United States.

AstraZeneca has millions of doses made in a U.S. facility, and has said that it would have 30 million shots ready at the beginning of April. The company’s shares rose slightly after Reuters first reported the news.

The deal to share the vaccine does not affect President Joe Biden’s plans to have vaccine available for all adults in the United States by the end of May, a senior administration official said, and it does not reduce the supply of available vaccine in the United States.
"

It makes sense to loan a vaccine not authorized for use here to our neighbors that are already using it, rather than have vaccine expire sitting on the shelf.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 05:40:50 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 05:47:19 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 06:33:37 pm
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.

Of course, back then he was competing with Trump and wanted to show how America will be partners with the world in opposition to Trump's America First motto.  Of course, now that Biden is president, it would be political suicide for him to send any vaccine to others in the world before every last American is vaccinated. So it's become Biden's America First motto.

See 18:35 of this video. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4CLoiA3vfQ
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 06:50:39 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 07:09:56 pm
I've already posted information on the difference between efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines. They are not the same thing.

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.
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 07:11:13 pm
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. You can read the US vaccine distribution plan on the CDC website.

https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines/distribution/index.html

In February, the US pledged $4 billion to the WHO to purchase and distribute vaccines globally.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 19, 2021, 07:16:24 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 19, 2021, 07:28:17 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 19, 2021, 07:28:37 pm
And very unlike his promises and intent before the election. 

Again, specifically, what are the promises, and now "intent", he expressed before the election that are not being met with respect to vaccines?

Should we start a lie list for Biden as we had for Trump?

In response to a similar question from you several weeks ago, I suggested that if you wanted to set up a list of Biden's "lies", you were free to do so. You certainly do not need my permission. But hurry; you are already sixty day behind schedule.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 20, 2021, 01:26:05 am
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%?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 20, 2021, 02:12:11 am
How smart do you have to be to know that a vaccine rated at 94/95% is better than one rated at 75/85%?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 20, 2021, 06:33:05 am
Given the fact that you can't understand the basic terminology, methodology, or variables involved in vaccine assessment..

That's just a standard smartass technique of the left nuts - question what the definition of "is" is. And condescension. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 20, 2021, 07:55:08 am
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?

Where are the other vaccines actually manufactured? Do we know?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 20, 2021, 08:52:42 am
... the Chinese or Russian vaccines which I wouldn't use to develop my film (much less put into my arms).

Why?

Perhaps you should take into account that the American Embassy in Moscow has pleaded with the Russian authorities to get Sputnik, as State Department was apparently unable to provide Pfizer for them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on March 20, 2021, 09:19:52 am
Why?

That has to be a rhetorical question. Surely by now you know why Alan wouldn't use the Chinese or Russian vaccines. I'll give you a hint: it has to do with precious bodily fluids.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 20, 2021, 09:26:09 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 20, 2021, 12:36:02 pm
Who the fuck is "sf" to come here anonymously and pontificate?

Who the hell are you to think you can swear at me?

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 20, 2021, 01:00:20 pm
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 20, 2021, 01:28:30 pm
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.
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. 

Quote
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 20, 2021, 01:41:43 pm
Who the hell are you to think you can swear at me?

S

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 20, 2021, 01:58:33 pm
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.

A country that has had great success in getting vaccines administered is Chile. They rank third in the world for per capita vaccination behind only Israel and the UAE.

It is not all good news, however. They are currently experiencing a massive spike in cases and hospitals are nearly full.

Chile sets daily record for coronavirus cases even as vaccination drive plows ahead - Reuters - March 20, 2021

https://www.reuters.com/article/chile-sets-daily-record-for-coronavirus-cases-even-as-vaccination-drive-plows-ahead (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-chile/chile-sets-daily-record-for-coronavirus-cases-even-as-vaccination-drive-plows-ahead-idUSKBN2BC0L3)

SANTIAGO (Reuters) - Chile broke its single day record for new cases of the coronavirus on Saturday, health officials said, leaving hospitals on the verge of collapse even as the South American nation races on with a mass vaccination program.

Cases have been ticking up for weeks following the end of the southern hemisphere summer holiday, but soared to 7,084, above the previous high of 6,938 last June, the data shows.

The fast rising caseload has filled critical care wards north to south, leaving Chile with just 198 beds available for new patients. All of the capital Santiago, the economic engine, is in strict lockdown this weekend.

Chile, a comparatively small but wealthy Andean nation, is at the forefront of a global inoculation drive on a per capita basis. It ranks third globally, behind Israel and the United Arab Emirates, for most doses administered per population, according to a Reuters tabulation.

But officials say the holiday infections, the arrival of more contagious variants of the virus and a relaxation of sanitary measures amid the successful vaccination program have prompted a more vicious second wave.

Chile was the first in South America here to begin vaccinating its citizens, with an early shipment of the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 24.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on March 20, 2021, 08:23:14 pm
I am posting under my real name. . . . Newbie, anonymous  smart asses, however, get less respect from me.

Agree.  Posting political views with a pseudonym really is egregious behavior.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 21, 2021, 02:32:50 pm
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.
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 21, 2021, 04:14:06 pm
... 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 22, 2021, 06:12:01 am
???

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.

Drinking a beer with a friend from a different country is looking like a distant dream at this point :-(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 01:10:42 pm
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

I'm not involved in your argument and don't wish to be dragged into it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 01:16:03 pm
That's just a standard smartass technique of the left nuts - question what the definition of "is" is. And condescension.

No one is questioning the definition of "is". It's more akin to saying this is an apple and this is an orange and repeatedly receiving a blank stare. You're mistaking condescension with exhaustion from running in circles.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on March 22, 2021, 02:40:36 pm
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/)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 03:04:34 pm
..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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on March 22, 2021, 03:40:12 pm
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)

Indeed.  As an aside, I've recommended it before here (and other places), but 'Infamous Scribblers' is an incredible read for anyone into political media. (https://www.amazon.com/Infamous-Scribblers-Eric-Burns/dp/1586484281)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 22, 2021, 05:27:30 pm
Some posts submitted by anonymous posters are superior to rushed tripes contrived by posters under real names.

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.

Quote
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.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/facebook-disables-13-billion-fake-accounts-oct-dec-last-year-2021-03-22/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 22, 2021, 06:14:36 pm
long overdue
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 22, 2021, 08:35:36 pm
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)
I doubt if there are any Madisons or Hamiltons posting here. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 22, 2021, 08:40:27 pm
Some posts submitted by anonymous posters are superior to rushed tripes contrived by posters under real names.

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/
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? 


It sounds like they're making arbitrary and political decisions. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 09:21:03 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 09:25:53 pm
U.S. says Russian-backed outlets spread COVID-19 vaccine 'disinformation' - March 7, 2021

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 22, 2021, 09:31:42 pm
Your link didn't work for me. This link should work.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 22, 2021, 09:42:55 pm
U.S. says Russian-backed outlets spread COVID-19 vaccine 'disinformation' - March 7, 2021

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.  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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 09:58:41 pm
The article didn't say what the disinformation was.

COVID-19 Vaccine Myths Are Spreading Thanks to Russian Propaganda: What to Know - March 12, 2021

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 22, 2021, 10:27:18 pm
CDC information on variants circulating in the United States

SARS-CoV-2 Variant Classifications and Definitions

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/variant-surveillance/variant-info (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/variant-surveillance/variant-info.html)

Variant Proportions in the U.S.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/variant-proportions (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/variant-proportions.html)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 22, 2021, 11:03:09 pm
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? 

3ft is a minimum safe distance, 6 ft is recommended and 8ft is even better.
Staying at home is the best.

Quote
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2021, 03:48:08 am
Russians again!?

Hahahaha... you guys never learn. Should we call Mueller again?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 09:30:59 am
COVID-19 Vaccine Myths Are Spreading Thanks to Russian Propaganda: What to Know - March 12, 2021

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.
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. 

From your article:
The campaign against the widely used Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is likely due to its potential competition against Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine, a report by the Alliance for Securing Democracy said.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 09:39:28 am
3ft is a minimum safe distance, 6 ft is recommended and 8ft is even better.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 23, 2021, 10:23:22 am
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.

I don't need a study to come to that conclusion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 10:57:42 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2021, 11:22:08 am
For anyone curios, I had not significant reaction to neither first, nor second Pfizer shot, short of going to bed on both days around 11pm, while my usual time would be around 1am or 2am. I did have Covid last March, however, so probably still some antibodies present. I also never ever had any reaction to the multitude of vaccines from my childhood, all the way to the last 10-15 years of regular flu shots.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 23, 2021, 11:43:57 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 12:28:24 pm
Extra weight might hamper also sex life.
Oh.  So that's the problem.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 02:54:23 pm
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.

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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 02:59:30 pm
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!
99% of the propaganda was spread by Democratic politicians
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 03:10:16 pm
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.  Were the Democrats colluding with the Russians? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 03:41:13 pm
Is this Russian propaganda?

‘I was sort of stunned’: Fauci and U.S. officials say AstraZeneca released ‘outdated information’ from Covid-19 vaccine trial
U.S. health officials raised concerns early Tuesday that positive results that AstraZeneca announced Monday for its Covid-19 vaccine may have been based on “an incomplete view of the efficacy data” from a clinical trial and relied on “outdated information,” throwing another curveball in the saga of the company’s vaccine.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/23/astrazeneca-may-have-used-outdated-information-in-announcing-covid19-vaccine-results/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 03:47:50 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 04:14:34 pm
Is this Russian propaganda?

It's just the opposite. It's transparency, but you knew that already in making the false equivalence.

"Asked why NIAID released its unusual statement, Fauci said, “We just felt we could not remain silent. Because if we did remain silent, we could be understandably accused of covering something up. And we definitely didn’t want to be in that position.”

He added: “In my mind, it’s an unforced error by the company.”

"Fauci said on “Good Morning America” Tuesday the frustration was that “this is very likely a very good vaccine” and that he hoped people would understand the DSMB concerns were an example of one of the many guardrails ensuring the quality of the vaccine development process."

“If you look at it, the data really are quite good, but when they put it into the press release, it wasn’t completely accurate,” Fauci said. “We have to keep essentially trying as hard as we can to get people to understand there are safeguards in place.”
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2021, 04:34:43 pm
It's just the opposite. It's transparency...

 ;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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2021, 04:37:05 pm
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!

 ;D ;D ;D

Have you tried a career in stand up?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 05:27:25 pm
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.

Your clear recollection is faulty. In September, Trump made repeated claims that a vaccine could be available before the election. “We think we can start some time in October. So as soon as it’s announced we’ll be able to start. That will be from mid-October on. It may be a little bit later than that. The vaccine could be distributed starting in October or November, I don’t think it’s going to be too much later than that.”

Trump went further by contradicting the CDC director's timeline of limited quantities of vaccine starting in November or December. “I think he made a mistake when he said that. It’s just incorrect information and I called him and he didn’t tell me that and I think he got the message maybe confused, maybe it was stated incorrectly,” “We’re ready to go immediately as the vaccine is announced and it could be announced in October, it could be announced a little bit after October but once we go we’re ready.”

Following those remarks a number of people pushed back, including Democrats, saying that they trusted what the scientists at CDC and FDA said regarding vaccine development and whether vaccines could be distributed before election day, but not Trump's estimates. Biden said that he trusted vaccines and he trusted scientists but he didn't trust Donald Trump. It was Trump's word they said they wouldn't take NOT the vaccines authorized by the scientists tasked with approving them. Your clear recollection is misleading you and your statements.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/16/trump-says-he-thinks-us-could-start-distributing-a-coronavirus-vaccine-in-october (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/16/trump-says-he-thinks-us-could-start-distributing-a-coronavirus-vaccine-in-october.html)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 05:32:27 pm
;D ;D ;D

Oh, man, what's your real name, Spin Doctor?

Just quoting from Alan's link to provide fuller context to the remarks he cited.

But if the same info came attributed to, say, anonymous sources instead of Dr. Fauxi, it would have been labeled "Russian propaganda," right?

Oh! Heaven forbid that anyone would think that Putin engages in activities harmful to democracy or human lives!

;D ;D ;D

Have you tried a career in stand up?

I don't think that anyone could make a career out of the material that you find funny. Not many people would find it so amusing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 23, 2021, 05:52:56 pm
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?

I seem to remember you claiming this before and failing to substantiate it when you were challenged. Got any more this time around?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 06:11:50 pm
Your article confirmed my guess.

Oh, naturally!

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. 

Except misinformation about cameras doesn't affect the health and safety of the people that read and share it with others. Other than that, "Not much different" perhaps.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 06:33:20 pm
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....

So you associate propaganda designed to spread doubt about the safety and efficacy of vaccines to Americans with advertising? Doing so at a critical time, when efforts are ramping up to contain a pandemic and save lives by getting enough people vaccinated doesn't give you pause?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 23, 2021, 06:36:17 pm
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

No wonder, considering his great wisdom and extensive knowledge of microbiology. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 23, 2021, 06:48:07 pm
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?

I don't recall it, but according to Radio Yerevan, in principle this is true. However, it was not the Democrats but the Republicans, instead of the vaccines it was pomegranates, and rather than saying they wouldn't take it, they were asking for it.

More Yerevan jokes at: Radio Yerevan  (http://www.armeniapedia.org/wiki/Radio_Yerevan_Jokes)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2021, 08:48:21 pm
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on March 23, 2021, 09:12:30 pm
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.

So, setting aside your inherent distaste for Democrats/liberals, what’s your take on how Russia is operating here? It’s not like the “left” are the only ones that believe Putin and his government are bad actors.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 23, 2021, 09:17:56 pm
Maybe because I speak Russian

I have no doubt that your Russian language abilities vastly exceed mine. I only had a couple of years of Russian in high school and I'm a poor speaker of the language, though my reading ability is a bit better than my speaking.

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... maybe not... People that have lived in the U.S. their entire lives can have a very different grasp and opposing opinions about what's realistic regarding American affairs. The same seems to hold true in every other country I've visited. Everyone forms opinions and judgments from their own perspective—too often, thru very narrow ideological lenses of all manner and description.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 23, 2021, 11:39:18 pm
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. 

Democrats face quandary on vaccine support as election nears
President Donald Trump is escalating his promise for a coronavirus vaccine before Election Day.

But across America, Democrats, independents and even some Republicans do not trust his administration to produce a safe and effective vaccine on such an aggressive timeline. Such hesitancy threatens to exacerbate the public health risk for millions of Americans whenever a vaccine is released.

With the Nov. 3 election fast approaching, Democratic officials face a delicate political challenge.

Should they attack Trump’s vaccine claims too aggressively, Democrats risk further undermining public confidence in a possible lifesaving medicine while looking as though they are rooting against a potential cure. But if they don’t push back, it makes it easier for Trump to use the real or imagined prospect of a vaccine to boost his reelection campaign.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-virus-outbreak-elections-public-health-archive-8790eda23e94aec7cf7b4beaaa67ceaf
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 24, 2021, 12:24:44 am
Speaking about the good old times, here are some indisputable historical facts.

Quote
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.

https://www.immune.org.nz/vaccines/vaccine-development/brief-history-vaccination#:~:text=Edward%20Jenner%20is%20considered%20the,first%20smallpox%20vaccine%20was%20developed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 24, 2021, 03:05:32 am
...  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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 24, 2021, 09:05:28 am
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.

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
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?

China, Russia officials meet in show of unity against EU, US
China and Russia were rivals for leadership of the communist world during the Cold War but have built a strong relationship in recent years based on opposition to the U.S.-led liberal order, as well as cooperation in military affairs, technology and trade in natural resources.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 24, 2021, 10:32:14 am
A useful video that might help people understand what vaccine efficacy numbers mean and what they don't mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 24, 2021, 10:52:34 am
A useful video that might help people understand what vaccine efficacy numbers mean and what they don't mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 24, 2021, 12:19:01 pm

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 24, 2021, 01:15:49 pm
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 24, 2021, 01:39:41 pm
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.

You are talking nonsense. Any information that doesn't fit in with your understanding or prejudice you just brush off as "political". Maybe the change in menu at your local burger joint to replace chili sauce with bbq is "political" too. Take off your paranoid glasses and try to assess information on its merits. 

What is said that the numbers quoted for "efficacy" can't be compared like for like. The numbers don't say that the J&J (or AZ) vaccine is as good as Pfizer, but they don't say that it's worse. What they say is that under specific circumstances (very high infection rates, Brazil and SA variants) it gives a good level of protection. Would Pfizer have worked better in that case? - we can't say (I hope it would, cos that's the jab I had). How the different vaccines work in future, with a different background infection level, and a different variant, remains to be seen - in ny case much better than having no vaccine at all.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 24, 2021, 02:51:21 pm
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.

Complete nonsense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 24, 2021, 02:55:59 pm
J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA.

100% false. The J&J vaccine clinical trials were conducted in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, South Africa, and the United States.

COVID-19 variants circulate faster than samples can be collected and sequenced and proportions vary by state. In California variants are the dominate proportion. Florida and Illinois have all of the CDC Variants of Concern from the UK, California, South Africa, and Brazil circulating. New Jersey has the UK and California variants. In Nevada over 44% of recent samples are variants. The relative proportion of variants currently circulating throughout the U.S. is uncertain, but what is known is that more emerge over time and spread throughout the country.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 24, 2021, 03:37:50 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 24, 2021, 03:43:44 pm
Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions.

... which will provide a vastly more accurate picture than the one you paint.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 24, 2021, 04:00:25 pm
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.

That would be worrying if I thought anyone was dumb enough to take your medical advice.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 24, 2021, 04:57:56 pm
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.

The pushback was against Trump claims, "for political reasons", that vaccines could start shipping before election day and the distrust expressed was in regard to what Trump was saying. The basic message to the public was to trust what the science and scientists say regarding vaccines, not Trump.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 24, 2021, 05:35:48 pm
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.

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 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.

But across America, Democrats, independents and even some Republicans do not trust his administration to produce a safe and effective vaccine on such an aggressive timeline. Such hesitancy threatens to exacerbate the public health risk for millions of Americans whenever a vaccine is released.

With the Nov. 3 election fast approaching, Democratic officials face a delicate political challenge.

Should they attack Trump’s vaccine claims too aggressively, Democrats risk further undermining public confidence in a possible lifesaving medicine while looking as though they are rooting against a potential cure. But if they don’t push back, it makes it easier for Trump to use the real or imagined prospect of a vaccine to boost his reelection campaign.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 24, 2021, 05:39:20 pm
You deliberately...

Enough with the smoke and mirrors. Cut to the chase. Where does the article you cite quote Democrats saying they won't take a vaccine? That's your specific accusation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 24, 2021, 07:09:11 pm
J&J plant authorization clears way for big boost in U.S. COVID-19 shots

Reuters - March 23, 2021

https://www.reuters.com/article/J&J plant authorization clears way for big boost in U.S. COVID-19 shots (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-johnson-johnson-va-idUSKBN2BF2MA)

A large plant being used to manufacture Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine was cleared by U.S. regulators on Tuesday, setting the stage for the weekly U.S. supply to surge more then 20 percent.

About 27 million COVID-19 vaccine doses will be allocated to U.S. states and other localities this week, including 4 million from J&J, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters. That is the largest allocation yet, up from 22 million last week.

Earlier, the Indiana plant at which Catalent Inc is helping to manufacture the J&J vaccine received U.S. regulatory authorization, the companies said.

J&J’s shipments had slowed considerably since the first week of the month, but the new authorization will enable it to ship out millions of doses.

J&J tapped contract manufacturers Catalent and Emergent BioSolutions Inc to scale up production and meet its global supply targets. Catalent provides the final stage - called fill and finish - while Emergent makes the drug substance.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the one-shot J&J vaccine in February, but only for its production facility in the Netherlands and a small fill-and-finish plant in the United States.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 25, 2021, 07:38:51 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 25, 2021, 01:09:57 pm
Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.

Didn't last, did it?

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 25, 2021, 01:11:46 pm
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 see jeremyrh has changed his avatar.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 25, 2021, 02:51:57 pm
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

Typical for today's journalism (or any journalism). If there is a good news, ignore it and search for the bad one. Those sell the papers. Of course we have pockets of anti vaccers, every country does. But you do not become #2 in Europe and #3-4 in the world if that would be a dominant factor.

 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Michael West on March 25, 2021, 03:30:52 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 25, 2021, 03:39:33 pm
So, it looks like 200 million shots will be administered in the first 100 days of Biden's presidency.
Under promised and over delivered, unlike many things over promised and under delivered under the previous president.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 25, 2021, 03:55:03 pm
The CDC had to "say" something to justify their existence. 
My question was rhetorical. Of course, I agree with you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 25, 2021, 03:59:32 pm
So, it looks like 200 million shots will be administered in the first 100 days of Biden's presidency.
Under promised and over delivered, unlike many things over promised and under delivered under the previous president.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 25, 2021, 04:05:28 pm
Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.

Gratefully,
Dale

Didn't last, did it?

S

And what would you say is your most valuable contribution to the discussion of new vaccines?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 25, 2021, 04:26:11 pm
The CDC had to "say" something to justify their existence.

CDC is the acronym for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As long as diseases exist or public health is a reasonable concern, I don't think it will be all that difficult for CDC to "justify their existence".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 25, 2021, 05:02:40 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 25, 2021, 07:33:04 pm
Looks like in Miami the safe social distance is less than 6 ft.

(https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/x06qv0/picture250117529/alternates/FREE_1140/MIA_MIAMI_BEACH_DAV20.JPG)

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article250181905.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 25, 2021, 07:51:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 25, 2021, 07:53:32 pm
Speaking of Mexicans, a couple of them invented this new mask that even Fauci should approve for eating.  However, I wouldn't be eating while watching the video.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1374777986965209100
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 25, 2021, 10:19:13 pm
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.

“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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 26, 2021, 12:13:06 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 26, 2021, 10:05:15 am
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?

Macron has shown himself to be a complete incompetent, labelling AZ as "quasi-ineffective" and now throwing his toys out of the pram because AZ supplies to France have been held up, and despite the fact that 50% of French people have said they won't accept a vaccination, and so now the SA variant is on the rise in France threatening both them and their neighbours. Quel foutoir!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 26, 2021, 10:47:19 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 26, 2021, 11:06:21 am
It required a leader with foresight and willingness to act.

Too funny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXxuUJJz4VE
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 26, 2021, 11:29:53 am
It required a leader with foresight and willingness to act.

Like Benjamin Netanyahu.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on March 26, 2021, 12:41:28 pm
And what would you say is your most valuable contribution to the discussion of new vaccines?

Refraining from silly political posturing, which I understand from its title ("the sole domicile of politics") is supposed to be confined to just one topic (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1212976#new).

They also serve, who only stand and wait.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 26, 2021, 02:08:16 pm
Refraining from silly posturing, political or otherwise, would be a good practice for each of us to embrace going forward. It will make for a better flow of useful information.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 26, 2021, 02:17:11 pm
If you're looking for concise and informative discussion of vaccines and variants, this recent 60 Minutes video is useful. It discusses the current vaccines and variants; the fundamnental science; and the newly emerging domestic variants in the U.S. including the most recent New York variant. It's about 13-minutes long.

How do coronavirus variants form and will the current vaccines work against them?

https://www.youtube.com/60 Minutes - How do coronavirus variants form and will the current vaccines work against them? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOK-yvXCcGo)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 26, 2021, 02:34:37 pm
Another interesting 60 Minutes segment on the development of the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine is worth watching. Again 13-minutes in length.

As you probably know, the vaccine was developed by Turkish immigrants in Germany who founded the R&D company BioNTech and were funded by a $445 million grant from the German government and an open checkbook from their manufacturing and distribution partner Pfizer.

How the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was developed

https://60 Minutes - How the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was developed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM3gSgvN2Fw)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 26, 2021, 03:11:29 pm
And... One more short 12-minute video worth watching on how and 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.

In a later post, I'll give my views on who the real heroes are inside and outside of government that made rapid vaccine development and deployment in the U.S. possible. Spoiler alert... It wasn't Biden, or Trump, or even Fauci.

Meanwhile, This is a concise and very informative history of mRNA development that led to the current vaccines.

Why It Actually Took 50 Years to Make COVID mRNA Vaccines

https://www.youtube.com/Why It Actually Took 50 Years to Make COVID mRNA Vaccines (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPeeCyJReZw)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 26, 2021, 04:01:18 pm
... 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.


This is probably always true.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 27, 2021, 08:51:53 am
Enough said:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on March 27, 2021, 09:23:52 am
Enough said
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on March 27, 2021, 10:15:56 am
Enough said:

Clearly unequivocal proof that MASKS CAUSE COVID.

Also, going on boats causes summer, and falling leaves causes snow.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 27, 2021, 10:51:44 am
Clearly unequivocal proof that MASKS CAUSE COVID.

Also, going on boats causes summer, and falling leaves causes snow.

You are smarter than that, buddy  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 27, 2021, 01:37:29 pm
Enough said:

The reason that Czechia had a remarkably low covid counts in the initial phase, was due to mandatory masks and border closings. In March 2020, Czechia and Slovakia were the only two EU countries which made mask wearing mandatory.

In May 2020, the mask wearing and travel restrictions in Czechia were relaxed and the infection count started to slowly rise. In September 2020, the numbers started to rise more rapidly and mask wearing was ordered again. 

The three peaks in the second chart coincide with Summer Travel, Christmas, and Carnival (mid February) events.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on March 27, 2021, 01:43:43 pm
You are smarter than that, buddy  ;)

I was until I started arguing politics with you goofballs on LuLa ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 27, 2021, 02:38:59 pm
Enough said:

Not even remotely enough.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on March 27, 2021, 09:25:36 pm
Not even remotely enough.

+10
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 30, 2021, 08:30:51 am
1 dose of Moderna, Pfizer vaccines effective against COVID-19. 'Get the second dose,' experts say.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/1-dose-moderna-pfizer-vaccines-effective-covid-19-get-second-dose-experts-192823135.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 30, 2021, 08:32:44 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 30, 2021, 08:57:09 am
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

How can any doom happen under St. Biden and Virgin Harris watch?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 31, 2021, 10:21:37 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on March 31, 2021, 10:44:01 am
No link provided, but there is this article...

https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-data-vaccinated-people-do-not-carry-covid-19-2021-3 (https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-data-vaccinated-people-do-not-carry-covid-19-2021-3)

During an MSNBC interview with Rachel Maddow on Monday, Walensky said: "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data."

Walensky was referring to a new CDC study of nearly 4,000 frontline workers, some vaccinated and some not, who tested themselves weekly for COVID-19 infections between December and March.

Among fully vaccinated people in the study, there were only three "breakthrough" COVID-19 infections detected. In stark contrast, unvaccinated participants in the study logged 161 COVID-19 cases.

This is a great sign, because it means that vaccinated people likely protect those around them from catching the coronavirus very, very well.

But, more data is still needed to say so definitively, which is why researchers are currently recruiting thousands of college students across the country to find out more about the likelihood of asymptomatic spread of this virus among vaccinated people.

"We hope that within the next five or so months we'll be able to answer the very important question about whether vaccinated people get infected asymptomatically, and if they do, do they transmit the infection to others," Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious-disease expert, said at a White House COVID-19 task force briefing on Friday.

On MSNBC, Walensky also spoke about the challenges ahead for the country to exit the pandemic.

New, more transmissible virus variants are spreading fast, at a time when a majority of younger US adults have not been vaccinated quite yet. Walensky shared her fears about a forth surge on the horizon this spring.

"We've done so well in vaccinating the more senior members of our society that deaths might not be what we would expect with prior surges. It's also the case, though, that, you know, if we don't see those number of deaths, the deaths that we're going to see is among younger people," Walensky told Maddow. "Obviously, we don't want to see those either."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 31, 2021, 10:46:11 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 31, 2021, 10:59:10 am
https://www.foxnews.com/health/ny-woman-contracts-coronavirus-month-after-covid-19-vaccination-report-says

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 31, 2021, 11:18:31 am
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.
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.
https://www.newsmax.com/us/cdc-vaccinated-immunity/2021/03/30/id/1015768/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 31, 2021, 11:27:42 am
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on March 31, 2021, 09:03:49 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on March 31, 2021, 10:31:14 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 01, 2021, 06:08:42 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 01, 2021, 06:34:37 am
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.

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. 

Quote
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.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/01/almost-third-of-uk-covid-hospital-patients-readmitted-within-four-months
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 01, 2021, 07:40:56 am
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

That's just more commie panic porn. There is no chance in hell that ⅓ are reinfected.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 01, 2021, 07:45:35 am
Quote
... one in eight of patients dies...

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 10:09:56 am
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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 10:23:59 am
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.
There was nothing in the article stating retransmission happened although the poster implied the article stated that.  I was correcting his statement. 

Additionally, from a separate March 30 article below, the CDC now says that re-transmission from a vaccinated person doesn't happen.  Since she said it on Rachel Maddow's MSNBC show, it must be true.   ::)

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.newsmax.com/us/cdc-vaccinated-immunity/2021/03/30/id/1015768/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 10:35:03 am
There was nothing in the article stating retransmission happened although the poster implied the article stated that.  I was correcting his statement. 

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.

Look up what "rather than" means.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 10:35:29 am
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. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 10:46:16 am
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.

Look up what "rather than" means.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/rather-than)
Here is my post and his. There were a number of posts.  You can't take one out of context.

Quote from: degrub on March 31, 2021, 09:03:49 pm
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.
It would be equally likely that she was infected elsewhere since this is transmitted by air.

My subsequent response: 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 11:14:12 am
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.

Quote
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 called "erroneous" a statement ("that she passed the infection along to others") which no one made.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 11:20:42 am
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 11:55:24 am
Which experts are we to believe?

The ones with the most knowledge and experience in the relevant field.

Experts are mistrusted.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 01, 2021, 01:26:18 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 01:31:54 pm
The ones with the most knowledge and experience in the relevant field.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 02:32:27 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 02:47:47 pm
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.

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 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.

Interestingly, the people who follow a lot of these things are actually more confused than the average person. The more they read, the more they learn that no one has an exact handle on anything.  A lot of suggestions are just that. Odds making.  So-called facts are diverse and become overwhelming.  It's like looking for a new camera.  The more you study the specs, the more questions they raise and the more difficult it becomes to make a decision.  You begin to realize that no camera will satisfy all your needs.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 03:01:36 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 03:14:44 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 03:44:22 pm
I'm excited about science as much as you are.

You're the judge of your own excitement. It's of no concern to me.

But, science isn't the problem.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 04:15:36 pm
You're the judge of your own excitement. It's of no concern to me.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: pschefz on April 01, 2021, 04:50:48 pm

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 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?!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 04:59:56 pm
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 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?!
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 05:33:48 pm
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.

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".

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 01, 2021, 05:33:56 pm
I have no clue if vaccines are the answer . . .

I think it's fairly clear that vaccines are the answer.  The things that aren't clear yet are (1) how effective the current vaccines will turn out to be against the mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that are currently circulating in various places, (2) whether those of us who have been "fully" vaccinated will need additional doses or different vaccines to deal with the mutating virus, (3) how transmissible the virus is by individuals who have been vaccinated, (4) how durable the protection offered by the various vaccines will prove to be, and (5) whether enough of the world population can be vaccinated in order to reasonably consider the virus under control.

The first four questions can be answered by gathering more evidence.  It will take time and considerable monitoring of the real-world performance of the vaccines, but definitive answers should be possible.  The fifth issue is the one that worries me.  I don't see any indication yet of the ramping up of an international effort that would be sufficient to deploy an effective vaccination effort everywhere and, as we all learned all too quickly at the beginning of 2020, a virus as aggressive as this one is no respecter of national borders or oceans.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 05:50:27 pm
An excellent and informative post. I would only add  to your comments — "(5) whether enough of the world population can be vaccinated in order to reasonably consider the virus under control." "The fifth issue is the one that worries me.  I don't see any indication yet of the ramping up of an international effort that would be sufficient to deploy an effective vaccination effort everywhere and, as we all learned all too quickly at the beginning of 2020, a virus as aggressive as this one is no respecter of national borders or oceans." — that this should be of concern to everyone. Until the world has sufficient immunity everywhere, the virus will continue to mutate and allow the possibility for one or more variants to emerge with the potential to be worse than the original or current known variants.

It's the reason why a pandemic like this has to be taken seriously everywhere and brought under control as quickly as possible to prevent further spread and mutation. This particular virus has shown a worrisome ability to spread quickly and to mutate into more transmissible and potentially deadlier variants.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 06:05:35 pm
Science isn't the truth.

Science is the never ending search for the best available understanding and explanation of what is observed in the natural world.

Do not put your trust in princes.

You can however trust that science will continually evolve in better understanding the natural world as that's what science and nature do—evolve.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 01, 2021, 06:14:23 pm
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.

Please spare us this drivel.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 07:07:53 pm
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".

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.
Well, now you posted three posts.  I hope you feel better.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 01, 2021, 07:40:40 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 01, 2021, 07:42:41 pm
....and everything we (as a family) have sacrificed has been less effective because of people like you....

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 08:54:01 pm
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.

This is why no one should ever ever take medical advice or public health recommendations from some online comment. As for, "The ONLY answer is improving one’s immune system."; well, that's what vaccines do in a very specific and effective way.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 01, 2021, 09:01:22 pm
The ONLY answer is improving one’s immune system.

Yes, but that's a good way of describing what vaccines do.  They prime the recipient's immune system to react effectively to the invading pathogen.

Quote
And deal with it like we deal with a seasonal flu. That is, some will take a vaccine, some won’t . . .

That indeed is what may happen, which is why I'm not optimistic about getting this coronavirus under control without a concerted multinational effort unless it takes a currently unexpected turn and mutates in new, more benign directions.  This virus is very different from any influenza.  It is significantly more infectious and more lethal, especially to old people who are otherwise healthy.  If we don't get it under control, I suspect we will be living with its disruptions indefinitely.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 01, 2021, 09:18:11 pm
Thanks. That's a much better reasoned and complete response than my own, with an accurate assessment of the evolving situation as it appears today. I may be a little more optimistic about the possibility of a strong multinational effort in pursuit of global vaccination; but, only time will tell.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 02, 2021, 02:35:49 am
... 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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 02, 2021, 07:58:39 am
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).

Sounds like you're still clinging to the "this is just another flu, nothing to see here" line.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 02, 2021, 09:58:11 am
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).

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 02, 2021, 10:03:52 am
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 . . .

Actually, as I'm sure you already know, the H1N1 virus that caused the 1918 pandemic was very different from the influenza viruses (including H1N1 variants) which circulate today.  That older H1N1 no longer exists in the wild, but it has been reconstructed in the laboratory in an attempt to discover why so many people died.  Secondary infections, such as pneumonia, may have been a significant factor.  (Many 'flu deaths today are attributable to pneumonia. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3827586/))  Much about the 1918 pandemic is still unknown, but the environment in which that virus spread probably accounted for much of its mortality:

Quote
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

Modern influenza viruses are still a serious health risk, especially for the unvaccinated.  But the SARS-CoV-2 virus is so far unique in that it spreads rapidly and silently: the majority of those infected are asymptomatic, and therefore transmit the pathogen unknowingly—including to individuals who are much more vulnerable for a variety of reasons and who do develop symptoms which can escalate radically, often resulting in death.  Attempts to equate it with "the 'flu" don't make any sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 02, 2021, 10:09:02 am
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.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#/media/File:1918_Headlines_from_Chicago_newspapers_-_Spanish_flu_-_1918_influenza_pandemic.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#/media/File:1918_Headlines_from_Chicago_newspapers_-_Spanish_flu_-_1918_influenza_pandemic.jpg
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 02, 2021, 10:35:02 am
... majority of those infected are asymptomatic, and therefore transmit the pathogen unknowingly...

Asymptomatic transmission accounts from zero to negligible. Which makes perfect sense. If you have no symptoms, you are not coughing or sneezing. The asymptomatic cases are also caused by a low viral load, therefore even their breathing contains even smaller viral load, acting almost like a vaccine for the recipients.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 02, 2021, 10:35:41 am
Sounds like you're still clinging to the "this is just another flu, nothing to see here" line.

You got it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 02, 2021, 12:58:33 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 02, 2021, 01:21:28 pm
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

Amazing how what we have learned over the last 100+ years of vaccine science, even after all of this, is ...

... still true. 

Honestly, and I do realize that if you are over 65 and still not vaccinated you should have concerns, people in general are over this.  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. 

I did a shoot yesterday at a large print and fabrication shop that had a full crew working, around 35 employees.  Not a single mask was to be seen.  Being in architecture and working with contractors half the time, whom have been pretty "caviler" over these restriction since the beginning, it was not surprising to see the shop workers not wearing anything.  But even the office staff was mask free. 

I asked the guy I was working with if they require visitors to wear masks.  He just looked at me as if to say, of course not.  Grant it, this shop is in a 1800s commercial building with little to no windows on the first floor, none clean enough to see through at least, was not open to the public, and not in a neighborhood you would just happen to find yourself in for no good reason, and even with a good reason you may not either, so away from prying eyes. 

It was a pretty good shoot. 

Although the faint smell of tremendous quantities of raw paper and ink that gradually grows in intensity within your nasal cavity while being in such facilities to point of making you feel like you are on the verge of dry heaving was, by the end of the day, making me reconsider going mask free. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on April 02, 2021, 02:59:12 pm
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.

How feeble: a purer example of argumentum ad hominem would be hard to find.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 02, 2021, 03:23:51 pm
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. 

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.”

Quote
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 02, 2021, 04:09:38 pm
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.”

LOL, the same old same old sky is falling nonsense.  If it was up to people like you, we would be wearing masks from now until the end of time. 

I am fully aware of C-19 and it's risks for people in my age group with my health, which is why I am not too concerned about it.  For someone like me, all the science shows I am just as likely to die from it as the flu, perhaps a smidge more, if I were to catch it.  The IFR, last I checked for my age group, is 0.04%.  Now, do I want to catch it.  No, but I dont want to be in a car accident either.  However, my desire to avoid both those things is not enough to justify changing my actions since the chances of each are extremely small.   

Furthermore, spare me the argument that I, a singular person, am responsible for the health of the world.  I give that no credence anymore.

Now, when it comes to bear attacks, regardless of age, if you are mauled by one, the science shows you will probably die.  Even if you play dead, you still have a 25% chance of dying when encountering a bear.  (I just looked that up and it is surprisingly higher then what I thought after being told playing dead can be effective strategy.  I guess when there are only bad options, you go for the least bad.)  That is not a fatality rate to take lightly, and even if you survive you will most likely be marred for the rest of your life.  Now, does this keep from hiking in the forest?  No, but I make sure to make plenty of noise so I dont surprise a bear and get my face ripped off for the pleasure. 


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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 04:27:45 pm
Furthermore, spare me the argument that I, a singular person, am responsible for the health of the world.  I give that no credence anymore.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 04:31:58 pm
How feeble: a purer example of argumentum ad hominem would be hard to find.

S

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 02, 2021, 05:01:05 pm
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.

As of today, about 75% of seniors have been vaccinated nationwide, and that number is only going up.  They are, by far, the most at risk group representing 80.75% of all C-19 deaths in the USA. 

Regardless if the vaccines work, and they appear to be working, or if vaccinated individuals can still spread C-19, we have now done all that we can, and it is time to get back to normal.  Even if they did not work, it would still be time to accept the reality and move on.  If you cant let go of the fear, that is understandable. 

But, even so, I think by the end of this month, it will be common place in nearly the entire USA to see more people without masks then with. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 05:32:39 pm
If you cant let go of the fear, that is understandable. 

Fear can be reasonable or unreasonable and can also fall somewhere in between. The lack of fear follows the same pattern.

My personal goal is to aim for reasonable. At all times, I aim to steer away from reckless fearlessness and paranoid fear.

During a pandemic without parallel in a century of an easily transmitted virus, I find it a sensible course of action to listen to the guidance of public health officials for the simple reason that they have a much deeper knowledge of the subject than I do. It's generally worked out well for me to listen to those that have a deeper understanding of a particular subject than I possess in navigating life. This is no exception.

Until this pandemic is under control, there isn't going to be any normal to get back to. People have seen overflowing hospitals and bodies stacked in refrigerated trucks in various places during waves of its spread. Fear of that reoccurring is not unreasonable. The greater the number of people who are vaccinated and following public health recommendations, like masks and social distancing, the sooner we will see normal again.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 05:56:01 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 02, 2021, 06:13:09 pm
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. 

We have to consider that providers are responsible for caring for their families and feeding them.  Whenever we act, there's a chance of hurting ourselves or others.  Sometimes it's hard to balance these things as is the case with Covid.  I think a little understanding on all sides that there are no simple answers to these questions would go a long way in maintaining some comity in our society.  No one is evil or a monster.  We're all trying to stay healthy and care for those we love as well as be responsible to our neighbors. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 02, 2021, 06:28:32 pm
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.

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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 02, 2021, 06:29:09 pm

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 02, 2021, 06:59:53 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 07:23:37 pm
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."

No, you can't see my retort although you believe that you can. My retort would be...

I'm familiar with the use of "the world" as an idiom. It's an expressive substitute for "everyone" as in: Hey, tell the world, why don't you!. It's an expressive substitute for "everything" as in: You mean the world to me. It's an expressive substitute for "anything" as in: I wouldn't miss this for the world. It is of course used as a substitute for "everywhere". It can also be used to refer to the "entirety" of something or something contained within an entire entity as in: The world of science.

In other words, "the world" is used to express the expansiveness or all-inclusiveness of something. As an idiom it is the opposite of something small, exclusive, personal, or local. Though I wouldn't assume that "anyone with half a brain" would necessarily know that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 02, 2021, 10:04:47 pm
Cuba has their own vaccine development program. Two are being tested in Phase III trials. A couple of news stories and a video below...

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)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 08:29:10 am
Cuba has their own vaccine development program. Two are being tested in Phase III trials. A couple of news stories and a video below...

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)


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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 09:12:11 am
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. 

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.  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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 03, 2021, 10:27:33 am
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. 

Yes, this is a problem because it requires intelligence to put it all together and understand the message.

I can see why you liked Trump - his message was always easy to understand (even if it was wrong.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 03, 2021, 10:34:57 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 03, 2021, 10:47:00 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 03, 2021, 10:55:46 am
;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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 03, 2021, 10:59:06 am
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 03, 2021, 11:03:22 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on April 03, 2021, 11:10:50 am
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.

I think I can tolerate personal abuse from another hider in anonymity.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 03, 2021, 11:16:29 am
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.

It is a huge inconvenience for me, both physically and metaphorically. You don't muzzle 99.9x percent of the population for the questionable benefit of the 0.0y percent. Having said that, masks have their place,  based on individual decision and assessment of risk: in crowded, purely ventilated spaces, where one would spend more than 10-15 min in close proximity to strangers.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 11:22:24 am
I think I can tolerate personal abuse from another hider in anonymity.

S

Well, thanks for sharing with us that you derive pleasure from provoking personal abuse.

Now, why don't you fly off to some other part of the web and see if you can't find some useful contribution to bring back on the topic of Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine. Until, then, buzz off.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 12:02:56 pm
Yes, this is a problem because it requires intelligence to put it all together and understand the message.

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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 03, 2021, 12:35:38 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 03, 2021, 12:38:19 pm
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" :-)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 03, 2021, 12:39:56 pm
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. I didn't imply it will stop at 60K, just to wake me up. I had it, survived it. You? Still live in fear?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 12:55:25 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 03:41:56 pm
Well, that doesn't mean anything.

It means that you were asleep at the wheel then and are still asleep. Had you been behind the wheel and driving public health response to the pandemic, it would have quickly ended up in a ditch with far more people mourning friends and loved ones than we already have and the virus running even more rapidly beyond any hope of control.

You may view this post as one more bit of "panic porn" for you to laugh at and ridicule. Then again, I'm more interested in science and public health than your entertainment. So, I posted it regardless. Enjoy.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 03:53:14 pm
Alan, enjoy life. Go on a trip. Do not listen to political idiots, the likes of CDC and Dr. Fauxi.

Politics is not what scientists and doctors at CDC, and other similar institutions, have spent a lifetime researching and studying. It is the prevention and control of infectious diseases. I suspect they are a far better source of information on that particular subject than anyone here, including yourself, despite being a distinguished gentleman, as you are, in other areas of life.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 03:57:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 07:29:05 pm
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.

Quote from: Alan Klein on April 01, 2021, 10:35:29 am
Quote
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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 08:00:31 pm
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.

It isn't hard to understand the advice from CDC or the administration. Individuals that are fully vaccinated are at much lower personal risk to engage in certain activities such as small gatherings with other fully vaccinated individuals without masks and travel without being tested.

However, the pandemic is still not under control. Therefore, masks and social distancing are recommended in public; gatherings other than the ones described above or where distance is difficult to maintain should be avoided; and other hygiene measures practiced as we have been doing.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html)

The overall message is that as more people are vaccinated we get closer to control of the pandemic, but it is too soon to relax and think it's over — so, get vaccinated, wear a mask in public, avoid crowded situations, maintain social distancing, follow CDC guidance as it is updated for current conditions, and we can get thru this more quickly, together, and without another unnecessary and unwanted resurgence.

What are you confused about?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 03, 2021, 08:23:21 pm
What does a basic understanding of science have to do with deciphering this advice?

I don't think understanding the science is a prerequisite for being able to decipher the information and recommendations from the federal government.  What is useful is to be able to distinguish the evidence from the guidance.

For residents of the United States (I haven't seen reliable information from other countries), the evidence is that "fully vaccinated" individuals who wear effective face masks, and observe physical-distancing and hand-sanitizing precautions, can probably travel on public conveyances with relatively low risk of infection and very low risk of hospitalization or dying, even if they are exposed to people who are infected.

The guidance is that nobody should travel unless absolutely necessary (e.g., hoping to see a dying family member for the last time) because (1) some proportion of even fully-vaccinated individuals will get infected (probably between five and ten percent, according to the current data, which are likely to change as more evidence is gathered), and (2) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention only have fragmentary evidence about the effectiveness of the vaccines that have been administered against the mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that are currently circulating.

If you don't want to deal with complexity, or are risk-averse, it isn't very difficult to figure out what to do: stay put for now.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 11:00:55 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 03, 2021, 11:22:19 pm
Here's the summary of recommendations from CDC for those who are fully vaccinated. Which part do find confusing?

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 03, 2021, 11:26:47 pm
Just more panic-porn.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 03, 2021, 11:59:42 pm
Here's the summary of recommendations from CDC for those who are fully vaccinated. Which part do find confusing?

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html)
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.

Quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 02:24:11 am
Sorry, this bus is too crowded for me. I'm leaving you, and "Yahoo", and "TV", and "the CDC", and their "official site", and "Biden", and "Trump, and "the press", and "Rochelle Walensky", and "people weighing visits to family or vacation spots", and the "White House", and "all levels of government", and "every elected official", and "science", and "politics" to finish this ride together or walk hand-in-hand.

But, I'm getting off. This is where I got on and the bus hasn't moved in hours. It's only taken on more passengers.

Best of luck and have a safe trip.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 04, 2021, 05:08:59 am
... The guidance is that nobody should travel unless absolutely necessary...

 ;D ;D ;D 

Sorry, Chris, I am not laughing at you, you know I like you, but at the absolutely idiotic, dystopian, Orwellian “guidance.”

Jesus, people, live your life! Travel (millions have been doing that), laugh with friends, get together, go out. Your chances of NOT getting infected are 95%-ish, your chances or surviving if you do are even better, 99%-ish. It is a virus. Microscopic. It might get to you no matter what you do. Fascist states, like CA and NY, have no better results than free states, like FL. European states with harsh mask and lockdown mandates have no better results (and often worse) than those with less restrictive measures. The same state, regardless of having strict or lax mask usage, will experience ups and downs in cases due to other factors (a proof mask mandates are irrelevant). I have friends who put their life on pause for a year, lived a panicky and miserable life, and still got infected. Get vaccinated. Wear a mask when absolutely necessary (not to virtue signal): in crowded, poorly ventilated spaces, when exposed to strangers in close proximity for more than 10-15 minutes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 04, 2021, 05:11:35 am
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.

Well, thanks. That’s a sound advice in general. It’s been a year. Absolutely no after effects.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 04, 2021, 07:23:40 am
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.

Apparently. Covid-19 virus can damage also brain.

Quote
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.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 04, 2021, 07:41:25 am
Apparently. Covid-19 virus can damage also brain....

As can a prolonged participation in LuLa forums.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 04, 2021, 08:21:14 am
As can a prolonged participation in LuLa forums.

 ;D  ;D  ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 04, 2021, 10:43:40 am
As can a prolonged participation in LuLa forums.

Right! The first manifestation of such a condition is usually a switch from Coffee Corner to Wet Darkroom.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 04, 2021, 11:44:13 am
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.

It's always safer to not travel then to travel.  This is nothing but them stating a truism to try and further panic. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 11:56:02 am
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?

https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 04, 2021, 11:59:50 am
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?

She very specifically said that children can be back in school without teachers being vaccinated. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 04, 2021, 12:02:17 pm
You made this same...

I thought you got off this bus!?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 12:03:48 pm
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.

https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947)

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 12:08:26 pm
I thought you got off this bus!?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 04, 2021, 12:13:53 pm
Your chances of NOT getting infected are 95%-ish . . .

Currently, the best available current evidence (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm) from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is that the two mRNA vaccines (from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna) are 90 percent effective in preventing infection after a second dose and 80 percent effective after only one dose.  These data, from a real-world study of medical care providers and other "first responders" between mid-December and mid-March, are consistent with the results from the respective clinical trials of the two vaccines; the slightly lower effectiveness estimates probably reflect the fact that the real-world study checked for infections among asymptomatic as well as symptomatic individuals while the clinical trials only counted those who contracted symptomatic COVID-19.  Still, these are remarkably good results for any vaccine.

It's still not clear how likely infected vaccinated individuals are to transmit the SARS-CoV-2 virus to others or whether the vaccines' effectiveness is significantly reduced against some of the recent, more aggressive mutations of the virus that were first discovered in the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Brazil.  Both Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna reportedly are developing modified mRNA doses that are specifically targeted at these mutations and which could, if necessary, be administered as a second "booster" dose.  (There is some evidence from its clinical trials that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, based on a different technology—an adenovirus vector—provides good protection from the the first two of these variants.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 04, 2021, 12:17:10 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 12:35:49 pm
It's always safer to not travel then to travel.  This is nothing but them stating a truism to try and further panic. 

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. 
Well, Fauci is trying to get on the Emmy committee. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 12:39:33 pm
She very specifically said that children can be back in school without teachers being vaccinated. 

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. 
It never was about science with the Democrats.  It was always politics.  The only thing that's changed is now they're in power.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 12:41:33 pm
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1208947#msg1208947)

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

Oh, stop it.  She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 12:59:00 pm
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.

Nah. There's no point when you filter out "the minutia" to the point that statements become distorted.

What you call "minutia" is context and full quotes. You filter that out in order to hear what you want to hear.

So for instance, when a question is asked about "vaccinations to teachers in particular so that schools can reopen in the fall."

And the answer to that question is : "That said, I want to be very clear about schools, which is: "Yes, ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] 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."

And after going thru your filter it comes out... "the head of the CDC issued a statement in which she said schools are safe to reopen"

The fall school term is still some months away. The CDC hasn't changed their guidance about teachers needing to be vaccinated to re-open. But if you filter and distort statements enough, I'm sure that you'll feel secure in your point of view.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 01:01:12 pm
Oh, stop it.  She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion.

Really? When did the CDC switch their opinion on teachers not needing to be vaccinated for schools to re-open?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 01:22:53 pm
Biden's supporting the teacher's union because they supported him in the election.  The CDC director works for the President. It's politics, not science.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 01:26:13 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 01:49:40 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 04, 2021, 03:14:43 pm
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. 

No! Please, No!

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51094806402_070f05f2b4_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 03:29:04 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 04:50:22 pm
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.

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.
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.

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:
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 04, 2021, 05:38:04 pm
;D ;D ;D

Just more panic-porn.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 06:04:53 pm
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:

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?

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 04, 2021, 06:05:43 pm
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.

How does a healthy person know they are not carrying the virus. Many people are asymptomatic and can spread the virus just like someone else on their death bed. See that's the false sense of security the ignorant have...I feel great so I don't need no damn mask.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 04, 2021, 06:07:56 pm
Alan, enjoy life. Go on a trip. Do not listen to political idiots, the likes of CDC and Dr. Fauxi.

Yeh, listen to that other political idiot called Trump. He knows best.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 04, 2021, 06:10:10 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 06:15:07 pm
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?

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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 06:15:44 pm
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.

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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 04, 2021, 06:24:46 pm
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.

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."

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 06:31:06 pm
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.

This is typical. What a waste of freaking time. There are facts.

The CDC director was asked by a reporter about the prioritization of teachers for vaccines before schools reopen in the fall at a press conference. That's a FACT.

The CDC director responded "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." That's a FACT. There  are "witnesses" and "transcripts". I know because I posted the transcript twice myself. That's a FACT.

You made the FALSE claim that ""She got a call from Biden and switched her opinion". That's a FACT.

There has been and there was no "switch of opinion" regardless of your "belief" and that too is a FACT.

I'm done with this. What a waste.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 04, 2021, 06:33:06 pm
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.

It's all paranoia and a waste of time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 04, 2021, 06:35:30 pm
Many people are asymptomatic and can spread the virus just like someone else on their death bed.

For obvious reasons, it is difficult to produce precise statistics on asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2.  I have read estimates ranging from 30 percent to 60 percent of all infections.  There appears to be an expert consensus that transmission by presymptomatic individuals is somewhat more common than transmission by those who never develop symptoms.  However, that may be an artifact of contact-tracing being performed more often on the former group than on the latter because the infection was not discovered in many of the latter until it was too late to initiate a contact-tracing regime.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 03:58:53 am
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.

 ;D ;D ;D

Oh, brother... spare me your appeal to emotion (look it up, it is a logical fallacy)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 04:02:29 am
... Many people are asymptomatic and can spread the virus just like someone else on their death bed...

 ;D ;D ;D

I have posted, months ago, links to research that found zero to negligible chance of asymptomatic transmission.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 04:05:49 am
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.

I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 05, 2021, 04:36:36 am
;D ;D ;D

I have posted, months ago, links to research that found zero to negligible chance of asymptomatic transmission.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 05, 2021, 05:35:22 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 06:36:22 am
Perhaps it's just one of those statements which provides less reassurance with repetition.

Feel free to dispute it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 06:37:07 am
What neo-fascism is like:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 05, 2021, 06:59:13 am
Feel free to dispute it.

I'm just suggesting that like telling someone in intensive care — the person in the next bed over looks even closer to death than you do — the statement may provide less reassurance with repetition.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 05, 2021, 07:50:49 am
What neo-fascism is like:

That is the state we have fallen to in the UK. More interested in statues than people.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 05, 2021, 09:01:06 am
I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.

You have all the answers don't you. If I had the energy, which I don't for someone as smug as you, I'd look up your post about the yearly flu being much more deadly than Covid. You explicitly said the flu kills more yearly than Covid and so smartly said to wake you up when Covid hits 60,000 deaths, as this is what a bad year of flu kills in the US. You can spin you BS anyway you like, but you were totally WRONG back then and you are totally WRONG now. Keep digging, you just might disappear.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 05, 2021, 09:02:07 am
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.

Slobo doesn't believe in facts...just his BS that he spreads.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 05, 2021, 11:04:25 am
I posted a few posts above that the flu has killed more than 100 times more people in the world than Covid.

I was listening to a infectious disease doctor one day on some podcast or other who said that at any one time there are about 100 common viruses floating around causing illnesses of differing seriousness among humans. Some are more commonly seen than others. Some cause mild symptoms and we usually refer to them as the common cold. Others cause more severe symptoms and we lump those together and call them "flu". There are also other more serious ones.

About a year ago, on either this thread or a previous one, you compared the numbers of deaths due to flu at 30,000 or 40,000 per year (I forget the exact number you used; USA numbers) and compared it to the known number of Covid deaths AT THAT TIME, which was a few hundred and you concluded that Covid was not serious. It made no sense at the time to compare annual flu deaths with the up-to-then deaths due to Covid, but it must have made sense to you. Well, the USA had about 500,000 deaths in one year due to Covid. This should have caused you to revisit your thinking.

Nowadays, you compare total deaths due to flu, apparently for the whole of the last century or so (or am I misunderstanding) to the up-to-now Covid deaths. You're using the same logic as last spring, but translated it to a different time of reference. It made no sense to compare the numbers in that way last year and it makes no sense now.

You have decided, for reasons of your own, that Covid is not important and all your analyses somehow support that. At best, that logic is suspect. Over time and different discussions, you have shown yourself to take pride in being a contrarian, and seem to justify that to yourself because it makes you feel independent and not a follower of trends. You are confusing independence of thought with contrarianism, they are not the same thing. 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.

Luckily, mostly due to various interventions, practical and vaccine, controlling Covid seems now possible. Over time, with some more luck, the virus will mutate to be less virulent. Your notion that it was never anything to worry is preposterous.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 05, 2021, 11:41:52 am
I think the problem with Covid is that it became an either-or situation.  The argument has been go 100% medical and damn the economic considerations or go 100% economic, damn the medical issues.  The real solution is a compromise. 

Pretty much that's how it's been addressed first going one way then the other, then back again almost like the tide. It's one of those situations that have no single solution, no one answer that resolves all the issues. We all have been fumbling as we try to find a way to handle both sides effectively and that's been difficult, probably impossible.  Both sides think they're right and don't budge from their position, especially complicated by an election year in the USA.  Of course, these same issues have become apparent in other countries a well where conflicts have grown violent.  Fear about dying or losing your home causes conflict for individuals as well as nations. I'm sure we'll all get beyond these arguments and move on.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 05, 2021, 01:19:48 pm
I think

Little evidence of that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 02:09:51 pm
... Your notion that it was never anything to worry is preposterous.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 05, 2021, 11:29:47 pm
... 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....

You sure?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 06, 2021, 12:31:21 am
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.

I understand where you're coming from regarding "natural event", but I would say that as a species, we've come to understand that the actions we collectively take as well as don't take can manage the spread of viruses. Back in the Spanish Flu days, they most certainly did wear masks (there are pictures of men wearing them at various places) to combat the spread of the virus. What they didn't have then was the technology we do now to quickly and effectively treat the virus.

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%. There's also many questions around the reliability of the numbers, especially out of China, for political reasons that weren't present 100 years ago. And remember that the 3% was with mask wearing and without the anti-mask religious political debate.

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.

As many have said, the problem with COVID-19 isn't just the disease itself but the denial of service attach it has on health services for other ailments due to COVID-19 overwhelming existing facilities. It may be that you yourself don't die from COVID-19 but because you can't get care that you need because of COVID-19 denying you the medical resources required.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 12:55:40 am
... 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....

That’s an interesting angle.

As for masks, I am not against masks, but against mask mandates. I am with Obama: “If you like your mask, you can keep your mask.” I am against lockdowns. Not to mention curfews. Or any other fascist measures, like tracking, neighbor snitching, backyard drone-monitoring, yellow arm bands (a.k.a. Covid passports). Or sending people to jail for 10 years for lying (or forgetting) which countries they visited.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 12:59:34 am
... 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%....

Can you elaborate why is that relevant in this context?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 01:00:55 am
Another interesting angle:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 05:43:52 am
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).

That's almost reaching Klein levels of wrongness.  OK, maybe not, but still very wrong.  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.  That gave us the time to develop and roll out vaccines.  What happens next we don't know - hopefully some sort of annual booster jab will be sufficient.  If new variants keep arising in non-vaccinated populations then it is hard to see an end.

Quote
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.

I don't really see the point of your comparison. Spanish flu killed a lot of people, bubonic plague killed a lot of people - so what ?

"Commie wave", "fascist measures" - too funny!! :-)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 05:54:50 am
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.

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.
 
Quote
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.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7731485/covid-variant-cases-young-canadians/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 06:44:12 am
... 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....

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 06:45:37 am
... there are plenty of reports of even young healthy people falling ill and dying due to the C19 virus...

Many young people also die crossing the street. It happens. The always crucial question is with what probability. Still extremely low.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 07:10:23 am
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.

Delayed until people can be protected by vaccines - which is the whole point.  Comparing countries is not sensible as there are too many differences between them; better idea to look at the rates of infection/hospitalisation/deaths in a given country compared with the dates of lockdown. The evidence is clear.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 07:59:42 am

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 08:00:23 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 08:06:23 am
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.

My point was that Covid-19 is not necessarily more benign than Spanish flu.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 08:09:31 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 08:40:29 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 06, 2021, 08:56:17 am
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.

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 ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 09:25:02 am
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.

That was my other point.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 09:32:40 am
My point was that Covid-19 is not necessarily more benign than Spanish flu.

Are you suggesting that we actually have a cure for Covid?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 09:35:24 am
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 ;)

If Americans wouldn't have, what, 400-500 millions of guns in their hands, it indeed would be a short, slippery slope to AOC's re-education camps. Or jail, as in the UK.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 09:50:42 am
Your alternative seems to be to just let millions of people die...

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 06, 2021, 10:01:34 am
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.

We're experiencing a similar phenomenon in many parts of the United States, including here in the state of Maryland, where three-quarters of the residents 65 and older have received at least one dose of vaccine.  Individuals in their 20s and 30s increasingly are getting sick and requiring hospitalization, and some are dying.  This probably reflects the growing prevalence of the very aggressive B.1.1.7 mutation (the variant which was first identified in the U.K. and is now rapidly spreading worldwide), which is both significantly more infectious and substantially more lethal than earlier variants of SARS-CoV-2, and the tendency of young adults to ignore mask and physical distancing regulations.  The state government is now making vaccines available to everyone 16 and older—many other states are doing the same—in an attempt to prevent another massive wave of infection and avoid overwhelming the intensive-care capacity of the hospitals.  Unfortunately, it's unlikely enough people can be vaccinated in time to prevent that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 10:02:59 am
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 10:17:15 am
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.
Like when the cop shot the guy who refused to wear a mask. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 10:18:09 am
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.

Of course it's working - we have avoided millions of people dying and are a long way towards vaccination in many places.

Quote

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.

Not so. Most of the people dying were old, 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.
Quote
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?
Quote
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.

I have no idea about Serbia. Certainly Italy, which has an excellent health service, was overwhelmed in the first wave. Hospitals are quick to build - we built three huge ones here. They were never used because hospitals need staff, not just beds.

What is kind of ironic is that you seem happy to sacrifice millions of lives on the altar of ideological purity. Did someone mention "gulags"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 10:48:45 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 10:52:04 am
... 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.

You are hiding behind weasel words "also." "some," "a lot" etc. These are media panic-porn headlines. The percentages are miniscule.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 10:54:58 am
...  Hospitals are quick to build - we built three huge ones here. They were never used because hospitals need staff, not just beds...

Covid patients do not need constant attention. Most of the time you just sleep. Doctor's visit once a day. Mostly to appear they can do something.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 11:01:42 am
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.

You'll be pleased to know that a cure is coming.

Quote
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.

https://www.future-science.com/doi/10.2144/btn-2020-0145
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 11:08:56 am
You'll be pleased to know that a cure is coming...

Which is just a confirmation that it doesn't exist today.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 11:30:39 am
... What is kind of ironic is that you seem happy to sacrifice millions of lives on the altar of ideological purity?...

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"  :) )
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 11:48:29 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 12:01:26 pm
and also it is an entirely different matter than the previously discussed comparison of CC19 with Spanish flu.

As well as completely different matter than Biden's dog having more bite than the owner ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 06, 2021, 12:06:31 pm
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 12:23:59 pm
You are hiding behind weasel words "also." "some," "a lot" etc. These are media panic-porn headlines. The percentages are miniscule.

We simply don't know that at this point. A year ago we'd never even heard of "long covid".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 12:25:31 pm
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"  :) )

"Obsessed" - no.  Your "much broader measure" is 99% imagination.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 12:26:22 pm
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...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 06, 2021, 12:31:07 pm
"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



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 12:53:18 pm
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

I'm not sure how those kids are better off by letting their parents die in the street ?  Or doesn't your "broader measure" include that?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 01:21:16 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 02:04:21 pm
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.

What's that got to do with anything? Try to think for yourself instead of just playing mini-Trump and parroting his propaganda.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 02:08:12 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 06, 2021, 02:16:18 pm
Exceptions that prove the rule.

I love that :)

Quote
Australia and New Zealand are islands, small population, at the end of the world, and draconian, fascist measures.

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
Have no clue about Vietnam.  But doubt Vietnam has a large obese population, which is the main predictor of covid spread.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 02:52:24 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 02:56:56 pm
I love that :)

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?

As Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 06, 2021, 03:10:26 pm
You would prefer to live in a Communist dictatorship like China or Vietnam?

Where did he say that? Oh yes. That's right. He didn't.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 03:11:44 pm
  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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 03:13:18 pm
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."

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 03:14:15 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 03:18:18 pm
Yes, Chinese in Wuhan were allowed to fly to other countries in the world but not to other parts of China.

Can you direct me to this fact.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 03:18:39 pm
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
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/blogs/Whathappensif/how-china-locked-down-internally-for-covid-19-but-pushed-foreign-travel/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 03:25:18 pm
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. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 03:29:54 pm
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/

And here's the rest of the story:

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-04-28/Did-China-deliberately-export-COVID-19-to-the-rest-of-the-world--Q2oGomPRss/index.html

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 03:34:47 pm
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. :)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 03:46:41 pm
And here's the rest of the story:

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-04-28/Did-China-deliberately-export-COVID-19-to-the-rest-of-the-world--Q2oGomPRss/index.html


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.

After the Chinese shutdown domestic travel:
"By the time Chinese officials acknowledged the risk of human-to-human transmission on Jan. 21, local outbreaks were already seeded in Beijing, Shanghai and other major cities.  Cases as of Jan. 21  Travel on Jan. 21
Two days later, the authorities locked down Wuhan, and many cities followed in the next few weeks. Travel across China nearly stopped.  Cases as of Jan. 21  Travel on Feb. 4
As the outbreak moved across China in early January, international travel continued as normal.
Thousands of people flew out of Wuhan to cities around the world."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/22/world/coronavirus-spread.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 03:50:11 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 04:00:47 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 04:03:48 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 06, 2021, 04:15:25 pm
You're blaming the victims for China's duplicity.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 06, 2021, 04:25:42 pm
Closed mind?  Because I'm opposed to dictatorships.  What a strange belief you have.

No, your view on food, customs, religions etc... Might do you some good to see how the rest of the world works...you just might not be so scared of them once you realize how much you have in common with them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 06, 2021, 10:50:57 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 07:27:30 am
Enough said:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 07:57:31 am
Dr. Fauxi confused by the Neanderthal Texans:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 07, 2021, 08:43:39 am
Dr. Fauxi confused by the Neanderthal Texans:

Could be because Texans eat more chili and steaks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 09:17:08 am
Could be because Texans eat more chili and steaks.

A digression from the thread theme:

So Putin and Medvedev are at a restaurant.
Waiter: What will you be having?
Putin: A steak
Waiter: And your vegetable?
Putin: He'll have a steak too.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 10:20:39 am
My wife and are both type A and worried about this.   More bad advice from experts proven wrong.

Study refutes theory that blood type affects COVID risk
A or B, AB or O, it doesn't matter—your blood type has nothing to do with your risk of contracting severe COVID-19, a new study concludes.

Early in the pandemic, some reports suggested people with A-type blood were more susceptible to COVID, while those with O-type blood were less so.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-04-refutes-theory-blood-affects-covid.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 10:31:52 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 10:48:28 am
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.

Oh, get off the high horse!

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 10:56:05 am


It can work by NOT publishing preliminary, inconclusive indications.


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.

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.



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 07, 2021, 10:57:14 am
you woke people

Usually I take using the word "woke" in this derogatory way as an indication that the speaker has nothing original to say and can be safely added to an "ignore" list.  As you're a mate, I'll suspend judgement :-)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 12:14:11 pm
Oh, get off the high horse!

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.
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again.  They can't control themselves.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 12:36:49 pm
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.

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.




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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 07, 2021, 12:37:01 pm
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again.  They can't control themselves.

Proving the value of my rule of thumb. Though in this case it was unnecessary, since liars are rarely worth listening to.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 12:42:40 pm
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again.  They can't control themselves.

Too funny.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 12:48:48 pm
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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 01:05:22 pm
Too funny.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 07, 2021, 01:07:50 pm
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.

Tell lies.  Oh, no - that's you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 01:13:44 pm
Since the moderator left, the woke have reverted to childish behavior again.  They can't control themselves.

The behavior of those that want to redirect this thread into a platform for their ideology is childish, but I wouldn't call it "woke". I agree they can't control themselves.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 01:18:53 pm
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.


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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 01:22:30 pm
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.

Silly hogwash. Nobody shut you down, nobody deleted your posts, nobody attacked your business.

I'll add one more comment. Your categorization of me as being on the left is another pathetic sign of the times. In your bizarro world, if you're not alt-right, then you're a Maoist. That's ridiculous. (You see, that was hyperbole.)

Alt-right wing fantasy conspiracy militia proud boys is not conservative. Go read some books, is my advice. Start with Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, only don't stop with the two paragraphs that the pseudo-libertarians keep repeating online, read the other 1000 pages.

But I do regret engaging in this pointless nonsense in this thread. For that I apologize to other readers.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 01:27:08 pm
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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 01:30:16 pm
https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/06/18/genes-blood-type-tied-to-covid-19-risk-of-severe-disease (https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/06/18/genes-blood-type-tied-to-covid-19-risk-of-severe-disease/)

The other association signal popped up on chromosome 9, right over the area of the genome that determines blood type. Whether you are classified as an A, B, AB, or O blood type, depends on how your genes instruct your blood cells to produce (or not produce) a certain set of proteins. The researchers did find evidence suggesting a relationship between blood type and COVID-19 risk. They noted that this area also includes a genetic variant associated with increased levels of interleukin-6, which plays a role in inflammation and may have implications for COVID-19 as well.

These findings, completed in two months under very difficult clinical conditions, clearly warrant further study to understand the implications more fully.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 02:17:20 pm
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 02:24:39 pm
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.

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.


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? 

You seem to want it both ways.  On the one hand, we should listen to the experts.  Then, when they change their minds, you advocate we shouldn't have listened too closely because the evidence wasn't confirmed. Maybe the public should just flip a coin.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 02:30:33 pm
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.

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?

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.

Listen to the experts or don't listen to the experts. It is entirely your choice. But please stop whining about it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 02:36:28 pm
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.

Science is not a religion and its not about being right or the truth. Science is an ever expanding pool of knowledge based on research and evidence. It seeks the best explanation for what is observed based on the best available evidence. As evidence changes, and hypothesis and theories are tested and challenged, or proofs emerge, it is incorporated into that ever expanding pool of knowledge. If you don't understand that; you're missing the entire underlying principle and instead of wading into a pool of growing and evolving knowledge; you're left standing at the side just kicking at the water.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 07, 2021, 02:37:16 pm
Articles like the one I linked to written by AARP (American Association for Retired People) with 38 million members are written for the layman. 

The first sentence of the AARP article says: "Even still, experts caution that the accumulating evidence on this subject shouldn't influence everyday medical or public health decisions."

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 02:44:37 pm
Science is not a religion...

 ;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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 02:50:34 pm
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?

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.
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.

So people determine risks differently even as we're all exposed to the same experts.  Just as photography threads have opinions on all sorts of things that differ despite "expert" opinions about everything.  Well, Covid is similar.  People believe differently and so-called expert opinions are not the same.  People think Nikon's the greatest.  Others say Canon.  I've never gone to a horse race where there weren't bets on every horse.

Drawing moral conclusions based on actions when people assess risk differently and interpret odds differently as well is unfair and frankly mean.  No one wants to hurt his neighbor.  But we all have needs to care for ourselves and our families.  We have to consider other things.  Covid is about health and the economy.  You can't separate one from the other.  Danger comes from both sides of the equation.  Since there is no simple solution, we have to deal with tradeoffs.  That's all I've been suggesting.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 02:59:15 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:05:09 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:06:33 pm
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? 


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?

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:07:40 pm
;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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:08:28 pm
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?

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.


Would you prefer I listen to Trump?  How about Biden?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:08:43 pm
You want them to read between the lines.

That is the exact opposite of what I suggested.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:11:36 pm
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:11:43 pm
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?

This must the 20th time we've travelled down this road and we always end up at the same place. You read something you don't understand, and then later complain that you didn't understand it and so therefore someone was lying to you, and it always turns out to be someone that you decided was not going to tell you the truth anyway because, well,  they're experts.

Nobody in any of those articles EVER told you what to do. They were simply reports of ongoing research, no actionable information. What is so difficult to understand about that?

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 03:12:13 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:12:18 pm
Would you prefer I listen to Trump?  How about Biden?  :)

It would be helpful to this thread if you quit repeatedly bringing either up and discuss what the actual thread subject title is instead.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:14:16 pm
Would you prefer I listen to Trump?  How about Biden?  :)

WTF do Trump and Biden have to do with anything?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 03:14:55 pm
You see religion is about the Truth.  It doesn't change.

Did you read that in your AARP magazine or is that what one of the experts down at your place of worship told you?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:15:37 pm
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.

Thanks, that was helpful.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:16:00 pm
So putting your faith in science will disappoint you.

Science has nothing to do with faith. Understanding that would go a long way toward your first steps in understanding science.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:17:12 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:19:12 pm
WTF do Trump and Biden have to do with anything?

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:20:33 pm
Baloney.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:21:18 pm
... In any case, how do you get medical advice about Covid?

Are you kidding or what?

Your doctor, your public health office, CDC, Mayo Clinic web site, those would be good starts.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 03:22:46 pm
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.

Well in that case, in the future I'll come to you for medical advice, since you seem to be on top of things.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 03:24:09 pm
In any case, how do you get medical advice about Covid?

My physicians.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:29:10 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:34:32 pm
Are you kidding or what?

Your doctor, your public health office, CDC, Mayo Clinic web site, those would be good starts.


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.   :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 07, 2021, 03:36:19 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 03:37:20 pm
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.

What sort of adjustments to the universe are these people making?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 07, 2021, 03:45:47 pm
Don't ask me.  I'm just as confused as everyone else.

Who exactly is confused other than you?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:47:19 pm
What sort of adjustments to the universe are these people making?

None. It's empty rhetoric trying to pose as meaningful in some way. To whom, I can't imagine, other than its author.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 03:49:38 pm
Don't ask me.  I'm just as confused as everyone else.

You're overestimating the confusion of "everyone else" and underestimating your own.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 04:05:57 pm
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.

Hogwash.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 04:07:03 pm
Doctors?  Which one?  I always get second opinions.

You're all set then.


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.   :)

That might be a mistake.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 07, 2021, 07:11:58 pm
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 07, 2021, 07:57:49 pm
Can I buy you a drink...

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 immunity. The more people infected, the better.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 08:16:21 pm
The more people infected, the better.

Antiscience porn.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 07, 2021, 08:23:35 pm
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.

Zeroing on the death portion of the virus stats, you could say - the more dead, the better.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 07, 2021, 08:24:32 pm
Robert, the science religious fanatic, thinks that science is always right. Never mind that scientists flip-flop worse than John Kerry.

Until there is an answer with precision, that's normal because discoveries change thinking and conclusions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 07, 2021, 08:25:48 pm
;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.

That's not as crazy as it sounds but this thread is not that topic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 07, 2021, 08:32:15 pm
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.

How did that work out for England?
Or what was the Nordic country that tried that approach?

The point here is that there's an unknown: how will your body respond to the virus.

Every time there's a small outbreak it is "oh 1 in 40 needed to go to hospital." It's only 1 in 40 because most other people are trying hard to stop its spread. It is highly contagious. Not as bad as measles, but more contagious than influenza. This plus the high hospitalisation rate means that the 1 in 40 might become 1000 in 40000 in your town in short time and, oh, does your local hospital have 1000 beds because recovery time can be very long?

The hard part for many people to understand is that this virus expands exponentially amongst the population if it is not checked.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 07, 2021, 08:52:07 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 07, 2021, 09:23:18 pm
An international group that gets relatively little notice is the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), a group established at the start of 2017 with both public and private funding and partnerships. Their mission from the beginning has been vaccine development and distribution assistance and funding. As an example of their COVID-19 efforts, on January 23, 2020 they agreed to provide funding for Moderna's mRNA vaccine development. This is not new for CEPI as they have been funding mRNA vaccine research before anyone had ever heard of COVID-19.

They have now allocated $200 million to funding for development of broadly protective coronavirus vaccines.

https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-launches-funding-call-to-advance-development-of-broadly-protective-coronavirus-vaccines (https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-launches-funding-call-to-advance-development-of-broadly-protective-coronavirus-vaccines/)

CEPI launches funding call to advance development of broadly protective coronavirus vaccines

OSLO, Norway, March 31, 2021: CEPI, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, today launched a call for proposals to develop broadly protective SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and broadly protective Betacoronavirus vaccines. CEPI plans to invest up to US$200 million in promising vaccine candidates up to clinical proof of concept.

Betacoronaviruses are types of coronavirus that cause Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), which have been responsible for major epidemics in Asia and the Middle East in recent years, and also SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

The main focus of this call for proposals is to support the research and development of novel immunogens (ie, antigens that elicit an adaptive immune response) for use in vaccines that can elicit durable, broadly protective immune responses.

This opportunity will be open, worldwide, to research and development organisations with expertise in vaccine development.


This is part of a $3.5 billion effort announced earlier in March to develop vaccines for future viruses with a goal of cutting development time down to 100 days.

https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-launches-plan-to-tackle-risk-of-future-pandemics-and-epidemics (https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-launches-plan-to-tackle-risk-of-future-pandemics-and-epidemics/)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 07, 2021, 09:33:28 pm
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.

Ask the people of Wuhan that needed make shift hospitals created or the doctors from the Lombardy region of Italy or the people of NYC last year.

The question of how do we make assertions is driven by observations of large populations (which have already happened), not by small-N studies. We say that based on large populations X% need hospitalisation, Y% will die so that 1 in N for small studies is extrapolated using already established data for larger groups of people.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 07, 2021, 09:35:50 pm
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.

Sure, but if you string enough of these non-events together, you end up with 571,000+ deaths in a little over a year (from Worldometer).

Amazing how we keep having this same conversation, isn't it?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on April 07, 2021, 10:47:28 pm
This thread has become insane.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 05:29:59 am
Science:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 08, 2021, 05:58:02 am
Science:

I'm not sure what is the relevance to science?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 07:27:32 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 07:45:16 am
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.

Which science do you have access to?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 08, 2021, 07:46:36 am

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.

Here the politicians use "science" as an excuse for ducking decisions - "we're following the science" they say, cherry-picking the bits of science that suit them
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 08:09:41 am
... The hard part for many people to understand is that this virus expands exponentially amongst the population if it is not checked.


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.

Fatalities are less than 1% of the officially positive (meaning a half or a third of a percent of the infected, if you expand the numbers as per above). Again, hardly exponential.

I can hear you arguing that it is because it is mitigated by lockdown measures. While we did have even a curfew in April last year, our measures are ever since so relaxed that many foreigners are fleeing their native countries, from Europe, the US, and the rest of the world, and flocking to Serbia precisely because they can breathe freely here (pardon the perhaps inadequate metaphor - masks are still required inside).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 08:30:06 am
One way to make lockdowns truly effective:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 08:47:27 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 08:52:28 am
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.

Do you consider yourself a "poor ignorant schnook". If not, what makes you special?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 08, 2021, 09:00:26 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 08, 2021, 09:06:04 am
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.

I was watching youtube videos about electric cars on Easter in my home. Plan to do it again this weekend.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 09:07:16 am
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.

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.

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).


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 08, 2021, 09:16:54 am
I was watching youtube videos about electric cars on Easter in my home. Plan to do it again this weekend.

Actually, I was thinking about going to a Rangers game this weekend.  Sunday tickets are just $10 right now. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 09:30:38 am
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.

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"?

I'll ignore your second paragraph which "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)."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 08, 2021, 09:37:18 am
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"?

It's work communicated in a scientific journal - some people spotted a connection and did some work to see if it was real.  They communicate it so that other researchers can see what they did and expand on it, or use the ideas for some other study.  They aren't published so some hypochondriac in a cellar in New Jersey can pretend he knows what's going on.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 08, 2021, 10:07:49 am
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.

Actually, I take a much more sinister view.  Real science tends to be very slow moving and results usually show that there is a broad range of possibilities.  For example, how effective are masks?  Well the Lancet put out a report about a year ago that said masks could help stop the spread somewhere between 6% to 80%.  6% would do essentially nothing whereas 80% would stop the pandemic practically over night.  However, this range is almost never mentioned. 

Instead those with a political agenda pick the end that would help them the most.  For those whom are pro-mask, they say science shows masks could help stop the spread by as much as 80%.  Although this is technically true (and a trick TT often falls for), it is highly deceptive since they are not stating the lower end of the spectrum.  They of course realize they are doing this but care more about there politics then actually broadcasting the science. 

So, a year later, after the science has been purposely distorted repeatable, the public believes that if only everyone had worn masks we would never have had this pandemic while ignoring the fact that 90+% of the country was indeed wearing masks (and the less then 10% that was not is too small of a percentage to matter). 

Another great example is the claim that 1 in 5 college women are sexually assaulted.  This came from an Internet volunteer only survey being advertised on websites that dealt with sexual assault.  So the survey incorporated both a selection bias (by only advertising to women who already had enough of an interest in sexual assault to search out information) and a participation bias (by being a non-paid survey which only those interested in the subject will participate in).  So this survey was by no mean accurate, and knowingly designed that.  The researchers, one of whom was a woman, were trying to gin up interest on sexual assault on campus so they could get enough grants/donations to perform an actual non-biased study.  They stated this publicly along with that this result should not be taken as true.  However the HRC campaign latched onto this and now many actually think 20% of college women are sexually assaulted even though that percentage is a good deal higher then the worst countries in the world for sexual assault, making it obviously absurd. 

The politics of climate change does this all the time too.  We often here that we are detecting so many more hurricanes then what we use to in the years past, so that is proof of how serious climate change is.  What they never point out though is that most hurricanes drift out into the Bermuda Triangle somewhere before dying out, and, before the advent of weather satellites, they would have largely never had been noticed, let alone recorded, in the past.  Furthermore, the number of hurricanes that make landfall have been remarkably consistent over the last century.  So actually, although the statement that we are detecting more is technically true, the implication that it is because we are having more hurricanes is actually false. 

So, in my view, whnever you hear a politician (aka anyone in government) saying "the science shows," they are probably distorting the science purposely for political reasons. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 10:13:42 am
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 distrustful of science when scientists discover that what they thought was true isn't, and now they have a better explanation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:16:45 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 10:57:58 am
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.

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.

Maybe this will answer your question:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 11:11:52 am
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.

This is all a repeat. You can save yourself some time and re-read yesterday's posts.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 11:17:48 am
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"? ...


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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 11:47:00 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 11:48:27 am
Cheers!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 08, 2021, 11:53:41 am
Easy for scientists and politicians to speculate at what you should do.  It doesn't affect their salary.  They're still working.

What a stupid thing to say. Scientists do their best to find out the truth and propose actions based on their understanding. It's neither easy nor difficult, and nothing to do with their salary.  Try not to be a liar AND a fool.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 11:55:44 am
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.

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.


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?   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 11:56:02 am
This article will add some context to the information in Slobodan's graphic.

https://wineindustryadvisor.com/2021/03/31/nielseniq-beverage-alcohol-update-march
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 11:57:03 am
Cheers!
Better than bleach.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 12:04:31 pm
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.

You do realize that you are in charge of what you worry about?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 12:34:50 pm
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.

You do realize that you are in charge of what you worry about?
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 12:45:38 pm
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 "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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 01:09:32 pm
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 "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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 01:14:01 pm
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.

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."

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?

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.

Are you a member of the public? Are you confused? If not, why not?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 08, 2021, 01:39:23 pm
This article will add some context to the information in Slobodan's graphic.

https://wineindustryadvisor.com/2021/03/31/nielseniq-beverage-alcohol-update-march

And that doesn't take into account all the wine Joe Kitchen makes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 02:58:27 pm
Easy for scientists and politicians to speculate at what you should do.  It doesn't affect their salary.  They're still working.

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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 08, 2021, 03:06:53 pm
... Shall we not listen to the scientists, and not factor what they say into decisions about what to do? ...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 03:25:46 pm
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."

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?
Because I'm an old fart and 50% of the dead are my age.   :(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 03:32:07 pm
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.

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?
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 03:34:07 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 03:35:48 pm
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. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 03:36:10 pm
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."

You must have completely lost your mind.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 03:38:17 pm
Because I'm an old fart and 50% of the dead are my age.   :(

If that is true, then the other 50% are alive. Kind of makes you sound average.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 03:38:45 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 03:50:04 pm
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".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 04:09:28 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 08, 2021, 04:14:11 pm
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.

Well, if you can find a post where someone said that, I'll be happy to revise my recollection. If you do find something, you'll also need to explain how you made the jump from whatever you find someone said to "politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists", because "politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists" sounds like one of those logical fallacies known as a straw man which you frequently fall victim to.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 04:25:43 pm
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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 05:29:09 pm
You've said politicians should only listen to the scientists, not to the economists.

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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 05:57:03 pm
Damn.  The experts changed their minds. Again.

No. They didn't. It's just your attempt to find a molehill from which to build a mountain.

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?

All that disinfecting was a waste of time.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 08, 2021, 06:39:34 pm
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.

Words are important. I said that it expands exponentially if not addressed.

This is Serbia:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/serbia/

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 08, 2021, 06:43:20 pm
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

This has been true and communicated from the beginning. If you didn't know that then you weren't doing enough reading 12 or more months ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 08, 2021, 06:54:16 pm
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 Internet enables access to a lot of information - including true science. Understanding may not be easy for the layperson.

Attatchment and https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/9/3326/pdf provided.

If you want true science, all you have to do is use Google to find it by looking for research papers (some will be hidden behind paywalls) on the topic you're interested in.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 07:34:52 pm
Do you think most people... check to see if "possible" is in there?

Yes. Most people have sufficient reading and comprehension ability to understand the difference between a declarative statement of fact and a qualified statement of something that is possible, probable, likely, unlikely, may, etc. without feeling an irresistible urge to jump to a conclusion. As we've seen here, that doesn't apply to everyone, but for most people the answer is yes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 07:47:54 pm
everything Fauci says is couched with that word in everything he says:  "Possible" or "it's likely".

That would be something to consider practicing yourself. It might help you to recognize more of the gray in the world and reduce the high contrast thinking.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 07:51:18 pm
Even Biden says... "I'm going to listen to the scientists."

I would hope so! When someone knows vastly more than yourself about a subject, only a fool wouldn't listen.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 08:24:05 pm
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.

Your individual health is likely not of much concern to anyone but yourself and your friends and family. I doubt if "the government" is wondering, how's Slobodan feeling today and what can we do to make him feel better?

Public health is, however, a natural concern of government. Government public health services can't completely stop the spread of a pandemic infectious disease, but it can take measures and make recommendations to mitigate the spread in order to reduce the impact on the health of the general population. More importantly, mitigation efforts help to slow or reduce the emergence of more deadly and more transmissible mutations of the disease. Also of public concern, mitigation efforts help to prevent medical services, which are needed by the population as a whole, from becoming overwhelmed in your community.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 08:25:22 pm
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.

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?
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 08:29:40 pm
My comments were about you and your propensity for assigning false quotes to other individuals. My comments were not about what "many people" say, they were about what you do.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 08:35:52 pm
No. They didn't. It's just your attempt to find a molehill from which to build a mountain.

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.  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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 08:40:22 pm
nonsense. The CDC now tells us soap and water is enough.

When did they tell you that soap and water wasn't helpful in reducing virus spread?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 08, 2021, 08:52:40 pm
The Internet enables access to a lot of information - including true science. Understanding may not be easy for the layperson.

A good place to start, especially for those who are not accustomed to reading technical documents, is the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/Novel_Coronavirus_Reports.html) from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  This is how the CDC communicates directly with clinical practitioners.  These reports are more accessible than some of the preprints that researchers post directly on the 'Net to communicate their preliminary findings with other researchers—for those of us with no relevant formal training, I would compare their difficulty with reading a book in a language in which you are not completely fluent—and, unlike many of the peer-reviewed and published papers, they are not behind a paywall.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 08, 2021, 09:12:58 pm
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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 09:50:01 pm
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?

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:02:47 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:10:46 pm
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.

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.
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2021, 10:14:35 pm
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.

Were they really pushing disinfectants the way you say?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:18:44 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:23:45 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 10:33:38 pm
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.

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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 10:47:27 pm
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).


This is the shocking and incredible "new" guidance...

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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:50:38 pm
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.

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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 10:54:09 pm
Many people here have repeatedly taken the follow the science and ignore the economy view.

I've never seen anyone here suggest "ignore the economy". It's your twisted interpretation to fit your repetitious narrative.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 10:58:56 pm
This is the shocking and incredible "new" guidance...

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.
The new protocol from the CDC was just released Monday. The following is from the news  link posted earlier.

"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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 11:02:57 pm
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.

Of course, many people became extra cautious regarding cleaning and germs in their home. Who wouldn't during the first major pandemic in 100 years? That seems a reasonable common sense concern, with or without household cleaning tips from the CDC, Good Housekeeping, or anyone else.

The rest, the devious and untrustworthy "experts" thing, is your obsession and your problem.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 11:06:00 pm
The new protocol from the CDC was just released Monday. The following is from the news  link posted earlier.

I saw it the first time. You're beginning to sputter and repeat yourself. Calm down, it's going to be OK.

What I posted is the "new" guidance. Check the date on the link.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 08, 2021, 11:06:35 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 08, 2021, 11:21:16 pm
Others suggested we should wait until the entire Covid was gone before opening the economy.

No one said that. You have a fever. Take some Tylenol.

Others posited that we should be listening to scientists only and not economists.

No one said that either. You appear to read things which then form twisted impressions in your mind.

Life was more important than money.

How much would you take for yours or someone you love?

There was no balance from these posters.

Of course there was balance. Everyone here has realized there has to be some balance struck. It appears that if someone has a balance different than yours, it registers in your mind as "no balance". That's your issue, not theirs.

Where have you been?

Right here Doc.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 12:09:32 am
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.

I agree, as do a number of scientists, that media soundbite stories on science often minimize, or sometimes leave out, important context or qualifiers. That's the media that we have today. Of course, some sources are better than others at reporting science topics and scientists are rarely to blame for poor journalism. So... choose your sources carefully folks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 04:21:54 am
... 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 something goes up and down in certain shorter periods, it is not exponential overall. Obviously, it is in the up phase. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 04:25:12 am
... If you want true science, all you have to do is use Google...

Sure. I can also use Google to find a book in Chinese... or Arabic  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 04:38:18 am
... Public health is, however, a natural concern of government...

There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?

Since I don’t know your location, I can only guess that we have a vastly different views on what government is meant for. If you are a European, then I understand. Europeans still have a serfdom mentality in their genes. The power is always above, and they are only its loyal subjects: God - King/Queen - Government. America is built on the rejection of such a premise. Then again, you could be located on the American Left, where they are just wanna-be Europeans  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 04:46:42 am
... the first major pandemic in 100 years....

Hardly.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 04:49:54 am
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?

+1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 09, 2021, 06:10:28 am
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 :-(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 06:25:31 am
Clean water - another communist plot :-(

Countries with the strongest government role possible (i.e., communist ones) have had the worst ecological results.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 06:37:25 am
Speaking of public health:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CNa686BlMWr/?igshid=g4wflq7blfg1&fbclid=IwAR25S6taP8Tn736eGNP0yG5CRp6hE6pp1iiTDFdMqLrgiAjBe98mkejhKh4

"French farmers joining the fight against tyranny.... Dumping manure in front of the politician offices"  ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 09, 2021, 06:52:26 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 06:55:43 am
You are listening to wrong experts, Alan
Same nonsense as taking daily aspirin for your heart or drinking milk for your bones.

 ;D ;D ;D

Isn't that exactly what Alan has been saying? First they were for it, before they were against it, like John Kerry. First they were the right experts, then the wrong ones.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 06:58:44 am
Perfect illustration:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 09, 2021, 07:04:41 am
Countries with the strongest government role possible (i.e., communist ones) have had the worst ecological results.

I'm talking about drinking water. How is that private well in your back yard working out?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 09, 2021, 07:05:53 am
Perfect illustration:

It is indeed - appeal to the authority of made-up images.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 09, 2021, 07:10:33 am
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.
Quote
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.

The increased dying is less easy to explain that way.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 09, 2021, 07:19:39 am
There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?


You're right, there is no society, there are only individuals, like Thatcher said (or is often quoted to have said, I have no idea if it was taken out of context). Trouble is there is society and there are many aspects to public health. Is it difficult to live with those kinds of blatant contradictions?




... If you are a European, then I understand. Europeans still have a serfdom mentality in their genes. ...

This again? In their genes, is it. Thanks for the laugh.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 07:24:17 am
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"

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 07:34:00 am
That's why the statement was accompanied by the caveat that growth is exponential IF NOT CONSTRAINED...

Yes, true. But the "constraints" were laughable, as they are right now, as we speak.

Right now, restaurants and shopping centers are closed. Restaurants, which had been half-empty anyway, with all the government measures followed, tables set at a distance, disinfectant on the table, waiters and entering and leaving patrons with masks. Shopping centers, where you'd have a few people at any given time inside a store, and quickly passing by each other between stores. All wearing masks. Those were closed. But everything else is working. Offices, companies, factories. Public transport. Supermarkets. Huge supermarkets, like Lidl (equivalent to Costco in the US), working, forming huge lines where people would stand for 10-15 minutes in close proximity. Those have been open. Such a restraint.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 09, 2021, 08:20:42 am
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"

I like what you did there, squeezed in a Godwin in an almost acceptable way.

My reaction is, so what. It's a big world, you can find someone with any opinion you want.

Personally, if you can't tell the difference between a fascist regime and temporary safety measures, I think you need to re-examine the thought processes that led you to this point.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 09:55:15 am
You are listening to wrong experts, Alan
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? :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 09, 2021, 09:57:06 am
The CDC who I;ve followed the most,  is the wrong expert regarding disinfectants cleaning surfaces?  So who should I listen to? Trump?  Biden? :)


Yes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 09:57:44 am
Countries with the strongest government role possible (i.e., communist ones) have had the worst ecological results.
Chernoble?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 10:10:59 am
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"


Fortunately 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 09, 2021, 10:31:09 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 10:55:07 am
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.  :)

To answer your questions, since getting both shots, I've become more relaxed but still wear a mask when near others often just out of courtesy to them.  I won't eat in a restaurant but am considering getting together with friends who also have had their shots.  I still haven't seen my daughter and son-in-law, and that bothers me emotionally. I keep telling myself it's OK because she's trying to have a baby. My wife who had both shots as well still wears a double mask.  I'm still cautious because I'm 76 with loads of comorbidities. But I've relaxed a lot and can't wait for this thing to end.  I miss eating out and I want to travel again.  It hasn't hurt by photography since I shoot landscapes alone in less frequented places.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 09, 2021, 11:58:04 am
I'm talking about drinking water. How is that private well in your back yard working out?

I know a lot of people with wells in their back yard and only use well water.  They are very prevalent in Bucks and Lehigh county.  They very much prefer it over water from our suburban water systems.  Now, of course, I am not talking about open wells that only go down 40 or 50 feet, but close mined wells that go down well over a 100 and require a pump and filter. 

So they are not as bad as you are making them out to be and I have yet to meet anyone with a well who would prefer connecting to the utility. 

With that being said, most of these houses need to use propane since they also have no natural gas hookup.  I lived in an apartment for a time with a propane stove.  Given the option between well water but dealing with the smell of burned propane or utility water but having clean burning natural gas, I'd pick the latter. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 09, 2021, 12:00:41 pm
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.

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 here 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. Who can forget your descriptions of wiping down your groceries? 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 09, 2021, 12:06:41 pm
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.

True, although their is always rainwater.  Bermuda makes it work. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 12:10:42 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 12:15:58 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 12:24:23 pm
I wouldn't and haven't reacted or responded as Jeremy has since then. Then again, the offensive remarks that Alan falsely attributed to Jeremy were considerably worse than those he has attributed to others. So, that's why I'm inclined to just let it go and ignore it. I understand what has caused his hostility even though it isn't how I would choose to handle it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 12:39:23 pm
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. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 12:42:24 pm
True, although their is always rainwater.  Bermuda makes it work. 

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.
Are you sure he doesn't hide his wine there from his wife?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 09, 2021, 12:46:28 pm
It's true, Frank, that I'm a contrarian, a rebel really.  I love playing Devil's advocate, thinking out of the box.

For self-professed contrarian, you offer a very credible impression of an orthodox, mantra-chanting, right-wing populist.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 12:54:17 pm
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.

I've said often this thread is devolving into name-calling which is unfortunate as it's helping to kill LuLa which needs all the help it can get.  I'll get the ball rolling by apologizing if any of my posts called anyone a racist and promise not to resort to any name-calling of anyone whatsoever regardless of how nasty they may be at times.  My defenses will remain cordial even if they screw up. However, I reserve the right to put them on the Ignore list again. 

Would others here be willing to agree to similar courtesies?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 12:56:53 pm
Debatable. What is not debatable is that you are a liar.

I understand why you are angry with Alan. The statements he attributed to you were incredibly insulting and egregious.

But, given his response, or lack thereof, since then, it's very unlikely that Alan is ever going to take responsibility for his own actions. As he is unwilling or unable to self reflect in an honest way, you might want to consider a different approach, if only to avoid drawing others into the fray like Slobodan, who I respect even when we strongly disagree. Just a suggestion. It's your call, as you were the injured party.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 01:02:29 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 01:17:20 pm
Novavax has added a twist to their clinical trial which I had not heard of until now.

Novavax adds blinded crossover arms to COVID-19 vaccine trials - April 6, 2021

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/novavax-adds-blinded-crossover-arms-to-covid-19-vaccine-trials (https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/novavax-adds-blinded-crossover-arms-to-covid-19-vaccine-trials)

Novavax has added crossover arms to late-phase clinical trials of its COVID-19 vaccine. The action will enable participants in the placebo cohorts of the original trials to get vaccinated without unblinding the studies.

Participants in the 15,000-subject U.K. trial and 30,000-subject U.S.-Mexico study, which is yet to post data, will be offered the chance to get an additional round of injections. People who originally got a placebo will get two doses of the vaccine, and people who originally got the vaccine will receive two doses of placebo.

Novavax has taken a different approach to the South African phase 2b, where the prevalence of the B.1.351 variant contributed to weaker efficacy data than in the U.K. Placebo participants will still get the vaccine, but subjects in the original vaccine arm will also get a booster dose of NVX-CoV2373.

The design of the South African crossover trial will enable Novavax to evaluate whether an additional dose of its vaccine improves protection against B.1.351. The variant makes up a far smaller proportion of all COVID-19 cases in the U.K. and U.S.

Across all three trials, Novavax will conduct the crossover stages without unblinding the studies. The approach enables Novavax to address the ethical concern about leaving people unprotected during a pandemic while retaining the ability to assess efficacy. Novavax plans to follow participants for up to two years to assess the durability of protection. Participants have the option to become unblinded and receive a vaccine through their national immunization campaigns.

Novavax’s approach differs from those of other COVID-19 vaccine developers, which articulated their plans to the FDA as part of the emergency use authorization process. Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna proposed allowing participants who become eligible for vaccination under real-world immunization programs to request to be unblinded. Johnson & Johnson suggested an open-label crossover.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on April 09, 2021, 01:57:08 pm
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.

Button is not disabled.
I received a flag about this very thread which I’m close to shutting down.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on April 09, 2021, 02:01:01 pm
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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 02:05:52 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 09, 2021, 02:08:09 pm
Button is not disabled...

Yes, I tried it again and it works. Could have been a temporary glitch, as when tested it earlier I got a response to the effect of “sorry, the board you are trying to reach is not active now” or some similar wording.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 09, 2021, 02:24:37 pm
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

Well, there is precious little info on vaccines anymore.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 09, 2021, 02:28:36 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 09, 2021, 02:40:00 pm
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.

I'd vote for that option.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 09, 2021, 03:37:12 pm
. . . 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.

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):

Quote
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.

This somewhat complicates the risk-benefit assessment of which vaccines are most appropriate to administer to this segment of the population.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 09, 2021, 04:09:39 pm
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?

I don't know enough to have an opinion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 09, 2021, 04:12:15 pm
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.

Rise of Variants in Europe Shows How Dangerous the Virus Can Be (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/09/world/europe/europe-coronavirus-variants.html?searchResultPosition=1)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 09, 2021, 04:27:38 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 09, 2021, 04:35:03 pm
Is there anything at all constructive still occurring for each of you in this thread? Is there even a thread?

Note to moderator:
There’s plenty of scope for this thread to serve as a useful noticeboard come pinboard for both developments in vaccines and the latest research into the virus itself, which I believe to be the intention of the OP. Effective moderation calls for intervention at times and eliminating notably uninformed  ‘grandstanding’  by some individuals.

There is a difference between ongoing scientific research and personalised ‘virus theory’ combined with lambasting the epidemiologists who are tasked to lead us through this pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 09, 2021, 05:03:31 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 09, 2021, 05:17:07 pm
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.

Certainly, I’m hearing of ICU’s populated, in the majority, by the 20 to 35’s at least here in Athens. Whereas Greece was one of the outperformers in last year’s lockdown, the viral load, as measured daily by the Govt, has reached new highs, similar to the other Mediterranean countries.

I’ll PM you the rest.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 11:48:10 pm
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 09, 2021, 11:51:41 pm
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):

This somewhat complicates the risk-benefit assessment of which vaccines are most appropriate to administer to this segment of the population.
Good news for children.

Pfizer Asks FDA to Expand its Coronavirus Vaccine Authorization to Children Ages 12 to 15
https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-04-09/pfizer-asks-fda-to-expand-its-coronavirus-vaccine-authorization-to-children-ages-12-to-15
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 10, 2021, 07:28:31 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 10, 2021, 07:57:46 am
Interesting article.  Frankly, I don't understand it.  But it seems that the shots are better than the 95% announced.

95% efficacy for COVID vaccines doesn’t mean there’s a 5% infection risk. Here’s why
https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article250559589.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 10, 2021, 07:59:55 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: John Camp on April 10, 2021, 08:48:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 10, 2021, 09:46:22 pm
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.

Are they including all the murdered journalists as Covid cases?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 10, 2021, 11:48:53 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 11, 2021, 12:01:59 am
The question for this thread would be was he vaccinated with a Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 11, 2021, 12:12:40 am
I heard Navalny was using that poison after listening to Trump go on about antiseptics.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on April 11, 2021, 12:20:45 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: KLaban on April 11, 2021, 04:52:12 am
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.

Just the one?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 11, 2021, 09:41:01 am
https://www.axios.com/chinese-covid-vaccines-low-efficacy-rates-official-f548e76b-d26b-4eab-be5c-cc1060d032f5.html?fbclid=IwAR0ZChvcNhhobRHRm0bJra_eM5AwrMAWgOS2CMAD0wpirg6X35Fj-c3rXRQ

"China's COVID vaccines have low efficacy rates, official says"

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 11, 2021, 10:49:00 am
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.

(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.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 11, 2021, 10:53:25 am
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.

(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.)
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 11, 2021, 11:35:17 am
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.

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 11, 2021, 11:58:55 am
Most likely, the infection counts are under-reported in many other countries.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 11, 2021, 12:07:58 pm
Canada had an issue with long waits before Covid.

Any reason in particular you decided to make that comment?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 11, 2021, 01:04:28 pm
Canada had an issue with long waits before Covid.

We had many issues with Alan Klein before his last comment.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 11, 2021, 01:31:57 pm
Last Friday was a record day in Ontario with 541 C-19 patients in ICU's and a projected number of 800 by end of the month. The hospitals were instructed to 'ramp down' all elective surgeries starting Monday. After the first wave the surgery backlog reached 184,000 cases. The latest surgery cancellations will put the backlog in Ontario to over 250,000.

Quote
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.

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-hospitals-told-to-ramp-down-all-elective-surgeries-starting-monday-1.5380634

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 03:42:25 am
https://brandnewtube.com/watch/fauci-asymptomatic-transmission-has-never-been-the-driver-of-outbreaks_pPPVzXKMCEbAO2W.html?lang=type&fbclid=IwAR2WpvCPBRR9Z0rWUmM4fgfzUry4IKOIThwil_0DtdYp_WtVsozah960yPQ

For those unwilling to click on the video link, here is a transcript:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 12, 2021, 09:21:19 am
For those unwilling to click on the video link, here is a transcript:

In January, 2020, when Dr. Fauci made the remark in that video clip, he was stating a fact.  No respiratory epidemic had ever been caused by infected individuals with no symptoms and virologists believed asymptomatic transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, if it happened at all, was extremely rare.

In the year since then, the evidence has accumulated that a significant number of COVID-19 cases are the result of transmission by asymptomatic individuals, which includes those who have not yet developed symptoms (presymptomatic) as well as those who never will.  The precise proportion of symptomatic to asymptomatic transmission is still unknown.

In this respect, as well as others, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has turned out to be, as they say in the trade, a "novel coronavirus."

Remarkable, isn't it?  Sometimes things happen which have never happened before.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 09:44:42 am
... In the year since then, the evidence has accumulated that a significant number...

An equal number of studies resulted in numbers ranging from zero to negligible.

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.

The next question is then: if that was the state of the art science a year ago, why were the healthy quarantined and locked down, instead of just the sick? The explanation then was that the "healthy" may not be healthy at all, just asymptomatic. See the contradiction?

P.S. Between "this time it is different" (which failed every time it was used as an excuse) and "nihil novi sub sole," guess which one I believe more?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 09:57:19 am
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 should have stopped once doctors discovered that bleeding with leeches and purging with clysters could restore the balance of the four humors. I'll also add the now apparently required argument: blah, blah, blah.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 10:02:04 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 10:12:23 am
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.

So we have moved from "fake news" to "fake research". Not totally unexpected.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 12, 2021, 10:26:13 am
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.  To economize, you could start just using letters, like "CSLW." (Commie Socialist Woke Liberals)

Like when us lefties had to keep adding letters to LGBTQ etc - saves a TON of bandwidth, and all your homies will appreciate the anti-virtue signaling

;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 10:38:24 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 10:45:56 am
Here is an explanation of the origin or the word "woke". I don't know if it is accurate, but I kind of like the idea of the beatniks made it up.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/woke
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 12, 2021, 10:54:33 am
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?

Hold on. "Fascist" is you guys.  Keep it straight.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 12, 2021, 10:58:14 am
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.

Quote
. . . 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:01:31 am
Hold on. "Fascist" is you guys.  Keep it straight.

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"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:02:55 am
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.

Isn't that old news?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 12, 2021, 11:11:59 am
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"

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.

Also, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea sends their appreciation for your strict interpretation of naming conventions and suggests you consult with Dennis Rodman on future endeavors.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 11:15:22 am
Isn't that old news?

It is probably old news. Scientists are figuring out that some people don't want to hear the results of new research, so they just go with the old stuff. That way they don't lose the public's confidence and trust.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:20:55 am
It is probably old news....

There you go again.

Hasn't the "at least six months" already been in the news for at least several weeks? That was my question.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:22:46 am
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....

Touché.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 11:29:35 am
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"

Strawberries and cream = banana cream pie, since they both contain fruit and cream, not to mention that they both have the word "cream" in their name.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 12, 2021, 11:32:28 am
Isn't that old news?

Six days old, at the time I am writing this.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:38:12 am
Six days old, at the time I am writing this.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 12, 2021, 11:47:53 am
. . . hasn't that being in the news for at least several weeks now? Or was it only for Pfizer?

There was a Pfizer/BioNTech press release about a week earlier that reported durable immunity of their mRNA vaccine for six months, but as far as I know the data it was based on have not been published yet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 11:50:50 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 11:55:31 am
Wouldn't we have to wait for six months at least to see if they're still effective and to what degree? Has it been that long?  Have any of them shown effectiveness against the variants?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 11:57:37 am
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?

What are you now, Alan Klein for the woke side? 😉
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 12:03:24 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 12:15:14 pm
Are Canadians being forced to get shots?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Zz2eZWyQsD4K/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 12:16:28 pm
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.

So is this new research, which might or might not 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 12:21:04 pm
What are you now, Alan Klein for the woke side? 😉

Nope. You convinced me that the masters of the woke scientists were just releasing fake research, so those are questions which naturally arose about this new news which might be old.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 12, 2021, 12:36:20 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 12:47:10 pm
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 years or whatever, I am not going to throw my hands up in the air and lose confidence or trust in science. If and when scientists determine I need another vaccination or booster or whatever, I'll get it. I also put the recommended air pressure in my tires. Maybe that is a conspiracy by the tire manufacturers (or their masters) to make your tires wear out sooner so they can sell more tires.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 12, 2021, 12:53:13 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 12:57:16 pm
Are you TRYING to start a fight?????? (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11249-020-1273-5)

No. I guess I am just pointing out how gullible I am.  It's kind of like when I go to the doctor and he tells me I have high cholesterol and need to make some adjustments in my diet, I don't try to figure out who his master is or get two or three other opinions. I don't even say let's go three out of five with the blood work.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 12, 2021, 01:07:12 pm
Are Canadians being forced to get shots?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Zz2eZWyQsD4K/

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 12, 2021, 01:09:25 pm
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. 

But anyway, my wife and I this Sunday found a seemingly random yet classic "middle of the block" Philly old-man's bar in what use to be a row house around the corner from us to watch round 4 of The Master's.  Walked in, no-one was wearing a mask, we then asked if they really needed us to order food to get a drink, to which they replied, to our delight, "yeah we dont follow those rules."  Appalled by the total disrespect at our city's Supremes, we decided it was our kind of place and had a few drinks without food while watching Japan kick everyones ass for the first time in 80 years.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 01:16:45 pm
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.

May I make a suggestion? Don't take medical advice from Brian Stelter or Joy Reid, or if you do, don't complain about being confused.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 01:57:03 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 02:03:27 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 02:08:09 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 12, 2021, 02:08:47 pm
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.

Have you actually watched the video?

A follow-up question: how did you find the video?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 12, 2021, 03:02:51 pm
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 04:05:27 pm
Robert, we live in a world where reality is stranger than satire, so the two can easily be confused.

Is it a satire or reality that Canada has erected a ten-feet fence around a church, to prevent people from going in? If you said it here, should we have taken you seriously? See where I am going with this? 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 12, 2021, 04:07:41 pm
... You don't have to be a wise guy with every post I make. 

Amen to that!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 04:09:25 pm
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.  :-[
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 12, 2021, 04:36:46 pm
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.

There's no scientific rigor to it, but it's interesting as an observational study nonetheless.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 12, 2021, 04:37:27 pm
Yes.  :-[

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 06:33:07 pm
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.

There's no scientific rigor to it, but it's interesting as an observational study nonetheless.
What are your observations and conclusions?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 06:35:44 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 12, 2021, 06:46:43 pm
What are your observations and conclusions?

That impulse control varies greatly among individuals engaged in this thread and that for some it is relatively weak, though all are susceptible to momentary lapse when sufficiently provoked. It's a matter of degree in both provocation and individual ability in impulse control. Some require no provocation whatever; have no impulse control; and simply change the subject to suit their own whims, purpose, or desire.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 12, 2021, 09:30:06 pm
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.

The thing is I still don't know if you've been kidding or not. Do you believe that Canadians are being forcibly vaccinated?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 12, 2021, 09:31:13 pm
...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.

I am certain that some people will believe anything.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 12, 2021, 10:23:23 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 05:47:54 am
Note to TechTalk: there is no fun in discussion serious issues ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 06:03:05 am
... Do you believe that Canadians are being forcibly vaccinated?

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).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 06:08:32 am
American culture has been conquering the world for quite some time. The latest export? Wokeness.

In the north of Serbia, a city woke up (pardon the pun) to this, plastered all over the city:

"Anti-Waxers to Jail!"

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 13, 2021, 06:08:46 am
Note to TechTalk: there is no fun in discussion serious issues ;)

I think I saw somewhere the same group posing as farmers but instead of the stethoscopes they were equipped with pitchforks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 07:47:53 am
https://apple.news/AGMV7LZZFR4eOBriSS-VQEA

P.S. My daughter falls in that risk group and is in that window too (6-13 days)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 08:39:05 am
https://apple.news/AGMV7LZZFR4eOBriSS-VQEA

P.S. My daughter falls in that risk group and is in that window too (6-13 days)
It's very rare.  She'll be OK.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:04:09 am
A friedn gave me these statistics.  Why weren;t the number for 2020 400,000 higher?  Are those numbers correct?
 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.

It’s an interesting statistic.

Food for DEEP Thought...
... 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%
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:07:22 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:10:08 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 13, 2021, 09:12:50 am
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. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:22:02 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 13, 2021, 09:30:58 am
...  Please explain why the deaths in 2020 were not higher.

No.

You raised the subject, not me.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:40:33 am
No.

You raised the subject, not me.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:41:48 am
Slobodan's argued the same point.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 13, 2021, 09:44:13 am
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).

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 09:47:18 am

... 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%

If true, the numbers are indeed very interesting.

Primarily because they actually show a decrease in deaths year after year. How so? Because the population growth each year exceeded the increase in deaths:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 13, 2021, 09:47:25 am
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.

And maybe somebody will. Be patient. I won't.

At first glance though, I don't understand why it would make you feel better if you had experienced the normal 300,000 odd deaths AS WELL AS the more than half million Covid ones.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:56:02 am
It appears the numbers I received were incorrect.  I did a little direct research and the CDC site shows much larger increases in deaths for 2020 that would cover the 400,000 (actually around377,000) and then some.  So it seems isolation did not appear to change much after all regarding other diseases.  I didn't check individual type of diseases changes only the sums.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e1.htm#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20approximately%203%2C358%2C814%20deaths%20occurred%20in%20the%20United%20States,15.9%25%20from%20715.2%20in%202019.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 09:58:04 am
Sorry if I got everyone all excited.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 09:59:04 am
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...

Why don't you provide images or text of "what actually happened at the church"?

There is a video inside that article I linked to, you can see for yourself what is going on. Here is another report, showing the same scenes:

https://news.yahoo.com/protesters-pull-down-fences-clash-172724136.html

As for the "public health emergency" - you know my opinion that it is just used as a pretext for fascist measures and training people into obedience. It is not the role of the government to act in "my best interest," contrary to what i think it is. Especially when manufactured protests, with billions in burnt cities and other damage, are celebrated and encouraged at the same time.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 10:10:03 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 10:12:36 am
Wasn't J&J, the one that had less efficacy, the one we argued over? 

Johnson & Johnson vaccine should be paused in U.S. after 'extremely rare' blood clots, FDA and CDC say
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/johnson-johnson-vaccine-should-be-paused-u-s-after-extremely-n1263898
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 13, 2021, 10:17:55 am
An unscientific response.  Please explain why the deaths in 2020 were not higher.

Many people couldn't visit their doctors and also they didn't ingest as many pills as before.

Quote
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.

https://healthydebate.ca/2019/08/topic/medical-error-causing-death/#:~:text=In%20May%202016%2C%20the%20British,were%20caused%20by%20medical%20error.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 10:26:22 am
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.

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.
They weren't given a free pass. The court felt that churches were required to have more restrictions than other similar venues.

I know from my own experience in construction, that churches and other religious buildings have to meet all building codes and match buildings of similar construction and use.  The religious protections under the constitution are not being violated by having to meet standard building codes.  They have to install smoke detectors, have the required number of exits, and even meet ADA codes for the disabled like installing ramps for wheelchairs.  But they don't have to do more than other similar buildings.  Apparently the court felt they were singled out for having to be more restrictive when it came to Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 10:34:41 am
Quote
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 mean I should get a third opinion? :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 13, 2021, 10:35:01 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 10:40:16 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 13, 2021, 11:53:25 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 13, 2021, 12:27:35 pm
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 13, 2021, 01:00:55 pm
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/

Selfish people are selfish, such as it ever was.  Fauci is pretty straightforward:

Quote
“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.”

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 13, 2021, 02:21:22 pm
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. 
Raldi says the RCMP is going to come down from Canada and twist your arm and then inject you in the other one. :)  Eh.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 03:37:21 pm
... Fauci is pretty straightforward:

Fucc Fauxi.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 13, 2021, 03:40:33 pm
Fucc Fauxi.

Yeah, that's an opinion. And?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 13, 2021, 05:07:33 pm
Fucc Fauxi.

Why?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 13, 2021, 05:11:20 pm
So, if the vaccines work, why do we need to still act as if they do not after getting them?

Because, while the vaccinated may have better protection against getting infected themselves, they may still be infectious to others.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 13, 2021, 06:56:44 pm
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

By all means, have a breakfast with your friends. That will be the quickest and simplest way to find out how effective was your vaccine shot.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 13, 2021, 07:54:59 pm
Because, while the vaccinated may have better protection against getting infected themselves, they may still be infectious to others.

Those others then should protect themselves by 1. Being vaccinated 2. Staying home or 3. Wearing triple mask.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on April 13, 2021, 09:38:31 pm
Fucc Fauxi.

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.

As a physician with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Fauci has served American public health in various capacities for more than 50 years, and has been an advisor to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan.[1] He became director of the NIAID in 1984 and has made contributions to HIV/AIDS research and other immunodeficiency diseases, both as a scientist and as the head of the NIAID.[2] From 1983 to 2002, Fauci was one of the world's most frequently-cited scientists across all scientific journals.[2] In 2008, President George W. Bush awarded Fauci the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States, for his work on the AIDS relief program PEPFAR.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 14, 2021, 12:22:15 am
Because, while the vaccinated may have better protection against getting infected themselves, they may still be infectious to others.

And what happened to the last 100+ years of vaccine science, not to mention the last year of research on C-19 showing non-Symptomatic cases not spreading the virus? 

Like I said, if you want to say that we need to get the vaccine while at the same time say we can not get back to normal even after doing so, dont be surprised when people don't see the need to get vaccinated.  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.  And lets not forget the countless Dems telling us back in October that we should not trust the vaccine due to Trump's involvement and the Tuskegee experiments.   

It is the Dems that have sown this seed of vaccine denialism, and no Dem has actually done anything to try and fix it. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 07:17:14 am
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....

I have no clue about virology. I couldn't care less about virology. I just don't want morons who have the title virologist to run and ruin my life.

Is that the same moron (and his minions in the media and politics) who said:

- general population doesn't need masks

- then he said "oh, wait, they do... and if they don't, snitch on them, arrest them, throw them in jail

- then he said "oh, wait, masks do not work after all ... to make them even remotely efficient, you need two or even three

- asymptomatics are not the driver of pandemics

- then he said they are the major driver

- removing restrictions in Texas is Neanderthal thinking (whispering in another moron's ear)

- then he said he doesn't understand why Texans are not dead by now

That "expert"?


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 08:22:21 am
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 not to do something, they will latch on to pretty much anything, rational or irrational. People already have half a dozen excuses for not getting vaccinated. What's one more? All this may do is shift some people from one excuse to the another without affecting the total number of people not getting vaccinated. For example, you didn't need this new excuse for deciding not to get vaccinated. You rationalized not getting vaccinated a long time ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 14, 2021, 08:30:37 am
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.

And my experience is when you give people contradictory statements (vaccines work yet we still cant back to normal because they may not work), you confuse people and they tend not to care. 

So, in the end, the vaccine hesitancy we are seeing is being brought to us by the Dems. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 08:48:49 am
...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 09:23:07 am
Surely you can do better than Rand Paul as an oracle of wisdom.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 14, 2021, 09:44:38 am
Surely you can do better than Rand Paul as an oracle of wisdom.

(Maybe he can't.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 14, 2021, 09:46:27 am
...  I just don't want morons who have the title virologist to run and ruin my life.

Please remain calm.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 14, 2021, 10:16:46 am
(Maybe he can't.)

Why would you?

Virologist speaking on viral infection - questionable.
Ophthalmologist speaking on viral infection - heck yeah!

Makes perfect sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 10:25:35 am
... Virologist speaking on viral infection - questionable.
Ophthalmologist speaking on viral infection - heck yeah!

Makes perfect sense.

Appeal to authority, much? A logical fallacy, btw.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 10:29:00 am
Please remain calm.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 14, 2021, 10:30:27 am
Appeal to authority, much? A logical fallacy, btw.

Nope. Quoth Google. 

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 14, 2021, 10:32:17 am


 ;D.  This has been my experience also :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 10:50:29 am
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)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 11:01:34 am
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.

I don't think an appeal to authority (Dr. Fauci) is nearly as problematic as an appeal to a false authority (Rand Paul), which is a logical fallacy too. Keep in mind when your opponent calls you out for making an appeal to authority, he is conceding that the guy you are relying on is an authority, and the audience will think that even if you made a logical fallacy, your argument is probably right. When your opponent makes an appeal to a false authority, and you call him out for it, the audience will think that your opponent must be an idiot for relying on a guy who doesn't have any idea what he is talking about.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 11:17:01 am
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.  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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 11:34:28 am
... your opponent must be an idiot...

Thank you, oh, the Smart One!

You always have something smart-assy to say about anything and everything.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 11:34:43 am
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.

If James is relying on Dr. Fauci as an authority on virology, then he is making an an appeal to authority. If you are relying on Rand Paul as an authority on petty tyrants, then you are making an appeal to authority too. Neither are helpful to winning your argument. I know why Dr. Fauci is an expert on virology (and epidemiology). I don't know why you think Rand Paul is an expert on petty tyrants. Is it because he is a libertarian?

Here is an interesting fact: Rand Paul doesn't have an undergraduate degree, even though he claims to have one in English and biology. Turns out he entered med school before finishing his undergraduate degree. I have a friend who did that. Anyway, degree or no degree, how does studying English and biology make you an expert on petty tyrants? I could see it if your undergraduate degree was in history or political science, but English and biology?

https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rand-pauls-biology-degree/

By the way, when I heard that Rand Paul got beat up by his neighbor, I wasn't the least bit surprised. It seem perfectly normal that he would get beat up by someone sooner or later given his winning personality. I read a few articles about why he got beat up by his neighbor, but none were conclusive. The one that rang true was that when Rand Paul mowed along his property line, he did so in the direction which caused the grass clippings to shoot out on his neighbor's property. That sounded like something Rand Paul would do. Apparently his neighbor was really particular about his lawn.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 14, 2021, 12:33:00 pm
Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people even more.

Dr. Fauci was not responsible for the federal government's recommendation that there be a temporary pause in vaccinations with the Johnson & Johnson product until the reports involving blood clots could be reviewed: the decision was made by the Food and Drug Administration in coordination with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 12:40:54 pm
... It seem perfectly normal that he would get beat up by someone sooner or later given his winning personality...

I am speechless 😱😱😱
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 01:40:38 pm
I am speechless 😱😱😱

Maybe "entirely predictable" would be a better choice of words.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 14, 2021, 01:50:53 pm
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

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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 02:09:19 pm
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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 02:13:44 pm
Nope. You appealed to Dr. Fauxi's authority, who IS (supposedly) "an expert in the field of question" (virology)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 02:23:04 pm
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.

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?
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.

Additionally, there were millions of people who had appointments to get the Johnson vaccine.  Now they're walking around without it, and will possibly get Covid and die from that in larger numbers while waiting until the CDC to make up it's mind.  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.

Also, if the government and CDC, and FDA are pulling it, it's harder to argue with people who rather not take it.  The problem is Fauci is a politician.  He's afraid to make a decision without talking out of both sides of his mouth.  I guess that's why he's been in his position in the government for thirty years.  He knows how to play it safe.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 02:33:43 pm
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.

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):

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 02:35:17 pm
Maybe "entirely predictable" would be a better choice of words.

In case it is not clear, I am speechless that you consider it "perfectly normal" to beat someone up because of their personality.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 02:35:55 pm
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.   

By increasing the risk of blood clots, stroke, and heart attack, hormonal contraception leads to the death of 300-400 women every year.
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2019/03/49896/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 02:36:26 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 02:37:54 pm
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?

Aren't you confusing CDC with FDA?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 02:40:51 pm
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?

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.
They have the legal right to do what they did.  I just think it was stupid for the reasons I gave above.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 02:53:50 pm
Aren't you confusing CDC with FDA?

Yes, the FDA approves medicines. I don't know which agency put a pause on the J&J vaccine. Ask Alan.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 03:01:54 pm
They have the legal right to do what they did.  I just think it was stupid for the reasons I gave above.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 03:03:07 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 03:09:29 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 03:10:26 pm
Virologists exist to write research papers, collect titles and positions, and associated remuneration

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.

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.

not to run my life. When they do, they are petty tyrants, not virologists.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 03:12:48 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 03:21:10 pm
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 03:24:15 pm
Who are these reasonable people you are talking about?
Apparently not you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 03:25:18 pm
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 made no appeal to authority. I broadly and correctly stated Dr. Fauci's field of specialization, accomplishments, and place in the scientific and medical communities. I have no idea why that would trigger your response, except for my stated view that criticism from those outside of his field of expertise has in no way diminished the respect of those within his field of expertise.

Relax.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 03:31:03 pm
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.

Do you know the person, and his or her position, who pulled the J&J vaccine? The CDC website says this:

"CDC and FDA have recommended a pause in the use of the Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in the United States out of an abundance of caution, effective Tuesday, April 13."

It is interesting that it says that the "CDC and FDA have recommended". Who have they recommended it to? Who acted on their recommendation? It wouldn't surprise me if it was a political appointee, perhaps even at the state level. Do you know?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 03:33:06 pm
I believe the point Slobodan was making was that doctors should not be making public policy.

They don't. They only provide advice and recommendations. Policy makers decide what to do with the advice they receive. So, you can relax and breath easy now.

Oh, and the other things that doctors do is advance the understanding, treatment, and prevention of diseases, as well as take care of you when you're sick.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 04:08:21 pm
In case it is not clear, I am speechless that you consider it "perfectly normal" to beat someone up because of their personality.

I agree. It was a poor choice of words. I should have said "entirely predictable".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 04:11:10 pm
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.

I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion. I haven't said whether I thought pausing the vaccine was a good idea or a bad idea.

So again I ask. Who are these reasonable people you are talking about?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 14, 2021, 04:15:55 pm
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):

Of course, and no one argued such.   But that doesn't mean that anyone's opinion on anything is equally valid.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 04:19:04 pm
As usual, you're putting words in my mouth that I never said.

Go back and look at the post to which you're referring. Do you see that "?" at the end of the sentence? That "?" means that it is a question as opposed to a statement or quote. He is asking you if that's what you believe. Understand?

He isn't "putting words in [your] mouth that [you] never said". Perhaps you're trying to ease a guilty conscience.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 04:44:33 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 14, 2021, 05:58:24 pm
It was a bad decision.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 06:53:20 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 14, 2021, 07:23:53 pm
... Given the respect I have for your intelligence, I'm surprised that you would describe them the way you have above....

That was a rhetorical and hyperbolic sarcasm :) 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 14, 2021, 07:26:37 pm
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.

Yes, but your bad teeth have zero affect on anyone else, thus the decision is all yours. Now when something could affect others, then it’s not quite that simple, like smoking in planes or driving drunk can have severe affects on others, so those decisions are taken out of your hands...like they should be.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 08:34:41 pm
That was a rhetorical and hyperbolic sarcasm :)

Thanks. That's a reasonable reply. I should have realized, but you do have a way of stating things rather emphatically—not to say that's always a bad thing mind you.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 14, 2021, 08:42:31 pm
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention met this afternoon, and the participants reportedly concluded that additional information would be necessary before they could ratify, revoke, or amend the federal government's recommendation that providers temporarily suspend use of the Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine.

As far as I have been able to determine, most states are following the federal recommendation, and filling all existing appointments for their residents with one of the two approved mRNA vaccines.

The committee has published a number of interesting documents that were prepared for the participants in today's meeting, including a summary of Reports of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-04/03-COVID-Shimabukuro-508.pdf) and a Work Group Interpretation (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-04/05-COVID-Oliver-508.pdf) of the currently available data and the policy options that the committee will consider.

My impression is that whatever recommendation the committee makes with respect to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine will likely influence a future decision regarding emergency use authorization in the United States of the Oxford-AstraZenica vaccine, about which similar concerns have been raised, but that's an inference based on the way the data were presented in the documents I've linked to above rather than anything that has been reliably reported yet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 14, 2021, 09:13:56 pm
Thank you for the factual information.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 14, 2021, 09:32:32 pm
...  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.

One day I'm sure you'll get over Fauci dissing Trump.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 14, 2021, 09:52:32 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 15, 2021, 05:48:06 am
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.

Quote
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.

https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-frantically-adding-icu-beds-to-hospitals-as-occupancy-due-to-covid-19-hits-record-high-1.5385128
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 08:33:43 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 08:34:23 am
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 08:37:57 am
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.

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.
What misrepresentation has been made? The CDC stopped vaccinations using J&J.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 08:45:30 am
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?

But none of this has anything to do with the current situation as to holding up vaccinations.  The new issue of one death doesn't justify stopping it in my opinion.  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.  The one death doesn't change it s efficacy against Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 15, 2021, 09:12:48 am
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.

Many women feel exactly like that when recalling some perceived slight their husbands did or said thirty years ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 09:21:27 am
I'm already married.   :-\
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 09:31:35 am
... 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.

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).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 15, 2021, 09:39:53 am
And the stupendous messaging from our nonpareil elite class on the vaccines continues! 

Fifth of Americans refuse to get coronavirus vaccine as Johnson & Johnson shot is put on hold; Europeans' confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine plummeted when it was temporarily paused last month (https://www.foxnews.com/us/fifth-americans-refuse-coronavirus-vaccine-johnson-johnson-put-on-hold)

Yep, 7 out of 7,000,000 is enough to justify pulling a promising product I guess.  Sometime in the future, the Democrats' messaging on this will be viewed as a masterclass on how to thoroughly sow doubt on a promising scientific breakthrough while turning the populous en mass into anti-vaxers. 


But anyway, does Atlanta still have a mask mandate?  If so, how about the surrounding suburbs?  I may be flying down next week for a project and just want to gauge how back to normal it is. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 09:59:53 am

Many women feel exactly like that when recalling some perceived slight their husbands did or said thirty years ago.

What's funny is he can't even remember what it was.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 10:02:25 am
...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.

If no one will take it, how will it protect millions of people?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 15, 2021, 10:08:37 am
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.

That's a long time to hold a grudge.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 10:09:30 am
...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.
Quote

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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 10:13:11 am
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 15, 2021, 10:15:46 am
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

Here in Ottawa we're getting record number of infections. CHEO, local children's hospital, is converting some areas for adult Covid treatment because of ICUs that are filling up around town. It's anecdotal, but I can guess at what is happening. From what I see in my neighbourhood and local parks is that people are gathering in large groups and not just with close family, even though we're in the middle of a 4-week "lockdown" because of the resurgence in infections. Many people are already acting as if the pandemic is over, when it isn't. So far as I'm able to judge, the messaging about that is pretty clear about that, but messaging only works if people read or listen to it.

When you get infections, you'll get deaths, sure as sunrise. Stupid never sleeps.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 10:17:45 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 10:19:52 am
Here in Ottawa we're getting record number of infections....

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 10:23:54 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 15, 2021, 10:39:08 am
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?

You got the sequence wrong. FIRST we had record infections, THEN they imposed stay-at-home and store closings.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 15, 2021, 10:39:19 am
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?

It appears that the measures were not draconian enough for stupid people. As a matter of fact, the anti-covid measures over the last few weeks were relaxed. The travel and get-togethers over Easter didn't help. The lockdowns were re-instituted and hospitals closed again on Monday, so hopefully that with the continuing vaccinations will help to mitigate the spread.

In the meantime, Toronto area hospitals are redeploying hundreds of doctors, nurses and other health workers to care for critically ill COVID-19 patients to keep pace with the ongoing flood of patients.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 11:03:53 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 11:05:44 am
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 15, 2021, 11:07:44 am
"Officer, I was just running out to get my baby some formula.  Please don't shoot."

Hey, if you're going to hang an air freshener in the car, you're asking for trouble.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 04:12:12 pm
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

"The Head of Denmark’s Health Agency Keels Over and Drops Unconscious During Presser on Decision to Stop Using AstraZeneca Vaccines"

Quote
The death of a second person in Denmark who died after getting the AstraZeneca vaccine was reported this week.

There is a video inside the article.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 15, 2021, 04:35:04 pm
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

6 people who didn't get the AstraZeneca vaccine died from Covid in Denmark just in the last 3 days.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 15, 2021, 04:54:29 pm
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.

Quote
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 04:59:56 pm
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

No surprise. No one has said the vaccines are 100% effective. Neither are natural antibodies.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 15, 2021, 05:19:48 pm
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

Those numbers should go down as more people get vaccinated. Right now there are way more people that are not vaccinated and possible transmitters than are vaccinated. The vaccine is not 100% affective so infection while vaccinated is expected...but when we reach the so called herd immunity, things will change.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 15, 2021, 05:25:44 pm
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).

Drunk driving also has a very little chance of killing someone, yet we have these draconian laws that can actually put you into prison for driving drunk. Same with smoking on planes...how many people died because they sat next to someone on the plane while they smoked? How many bombs brought down planes in the last 50 years, yet we’ve put in huge delays at airports that are costing trillions of dollars every year.

I don’t see you all excited about these assaults on your liberty.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 05:41:02 pm
... I don’t see you all excited about these assaults on your liberty.

Oh, but I am. Against mandatory seat belts, against checking billions of passengers instead of just a few Muslims. Drunk drivers actually kill thousands every year - and yet, they are not prevented from driving in advance, unless caught. I don't mind taking off the street someone who is knowingly Covid positive AND coughing deliberately in people's faces.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 05:42:13 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 15, 2021, 05:51:08 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 15, 2021, 05:56:18 pm
It would be if it weren't bollocksing statistics. Why do you do that?

Not me. Les contrasted 6 to 2.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 15, 2021, 06:53:15 pm
I don't mind taking off the street someone who is knowingly Covid positive AND coughing deliberately in people's faces.

So if someone is coughing in someone's face, maybe make them take a COVID breathalyzer test? I have read a few stories about police arresting people for coughing in someone's face when the person asked them to put on a mask. This incident occurred at a WalMart. I've been telling you guys for months to avoid WalMart.

https://www.newsweek.com/couple-arrested-coughing-walmart-employees-refusing-wear-masks-1516455

You'll love this quote from the article:

"In a March letter, the Department of Justice said that coronavirus "appears to meet" the "statutory definition of a 'biological agent.'" Individuals attempting to intentionally infect others with COVID-19 could be brought up on terrorism charges."

"Threats or attempts to use COVID-19 as a weapon against Americans will not be tolerated," the letter said."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 15, 2021, 08:16:07 pm
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.

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 are 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 08:24:13 pm
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.

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.
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 15, 2021, 09:35:21 pm
... I don't mind taking off the street someone who is knowingly Covid positive AND coughing deliberately in people's faces.

I don't know about that. Sounds like a slippery slope to start arresting people for acting like assholes. :)

And anyway, why just if they have Covid. Would it be ok to deliberately cough on people if you don't have Covid?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 15, 2021, 09:53:02 pm
Interesting statistics. 

So far, 5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught Covid anyway in US, CDC says
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html

99.992% of fully vaccinated people have dodged COVID, CDC data shows
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/04/99-992-of-fully-vaccinated-people-have-dodged-covid-cdc-data-shows/

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: armand on April 15, 2021, 11:28:44 pm
Haven't read what was posted here in months and I don't plan to, just a word of caution.

You can definitely get Covid even if you are vaccinated (likelihood depending on the vaccine), and you can still get pretty sick. The benefit comes more from not dying or ending up in the ICU. I already know of 2 cases in our extended critical care group that got it after being vaccinated, so even if you are less likely to die from it taking precautions still makes sense.

As a side note in SW Michigan I think we have the highest numbers now, or at least tied with the highest that we had.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 15, 2021, 11:53:29 pm
What misrepresentation has been made?

The ones that you made yesterday come to mind.

The CDC stopped vaccinations using J&J.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:05:22 am
... 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...

How so?

Do those innovative vaccines create an invisible, impenetrable shield around you?

I assume not, so it means that when viruses enter your body (i.e., you get infected), the vaccine (i.e., antibodies it created) acts so swiftly to kill it on the spot?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:28:30 am
... when the US gets 6 million dead...

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:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:28:55 am
And one more:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:38:52 am
... when the US gets 6 million dead..

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:49:09 am
The benefits of not being vaccinated:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 16, 2021, 06:53:03 am
Many young and fit people succumb to C19 and will experience long lasting effects.

Quote
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.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:54:46 am
Maybe but I didn’t present it as a realistic estimate - just a number bigger than your initial guess if less than 60000.

Once again, it wasn't my initial guess of the final number. Just the threshold when I will start paying attention.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 16, 2021, 06:57:56 am
Many young and fit people succumb to C19 and will experience long lasting effects. ...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 16, 2021, 06:58:02 am
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.

I wonder how many fatalities are caused by hospital closures and surgery cancellations.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 16, 2021, 07:03:26 am
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.

Fortunately, none of my family and close friends have contracted C19 virus yet, but I've read quite a few stories about younger or middle-aged persons suffering or dead from it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 09:14:22 am
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:

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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 10:15:00 am
The ones that you made yesterday come to mind.

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?   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 10:22:15 am
The fat lady hasn't sung.  The war continues.  We will be adding up the deaths and economic and medical casualties for years.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 10:41:29 am
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 11:03:04 am
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.

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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 11:10:00 am

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.

I cannot believe you're doubling down on this idea.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 11:20:47 am
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?

If you are going to endlessly repeat your points, it seems only fair that I be allowed to do so too.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 11:48:57 am
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.

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




Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 16, 2021, 11:54:06 am
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.  :)

Come on you know Slob...he's just a shock jock. He loves to just stir the shit with his smart alic responses.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 16, 2021, 12:09:44 pm
All I suggested etc., etc. . . .

I cannot believe you're doubling down on this idea.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 12:11:12 pm
Why not?  I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 12:13:40 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 12:16:45 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 12:24:18 pm
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 do not repeat ad nauseum that experts can't be trusted, and in the next breath rely on a expert's opinion. That's your shtick.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 12:29:35 pm
I provided facts that support my opinion.  See #1267.  Your comment is just a cheap shot, Chris.

Reading #1267, it seems to me that you are providing an opinion to support your opinion, not a fact to support your opinion.

I just googled and found experts are making the same recommendation I am.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 12:44:38 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 12:48:49 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 12:54:18 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 16, 2021, 01:02:37 pm
What I said is that Covid experts kept changing their minds and scientific knowledge keeps changing.

For 'changing' read 'evolving'.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 16, 2021, 01:14:13 pm
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.”

Do you not realize how ridiculous your posts have become? You post the same crap over and over despite being given facts to the contrary. Now you post a statement that contradicts your own post from an hour and a half earlier.

This on top of your repeated "Fauci shutdown J&J vaccine scaring people"; "We didn't need Fauci to stop Johnson vaccinations"; when Fauci is not part of the CDC or FDA which made the recommendation. We get it. You don't like Fauci. You even gave us your reasoning for it. "I don't like Fauci for what he did thirty years ago and my feelings about it.  I forget the particular situation."

Move on. You're making a fool of yourself with this issue.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 16, 2021, 01:21:58 pm
“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.”

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 01:28:35 pm
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

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 01:31:14 pm
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 01:31:28 pm
But not taking the flu shot was my choice, not the government's.  ...

Are you saying that the government forced you to take the Covid vaccine? First I hear of this. I thought it was only in fascist Canada that they dragged you to the clinic at gun point. You may be confused.

If you were a computer, I'd say it's time for a reset.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 01:35:13 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 16, 2021, 01:39:52 pm
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.

Others have addressed these points in the preceding pages.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 16, 2021, 01:55:50 pm
I'm somehow reminded of a quote from the original Terminator movie. "Listen. Understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with...it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear...and it absolutely will not stop...Ever. Until you are dead." [or bored to death]
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 02:01:34 pm
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.

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. Of course that is not unexpected. You are mimicking the behavior and thought process of your immortal beloved Trump who yesterday said the the CDC recommended pausing the J&J vaccine because they are friends with Pfizer. Actually, I am a little surprised that you have yet to advance that conspiracy theory here.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 02:18:22 pm
Asked and answered many times by me as well as other here.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 02:24:37 pm
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? If so, how did you determine that? If not, how did you determine that?

Why are the eyes of the experts who are taking payoffs but with whom you agree not being blinded?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 02:43:45 pm
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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 02:51:26 pm
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:

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 16, 2021, 02:58:45 pm
As expected, you quoted my post, and then gave us two paragraphs of non sequiturs. I'll ask again:

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.     
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 16, 2021, 03:05:13 pm
Elon Musk just won the NASA contract to fly the astronauts to Moon. Which vaccine should they take?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 16, 2021, 03:11:32 pm
I already said in #1289 that many experts I agree with take payoffs too.

So the issue of whether an expert is taking a payoff is not a determining factor in your decision whom to believe.

Apparently, you're not reading my entire post, something you accuse me of.

I always read every word of your posts.

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.

There you go with that grain of salt business. You repeated yourself so I'll repeat myself:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 17, 2021, 09:02:55 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 17, 2021, 09:28:20 am
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.

My takeaway from that story is that you believe that because you would be willing to rat out the mob in exchange for being released from prison and enrolled in the witness protection program, experts can't be trusted.

And yet:

I already said in #1289 that many experts I agree with take payoffs too.

It is an interesting contradiction. As I noted above, it would appear that the issue of whether an expert is taking a payoff is not a determining factor in your decision whom to believe.

Also present was four government prosecutors, all considerably younger than me.

The foregoing sentence from your post really intrigues me.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 18, 2021, 07:06:34 pm
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 18, 2021, 10:18:30 pm
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/

That's an interesting article. It says "researchers" and "the study says", things like that but it never provides a reference. Was there one study? were there several? from which journal? It's an odd bit of reporting. Unless that information is confirmed by trusted sources (CDC, Mayo clinic, etc.), I wouldn't put too much credence in it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 18, 2021, 11:39:17 pm
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/

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.

Quote
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).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3626477/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 19, 2021, 07:40:28 am
I thought the two most important sentences in the article were this one in the first paragraph:

"That vaccine aside, there are other risk factors for blood clots it's worth being aware of."

which is the giveaway that the article isn't about the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, and:

"If You Have This Blood Type, Your Dementia Risk Is High, Study Says."

which is actually a link to a another article to give you something else to worry about.

If that weren't enough, that article contains this sentence which is a link to yet another article to give you even more to worry about:

"If You Have Type A Blood, You're at Higher Risk for This Kind of Cancer."

My suggestion is you avoid reading articles on this site, or you are going to be needing to visit your psychiatrist for some Xanax, or your insurance agent for one of those final expense policies, or both.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 19, 2021, 08:53:26 am
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/

Thanks, you put it better than I did. I think this article conveys zero useful information. The "links" to Covid vaccines, reading carefully, are via innuendo.


Alan, as has been suggested above, there are much better sources of information online, you'd be better off avoiding inflammatory articles like this one. They may exist to drop cookies onto your computer that enables them to sell you stuff later. If your self-image is as "rebel" and (or) "contrarian", as you have previously stated, that's fine, but for that to work you need a top drawer bullshit detector. "Alternative" is not necessarily good, sometimes it's a con.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 19, 2021, 05:02:36 pm
FAUCISM!

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 20, 2021, 04:08:09 am
...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 11:42:55 am
This expert agrees with me.  ;)

EU regulator finds possible blood clot link with J&J vaccine, but says benefits outweigh risks

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/20/covid-vaccine-ema-says-jj-shot-can-be-rolled-out-across-eu.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 03:25:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 03:41:44 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 20, 2021, 03:52:48 pm
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.

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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 04:59:53 pm
That's not what the non-Fauci expert said.  He said it should have not been paused.

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.

"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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 20, 2021, 05:09:16 pm
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.

+1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 05:27:48 pm
That was dumb.  But Fauci is a politician and always errs on being politically correct.

Somehow, I suspect that you are happily unaware of how large a role "dumb and political" Dr. Fauci has played in the efforts which led to the creation of the Moderna vaccine that is currently providing you with protection from COVID-19. Your feelings create a rather large blind spot.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 08:25:29 pm
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.

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
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 08:32:07 pm
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.

"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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 20, 2021, 08:58:06 pm
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 09:23:09 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 09:33:24 pm
How do people who had the appointments canceled because they were scheduled to take Johnson's vaccine suppose to get the shot?

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.

They now go to the end of the line and have to make re-appointments.

Do they? Where is that happening? What percentage of vaccine providers are telling patients that, if any?

Many places only have the Johnson vaccine so they can't immediately substitute.

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?

The other vaccines have to be distributed 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 09:40:33 pm
My beliefs are not dependent on what others think...

or much — if any — evidence, it often seems.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 09:45:49 pm
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.

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. 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. 

You have your facts wrong about the things you said.  Stopping the vaccine prevented many people from getting vaccinated on time, as they were scheduled.  Of course, some people may have been lucky to get other appts quickly.  But how many couldn't?  The government seems to have made no calculation of this issue or if they did, didn't care or think it was important enough. They "followed the science" but did not use any common sense.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:03:38 pm
I don't know why any places would stock and use more than one vaccine.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:06:41 pm
Note the place I went to to get mine, only vaccinated with Moderna.  Had Moderna been stopped, I would have been out of luck. 

That assumes that they wouldn't have been able to receive Pfizer vaccine thru reallocation of the vaccine supply. Why make such an assumption?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 10:14:25 pm
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.

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'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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:14:58 pm
You have your facts wrong about the things you said.

I can accept being wrong. It's happened plenty of times before in my life. Those experiences have tended to make me more cautious in what I say and how I say it, but still qualified as fallible without any doubt.

Just show me specifically what I asserted and in what context. Then show me some reliable evidence that disputes it. I'll make a full confession for you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 20, 2021, 10:19:29 pm
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.

All of which is based on your assumptions without any evidentiary support.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:21:17 pm
You're guessing most places did this.

No. I was answering your question "why any places would stock and use more than one vaccine". I gave one simple reason for why any places would do that for a vaccine or for anything else for that matter; to minimize any impact and provide an alternative source in the event of a supply disruption. It's a basic consideration in any properly organized inventory or distribution planning.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:32:46 pm
Additionally, it would make the shipments to each place more complicated because there would have to be coordination between the different manufacturers.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 10:35:58 pm
Here's an NY Times article on what stopping J&J did.  While we were only discussing how it affects America, it also has had a deleterious effect in other countries as well setting many of them back since J&J was suppose to back up Astra Zeneca which apparently has some real problems of its own.  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. The article also confirms my concern that stopping it would fuel vaccination hesitancy.

Johnson & Johnson Vaccinations Paused After Rare Clotting Cases Emerge
Federal health officials called for a halt in the use of the company’s coronavirus vaccine while they study serious illnesses that developed in six American women.

“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. “Right now, these adverse events appear to be extremely rare.”

While they framed the move as a recommendation to health practitioners, the impact was immediate. By Tuesday evening, every state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico had announced a pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine injections.

The same went for the U.S. military, federally run vaccination sites, and CVS and Walgreens, two pharmacy giants that participate in the federal program, officials said. Rite Aid, Walmart and Publix also announced that they had paused Johnson & Johnson injections.

Beyond American shores, Johnson & Johnson said it would delay the rollout of its vaccine in Europe, where several countries were poised to start administering it this week. South Africa, devastated by a more contagious variant of the virus that emerged there, also suspended use of the vaccine. Australia announced it would not purchase any doses.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:39:08 pm
Apparently, some of you got your facts wrong again.

Which facts are those?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 10:46:14 pm
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 10:48:21 pm
Which facts are those?
The facts I confirmed with the Times article. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:52:45 pm
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 10:53:44 pm
The facts I confirmed with the Times article.

Well, thanks for being so vague. Now, I can move on.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 20, 2021, 11:01:36 pm
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.

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? 

Quote from the NY Times article in an earlier post:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 20, 2021, 11:20:53 pm
That's not what the experts said, and we should follow the experts, shouldn't we? 

Yes. Listening to those that have more expertise than yourself, especially in highly complex fields, is generally a good idea. Airing differences of opinion among experts is also a good idea. It provides a broader perspective and is usually healthy and beneficial in informing those that ultimately have to make choices, judgements, and decisions on policies or in providing recommendations.

It's also helpful to recognize the tendency of many people to use any excuse that's handy to rationalize their preexisting beliefs. Some individuals have that inclination more so than others. It's best not to stereotype or generalize too broadly as individual people vary a great deal.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 02:28:08 am
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.

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.

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 02:42:44 am
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."

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 05:11:05 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 21, 2021, 06:38:07 am
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?

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 08:27:02 am
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.

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)
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 08:32:04 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 08:43:20 am
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:

Quote: While they framed the move as a recommendation to health practitioners, the impact was immediate. By Tuesday evening, every state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico had announced a pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine injections.

The same went for the U.S. military, federally run vaccination sites, and CVS and Walgreens, two pharmacy giants that participate in the federal program, officials said. Rite Aid, Walmart and Publix also announced that they had paused Johnson & Johnson injections.

Beyond American shores, Johnson & Johnson said it would delay the rollout of its vaccine in Europe, where several countries were poised to start administering it this week. South Africa, devastated by a more contagious variant of the virus that emerged there, also suspended use of the vaccine. Australia announced it would not purchase any doses.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 08:51:19 am
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?
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. 

Did Canada change it to 3-4 months because of Johnson cancellation?  Or was that what they decided before the Johnson issue?  The latter procedure was a contentious issue here in the USA.  But I believe all facilities decided on giving second doses within the 3-4 week period rather than giving out only single doses to more people and spreading out the second dose. .
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 21, 2021, 09:12:18 am
All you need to know about Dr. Fauxi and Faucism:

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 21, 2021, 09:14:29 am
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'm sorry to be so rude, but why should we read your opinion about how these places are managed? Why would we consider your opinions credible, since you've been SO wrong about SO many things before.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 21, 2021, 09:40:17 am
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 are correct, of course.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 21, 2021, 10:03:30 am
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.

More assumptions without any evidentiary support.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 21, 2021, 10:11:04 am
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?

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):

Quote
. . . 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]).

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 21, 2021, 10:15:21 am
I may disagree with Bill Maher on most policy issues, but I have to commend him for always giving it straight. 

New Rule: Give It to Me Straight, Doc | Real Time with Bill Maher (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp3gy_CLXho)

What I found most interesting, and disturbing, is that he sites polling that shows nearly 70% of Dems think the hospitalization rate for C-19 is over 20%, with most thinking it is over 50%, when it is really only between 1% and 5%.  Republicans, not surprisingly, have a much better grasp on the actual C-19 numbers and rates. 

The sheer amount of hysteria created over this by the media is going to take a long time for some to get over. 

To that point, here is an article published in Slate recently, It’s About Time for Us to Stop Wearing Masks Outside (https://slate.com/technology/2021/04/masks-outside-covid-risk-low.html).  Now the reason I post this is not for the content of the article, because honesty I have yet to wear a mask outside, but because of the visceral responses to it from lefties.  I could see at the beginning of this thinking it was necessary to wear a mask outside, but now, after all the research, the idea is absurd.  Yet, so many people have been completely mentally broken in the last year that this article was met with the equivalent indignation you would expect to see against one promoting genocide. 

The mental fallout from this is going to be severe for a lot of people.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 21, 2021, 10:16:19 am
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.

I and many of my friends received Pfizer vaccine. AstraZeneca vaccine has been re-approved and is administered now also in large numbers.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 21, 2021, 12:18:36 pm
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.

Here you are, Americans Misinformed About COVID Hospitalization (https://catalyst.independent.org/2021/03/24/americans-misinformed-about-covid-hospitalization/)

I will confer, before you point it out, that Republicans are only a little better here.  I wish they would perform these polls with a subset focusing on libertarians too. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 21, 2021, 01:25:52 pm
I'm sorry to be so rude, but why should we read your opinion...

Then why do you?

You do realize you are participating in an Alan Klain vs. the World series on your own volition?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 21, 2021, 01:28:39 pm
... He is ignorant on every subject, makes assumptions that suit his extreme political views, and is dishonest to boot...

That is absolutely and categorically wrong.

Alan represents a common man's views on the matter, his views are not extreme politically, and definitely is not dishonest.

You et al on the other hand...

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 21, 2021, 01:34:05 pm
... Republicans are significantly less likely than Democrats to realise that CV19 is more lethal than flu)

Which, of course, is not true, as I demonstrated earlier in the thread, short of the short-termism current hysteria.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 21, 2021, 01:51:48 pm
Thanks
So, not at all what was claimed by Maher, then.

No.  Maher's point was that if the left is insistent to call out right wing news sources for misinformation, they better call out and acknowledge their own misinformation as well especially when Republicans are doing a better job in the same area.  Otherwise, they lose credibility.  One great example of this is the left's hysteria over C-19, which Maher pointed out, all of which is not supported by the facts.  Republican though have by a much better grasp on the reality of C-19, which all the polling is showing. 

Now, getting back to my point, although republicans overall are doing a much better job at being informed on the overall risk factors and data when compared to the pseudo-science party, it is not as good as I would like it to be.  To this, I do realize that conservatives, just like liberals, tend to be emotional thinkers, whereas libertarians are not, which is why I said I would like to see a break down of libertarians as well. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on April 21, 2021, 02:16:29 pm
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.
Retract, reframe, or focus on something / someone else.

Josh
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 04:06:38 pm
Personal attack. This is the place we want to avoid.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 21, 2021, 04:20:36 pm
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.

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:

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?

It goes without saying that Alan's description does not reflect Jeremy's opinion of black people. It is a heinous accusation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 04:28:26 pm
More assumptions without any evidentiary support.

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.
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?

In any case, I'm sure some facilities were able to make up with other vaccines even doubling their appointment schedules for double dosing.  Many others probably just cancelled their appts period until they could get makeup vaccines.  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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 04:59:32 pm
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.

Once again, as is your habit, you post a reply which has no relationship whatever to the post which you're quoting and to which you're pretending to reply. My post was only in regard to your false assumption and repeated statement that vaccine sites require "special refrigeration equipment" for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. They don't. I gave you chapter and verse and the links to detailed storage information that proves it. Your reply is totally unresponsive to my post and simply goes off on an unrelated tangent.

Also, I've made no assumptions regarding what vaccine sites are doing. I've simply poked holes in false assumptions you've made like the requirement for "special refrigeration equipment".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 21, 2021, 05:04:39 pm
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 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.

To argue as you have that it's cancellation has had no effect on the vaccination rate counters common sense.

It is immediately obvious to anyone who reads my post that I made no such argument.

We won't know the full effect for weeks when surveys are completed that will provide exact statistics.

Which makes one wonder how you have reached the conclusions you have.

It may have been worse in other countries who didn't have access to other vaccines at all.

That might be true or it might not be true. I have not seen any data one way or the other.

In any case, it seems to me and a lot of other more experience people, that the government over-reacted.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 05:24:23 pm
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 21, 2021, 05:44:30 pm
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.

No, "we" are not giving our opinions. You are giving your opinion. I have not expressed an opinion on whether the FDA and CDC recommending a pause on J&J vaccine was a good idea or a bad idea. I have challenged your opinion because it is based on many assumptions that are without evidentiary support.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 06:08:33 pm
You conveniently ignored the part of the article.. [Blah, Blah, Blah]

I didn't conveniently ignore what you wrote. I quoted one of your statements and replied to it. I'm not going to waste any more time than I already have as you run down different rabbits holes with yet another reply that is unresponsive to a post to which you're pretending to reply, but instead are going off on a different tangent.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 21, 2021, 06:12:12 pm
You do realize you are participating in an Alan Klein vs. the World series on your own volition?

Excellent point.  Much of this repetitive bickering serves nobody's interest, except, perhaps, to keep the respective bickerers occupied.

Alan represents a common man's views on the matter, his views are not extreme politically, and definitely is not dishonest.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 21, 2021, 08:13:58 pm
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. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on April 21, 2021, 08:46:37 pm
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.

The exchange went like this...

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 21, 2021, 08:53:12 pm
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.

You are certainly entitled to your reading. I disagree with you. I think there is no excuse for Alan's post.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 10:19:14 pm
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.
Thanks for explaining my post. You did a better job than I could have.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 10:26:23 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 10:33:30 pm
Excellent point.  Much of this repetitive bickering serves nobody's interest, except, perhaps, to keep the respective bickerers occupied.

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.
Like Hillary Clinton you wou;d never associate with lepers or deplorables. Well, maybe the first.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 21, 2021, 10:34:27 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 21, 2021, 11:39:46 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: jeremyrh on April 22, 2021, 03:06:40 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 22, 2021, 03:25:08 am
In any case, this thread is disintegrating as is LuLa overall.

Stand up and take a bow.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 22, 2021, 04:00:20 am
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.

So my assessment was correct.

Any reasonable, non-snowflake reading of Alan’s post would come to the same conclusion. Alan’s claim was that Jeremy’s position was by implication in itself racist. There was no statement at any point that Jeremy is racist, just that he et al have not quite thought their position through to see the logical implication. The same position (as Alan’s) is currently held by many members of Congress and other political figures.

Oh, btw, the triggering statement by Jeremy is the preposterous, outrageous statement that there is racism in the States. There is none, short of the one invented and manufactured by Democrats for political purposes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 22, 2021, 04:04:37 am
This will be my last word on this or any subject on Lula...

Oh, mate, stop the cosplay... the snowflake costume doesn’t suit you. We love you nevertheless   :-*
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 22, 2021, 05:15:22 am
... 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 ...

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’. Alan is, free to  infer as he in his wisdom thinks. What he is NOT free to do is to transpose his inference then falsely and perniciously attribute them to others - in this case Jeremy.

IF Alan had said  'I infer from your post ...' it would have been but another 'Alan' post. He did not. What he wrote and subsequently refused to retract or at the very least amend was:

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

Words are important, 'You think' and 'your opinion' are definitive statements and, yes, they are offensive when falsely attributed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 22, 2021, 05:30:06 am
If you feel the need to comment, it would be best to have read the relevant posts first.

I can infer. As I did. Turns out, quite correctly.

Quote
You, inadvertently, hit the nail on the head when you say ‘inference or conjecture’.

Advertently.


Quote
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.

* After all, I have never seen another member of this forum so stoically accepting the constant barrage of personal insults from you et al, while remaining gentlemanly and polite all the time like Alan.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 22, 2021, 05:45:19 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 22, 2021, 06:12:04 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 22, 2021, 06:20:12 am
Again, I agree.

Proof that, 'there's always a first time for everything' ... [/levity]
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 22, 2021, 06:43:04 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 22, 2021, 06:47:58 am
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 thread is meant to be focused on the Coronavirus vaccines.
Time to get back on-topic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 22, 2021, 07:13:29 am
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.

We've heard this before. 

Anyone want to do an over/under bet on how long it will before Jeremy posts again?  Let's put the timeframe at, say, 14 days. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 22, 2021, 07:31:12 am
Update.

Johnson & Johnson’s COVID Vaccine Was Immunizing Homeless People. Then It Was Put On Pause
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/covid-vaccine-johnson-homeless-pause
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: faberryman on April 22, 2021, 07:42:17 am
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.

No. I'll repeat what you said:

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?

Like Jeremy, this will be my last post on LuLa.

Josh, you are not running a website. You are running a sewer.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 22, 2021, 08:30:17 am
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.

C'mon Frank (and Jeremy).  I get your frustration, but ultimately if someone bugs you, I think you have to make a choice to simply not engage, and if you do, you pretty much know what you're gonna get, right?  Head over to the greener pastures of the photography threads and let's talk about art.

I, for one, appreciate Josh's lighter, mindful moderation style.  If certain people take advantage, to my mind that's the price we pay, but such is the tragedy of the commons ;).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 22, 2021, 02:20:32 pm
Our own Jim Kasson published this on his Facebook.

Harry Potter and The Curious Case of Missing Flu (my title)



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on April 22, 2021, 04:25:20 pm
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.

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 (?)

I reiterate this quarterly; the articles often now see upward of 30k views after 6weeks, compared to 800 to 2k before I jumped on... those readers, the users of buy and sell and the many thousands of monthly people learning from the photo-threads- rarely spend time here. I leave it going because life is political and this forum is online homebase for some.
It's your guys smoking pit. I can sweep it up, but history has shown that people find another place to smoke and I'd prefer it not be in the lab etc.
In any case - please do always feel empowered to report things you believe are beyond the pale, and I'll judge.

Josh
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 22, 2021, 06:04:11 pm
Harry Potter and The Curious Case of Missing Flu (my title)

The New York Times published a piece on the "missing 'flu" today (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/22/science/flu-season-coronavirus-pandemic.html?searchResultPosition=2):

Quote
“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.

Apparently, several manufacturers are looking into feasibility of developing products that would combine coronavirus and influenza vaccines.  "One shot (or jab) fits all" (my title).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 22, 2021, 06:33:48 pm
Our own Jim Kasson published this on his Facebook.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 23, 2021, 10:03:16 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 23, 2021, 01:38:27 pm
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?

I predicted it, too and I didn't get flu nor common cold. Apparently, number of STD cases is also down, although some public health officials believe many cases are going undetected as clinics close during the pandemic and testing supplies are diverted to coronavirus screening. Well, maybe we should stay at home every winter (or wear protection devices permanently like many Chinese do).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 23, 2021, 05:35:51 pm
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.


Is the CDC not in Biden's pocket this week?  Or was that last week?  It's all so confusing :/

CDC recommends resumption of J&J vaccinations (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/23/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 23, 2021, 06:58:14 pm
You're finished with COVID-19, but is it finished with you?

An early but interesting retrospective study (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03553-9_reference.pdf) of patients treated by the U.S. Veterans Administration*, based on data from a large cohort of 87,000 COVID-19 patients and a comparison group of almost five million others, indicates that 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:

Quote
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.

The authors of the study note that "[t]he mechanism(s) which underly the post-acute and chronic manifestations of COVID-19 are not entirely clear.  Some of the manifestations may be driven by a direct effect of the viral infection and may be putatively explained by several hypotheses including persistent virus in immune-privileged sites, aberrant immune response, hyperactivation of the immune system, or autoimmunity.  Indirect effects including changes in social (e.g. reduced social contact and loneliness), economic (e.g. loss of employment), and behavioral conditions (e.g. changes in diet and exercise) that may be differentially experienced by people with COVID-19 may also shape health outcomes in COVID-19 survivors. . . . "

———
*The Veterans Administration manages a network of government-operated hospitals that provide medical services to former members of the military services of the United States.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 23, 2021, 10:07:06 pm
The 7-day moving average US deaths per day seems to have stopped decreasing recently https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/) and has been hovering around 800 per day. I hope that's either a data anomaly or because the vaccine effect hasn't fully kicked in yet. Until recently, deaths per day was decreasing slowly, but decreasing. 800 per day is about 290,000 per year, which is much higher that the average deaths from flu (40,000 or so, if I remember the discussions from last year), which would not be a comfortable base line. Hope that changes soon.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 24, 2021, 12:16:46 am
Is the CDC not in Biden's pocket this week?  Or was that last week?  It's all so confusing :/

CDC recommends resumption of J&J vaccinations (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/23/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/)
If you're confused following this stuff, imagine the average guy on the street.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 24, 2021, 05:47:54 am
... 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...

More panic-porn: once you are infected, you are doomed for life (very short life), so obey your Fürer, vaccinate, but still put 2-3 masks and still stay home.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 24, 2021, 10:43:41 am
If this variant spreads elsewhere, we could be starting this all over again.  Considering how crowded India is, I was surprised they were able to keep the rates down so long.

India’s daily coronavirus cases climb to new world record as hospitals buckle
India’s coronavirus infections rose by 346,786 overnight, the health ministry said on Saturday, setting a new world record for the third consecutive day, as overwhelmed hospitals in the densely-populated country begged for oxygen supplies.

India is in the grip of a rampaging second wave of the pandemic, hitting a rate of one COVID-19 death in just under every four minutes in Delhi as the capital’s underfunded health system buckles.

The government has deployed military planes and trains to get oxygen from the far corners of the country to Delhi. Television showed an oxygen truck arriving at Delhi’s Batra hospital after it issued an SOS saying it had 90 minutes of oxygen left for its 260 patients.

India surpassed the U.S. record of 297,430 single-day infections anywhere in the world on Thursday, making it the global epicenter of a pandemic that is waning in many other countries. The Indian government had itself declared it had beaten back the coronavirus in February when new cases fell to all time lows.

Health experts said India became complacent in the winter, when new cases were running at about 10,000 a day and seemed to be under control, lifting restrictions that allowed for the resumption of big gatherings.

Others said that it could also be a more dangerous variant of the virus coursing through the world’s second most populous country where people live in close proximity, often six to a room.


https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/indias-daily-coronavirus-cases-climb-to-new-world-record-hospitals-buckle.html

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 24, 2021, 12:18:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 24, 2021, 03:56:19 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 24, 2021, 06:35:31 pm
Moving along.  CDC said 139 million people had received at least one dose while 93 million people had been fully vaccinated as of today. That's 28% of all Americans who got both.  And 42% who got one shot. There are 330 million Americans.
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 24, 2021, 06:47:56 pm
Yeah you're right.  What's 347,000 cases a day?

Nothing compared to the yearly flu. What’s all the excitement about...right?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 24, 2021, 07:15:18 pm
Yeah you're right.  What's 347,000 cases a day?

349,165 by the end of the day
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on April 24, 2021, 07:49:04 pm
Personal attack. This is the place we want to avoid.
Retract, reframe, or focus on something / someone else.

Josh
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?
Your advertising may drop due to traffic reductions.
I've posted on this thread a lot; I'm fine if it all disappears. Seem you're not. Or you can defend and explain this forums existence including site traffic....
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???
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 24, 2021, 09:37:50 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 25, 2021, 08:27:53 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 25, 2021, 09:52:54 am
Yeah, but how would he derive the typical leftie pleasure of canceling everything they don't like?

Anybody been "cancelled" on this site?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 25, 2021, 10:37:53 am
More good news in the US:

Prognosis
The End of U.S. Mass Vaccination Is Coming Sooner Than Later

Rates of shots are falling as the campaign passes its peak
After three months of vaccination across the U.S., a majority of American adults have gotten shots, and the effort will soon shift from mass inoculation to mop-up.

As of Saturday, 138.6 million people in the U.S. have received at least one Covid-19 vaccine shot. About 1.3 million more are getting a first dose every day, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While the rate of new vaccinators is declining, even if were immediately cut in half, it would mean that six weeks from now more than half of the population of the U.S. and its territories will have had a dose.

Almost all of those who get a first dose are likely to their second, according to one CDC study. On top of that, more than 80% of people age 60 or over — the most vulnerable group — have had a dose and will likewise complete vaccination.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-25/when-will-u-s-vaccination-be-done-we-re-getting-closer
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 25, 2021, 12:07:25 pm
Anybody been "cancelled" on this site?

How relevant is that question? I was talking about his request for a future action, not the history.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 25, 2021, 09:19:48 pm
Apparently, Dr. Fauxi is coming to his senses. Or more precisely, to his common sense. He has finally realized what some of us have been saying for ages, that masks outside just don’t make much sense. He is now saying that it is a common sense. Well, doctor, duh!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 26, 2021, 05:28:25 am
More on Faucism:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 26, 2021, 08:39:44 am
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. 

Now we have the obverse.  The press's pal Biden's mistakes are ignored by the sycophantic press as they protect everything he does.  This is why no one believes the experts, the press, or the politicians.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 27, 2021, 08:11:58 am
Here's an interesting tidbit from the Covid front lines in Montreal area hospital. Partway down this article, a care worker talks about the difficulty of treating patients with Covid who don't "believe" in Covid, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-hospital-icu-patients-deniers-1.6002111 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-hospital-icu-patients-deniers-1.6002111). As if things weren't difficult enough.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 27, 2021, 08:57:12 am
Fauci said there's no problem with Covid on 1/26/20.

As usual, you are not being honest.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/29/steve-bannon/did-fauci-tell-us-not-worry-about-coronavirus/
Quote
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.

It was not a major threat at the time, but it did evolve and was mismanaged by the Trump administration.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 27, 2021, 09:44:36 am
As usual, you are 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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 27, 2021, 10:12:09 am
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 27, 2021, 11:32:45 am
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."

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 27, 2021, 11:37:46 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 27, 2021, 01:33:50 pm
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on April 27, 2021, 03:26:38 pm
yeah, but the owners of the "school" are prominent anti vaccine promoters.
no surprise.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 27, 2021, 04:23:01 pm
Fauci doesn't decide on travel restrictions, he is an immunologist.
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 27, 2021, 05:00:39 pm
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.

That statement is devoid of logic, on several levels.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 27, 2021, 05:16:48 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on April 27, 2021, 05:20:42 pm
That's a feature, not a bug.

True, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 27, 2021, 06:58:32 pm
That statement is devoid of logic, on several levels.
It makes more sense than your post.  It's over your head. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 27, 2021, 07:13:10 pm
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).

Stupid is as stupid does.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 27, 2021, 07:16:19 pm
So Trump was smarter than Fauci and shut down travel from China.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 27, 2021, 07:17:40 pm
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 of selectively reading things that line up with his warped views...leaving the facts for others to post.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 27, 2021, 07:28:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 27, 2021, 09:56:31 pm
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.

Does that make idiotic responses somehow better?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 27, 2021, 11:25:24 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 27, 2021, 11:29:28 pm
Does that make idiotic responses somehow better?
His responses are fine and on the mark. You're the one stooping to insults.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 28, 2021, 05:48:33 am
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.

"Sir, this is a call from your friendly fire department. Your kitchen on the ground floor is on fire. But it is not a major threat to you and your family upstairs, and right now you shouldn't worry about it... It is a very, very low risk for you, just something that we at the fire department should take very seriously."

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 28, 2021, 06:05:07 am
You mean Slobodan?  He has never concealed his actual name: why not use it?...

Thanks, Chris, appreciated.

I suspect chez is a native-English speaker and should know that "slob" has a negative connotation in English. If he or others find it tedious to type my full name, I've said on several occasions that "Slobo" is an accepted abbreviation both in my mother tongue and in English. If someone continues to use "slob"... well, I am thick-skinned, so wouldn't' care, but I (and others) would know it is used deliberately as an insult.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 28, 2021, 06:25:18 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 28, 2021, 08:34:04 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 28, 2021, 09:38:53 am
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.

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? 

 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 28, 2021, 03:00:29 pm
... 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.

I will let Chris Kern educate us on that.

However, even today, under Biden, the only requirement for entering the US for US citizens is a negative covid test. No quarantine. if I remember correctly, in January 2020, such tests were not available.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: hogloff on April 28, 2021, 03:25:58 pm
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? 

 

Sometimes doing the right thing might not look that great politically. Many countries around the world make people self isolate for 14 days upon entering the country.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on April 28, 2021, 06:04:40 pm
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 that caused the biggest problem. The travelers quickly spread throughout the states along with the virus some of them carried.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 28, 2021, 07:54:05 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 29, 2021, 02:45:59 am
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 29, 2021, 04:10:45 am
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...

QED.

Just wondering why was my question “asinine,” when you actually proved my point by answering it?

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on April 29, 2021, 04:45:15 am
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 29, 2021, 06:24:54 am
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/

You are taking advantage of the missing moderator.When links without explanation and without stating your point were discouraged.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 29, 2021, 08:50:25 am
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.

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 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 29, 2021, 10:00:02 am
You are taking advantage of the missing moderator.When links without explanation and without stating your point were discouraged.

The URL is pretty clear in this case ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 29, 2021, 10:05:43 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 29, 2021, 10:13:57 am
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):

Quote
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.”

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):

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 29, 2021, 10:57:55 am
The URL is pretty clear in this case ;)

Right... but the purpose of posting it? The point it was supposed to make?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 29, 2021, 11:00:00 am
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):


Again, James, what is your point? At least related to what I've been posting on the subject?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 29, 2021, 11:00:28 am
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):

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 29, 2021, 11:12:30 am
Again, James, what is your point? At least related to what I've been posting on the subject?

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.



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on April 29, 2021, 11:15:58 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 29, 2021, 01:11:03 pm
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.

Fair enough. I wasn't disputing that.

My beef was with chaz who claimed that shutting down travel from China by Trump was almost useless without supporting measures of quarantine, testing and contract tracing. I was arguing that no one (Fauxi, CDC, whatnot) at the time suggested such measures nor they were even possible at the time. Therefore it is not fair to blame Trump for the lack of such measures by the Monday-morning-quarterbacks.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 29, 2021, 02:00:21 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 29, 2021, 03:55:15 pm
. . . 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 30, 2021, 04:44:32 am
The Alan Klein Flu has certainly infected this thread about coronavirus vaccines.  There is no known cure.

A virus is just an annoyance for a well-developed immune system. Antibodies would take care of that. This thread, however, is apparently filled with busybodies that actually helped the virus thrive  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 30, 2021, 10:58:57 am
Moderna update.

Moderna Is Testing a New Version of Its COVID-19 Vaccine That Wouldn’t Require Ultra-Cold Storage
https://time.com/5978280/moderna-vaccine-ultra-cold-storage/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 30, 2021, 11:06:26 am
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 30, 2021, 12:42:28 pm
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/

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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on April 30, 2021, 12:46:57 pm
Texas will do OK. All the billionaires and Teslanaires are moving from CA and NY there.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on April 30, 2021, 01:02:36 pm
New Yorkers tend to move to Florida. Californians to Texas.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on April 30, 2021, 05:20:31 pm
Texas will do OK. All the billionaires and Teslanaires are moving from CA and NY there.

What does that say about the rest of us? 

Carter's legacy will be reaped again. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 01, 2021, 10:39:33 am
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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 01, 2021, 03:37:55 pm
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

Exactly! 

This is why I think so many lefties's minds have been broken by the last year.  They are ignoring all scientific facts just to hold onto the security blanket of masks, think it will save them.  They convince themselves it is one thing that matters, and if they get sick, well it was because of some other anti-masker, not crap luck.  The fact that they cant not give up their fear is sad, and will have ramifications on the economy. 

I think too many people work behind desks nowadays in safe environments and lack proper risk assessment.  I forget who said it, but "all philosophers need to keep one hand in the soil."  Everyone needs to do something, even for a little bit of time everyday, that can not been manipulated and falsely interpreted by the mind.  Something that you can not lie to yourself about if you screw up or if something goes awry.  In this quote, farming is the obvious task, which is something that you can not lie to yourself about.  It either works out or it does not, even if you do everything right. 

I both garden and ferment drink.  If things go wrong, there is no way to trick yourself into believing it did not.  I had a great garden last June and was looking at a nice yield, then it hailed for a hour one afternoon, and kill half my garden.  Such is life. 

Our current lifestyle gives too many the false notion you can control everything, when you cant.  And when you have everyone en mass suddenly learn this at the same time, this is the result. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 01, 2021, 06:18:27 pm
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.
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.
"


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 01, 2021, 08:51:34 pm
redo your math. it is off by a factor of 10 for the %,  unless i had a typo.
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.
"



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.

Of course, my wife still isn't impressed by the statistics or the claims of CDC and the experts.  Or my arguments for that matter?  She still isolates to a large degree and gives me hell when I don't.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 03, 2021, 04:02:45 am
In the meantime:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on May 03, 2021, 12:09:35 pm
A virus is just an annoyance for a well-developed immune system.

"Wake me when the death toll exceeds 60,000"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on May 03, 2021, 03:09:57 pm
"Wake me when the death toll exceeds 60,000"

Yep, wonder what bbq crow tastes like?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 03, 2021, 03:40:58 pm
Yep, wonder what bbq crow tastes like?

If's anything like pigeon or Squab, then not bad, not bad at all.  A bit less gamier then duck, but you can eat it mid-rare like duck.  It's quite nice. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 03, 2021, 06:30:17 pm
"Wake me when the death toll exceeds 60,000"

Your Führer's Covid death rate in his first 100 days is already at 45% of what you accused Trump of for the whole year.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 03, 2021, 06:31:03 pm
Yep, wonder what bbq crow tastes like?

You really think you said something smart?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 03, 2021, 07:59:12 pm
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 ...

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on May 03, 2021, 08:34:00 pm
What happens when you throw caution to the wind ...

(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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on May 03, 2021, 08:54:25 pm
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.

And, unfortunately, the out-of-control infection rates in South Asia and South America provide ideal laboratories for the development of new coronavirus variants, some of which may turn out to be able to evade the current vaccines.  (Not that other parts of the world are exempt, but the more infections, the greater the likelihood of mutation.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 04, 2021, 09:00:38 am
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 ...

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. 
The CDC and Fauci have been acting like politicians the whole time, not like experts. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 04, 2021, 09:02:49 am
What happens when you throw caution to the wind ...

(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.

I wonder if China infected India their adversary with the new variant? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on May 04, 2021, 11:23:47 am
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.

No do I recall accusing trump of any death figure.

Are you awake, yet? This just in: the death toll has exceeded 60,000.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on May 04, 2021, 12:03:29 pm
Your ignorance is showing, AGAIN.
You have zero idea who my “Furer” is.

I'm guessing that Slobodan must be referring to the Swiss mathematician Martin Fürer of Pennsylvania State University, Fürer's algorithm is an integer multiplication algorithm for extremely large integers with very low asymptotic complexity, published in 2007.

Of course, I could be mistaken and he means Führer (or Fuehrer when the umlaut is not available), but knowing Slobodan a little, I'm sure 'tis but a simple spelling mistake.

ITM. please remind him of the title of this thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on May 04, 2021, 03:17:21 pm
You really think you said something smart?

Smart enough to get your knickers wound up tight.

Do you think your infamous “wake me up when we reach 60,000” post is something smart as it looks pretty dumb now.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on May 04, 2021, 03:18:19 pm
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.

Surely you are smarter than that Slobo? Or maybe not!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 04, 2021, 08:33:24 pm
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. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 04, 2021, 09:20:56 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 04, 2021, 09:53:42 pm
The epidemiology and mitigation is straightforward. It is the behavior that raises controversy - inconsistent at times and illogical to many so the perception is created of “do what i say, not what i do”.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 04, 2021, 10:05:29 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 05, 2021, 06:08:52 am
... I'm sure 'tis but a simple spelling mistake...

Thanks for the correction, my bad.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 05, 2021, 07:03:46 am
... 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...

Grandma and grandpa killers:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 05, 2021, 10:12:14 am
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.

Please, get a grip.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on May 05, 2021, 11:11:13 am
Grandma and grandpa killers:

I'm pretty sure those are just puppets that resemble the Carters.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 05, 2021, 11:21:48 am
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 05, 2021, 11:26:52 am
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.

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.
>>>>>
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 05, 2021, 11:32:18 am
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.

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.
>>>>>
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on May 05, 2021, 04:27:27 pm
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 05, 2021, 05:16:24 pm
India is a rich county that has pharmaceutical manufacturers.  Why should they be allowed to steal another country's company's intellectual property?  Let them pay like everyone else. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 05, 2021, 09:47:24 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 05, 2021, 11:10:48 pm
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 06, 2021, 02:30:04 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on May 06, 2021, 08:11:37 am
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 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 06, 2021, 08:15:16 am
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. 

What's Biden going to say to Xi to counter that argument?  What a dope.

Pfizer, Moderna shares plummet after Biden administration backs a COVID-19 vaccine patent waiver
https://news.yahoo.com/pfizer-moderna-shares-plummet-biden-204800783.html

US backs waiving intellectual property rules on vaccines
https://apnews.com/article/intellectual-property-coronavirus-pandemic-business-global-trade-health-c2f1ba1e6e150dc6c081b8eb6fe4f1e5
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 06, 2021, 08:22:54 am
I thought ...

An extremely rare event.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 06, 2021, 08:25:56 am
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.

In any case, what claims does India or other countries have on intellectual property?  Why can't they pay for it?  Another question, is how can Biden give up the patents?  Was that part of the deal the government made?  Is Johnson protected because they didn't take government money?

In any case, profits should go to the American companies that developed the vaccines.   Why should we allow other countries to profit from it?  If they want the vaccines, pay the pharmaceutical companies for the vaccines or purchase a license from them to manufacturer the vaccines in their own factories based on the patented formulas.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on May 06, 2021, 08:44:00 am
An extremely rare event.

Great one slob. And I "thought" you were intelligent. There I did it twice in one day...maybe you should try it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 06, 2021, 07:46:45 pm
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?

Angela Merkel and Biontech-Chef Şahin reject the US suggestion to release the C19 patent and take away the patent protection.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 07, 2021, 01:16:38 pm
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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 07, 2021, 01:22:23 pm
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. 

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 07, 2021, 04:08:33 pm
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.

Dont forget inflation! 

I thought we would get a nice 6 to 8 month period where we would get some nice GDP growth, and then get it right up the ... with inflation.  But oh no, it seems like Mr. Inflation is not into foreplay and is coming at us dry too. 

On the positive note, now that inflation seems to be coming faster then what everyone thought, it, along with our true bipartisan savior, Joe Manchin, appears to be screwing up the entire Biden agenda.  So yeah, if I have to deal with some not so great inflation to keep Biden's radical plans to shove government even more into my life, I'll take it. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: kers on May 07, 2021, 07:53:41 pm
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.
It also does not export any vaccin - all it makes stays in the US. 
Because of the lack of raw material the  production in india is limited, although they have the knowledge and equipment to make vaccins.
The UK does not export any vaccin; it is Europe that exports vaccins. About 50% of what it makes.

https://www.euronews.com/2021/05/07/european-leaders-urge-u-s-britain-to-match-eu-generosity-on-vaccine-exports
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on May 07, 2021, 08:37:02 pm
I understand the US bans exporting raw material needed to make vaccins. This is because of the Defense Production Act.

That was true initially.  The U.S. government announced last month that it would be shipping raw materials needed for vaccine production to India.

Because of the lack of raw material the  production in india is limited, although they have the knowledge and equipment to make vaccins.

India does indeed have a large vaccine manufacturing capacity, but for traditional vaccines, not the new mRNA vaccines; producing the latter in India reportedly would require a transfer of technology, an investment in new factories, and the deployment of skilled workers that would take months if not years to complete.

Increased vaccine production by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, and export to parts of the world with serious deficits, appears to be the most viable solution to meeting the urgent needs of countries such as India and Brazil—as well as those of many other poorer countries.  This fairly clearly would require a coordinated international funding effort by the wealthier nations on both sides of the Atlantic.

(The Russian and Chinese governments also may make important contributions, but they appear to be determined to use their vaccine exports to serve their own foreign policy objectives rather than to participate in any international effort.  They also have been less than transparent about subjecting their efficacy and safety data to public expert review.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 10, 2021, 05:57:12 pm
Update from a German vaccine manufacturer.  This is why Merkel was against the waiver.

BioNTech CEO: Patent waivers are not needed
https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/552638-biontech-ceo-patent-waivers-are-not-needed
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 13, 2021, 03:44:17 pm
New CDC guidelines.  Good news.

Vaccinated Americans now may go without masks in most places, the C.D.C. said.
In a sharp turnabout from previous recommendations, federal health officials on Thursday advised that Americans who are fully vaccinated against the coronavirus may stop wearing masks or maintaining social distance in most indoor and outdoor settings, regardless of size.

The advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention comes as welcome news to Americans who have tired of restrictions and marks a watershed moment in the pandemic. Masks ignited controversy in communities across the United States, symbolizing a bitter partisan divide over approaches to the pandemic and a badge of political affiliation.

Permission to stop using them now offers an incentive to the many millions who are still holding out on vaccination. As of Wednesday, about 154 million people have received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, but only about one-third of the nation, some 117.6 million people, have been fully vaccinated.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/13/health/cdc-masks-guidance.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on May 13, 2021, 06:34:17 pm
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."

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 13, 2021, 06:42:41 pm
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."

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 13, 2021, 06:43:43 pm
So is the CDC lying to us now or before?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 13, 2021, 07:20:43 pm
Alan,

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 13, 2021, 08:17:17 pm
744 new deaths today in USA. Roughly the same in Canada per capita. So it appears that there are still plenty of freedom fighters there who think they don't need the vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 13, 2021, 09:41:42 pm
So you recommend we shouldn't listen to experts at the CDC but rather to you and your doctor?

Yes, that's what he meant.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 14, 2021, 08:53:49 am
Alan,

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 14, 2021, 10:29:52 am
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.

In short, and without despair, 1) making situational decisions with the knowledge we have (decision making with sparse, incomplete data and science), 2) doctor - Yes, your wife - dunno, you'll have to make a political decision on that one  ;), 3) Yes it has, but see (1), 4) THAT IS A TRUE STATEMENT !
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 14, 2021, 11:58:36 am
Well, we had long discussions about taking the expert's advice.  My problem is that who are the experts.

Experts on what?

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.

Quote
According to my wife who considers herself an expert, "they're all full of it."

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 14, 2021, 10:24:41 pm
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.

Alan, after today, you make your own advice. 

The CDC, suddenly, without any additional evidence or data or studies decided that those whom are vaccinated can walk around without a mask.  It is like an epiphany came to them all at once ...

An epiphany that told them that the Joe Biden administration is royally screwing shit up with extended lockdowns, because inflation to go up by keeping supply low, schooling is messing with parents, Biden brought war too the Middle East, etc. 

It is almost like all of this is political, well maybe, who knows, perhaps it is, but hey, can we really tell given that the CDC ignored all science so long as it help the Biden admin with its goals and then dropped it when it did not?  Well, who can say, except for those who are not morons. 

What I find so funny here is that there is a large amount of people who treat this as honest to God news, as if half the country had not already been doing, for the last few months, everything the CDC is now suggesting. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 15, 2021, 08:19:07 am
Experts on what?

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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 16, 2021, 08:05:48 am
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.

There are no absolutes. As long as you do not encounter people who are spreading the virus, you do not need a mask (and its effectiveness is limited anyway), unless you want to protect them in case you are infected yourself (and being vaccinated does not mean you cannot transmit and infect others). 

Quote
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."

Depends on the context. Being vaccinated means that you reduce the chance of getting infected, but there is still some chance because the effectiveness is not 100%. Besides, the longer it spreads amongst people (and it needs people to spread it), there will be new mutations against which the current vaccines may be less effective. Also, we do not know yet how long the protection of the vaccine lasts, it's a novel virus after all and we're learning as we go. And different people produce different amounts of antibodies. So again, there are no absolutes.

So, if you want to reduce the risk of getting (re)infected, or spreading the virus yourself, it helps to wear a mask. Especially when physical distancing is difficult, or when ventilation is poor. Remember, the common nose/mouth masks are more effective in the prevention of infecting others than yourself, so it's a service to others and less of a self-protection measure.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 16, 2021, 11:32:49 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 16, 2021, 12:27:09 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on May 19, 2021, 08:58:07 am
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.

Yes, this is recognised as a few people who've been vaccinated are developing COVID-19.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 19, 2021, 09:54:57 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2021, 11:58:57 am
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.

Right! Who are the these people?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 19, 2021, 01:58:14 pm
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.

Yes, and forever and ever and ever too, till the end of time.  So does that mean we should be wearing masks till the end of time too? 

Bart, do you also wash your hands every time you pet a dog or cat?  Do you leave your house with a helmet on?  As a photo editor, do you constantly worry about carpal tunnel?  Will you not go near a camp fire, since burning wood produces many of the same carcinogens that cigarettes do?   

Personally, I dont worry about any of these things, especially C-19 with a 0.05% IFR for those under 45, and 0.001% (or thereabouts) for the vaccinated. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 19, 2021, 03:29:31 pm
Right! Who are the these people?
Who cares?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2021, 03:48:28 pm
Quote from: LesPalenik on Today at 11:58:57 am
Right! Who are the these people?

Who cares?

After a lot of  research, I found that a good portion of the antivaxxers are Republicans.

Quote
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.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/04/republicans-anti-vaccine-herd-immunity
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 19, 2021, 04:12:11 pm
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
According 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 19, 2021, 04:19:08 pm
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

Lets not gloss over the anti-vax rhetoric by the Democrats in the past few months.  In October, Biden, Harris, Cuomo and many other Dems insisted that we should not trust the vaccine because it came out during the Trump administration.  Then, to make matters worse, they insisted in bringing up the Tuskegee experiments, which I am sure an overwhelming majority of blacks were not even thinking about.  Now yes, these were campaign plays, but it did have an effect on voters overall and even legitimized anti-vaxxers on the left, such as Farrakhan Warns Black People Against COVID-19 Vaccine And ‘Their Medications.’ (https://newsone.com/3971438/farrakhan-warns-black-people-covid-19-vaccine/)  BTW, Farrakhan has yet to be suspended for his anti-vax remarks in Twitter/Facebook and has not had any of those post removed either. 

You then had Biden and many Dems insisting on keeping people masked after getting the vaccine even though there is no science to support this notion, and some are continuing to do so like Pelosi.  This does nothing to encourage people to get the vaccine, which has been shown in polling.  Roughly 15% of republicans when surveyed last month said they would have likely gotten the vaccine if they would get back to normal.  That is in addition to the 20% who said they would never get the vaccine. 

Last, the hold put on the J&J vaccine, after only 6 of millions had blood clots, substantially increased hesitancy.  If you look at the graph of daily doses, it drops like a rock the day after the FDA pulled the vaccine, showing a direct correlation between the two. 

This is not a republican issue or a Trump issue, but a total blunder in the messaging from the Biden administration.  And the idea we should all just share our medical procedures onliine is absurd. 

And finally, surveys have also shown, repeatably, that republicans know the true risks of C-19 much more then Dems, with Dems being very likely to overestimate the risk of death and hospitalization.  Point being, Republicans are more informed about C-19 and the risks and the fact that only certain age groups and people with certain health factors need to worry about C-19.  If you are not part of that age group, C-19 does not pose a serious enough risk to worry about and therefore the need to get vaccinated is not as warranted without some kind of incentive, such as your employer requiring you to be vaccinated. 

So the fact that so many Republicans dont see the need to get vaccinated as compared to Democrats is almost certainly due to Republicans being, overall, more informed and Democrats being more hysterical. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2021, 05:19:14 pm
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.
Draw your own conclusions.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2021, 05:26:02 pm
Adding C19 death curves for Canada and US (as of 2 weeks ago). At that time, US vaccination rate was much higher than in Canada.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 19, 2021, 06:11:49 pm
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.
Draw your own conclusions.


Meanwhile, Canada isn't even on the vaccine chart but Uruguay is.  So what does that say about Canada?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2021, 08:26:58 pm
Meanwhile, Canada isn't even on the vaccine chart but Uruguay is.  So what does that say about Canada?

This is not about Canada vs USA, but about a race between life and death.
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.

Quote
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

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada-is-about-to-surpass-the-u-s-in-first-doses-of-the-covid-vaccine/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 20, 2021, 07:52:02 am
This is not about Canada vs USA, but about a race between life and death.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 20, 2021, 12:32:53 pm
Here is a very good read on how the debate about transmission of viral particles and bacteria came about, entrenched mitigation doctrine (wash hands), and previous recognition of airborne transmission was wildly skewed.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwup-that-helped-covid-kill/#intcid=recommendations_right-rail-shorter-timeframe-experiment-1hr_eeec32a2-ac17-4120-b3d5-81b20f5de121_popular4-1

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 20, 2021, 12:52:24 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 20, 2021, 01:23:01 pm
Are you still peddling the nonsense that Trump did a good job?
Operation Warp Speed was superb.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 20, 2021, 01:59:39 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 20, 2021, 03:46:26 pm
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.

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.

Well, as usual, I spoke too quickly.  I'm sorry.

I haven't found too many covidiots where I live.  There are a few I suppose.  But most people seem to be fairly responsible. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 23, 2021, 07:47:42 pm
Update:

Intelligence on Sick Staff at Wuhan Lab Fuels Debate On Covid-19 Origin
Report says researchers went to hospital in November 2019, shortly before confirmed outbreak; adds to calls for probe of whether virus escaped lab
https://www.wsj.com/articles/intelligence-on-sick-staff-at-wuhan-lab-fuels-debate-on-covid-19-origin-11621796228
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 23, 2021, 08:53:58 pm
Why did it take 18 months to notice it? Now it's most probably too late to do anything with that information.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 23, 2021, 11:19:56 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 24, 2021, 09:02:31 pm
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 25, 2021, 12:20:48 pm
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.

And now there is a new pigdemic coming from China.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/chinese-scientists-warn-new-variants-deadly-african-swine-fever/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 12:54:58 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 12:58:06 pm

And now there is a new pigdemic coming from China.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 25, 2021, 01:05:21 pm
Sorry to hear about your friend's friend.  Could Canadians get shots in America?

Alan, my friend and his wife are American citizens. Before, they lived in Virginia, but a few years ago they moved to central Mexico because of lower living costs and greater quality of life.

Canadians can get now their free covid shots in USA. but it's stil a hassle to travel there. Most Canadians have received by now their first covid shot, and soon they should receive their second shots.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/desperate-canadians-fly-south-to-get-covid-vaccine-shots-as-u-s-demand-falls
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 25, 2021, 01:08:32 pm
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.”   

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 01:18:09 pm
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.”   

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. 
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 25, 2021, 02:28:27 pm
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????

Please state your source...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 02:33:57 pm
As seems likely????

Please state your source...
What don't you understand about "as seems likely"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 25, 2021, 06:13:22 pm
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?

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.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 08:43:28 pm
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?

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.)
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 there are researchers who had the virus.  The new evidence revealed a couple of days ago in the WSJ that has even former lab deniers concerned is that it was just reported that there were three researchers from the lab that got sick in Nov or December of 2019 just before the outbreak. 

My biggest flag was something I read a few weeks ago.  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.  These adaptations can occur in two ways.  One is they have been spreading in humans for a period of time and adapted naturally.  Second is that the adaptation was developed and processed in a lab.  Problem is if it occurred naturally, then we would have seen the disease at an earlier stage with more animal markers which would have indicated animal originations.  Since we never saw earlier variants with those markers, that leaves adaptations that occurred by man in a lab.  It was the later variant that got out of a lab.

Add to that the coincidence that the lab was ten miles from the food market and in Wuhan where it was discovered and the indication that no animal has these virus pathogens, and it's a good likelihood that it developed in the lab.  Since I'm a betting man, I know where I would put my bet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 25, 2021, 10:10:05 pm
“ 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.


“ 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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 25, 2021, 10:27:32 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 25, 2021, 11:43:38 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 09:23:56 am
A reasonable man can draw reasonable conclusions.  After all, the Chinese buried all the evidence.

I hate to say it, but that's not evidence.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on May 26, 2021, 09:30:24 am
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.

If only they would all have the decency to go and get infected by coronavirus at once then everyone else could take a big sigh of relief.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on May 26, 2021, 09:36:56 am

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 26, 2021, 10:07:49 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on May 26, 2021, 10:16:10 am
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.

Well the trade unions have already lost - to China. Pity they didn't see that coming.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 01:23:48 pm
...  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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 26, 2021, 01:42:16 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 01:48:43 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 26, 2021, 02:07:48 pm
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.

Because it's a moot point.  As Dreed pointed out, they already lost to China.  What large scale unionized manufacturing is left in the country?  Let's put aside perishable goods, like food.  What is there left that would actually be effected by more open trade deals? 

Not to mention, if we want to break our reliance on China, we need other trade partners first.  Obama tried to do this with the Asian pact he formed, which Trump destroyed as soon as he got into office.  (I completely forget the name of it.)  It was a great idea, but why Asia?  Why not Latin America? 

I'd rather have my dollars go there, especially if it helps stabilize the region, not to the other side of the world to a culture that could not be more evil. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 26, 2021, 02:09:44 pm
“ 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.


“ 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

You're mistaken.  There were three not two.

The order comes after reports that three researchers at a lab in Wuhan, China, the city where the coronavirus pandemic is believed to have originated, fell sick in the fall of 2019.
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-director-cautions-americans-ahead-080019792.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 26, 2021, 02:15:20 pm
Even Democrats have grown suspicious of China's involvement.  Well, the election is over. No point blaming Trump anymore. Of course, everyone here who thought I was nuts for claiming this for months still aren't on board.  They'll defend China forever.  Just like the Paris climate change agreement.

Democrats back growing calls for Congress to probe lab leak theory
The ongoing discussions on Capitol Hill represent a remarkable bipartisan agreement that Congress should investigate the origins of a virus that has killed 3.5 million people worldwide.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/26/democrats-covid-lab-leak-theory-490951

Biden tasks intelligence community to report on Covid origins in 90 days
https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/26/politics/biden-intelligence-community-pandemic-origins-report/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 26, 2021, 02:18:11 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 04:34:54 pm
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.

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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 26, 2021, 05:48:57 pm
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.

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.  :)

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?   

Just to clarify a couple of points about Iran.  There was no treaty.  It was Obama agreeing with Iran personally.  An American treaty constitutionally requires the US Senate to approve it. Otherwise there's no legal national authority or responsibility for enforcing it.  Obama never went to the Senate to get their approval because he knew it would not pass.  Our constitution doesn't want the president to act as a king when it comes to making treaties.  If the agreement is enforced again by Biden personally, it still will not be a treaty and the next president can cancel it again.  I don't think Iran will care because in the meanwhile they'll get the sanctions dropped.

Second, the anti-nuclear protection had too many holes, and still does.  It will actually be worse than before as Iran also has said that pictures of their sites will not be allowed to be taken by inspectors.  So what will we have other than taking off sanctions that will allow them to make more trouble for everyone in the ME? 

Unfortunately, everything Trump did is being reversed despite some positive that he accomplished.  These are all knee-jerk reactions to not accept anything he did.  We're shooting ourselves in the foot.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 05:58:01 pm
... 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?

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on May 26, 2021, 09:23:51 pm
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?


We have learned, over the last 30 years, through multiple administrations, that the only thing we know China will respond to are tariffs.  Talks behind the scenes have been tried by Obama, Bush and Clinton, and they all failed, just like they will fail with Biden.  Tariffs and sanctions are the only tactic we know of that gets results. 

Furthermore, I was listening to a former Obama admin (leftie), being interview with Ben Shapiro (rightie), suggesting that we should revisit our US corporation charter rules in which we hand out with the assumption 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.  Of course the devil is in the details, but it is something that could help as well and could get bipartisan support. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 26, 2021, 09:39:48 pm
... 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  ...

I thought there already were strict rules about electronics, military secrets wrt trade, so what "dealings" would you have in mind here that are not already covered by those rules?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 27, 2021, 12:19:30 am
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?

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?
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 27, 2021, 04:09:55 pm
Our self interest for the most part - being better prepared for when the next one jumps species.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 27, 2021, 06:42:06 pm
Our self interest for the most part - being better prepared for when the next one jumps species.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 27, 2021, 07:08:49 pm
Pressure mounts to investigate, from both parties.

Senate passes bill requiring Biden admin to declassify intel on COVID-19 origins
The Senate has unanimously approved a measure requiring the federal government to declassify intelligence on the origins of COVID-19.
https://nypost.com/2021/05/27/senate-approves-measure-forcing-declassification-of-covid-intel/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: degrub on May 27, 2021, 10:11:44 pm
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.  :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 28, 2021, 12:54:31 am
Never mind.

Often the best choice when you don't want to ride an endless merry-go-round or become stuck in the mud.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 28, 2021, 04:32:21 pm
Unraveling China's "sinister plan" to "unleash coronavirus"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-A_OPWa5VI
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 28, 2021, 05:16:16 pm
Unraveling China's "sinister plan" to "unleash coronavirus"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-A_OPWa5VI

Outstanding find! Thanks for sharing it! I only hope everyone watches it as it is very revealing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 29, 2021, 08:28:08 am
Interesting summary article about the new calls to investigate the Wuhan lab, https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-wuhan-lab-leak-theory-1.6042038 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-wuhan-lab-leak-theory-1.6042038). 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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on May 29, 2021, 10:21:37 am
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 29, 2021, 11:17:53 am
Outstanding find! Thanks for sharing it! I only hope everyone watches it as it is very revealing.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 29, 2021, 11:21:34 am
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 29, 2021, 11:25:27 am
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.

They are not alone.

Did SARS-Cov-2 start in a Chinese lab?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab-r0capbzk&list=UUljE1ODdSF7LS9xx9eWq0GQ&index=12
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 29, 2021, 11:26:11 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 29, 2021, 03:37:08 pm
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

Thanks again. I took the opportunity, when watching the first video that you linked, to watch a few other recent videos on the channel. I was unaware of his YouTube channel, but I look forward to watching more of his content.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 29, 2021, 03:49:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 29, 2021, 04:59:05 pm
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/)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on May 29, 2021, 06:26:37 pm
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/)
[...]

Interesting site, thanks. They have some interesting articles on the subject at hand.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 29, 2021, 09:50:05 pm
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/)

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.
It came from a Chinese lab.  You're being an apologist for China.  Don't be naive.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: William Walker on May 30, 2021, 05:04:00 am
Outstanding find! Thanks for sharing it! I only hope everyone watches it as it is very revealing.
+1!!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 30, 2021, 07:27:44 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 30, 2021, 07:44:33 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on May 30, 2021, 07:51:41 am
It came from a Chinese lab.  You're being an apologist for China.  Don't be naive.

QED!!!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 30, 2021, 09:42:49 am
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on May 30, 2021, 10:18:28 am
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.

While on the subject of Chinese credibility, how come that they stopped reporting any deaths for the worldometers.info covid stats? Did they completely erase covid in China or are they just supressing that data? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 30, 2021, 10:57:43 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 30, 2021, 11:15:57 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 30, 2021, 11:18:46 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 30, 2021, 01:03:54 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on May 30, 2021, 04:34:09 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on May 30, 2021, 05:25:42 pm
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, just when we needed them, is interesting. I've been studying the history (https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52424.html) for awhile and find it fascinating. The speed with which they were able to be delivered to us was not a miracle created in 2020. The speed of vaccine development was due to a foundation of accumulated knowledge and occasional breakthroughs over many years in the lead-up to renewed and intensified interest in mRNA research which has accelerated over the past decade.

The speed of vaccine production was due to the foresight of Congress and President Bush in creating the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomedical_Advanced_Research_and_Development_Authority) at the end of 2006 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_the_Assistant_Secretary_for_Preparedness_and_Response). BARDA (https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/barda/) was established under the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act of 2006 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_and_All-Hazards_Preparedness_Act) thru bipartisan efforts. When COVID-19 arrived, there was no need to develop from scratch an infrastructure across multiple government agencies (https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/phemce/) to coordinate, streamline, and accelerate the evaluation, funding, development, approval, and production of vaccines . That infrastructure already existed in BARDA and The Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise (PHEMCE) and they performed extremely well. BARDA provides biomedical manufacturers with a single point of entry into multiple federal government agencies and facilitates (https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/barda/whoweare/) the process from proposal, to evaluation, to funding, to authorization, to production and procurement, and provides any needed infrastructure (https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/barda/influenza-and-emerging-infectious-diseases/coronavirus/pharmaceutical-manufacturing-in-america/) support along the way. BARDA is the agency that has managed the portfolio (https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/app/barda/coronavirus/COVID19.aspx?filter=vaccine) and provided billions of dollars in funding and assistance to a multitude of manufacturers including vaccines.

Of course, the scientists are the first in line for my gratitude. The institutions and the government officials who created or led them, years prior to the pandemic, enabling vaccine science to advance to its current state are next in line. At the top of that list would be NIAID (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Allergy_and_Infectious_Diseases) led by Anthony Fauci, M.D (https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio) who was instrumental in the establishment and funding of the NIAID Vaccine Research Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_Research_Center) and its Viral Pathogenesis Laboratory (https://www.niaid.nih.gov/research/viral-pathogenesis-lab) led by Barney Graham, M.D., Ph.D. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_S._Graham). Dr. Barney Graham and his research team headed by Kizzmekia Corbett, PhD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kizzmekia_Corbett) along with Jason McLellan, PhD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_McLellan) from the University of Texas at Austin engineered (https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/tiny-tweak-behind-COVID-19/98/i38) the stabilized version of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein which lies at the heart of the immune response generated by the COVID-19 vaccines from Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, J&J/Janssen, and Novavax.

Among the scientists making crucial breakthroughs in mRNA vaccine (https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/) development are Katalin Karikó, PhD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karikó) and Drew Weissman, MD, PhD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Weissman) at the University of Pennsylvania with research grants from NIAID. Prior to their discoveries published in 2005, mRNA development had stalled as using mRNA was neither safe or effective as a tool for combating human disease. Injecting mRNA created an unwanted inflammatory immunogenic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunogenicity) response which was sometimes fatal in experiments with lab animals and which also destroyed the delicate mRNA before it could reach the intended cells. They discovered that by modifying certain nucleosides in mRNA, and creating a method for doing so, effectiveness increased dramatically and regulated the unwanted inflammatory immunogenic response. These modification discoveries and methods are critical in the current mRNA vaccines being used, allowing them to be both safe and effective.

To Be Continued...

* Click on the links provided in the text above if you would like more information on any of the items highlighted.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on May 31, 2021, 08:50:53 am
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.

Thanks very much.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on June 01, 2021, 06:26:01 am
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.

Exactly, which is why he moved the investigation from the State Department to intelligence, which classifies anything by default. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on June 14, 2021, 10:11:50 am
This thread has experienced ... ahem ... a few twists and turns since I started it, as has the vaccine whose initial clinical trials inspired my first post, but Novavax announced in a press release today (https://ir.novavax.com/news-releases/news-release-details/novavax-covid-19-vaccine-demonstrates-90-overall-efficacy-and) that it finally is ready to apply for regulatory approval from the U.S. government to begin dispensing its vaccine.

Quote
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.

With vaccine supplies now more than adequate in the United States, the Novavax recombinant protein product, which uses a manufacturing technique that can be scaled up massively, should make an important contribution to fulfilling the global effort to control the SARS-CoV-2 virus.  The small U.S. company has already licensed manufacturers in the United Kingdom, Japan, and the Czech Republic to produce doses.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 03, 2021, 09:46:47 pm
A one-hour podcast of a TED interview about the remarkable year we just experienced in vaccine development, https://www.listennotes.com/et/podcasts/the-ted-interview/how-covid-vaccines-are-CoRLQAad_uB/ (https://www.listennotes.com/et/podcasts/the-ted-interview/how-covid-vaccines-are-CoRLQAad_uB/). Highly recommended listening as it touches on many of the topics that were discussed on these pages.

Adrian Hill is an Oxford researcher and one of the guys behind the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine. Fascinating interview about the different kinds of vaccines and what they can do. De-mystifies some of the stats we hear and makes you suspicious of what the media reports. One good bit is how vaccines might be used in diseases that have nothing to do with pathogens, like Alzheimers, where a vaccine could trigger an immune response to combat the pathology despite the fact that the pathology was not created by a pathogen. One very good news bit is that the stats that say that a vaccine may be only 95% effective is misleading, when all the current vaccines are close to 100% effective in eliminating serious illness and death, even if they don’t eliminate all Covid symptoms in people who contract it. That fact has ramifications for vaccines that may only be, say, 50% effective in other diseases. Even if they don’t eliminate all infections, if they reduce/eliminate serious illness and death, well, that’s kind of ok. There are plenty of nuances in the data that are badly described in the popular press and he illustrates a few.

One illuminating remark he makes is that it has been vaccines that have created herd immunity in many diseases and that the idea that we obtain herd immunity by letting the virus rip through the population is nonsense.

This talk is available on many podcast platforms. It’s a little over an hour long. Nice to listen to a scientist speak intelligently about things.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on July 04, 2021, 09:51:17 pm
Thanks! Well worth the hour spent listening. Packs a lot of useful education into an hour without being overwhelming or hard to digest.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 06, 2021, 01:05:35 pm
This article doesn't really belong on this thread, but since it's about Covid, it's more appropriate here than on the "political" thread. It's from the Washington Post and is about ICU nurses in Appalachia, https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/07/06/appalachian-covid-deniers-nurses-virginia/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/07/06/appalachian-covid-deniers-nurses-virginia/). It's a bit long but fascinating.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 08, 2021, 07:12:01 am
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on July 08, 2021, 06:27:02 pm
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).

Sad, but predicted. Everyone makes their own choices and must live with the consequences. I find it much more sad when a person dies from an action they had zero control over. That damn drunk driver running a red light and killing the innocent pedestrian coming home with a quart of milk from the corner store...that is sad.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on July 08, 2021, 08:14:45 pm
Pfizer reportedly will submit a request next month (https://apnews.com/article/europe-coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-34c3f2536747a7c08980d7359a8de70c) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for emergency use authorization to permit the administration of a third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine:

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: petermfiore on July 09, 2021, 11:04:13 am

I suspect manufacturers of other coronavirus vaccines won't be too far behind in making similar requests.

I would think that's a YES!

Peter
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 12, 2021, 09:56:37 pm
I hope this is just a hiccup, https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/562628-covid-19-case-count-spikes-hit-almost-every-state (https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/562628-covid-19-case-count-spikes-hit-almost-every-state).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 14, 2021, 08:52:51 am
It's very difficult to accept that this is happening, https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/14/politics/politics-needless-covid-deaths/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/14/politics/politics-needless-covid-deaths/index.html). Must be a little like what witch trials were like centuries ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 19, 2021, 11:35:06 pm
More reports of stalled US vaccinations, this time compared to Canada, https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/07/canada-is-beating-the-united-states-at-vaccination/ (https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/07/canada-is-beating-the-united-states-at-vaccination/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on July 20, 2021, 04:01:25 am
Canada has been consistently beating USA also in number of new infections and deaths.
July 19:
USA - 24,266 infections, 121 deaths
Canada - 701 infections, 5 deaths

July 18:
USA - 24,342 infections, 87 deaths
Canada - 259 infections, 7 deaths

USA population = 328 million, Canada - 37.6 million
USA total deaths / 1 million pop = 1,876
Canada total deaths / 1 million pop = 696
That's about 3 times worse for USA in relative terms (despite USA earlier vaccinations)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 22, 2021, 08:09:48 am
Interesting piece of data analysis regarding mask-wearing in Texas, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/texas-mask-mandate-no-effect/618942/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/texas-mask-mandate-no-effect/618942/). The author wondered why there wasn't a surge in infections when mask-wearing was relaxed in Texas early this year and discusses some explanations.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on July 23, 2021, 07:46:37 pm
Here in the U.S. state of Merryland, facemasks have become a fashion accessory.  (Below, a cellphone snap from a quick trip yesterday to a local shopping mall with my wife—both of us "fully vaccinated," but still masked-up.)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51329716864_e4a2c33ca2_c_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 27, 2021, 03:29:51 pm
Two interesting things. One is an article about vacationers in Missouri who refuse to take any Covid precautions, https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/07/27/ozarks-lake-covid-unvaccinated-500784 (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/07/27/ozarks-lake-covid-unvaccinated-500784). One especially interesting interview is with a lady with cancer who wore a mask in Walmart and was heckled by others to remove her mask. (Always beware the mob.)

The second is a Sam Harris podcast about Covid vaccines, their (outstanding) effectiveness and the mis- and dis-information that's being peddled against them, https://samharris.org/podcasts/256-contagion-bad-ideas/ (https://samharris.org/podcasts/256-contagion-bad-ideas/). Some really interesting discussion about actual data by an interviewee who knows and understands it all intimately. The podcast is about 90 min long and is presented in its entirely, not behind the normal paywall.

(As an aside, I don't follow everything that American politicians say these days about the vaccines, there's just too much info out there. But I wonder if there is someone out there in media land who is tracking all the people with public profile, such as sitting politicians, who preach against vaccines but who have themselves been inoculated. It seems as if that would be an interesting thing to make public.)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 29, 2021, 09:16:59 am
Some stories are just too sad for words, https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/29/health/vaccines-in-secret-missouri/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/29/health/vaccines-in-secret-missouri/index.html). Some folks in Missouri feel the need to hide the fact that they're getting inoculated.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on July 29, 2021, 09:37:39 am
Interesting podcast from Trending BBC about a thwarted Covid vaccine disinformation campaign, https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1xzq (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1xzq). It's about 20 min long.

From the episode's blurb, "A mystery sponsor secretly offered to pay social media stars to spread lies about the risks from a Covid vaccine. The plot failed spectacularly but who and what was behind it all?".

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on July 29, 2021, 05:49:53 pm
Some stories are just too sad for words. . . .  Some folks in Missouri feel the need to hide the fact that they're getting inoculated.

Apropos of pathos, the U.S. Treasury Department today apparently concluded it was necessary to authorize the individual states to divert federal economic relief funds in order to pay $100 each to recalcitrant residents in order to encourage them to get vaccinated.

My wife has una amiga in southern México who stood in line for an entire day last month with her extended family under the hot summer sun to get doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, only to be informed when they arrived near the head of the queue that the clinic had exhausted its supply.  A few weeks ago, they queued up again for the better part of the day, and had better luck: the entire family got vaccinated.  They were so happy, and relieved finally to be immunized, that they threw a party for their neighborhood.

I've long suspected that the average mexicano is smarter than the average estadounidense, so I wasn't surprised to receive this confirmation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on August 01, 2021, 09:45:00 am
I'm usually leery of "man-in-the-street" reporting, but the New York Times has published an interesting collection of interviews (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-americans.html?smid=url-share), supplemented by statistical data from sample surveys, with U.S. residents who either are reluctant or adamantly refuse to get the coronavirus vaccine.

Quote
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. . . .

Some of those who expressed reluctance to be vaccinated in their conversations with the Times reporters appeared to be wavering because of the rapid spread of the highly-contagious "Delta variant" in this country.  Others in that group were waiting for unconditional federal approval of the vaccines—which are now being administered under an emergency use authorization—or their next appointment with their family doctor.  They seem to be persuadable, at least.

The refuseniks are another story.

I don't know whether the Times reporters or their editors intentionally screened out the real nutcases—the conspiracy theorists who believe the program to administer the vaccines is part of a nefarious plot by bad actors—but even the interview subjects who said they wouldn't be vaccinated under any circumstances seemed fairly reasonable.  These people may be misinformed about the facts, or their thought processes may be confused, but they don't sound crazy.  Whether anything can shake their current determination not to be inoculated is an open question.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 19, 2021, 08:24:08 am
Sadly, Worldometer reported US daily deaths above 1000 yesterday. The 7-day moving average is trending in a bad direction.

I thought this item was bizarre news, if it's accurate, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/19/red-state-govs-push-pricey-covid-treatments-while-fighting-masks-506166 (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/19/red-state-govs-push-pricey-covid-treatments-while-fighting-masks-506166). So vaccines are new and risky but these various emergency use drugs are ok? What? There was no reason to expect the hysteria to die down, stupid of me to hope.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 19, 2021, 05:58:20 pm
I'm happy to report that I got my third Pfizer shot yesterday.   :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on August 19, 2021, 06:58:32 pm
I'm happy to report that I got my third Pfizer shot yesterday.   :)

I'm sure that's a relief.  From what I've read, all organ transplant patients who received one of the mRNA vaccines should be administered a second booster (third dose) as soon as possible.  Any significant side-effects?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 19, 2021, 11:14:28 pm
I have never had any reaction to any vaccination, not even a sore spot where the needle went in.

I guess I got a lot of practice with needles when I was younger, donating something like a few gallons of blood.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 20, 2021, 06:30:18 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on August 21, 2021, 09:27:46 pm
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...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 23, 2021, 04:28:22 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 23, 2021, 05:46:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 24, 2021, 03:31:03 pm
Two skirmishes in the Covid saga:

The town of Iraan Texas is shutting down https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/08/24/texas-town-iraan-essentially-closes-covid/8253550002/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/08/24/texas-town-iraan-essentially-closes-covid/8253550002/).

75 Florida doctors stage symbolic walkout, https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/75-florida-doctors-stage-walkout-in-protest-of-unvaccinated-covid-19-patients/ (https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/75-florida-doctors-stage-walkout-in-protest-of-unvaccinated-covid-19-patients/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 08:50:12 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 24, 2021, 09:18:01 pm
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.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 09:51:19 pm
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.

True, I am living my life normal, or as normal as I can.  And if you, or anyone else, wants to wear a mask, socially distance, etc, you certainly can do so.  I have no issue with it. 

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.  This is even the case when we now have research, from MIT, that masking and social distancing did pretty much nothing, and the only thing that mattered was length of indoor air exposure. 

Now we have the Delta variant, which is a 1000 times more contagious than Alpha, and 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.)  Even if we all wore new KN95 masks, properly, how is it going to matter to a variant that is 1000 times more contagious?  Moving onto other mandates, ...

Beliefs become dogma once challenged.  I consider anti-vax ideologies to be rather ignorant, but a mandate is one hell of a challenge to such an ignorant belief.  Even with a person with a mild case of anti-vaxsteria, issuing a mandate is likely to turn him into a member of the choir.  But the mandate crowd refuses to accept this and feels with the right laws and policies, you can just fix any flaw in humanity (an asinine concept which is one of the main reasons I am not a progressive).  They are moving forward with this in NYC and will create three obvious issues that very much effect society, and, by extension, me. 

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, especially outside of Manhattan where the vaccination rates are worse.  This is morally reprehensible, full stop. 

Second, non-vaccinated people will continue to be non-vaccinated and just start hanging out with each other en mass.  This will increase spread and the chance of mutations, effecting the overall population.

Last, many service businesses rely on minorities, and immigrants, to fill back of the house positions.  This may not sound politically correct, but that is the case.  This mandate is effectively going to kill the service industry and pull down the economy, which effects society. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 09:55:01 pm
Living in a civil society can be such a burden for some.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 10:01:45 pm
Living in a civil society can be such a burden for some.

As always, "rational and well reasoned dialogue." 

Thanks again. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 10:04:12 pm
I thought it a reasonable observation that is useful to recall from time to time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 10:06:52 pm
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 those that will not get vaccinated? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 10:11:00 pm
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 a balance between the two.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 10:18:59 pm
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.

That is not the problem.  The problem is that those of us whom what to discuss what that balance should be are shouted down by radicals if we do not toe the far left line, and liberals like yourself go along with it because you dont want to be left out of the club. 

Seriously, what policy discussions have we been able to have over this in the last year?  Biden is pushing vaccine mandates; has he, or any other Democrat, held a public discussion with someone who has a difference of opinion? 

Youtube, and nearly all other social media (all the ones that matter), wont even allow videos to be posted that contradict democratic talking points on the virus. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 10:30:31 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 10:36:28 pm
liberals like yourself

The only ideology to which I subscribe is that all ideology corrupts reason. The overarching philosophy to which I'm open is that reason and pragmatism need to be balanced along with empathy for the human condition.

But you're free to label me however you like. People like labels. It makes life simpler for them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on August 24, 2021, 10:54:40 pm
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.

Thanks for the definition, and completely ignoring what I was getting at. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 24, 2021, 11:13:10 pm
You're certainly entitled to your opinion... and I mine. I do happen to believe that public health matters are a legitimate concern for government officials that make policy decisions, regulations, and laws. Public health is one of a great many things in life that have to be balanced with personal freedom.

My response wasn't to your entire post nor do I feel any obligation to respond to everything that you write. My response was to your bottom line and your subsequent responses.

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. 

If you don't like my responses, I can live with that. If you want to characterize me and label me in your own fashion, I have no control over that, nor do I care to, as it doesn't affect my life in any way whatever.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 25, 2021, 01:30:19 am
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. 

I looked up Buster Shots and found the following:
"The Buster Shot was originally an old model of a handheld gun used by the late Resistance member Milan." 
Based on that explanation, I won't be getting any buster shots either.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on August 25, 2021, 02:27:44 am
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.

Attached graphic as an FYI.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 25, 2021, 07:27:32 am
... 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. ...

I understand that ubiquitous "state control" is primary concern of yours. Always good to be sensitive to it, but I really don't think we're there yet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 25, 2021, 01:26:54 pm
Delta Air Lines will now add $200 surcharge to health insurance premiums to all unvaccinated employees. Seems like an effective way to get the things done.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/25/delta-air-lines-unvaccinated-employees-will-face-200-fees-if-they-dont-get-covid-vaccine.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 25, 2021, 03:07:58 pm
First, in NYC

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.

(according to the official NY state health department)

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. (*and by "region", I discovered after I first posted this)

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.

69.6% of White Not Latinos are vaccinated, but only 22.7% of Blacks, 27.9% of Asians, and 30.4% of Latinos are.

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.

These numbers have been steady for the past few months and, even after the mandate was announced, no significant increases were seen.

Really? People stopped receiving vaccines "the past few months"? That seems odd.

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

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.

This is morally reprehensible, full stop. 

Your moral outrage is noted.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 25, 2021, 03:22:35 pm
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.

Please see the above post. It may help you to understand why I said that I do not "feel any obligation to respond to everything that you write".

Provide me with criticisms to those three observations.

Thanks... but just one took more than enough of my time and energy. Sometimes sending "a quip" your way seems adequate compared to other ways that I can invest my time.

And... Don't wear out that "rational and well reasoned dialogue" quote you borrowed from another thread too soon. You may want to use it again at a later date.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on August 25, 2021, 03:59:48 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 25, 2021, 08:09:43 pm
As with any statistics, the devil is in the details. I went back and double-checked the State of New York Dept. of Health website (https://covid19vaccine.health.ny.gov/vaccine-demographic-data) and in addition to counties, there is a drop down menu to select by one of 10 "regions". One of the regions is listed as New York City [Click the drop down menu for Regions; click on All to deselect it; click on New York City to select it; then click apply. If drop down menu remains, click on the page to to remove it]. But, it's impossible to compare NY State demographic data to NYC Department of Health demographic data because they use two entirely different basis for expressing the demographic percentages.

NYC Health Dept. lists their data as New York City "Residents" broken out by "Adults (18 years or older)" and "All Ages". This is further broken down by "Fully vaccinated" and "At least 1 dose". New York State lists their data by "People with at least one vaccine dose" and "Total population aged 15+". Given that NYC uses four categories and New York state uses just two with a different age group divider of 15+, it's already difficult to compare directly. New York State does NOT have a category for "Fully vaccinated". But that is NOT where the real difference is in the data.

There are also differences in how "race" and "ethnicity" are listed and much more importantly, how they're measured and expressed as percentages. The NYC Health Dept. uses the categories that I showed above: White; Black; Hispanic/Latino; Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander; and Native American/Alaska Native. New York State has a data set in a column shown for "Race" which lists: White; African American; Asian; and Other. There is another data set in a separate column for "Ethnicity" with only two categories: Hispanic/Latino or "Not Hispanic or Latino". New York State has two different data sets displayed in two separate columns, one for "Race" and another for "Ethnicity". Each data set column totals to 100% because they are entirely separate data sets.

I put "Not Hispanic or Latino" in bold above to draw attention to it because this is just one of the incorrect assumptions that Joe makes. According to him that category is "White Not Latinos". It isn't and they are not the same or even remotely similar. "Not Hispanic or Latino" includes every ethnicity other than "Hispanic/Latino"... not just "White".

As I mentioned above, the NY State data set for "Ethnicity" only has two ethnic categories and for "People with at least one vaccine dose". The NY State vaccination data for NYC is: Hispanic/Latino - 30.5% and "Not Hispanic or Latino" - 69.5% = 100% of the total vaccinated population in NYC who have received at least one vaccine dose. This means that of the total vaccinated population in NYC (that have received at least 1 vaccine Dose), 30.5% are Hispanic/Latino. It does NOT mean that of all the Hispanic/Latino population in NYC only 30.5% are vaccinated as Joe assumes and asserts.

New York State has in their separate "Race" data set a category for "White". AND... that category of "White" must include a large portion of "Hispanic/Latino" population. I'll explain why that is below.

Here's the NY State data set by "Race" for "People with at least 1 vaccine dose": White - 47%; African American - 22.7%; Asian - 27.9%; and Other - 2.4% = 100% of the total vaccinated population in NYC who have received at least one vaccine dose. Where is the "Hispanic/Latino" data shown in that 100% of the NYC population that have received at least one vaccine dose? Many (probably most) are going to be included in the "White" category. Some who are of mixed racial heritage may be in one of the other categories. NY State demographics don't categorize "Hispanic/Latino" separately as a "race" as Joe does in his assertions. But we already know, from the NY State "Ethnic" statistics that "Hispanic/Latino" category makes up 30.5% of all New York City residents who have received at least 1 vaccination. So they must be included in the "race" statistics somewhere or you couldn't get to a total which adds up to a 100% of vaccinated population.

Now look at the New York City Health Department data. Do their percentages add up to 100%? No, they add up to a much higher percentage than that! For anyone who has made it this far and hasn't yet figured out the statistical difference... New York State has two completely separate and different sets of statistics with demographic percentages expressed as a percentage of the total vaccinated population. NY State statistical data does NOT express their data as the percentage of people within any specific race or ethnic category who have been vaccinated.

New York City uses a single and entirely different measure that DOES express the percentage of people within a specific racial/ethnic category who have received a vaccination.

What Joe gets completely wrong, or whatever source he got his "statistical analysis" from gets wrong, is taking two different "racial" and "ethnic" data sets, each of which are expressed as a percentage of total vaccinated population, and then conflating the two, and then compounding the error by expressing it as if it's an entirely different measure of percentage within a racial/ethnic group.

Now Joe, neither I nor anyone else else can determine whether you did this statistical reporting on your own and got confused or whether you got it from an entirely unreliable source. You gave us no links, no background, no methodology—just statistics to swallow as facts as reported by you. What I know from past experience is that you have a tendency to make assumptions and jump to conclusions based on those assumptions. There isn't enough time in the day to sort out the assertions that result from that tendency. Do yourself and the rest of us a favor and slow down long enough to check things out that you post... or at least provide links to your sources for cryin' out loud.

* The data from both NYC and NY State are frequently updated, so percentage data may change at any time and differ from the numbers above.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 25, 2021, 08:35:11 pm
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?

Mine... I hope that I explained the difference clearly enough. I'm glad that you asked. It cleared up at least one part of the mystery regarding Joe's statistical "facts" which are not facts at all. We just don't yet know how he came to his conclusions. Maybe he'll tell us.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 25, 2021, 11:32:04 pm
New study by University of Waterloo shows a significant buildup over time of aerosol droplets – exhaled droplets so tiny they remain suspended and travel through the air – despite the use of common cloth and blue surgical masks.

Quote
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.

https://uwaterloo.ca/news/media/study-supports-widespread-use-better-masks-curb-covid-19
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 26, 2021, 01:36:12 am
Thanks for linking that news story. I looked at the full report of their data and findings (https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100) because Joe tossed a reference to it (without any link) into the same post I replied to above. Because of replying to the misrepresented demographic statistics, I hadn't had time to reply to his representation of this mask study or his mistaken belief that viral load and transmissibility are equivalent, when in fact they are completely different.

Here's how Joe represented it...

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.)

Joe says "Those blue medical [surgical] masks everyone wears only filters out 10% and cloth masks filter out essentially nothing, according to the research". What their tests showed for "filtration efficiency" is": 40% for cloth; 47% for surgical; and 95-96% for KN95/R95 masks. But wait, I'm going to be fair to Joe. Fit is very important in efficiency of masks. "The baseline filtration characteristics for the various masks tested in this study indicate that more than 50% of aerosols (polydisperse, 1 μm mean diameter) can pass through the material of commercially available cloth and surgical masks in ideal conditions (zero leakage due to fit), whereas ideal filtration efficiency is 95% (or higher) in the case of KN95 and R95 masks."

Their report said that "estimates for the apparent filtration efficiency", which are reported as an average within a +/- percentage range reported beside it, with their model were: 12% (± 9.7) for surgical masks (Joe says 10%, so pretty close to the average) and 9.8% (± 9.7) for cloth masks (Joe says, "essentially nothing, according to the research". You can decide how accurate that statement is for yourself.) For the KN95 it's 46.3% (± 9.4) and the R95 is 60.2% (± 9.0); so Joe's 50% is pretty close to the average.

I'm not making a judgement about their methodology, but it's not a bad idea to know how the tests were performed. Just noting this to avoid any assumptions.

"Experiments were conducted in the Fluid Mechanics Research Laboratory at the University of Waterloo... To study the dispersion of exhaled aerosols in an unventilated space, the room was sealed from all surroundings, which included shutting off the ventilation system and sealing all air passageways through the room envelope... The test model was a Prestan adult CPR manikin (https://www.aedsuperstore.com/prestan-training-manikins.html)... Breathing with aerosol-laden exhalation was provided by a custom breathing apparatus... The positive and negative air pressure cycle was provided by a mechanical ventilator... which operated through the repeated compression and decompression of an adult size med-rescuer bag-valve-mask (BVM) (1500 mL bag volume) by a pneumatic piston. Aerosols were produced by atomizing olive oil into particles with a mean diameter of about 1 μm (volume-weighted)".

Masks are only intended to reduce transmission, not eliminate it. Masks are only one piece of a series of public health recommendations which added together are a path to reduce transmission to a minimum. First and foremost is vaccination (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9kwDM3XIAEblWj?format=jpg&name=medium). There has been a major reduction in hospitalizations for those vaccinated (https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-chart-highlights-significantly-reduced-191824975.html).

What's been known all along still applies, the more people infected, the more variants will occur. So, vaccination + masks + ventilation + social distancing + avoiding large gatherings are still the path to reduced infection rates, reduced hospitalization, reduced deaths, and a reduction in new variants. It's been known public health science for a long time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 26, 2021, 05:00:31 am
I'm happy to report that I got my third Pfizer shot yesterday.   :)

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.
The data comes from two Phase 2 studies conducted in the United States and Europe observing 2,000 people in the studies.

Quote
"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.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/25/health/johnson-vaccine-booster-data/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on August 26, 2021, 08:04:45 am
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 26, 2021, 08:10:39 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 26, 2021, 09:06:00 am
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.

No. He actually believes that. He's conflating the amount of virus circulating in an infected person (viral load) with how contagious that person may be to another.

Someone infected with the Delta variant may have a 1,000 or 1,200 times the amount of virus in their system and it currently appears that infected person may be about 2x as contagious (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/images/variants/COVID_19_Strain-vs-DeltaVariant_1080x1080_08-02-21.jpg) in spreading an infection to others.

Even if we all wore new KN95 masks, properly, how is it going to matter to a variant that is 1000 times more contagious?

Well, it isn't like the virus is just going to knock that mask off and then laugh in your face. The Delta variant may be about 2x as contagious (see above), but it doesn't prevent a mask from filtering virus particles. The virus doesn't become like a super missile that can pentetrate whatever it encounters.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on August 26, 2021, 09:16:46 am
Regarding the general topic of mask effectiveness, it's often overlooked that when two people come into contact and both are wearing masks, the effectiveness increases substantially. In that instance, the masks act to filter both the air exhaled by one person and inhaled by another. Just something to keep in mind regarding their effectiveness, as it isn't a one way street.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on August 26, 2021, 09:35:28 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 26, 2021, 03:52:15 pm
More bad news, this time in Florida, https://ca.news.yahoo.com/florida-is-the-only-state-where-more-people-are-dying-of-covid-now-than-ever-before-what-went-wrong-090001893.html (https://ca.news.yahoo.com/florida-is-the-only-state-where-more-people-are-dying-of-covid-now-than-ever-before-what-went-wrong-090001893.html).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on August 26, 2021, 09:18:01 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on August 27, 2021, 12:50:04 pm
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.

What an idiot...he learned well from his master.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on August 30, 2021, 08:06:33 am
The horse dewormer seems to be flying of the shelves. At least in Alberta.

Quote
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.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/ivermectin-alberta-covid-1.6157200
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on August 31, 2021, 09:42:36 pm
The results of this study (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2783797?guestAccessKey=6ead80fe-bf08-4d53-8c5c-607249932480&utm_source=silverchair&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article_alert-jama&utm_content=olf&utm_term=083021) have not been replicated yet by other researchers, but it appears there may be a difference in the immune response conferred by the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines, perhaps at least partially attributable to their standard dosing regimes:

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 01, 2021, 03:23:08 pm
Looking at the most recent 7-day average number of daily deaths in the US due to Covid on Worldometer, the rate of increase seems to be flattening a bit, so the hope is that this peak won't be as high as previous ones.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on September 01, 2021, 11:32:40 pm
I got my booster shot today...I trust science over horse dewormer....or bleach. Living in Florida makes one a bit on the cynical side.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 06, 2021, 08:33:49 am
Not a bad summary article about the current state of things, https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/06/why-we-cant-turn-the-corner-on-covid-509349 (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/06/why-we-cant-turn-the-corner-on-covid-509349).

I like the "cover" photo, some intriguing signs in the background (Dungeon Bar?).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 06, 2021, 12:13:49 pm
I got my first two Pfizer shots last January and February, and I got a booster at a local Walgreens about a week ago.
Then a few days later I got an email from Walgreens inviting me to come in for my "second" shot.

I have decided to take a pass on that for now, as I'm hoping three is enough.   ;) 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 06, 2021, 01:41:03 pm
Three shots should be enough for this year.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 07, 2021, 01:35:27 pm
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).

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 07, 2021, 04:06:11 pm
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).

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.

Canada: anti-vaxxers hit Justin Trudeau with a handful of gravel
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/07/canada-anti-vaxxers-hit-justin-trudeau-with-a-handful-of-gravel
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 07, 2021, 04:14:16 pm
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".)

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 07, 2021, 04:27:34 pm
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".)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 07, 2021, 04:43:50 pm
Rather than get on a roller coaster manipulated by someone best ignored, I'd rather focus on life and death issues at the moment. There comes a point where dimwits become dangerous to everyone's safety and health—as is the case in Idaho right now.

 As of today, Idaho has activated crisis level care standards for several hospitals in Northern Idaho. What that means is hospitals are authorized to triage patients and ration care based on likelihood of survival. Here's a video explaining what that means (https://www.tiktok.com/@rx0rcist/video/7005235065869438213?lang=en&is_copy_url=0&is_from_webapp=v1&sender_device=pc&sender_web_id=7004087009850902021) which is under two minutes long and this is the chart seen in the video (https://jdsupra-html-images.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/55a2e752-3fe7-4a0e-a973-c25591d3390e-IL%20Public%20Health%20Chart.png). Here's a news report on the current hospital crisis (https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/idaho-enacts-crisis-hospital-care-standards-amid-covid-79872485) there.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 07, 2021, 04:58:36 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 07, 2021, 05:01:15 pm
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.

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.
Sure, fools are open to criticism. It's just that it would be nice if you aimed your arrows at more Canadian fools.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 07, 2021, 05:47:25 pm
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.

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.

There is my health, and there is your health. What is “public health” and what government has to do with it?

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.

Down with the CDC! Down with fascist lockdowns and mask mandates! Live free or die!

"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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 07, 2021, 06:26:57 pm
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.
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.     
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 07, 2021, 08:31:41 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 07, 2021, 09:18:33 pm
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)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 07, 2021, 09:22:38 pm
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.

Strict adherence to ideology really is rather silly. In the early 1970s on campus at McGill we'd buy copies of the Marxist-Leninist Daily for a lunch time laugh. It only cost a dime, cheap thrills. Silly slogans are just that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 07, 2021, 10:41:53 pm
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.

The Bush administration and CDC in 2005 established a goal for which we should all currently be grateful. That goal was set forth in the 2005 National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pandemic-influenza-strategy-2005.pdf). Their goal was to (page 5):

"Establish domestic production capacity and stockpiles of countermeasures to ensure:

- Sufficient vaccine to vaccinate front-line personnel and at-risk populations, including military personnel;

- Sufficient vaccine to vaccinate the entire U.S. population within six months of the emergence of a virus with pandemic potential; and

- Antiviral treatment for those who contract a pandemic strain of influenza."


The following year, BARDA was established thru bipartisan legislation to work toward those and other goals. BARDA and NIAID continued with those efforts year after year; funding research outside government; performing research inside government; and developing capabilities and capacities for what became a critical need in 2020. The BARDA Strategic Plan for 2011-2016 (https://www.phe.gov/about/barda/Documents/barda-strategic-plan.pdf) (page 13 - Goal 3) discusses those ongoing efforts toward the 2005 six month goal for vaccine development and capacity.

"GOAL 3

Agile, robust and sustainable U.S. manufacturing in­frastructure capable of rapidly producing vaccines and other biologics against pandemic influenza and other emerging threats

The 2005 National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza es­tablished a commitment to making vaccine available for all Americans within six months of the emergence of a virus with pandemic potential. BARDA has made significant progress towards increasing and securing domestic manufacturing capacity for pandemic influ­enza vaccine development. However, the recent re­sponse to 2009 H1N1 shows that we are still hampered by the limits of current technology. The first domestic cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza were identified in April and the pandemic peaked about six months later, in late October. Despite an intensive effort to develop a pandemic vaccine, the 2009 H1N1 vaccine arrived too late to have a significant effect on the dynamics of the fall disease wave. Influenza vaccines licensed in the U.S. use egg-based technology that is more than 50 years old and a substantial portion of the manufactur­ing capacity is based overseas.

Consistent with recommendations from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in its August 2010 Report to the President on Re-engineering the Influenza Vaccine Production Enterprise to Meet the Challenges of Pandemic Influenza BARDA is work­ing with several partners to develop more modern plat­forms for manufacturing influenza vaccines and this investment is beginning to pay off."


The more one looks at the background and history of the current COVID vaccines, the more you realize that it was not an innovation, nor an effort, that occurred or began in 2020. The effort was years in the making and the results arrived in the nick of time. Now, if only people would behave rationally... that will take a lot more time and effort!

* Sorry about the length of the post. Consider it to be a continuation of the narrative that I began earlier on the background and history of COVID vaccines. Regardless of how it was branded and marketed during an election year, credit goes to BARDA for the speed of production and scientists supported by NIAID for the development. While the six month goal wasn't met... it was accomplished with impressive speed nonetheless. There is also credit due to scientists worldwide and not just in the U.S.

** Bold type is as it appears in the original document linked above.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 08, 2021, 12:07:12 am
It would be nice if you would say something pleasant about us.  Were not all ogres you know.

We have. Here. Several times.

It's just that some seventy-odd million of you are apparently idiots.  It's hard to say anything pleasant about (or to) idiots. 

I'm referring to those idiots who oppose medical miracles like the covid vaccinations.  Or the idiots who term medical masks "face diapers". 

I could go on, but I won't.  It's past my bedtime.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 08, 2021, 09:17:57 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 08, 2021, 11:02:30 am
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.

There are covidiots both in US and in Canada. The undisputable fact is that US owns more of them, both in absolute and relative numbers.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 08, 2021, 11:30:59 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 08, 2021, 01:37:18 pm
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.

Oh please. If you want to ridicule some lame-ass Canadian politician, go ahead, no one is stopping you. No is stopping others either. This is utterly beside the point.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 08, 2021, 02:29:41 pm
This is utterly beside the point.

Good point.

But, that's the purpose—to send people in pursuit of trivial distractions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 08, 2021, 07:55:35 pm
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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 08, 2021, 11:37:08 pm


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.
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 09, 2021, 03:35:02 pm
Sad report from Idaho, https://idahocapitalsun.com/2021/09/08/dispatches-from-idahos-front-lines-a-hospital-bed-opens-because-someone-died/ (https://idahocapitalsun.com/2021/09/08/dispatches-from-idahos-front-lines-a-hospital-bed-opens-because-someone-died/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 09, 2021, 05:43:47 pm
It's great to see our president going for broke! 

Biden to announce vaccine mandate for companies with more than 100 employees (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-set-to-announce-vaccine-mandate-or-weekly-testing-for-companies-with-more-than-100-employees)

I am sure this will only have positive consequences. 

Call me crazy, but I just can not image forcing vaccination on those whom have not yet been vaccinated due to a variety of personal reasons will certainly not cause their resolve to be strengthened.  It will certainly not cause them to continue to not be vaccinated, leading to them eventually being fired only to collect unemployment.  Certainly businesses that rely on unvaccinated individuals will not decrease their workforces to be under the threshold (like happened with ObamaCare).  And if any of this does happen, certainly it will not happen en masse either, not leading to even more supply chain issues causing inflation to spike even further. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 09, 2021, 05:54:09 pm
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 09, 2021, 06:03:36 pm
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. 

Paying and making arrangements for weekly testing will suck up money and time and personal, not to mention it is a purely arbitrary expense that provides no real benefits to the business.  Businesses do whatever is necessary to avoid this type of expense, which Biden has generously provided them with two options to do so. 

Although some businesses may consider it at first, those whom approve of these measures will just ignore testing and move onto requiring vaccinations for all to save on those resources.  With the exception of those very rare individuals who are so amazing at their jobs, they are irreplaceable to the point where you just need to deal with the eccentricities, testing will not be option and those whom refuse vaccination will be fired. 

Those businesses whom do not approve of this, and are relatively small and rely on demographics that tend not to be vaccinated, will not have the personal resources to spare to perform the testing and will just rather decrease their workforces.  Contrary to popular belief on the left, this scenario will effect minorities the most.  Inner city minorities are still low on the percentage of those whom are vaccinated, leading businesses who rely on them to be put between a rock and hard place.  Either require vaccination and loose many of your workers due to them quitting, or just fire a few people to get below 100.  Sure, you can pick your poison here, but in the end, businesses in this position will eventually end up below 100 anyway, nullifying the mandate. 

Although I do not know the exact wording of the mandate and if it either applies on a per business basis or a per business owner basis (such as if you personally own multiple businesses with the number of combined employees in over the threshold, like ObamaCare), but, if the former, even with large businesses, I would not be surprised if we see businesses break down into multiple 99 person subsidiaries.  Even in the short term, this would be less expensive then testing weekly.  A business I know very well from what I do is construction, and most contractors are die hard MAGA people.  I guarantee you this will be the route many constructions firms take.  They will be forced to, since even vaccinated tradesmen will quit over this. 

That is the short and long of it.  The third option of testing weekly is nothing but a fantasy. 

Similar thing happened in Philly a few weeks ago with the new dining rules.  Restaurants could either check to make sure all patrons are vaccinated or require masks for everyone.  Nearly all restaurants choose the latter because they did not want to pay for someone to be a C-19 Vaccine Card bouncer. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 09, 2021, 11:10:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 10, 2021, 08:36:04 am
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.

Yes, you are in favor of vaccination or testing, which for most, if not you, will quickly devolve into vaccinations only. 

Due to previous posts, I assume you are an attorney.  Although I am aware that attorneys do not make as much personally as people think, it is still a business that generates a nice margin for resources on personal.  Not to mention, if in fact you do own a law firm, you are hiring a more sophisticated person then normal whom will be likely to get the vaccine then those at a lower income margin whom are generally not as sophisticated.  So perhaps you can absorb the costs of weekly testing, if all of your employees are not already vaccinated, which I would be willy to bet the vast majority are, but that does not mean all other business are in the same position as yours (and you should not just assume they are).  Most though are not going to want to put up with this, especially in lower marginal businesses that employ many part time employees in various locations like retail and hospitality. 

Lets look at a privately owned restaurant chain that, if they want down the testing route, would need to hire and pay for the transportation of someone to visit all their locations to ensure weekly testing is being completed.  He would need to do this multiple times a week too, since many employees are part time and will not all be present on the same day.  Considering many restaurants are strapped for cash right now, this will quickly become a burden and mandatory vaccines will, at first at least, be the easier option.  However, restaurants rely on lower income minorities for many of the back of house positions, like dish washers.  Not only that, dish washers are a not so easy position to fill, especially for weekends, since many native born Americans feel it is a position below them.  And trust me, those whom fill these position know this.  No way in hell would an unvaccinated dishwasher will chose to get vaccinated to keep his job; he will just quit, look for another job and find it by the end of the week. 

This is how it is going to play out in many instances.  The second and third order consequences will be less people employed leading to further supply chain issues and an increase in inflation. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 10, 2021, 08:53:00 am
To be honest though, I think this is a net positive for conservatism and federalism, and a net negative for progressivism in the long run. 

Societal ideas begin and, at first, seem promising only for them to grow and grow until, after a century, die from their own crushing weight.  This is exactly where the idea of large centrally control federal government progressivism is right now.  It is starting to die from its bloated weight and we are organically moving back towards federalism. 

Beliefs become dogma once challenged, and this mandate is one hell of a challenge.  If you look at the news, this mandate (overnight) has, like I predicted, only strengthened the resolve of those even mildly against it.  Biden is about to get mired down in the courts over this, but the real question is, if he prevails, how will he enforce it? 

He does not have the resources at the federal level to actually enforce this, just like Trump did not have the resources to deal with illegal aliens effectively, without state cooperation.  So Biden needs to rely on state health inspectors to enforce this.  But, just like so many blue states passed sanctuary immigration policies, refusing to allow their resources to help ICE, so many red states will just do the same here.  In all of the red states, this will be a mandate without any teeth and become a joke. 

This will just produce another organic separation of states away from the federal government, a trend, by the way, started by blue states with their sanctuary laws.  If presidents continue to do things like this, eventually enough people on the right and the left will just say, "I may agree with the current guy, but the next I probably wont and would rather not give him the power to interfere with my state even if that power benefits me now." 

If you disagree, just look at all of the sanctuary measures already in place against helping with federal enforcement.  We have sanctuary immigration policies, sanctuary gun enforcement policies, sanctuary marijuana (and other lite drug) policies, and now, soon to be, sanctuary health enforcement policies.  We are slowly moving back towards federalism, and the tighter the federal government's grip on centralized power (regardless of party), the more sand falls through their fingers. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 10, 2021, 08:59:22 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 10, 2021, 09:04:51 am
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 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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 10, 2021, 09:20:26 am
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.

We all have our passions. One of mine, since I was old enough to read, has been history. History, by its nature, incorporates a wide range of topics within it, including law; politics; psychology; culture; economics; and more. Maybe that's one of the reasons that I was drawn to it at a young age and continue to be.

For someone with a wide range of interests and an inclination for source documents (like historians), the web and Google make it so fast and easy compared to going to libraries—which I still enjoy. In any event, history involves a lot of searching for and reading of various documents—so, there you go. Not an attorney, just a nerdy kid at heart.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 10, 2021, 09:26:06 am
As someone who was originally going to become a chef, I have a much more expansive knowledge on cooking than most.

It's one of the things that I like about you. I was fortunate to be raised by two parents that were both excellent home cooks. So, I have a love of good food as well. I don't mean fancy, just well prepared from good ingredients.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 10, 2021, 10:01:04 am
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 mean you really aren't a Kurd?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 10, 2021, 10:03:18 am
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. 

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. 
Why?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 10, 2021, 11:29:27 am
.  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

And that’s precisely the problem with assumptions.  They’re frequently incorrect.

I understand, can pronounce and regularly employ all of the techniques you mention, but I have zero “training in a professional kitchen”.  Nor do I particularly enjoy cooking as a hobby.  I do enjoy food, though.

Facts, not assumptions, are what count.  It’s unfortunate that so many assume that their assumptions are facts.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 10, 2021, 02:31:14 pm
Why?

When holding an object still (say in order to cut it), it is very natural for you to extend out your fingers nearly all the way so they are almost horizontal.  This is just what most people do without thinking about it.  However, this presents a problem when you are using a knife since if you slip, the blade of the knife will fall on the top of your fingers and you'll cut yourself.  However, if your fingers are curled and you slip, the side of the knife will just bounce off your fingers instead since they are now in a vertical position.  Of course, you also need to position your thump behind your fingers, since you can not curl that into a vertical position. 

Next time you watch a cooking show, pay attention when the chef cuts something with a french knife.  They will always do this when cutting up and down. 

This is one of the first things you are trained to do in a kitchen.  And if you are not trained to do so, or if you do not pick it up right away, since you are using a knife all day everyday, you will eventually cut yourself so many times you'll just start to naturally do it. 

Most normal people, even avid home cooks, just are not using a knife nearly as much to get into the rote habit of curling their fingers.  If you do, its a tale tell sign that you probably worked in a restaurant as a cook for a little while.  And, if like me, you are in the habit of doing this, when you see some else not doing so, it causes you to cringe. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 10, 2021, 03:44:58 pm
Good advice, Joe.

My solution is even easier: I just leave all cutting and slicing to my wife.   :D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 11, 2021, 10:09:04 pm
Very disturbing news about child Covid deaths in Florida, https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/09/09/child-covid-fatalities-nearly-double-in-florida-1390807 (https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/09/09/child-covid-fatalities-nearly-double-in-florida-1390807).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 12, 2021, 07:01:02 am
And the number of deaths in USA in the last week is also very worrisome. Almost 2,000 just on Friday.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 12, 2021, 08:58:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 13, 2021, 04:55:15 pm
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 14, 2021, 07:25:37 am
This short article presents some strategies for combatting "merchants of doubt", https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/09/13/covid-19-and-the-new-merchants-of-doubt/ (https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/09/13/covid-19-and-the-new-merchants-of-doubt/). It won't have much effect, of course, but what interested me mostly were the comments about uploadable software, time travel and vaccinated feces collection.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 14, 2021, 10:42:55 pm
I just at today's Worldometer Covid death numbers for the USA, which were close to 2000 today. A week ago the 7-day moving average on daily deaths looked to be levelling off, maybe even decreasing, but it's looking less promising at the moment.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 15, 2021, 07:10:37 am
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 15, 2021, 11:41:27 am
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.

Yawn...wake me up when it reaches 60,000.  :-\
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 15, 2021, 10:37:33 pm
Florida governor does not correct speaker who claimed that vaccines alter your RNA, https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/09/15/desantis-flirts-with-the-anti-vaccine-crowd-1391038 (https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/09/15/desantis-flirts-with-the-anti-vaccine-crowd-1391038).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 16, 2021, 02:21:41 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 16, 2021, 02:22:17 pm
This is too good not to share:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 16, 2021, 02:34:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 16, 2021, 03:05:21 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 16, 2021, 04:27:16 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 16, 2021, 06:51:29 pm
Yawn...wake me up when it reaches 60,000.  :-\

+1

No matter how much he tries to ignore it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 17, 2021, 09:33:45 am
Bad developments in Idaho, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhmMPUgZit8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhmMPUgZit8).

"Likelihood Of Survival Becomes Key For Rationed Hospital Care In Covid-C..."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 10:17:52 am
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. 

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 17, 2021, 11:30:31 am
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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 17, 2021, 12:32:12 pm
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!")

"Beliefs" are not equivalent to facts.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 01:02:42 pm
Sometimes, it's a way of gently pointing out falsehoods and mis/disinformation.  (as opposed to shouting "LIAR!")

"Beliefs" are not equivalent to facts.


Humor is fine.  But some of it gets downright mean and personally insulting.  That isn't necessary.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 17, 2021, 01:03:38 pm
Bullshit....

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 05:00:25 pm
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 17, 2021, 05:03:45 pm
+1

No matter how much he tries to ignore it.

Well he stuck his neck out like the turkey for Thanks Giving...now he eats crow rather than turkey.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 17, 2021, 05:06:21 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 05:12:59 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 17, 2021, 05:14:52 pm
You really think you said something smart?

Got your attention...but then that does not need to be that smart.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 05:19:35 pm
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 ...

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. 
The whole Covid thing has been politicized from the very beginning with everyone taking up sides including many of the scientists.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 17, 2021, 05:23:06 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 05:37:14 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 17, 2021, 05:47:16 pm
Demeaning people who made the point is wrong.

Really Alan, you know who we are discussing here. Talk about demeaning people...he's right up there in the lead. I thought you were wiser than that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 17, 2021, 06:16:57 pm
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.

Actually, many experts were predicting right from the outset that Covid is much more dangerous than a flu. Some people didn't listen or didn't understand the important differences between the flu and Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 17, 2021, 06:30:56 pm
I made similar claims.  No one was recognizing that we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually. ...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 06:38:43 pm
Trump shut down travel from China in Jan 2020

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 17, 2021, 06:49:50 pm
Oh, please:

Even the "fact checkers" agree that it is "half true" (they usually use the term "mostly false," so using "half true" is quite a compliment coming from them):

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/29/steve-bannon/did-fauci-tell-us-not-worry-about-coronavirus/

Yeah, right... as any good politician he was using a double speak, a cop-out "right now."

Jan 21:

Quote
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."

Jan 26:

Quote
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."




Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 06:53:48 pm
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. 

Right now in NYC, 1/4 of the storefronts, shops, eateries, restaurants, etc.  in the financial district are shut; 1/3 in Midtown.   Politicians were faced with the decision of creating such economic problems or wait and see.  That's hard to do early on when the deaths were less than the common flu.  It's not unreasonable to want to wait. 

It's not like the Democrats had the right idea either from the beginning.  Like I said Biden called Trump xenophobic and many Democrats called him a racist for shutting down travel from China.  So it took everyone a while to understand the danger.  Even now there are arguments about how much things should be shut down, indoor eating, etc.  I still believe that long after COovid is a memory, our economic problems caused by it and the shutdown will long be with us.  Millions out of work, businesses shut down, inflation causing prices to escalate hurting the poor and lower-income the most.  It's long from over.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 06:55:52 pm
we basically ignored flu deaths every year that number in the tens of thousands annually.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 07:00:23 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 07:02:39 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 07:04:22 pm
The point is Trump acted long before Biden

You might not have noticed, but Trump was the President... Biden was a private citizen at the time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 07:08:01 pm
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.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 07:09:14 pm
Restriction?  Shutdown?  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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 07:23:36 pm
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.

I understood your post. Influenza was never "ignored", as you put it, by public health officials at any level of government, whether as annual seasonal flu or the potential for pandemics.

There is a difference in the response to infectious diseases, of which there are many, which are not of a pandemic nature and those that are more deadly and pandemic. A distinction with major differences in both outcome and response.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 07:25:40 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 07:45:44 pm
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.

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"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 07:55:52 pm
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.

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"?
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.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50094956821_2aa1eb2988_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jjHKo6)
Don't crowd me (https://flic.kr/p/2jjHKo6) by Alan Klein (https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50094956801_1951188563_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jjHKnK)
This Side Up - Park bench to Park Avenue (https://flic.kr/p/2jjHKnK) by Alan Klein (https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 08:07:04 pm
Oh! Well... that certainly proves that the "demands for the shutdown of the entire economy", from the anonymous people you cited, were carried out!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 08:11:38 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 08:17:15 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 17, 2021, 09:26:01 pm
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.

Quote
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 17, 2021, 09:26:22 pm
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.

Alan, you're either an absolute dead-loss idiot or the most skillful troll on LULA.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 17, 2021, 10:48:51 pm
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.

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
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 17, 2021, 11:27:45 pm
Alan, you're either...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 05:05:44 am
Alan, you're either an absolute dead-loss idiot or the most skillful troll on LULA.

This is simply despicable!

And if there is a moderators, you’d be banned for a while.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 05:08:56 am
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!?”
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 18, 2021, 05:20:58 am
That has been a repeated right-wing narrative that is so skewed, twisted, distorted, and pulled away from any context that it bears little resemblance to reality.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: josh.reichmann on September 18, 2021, 09:01:17 am
Remember the time when Biden was actively campaigning against “Trump’s” vaccines? “Who’s gonna take that shot!? Who’s gonna take that shot!?”

Agree. Peter, there are other ways of demonstrating your exaustion or bafflement with a POV.
Let's pull back from any personal attacks or temp banning is not out of the question.


Josh
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 18, 2021, 09:51:07 am
It shows that Trump was more concerned about Covid than Biden was.

This must be your third or fourth howler this week. Thanks for the entertainment.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 18, 2021, 09:57:24 am
... 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.

The indications were clear around the globe and many people and several countries understood and acted. Re-hashing every statement from the last 18 months is a bit beside the point. The richest nation on earth with 4% of the population had 20% of the deaths, and all this week, daily deaths have been hovering at the 2000 mark. I simply cannot believe that people are still peddling the "nothing we could have done" line when people were doing a lot everywhere else. And you even seem to be trying to pin it on Biden while he was out of office. How can you expect people to take you seriously?

This is a huge societal failure on the part of the US, with Trump as a major co-morbidity (author Michael Lewis's word). What the country should be doing is figuring out all the points of failure and re-designing them, but instead there are people worried about vaccine shredders and others still whining about masks and "freedom". It's incredible, really.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 10:12:20 am
... trying to pin it on Biden while he was out of office...

He has been in office the last eight months. 300,000 on his watch. Or you are trying to pin that too on Trump?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 10:14:21 am
... people are still peddling the "nothing we could have done" ...

People!? That is what Biden said at the beginning of his term "there is nothing we can do."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 18, 2021, 10:31:23 am
He has been in office the last eight months. 300,000 on his watch. Or you are trying to pin that too on Trump?

Sure, ok, it was all Biden's fault. Feel better now?

Does that get you anywhere?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 18, 2021, 11:15:55 am
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.

Yah, perhaps a little over the top, even if I did give him credit for one skill.

Sometimes, however, one is driven to the dark side by sheer frustration.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 18, 2021, 11:49:53 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 11:53:06 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 18, 2021, 12:10:57 pm

It does feel that way lately.  I just took the regular Flu shot. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 18, 2021, 12:45:14 pm
I see they approved the third Pfizer shot for people over 65 like me and my wife...

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 08:47:57 am
... 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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 09:07:08 am
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.


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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 09:15:46 am
Oh, how the tune changes when their guy is in charge! 🤣🤣🤣

Quote
One-Third Of New Drugs Had Safety Problems After FDA Approval

"It took a median of 4.2 years after the drugs were approved for these safety concerns to come to light..."

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/09/527575055/one-third-of-new-drugs-had-safety-problems-after-fda-approval?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3WdmlaZOQA5Tj1BkK-gCBOCYlzPECtFsrTAedsVQa-Mztthn48ZxvHibQ

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 19, 2021, 11:07:09 am
Interesting podcast about dogs and Covid, https://www.pushkin.fm/episode/the-dog-will-see-you-now/ (https://www.pushkin.fm/episode/the-dog-will-see-you-now/), the last episode of the most recent season of Revisionist History. It's about the high success rate of trained dogs in discovering many diseases and how they could be useful with Covid.

Snowflake alert: Malcolm Gladwell makes a very disparaging remark about the efficacy of the US in the face of Covid. It occurs past the midway point, sensitive souls should take care. :)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 19, 2021, 11:09:53 am
: 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/

F.U.D.

That's right, there are some things that aren't known until they are known. Meanwhile, effectiveness of the Covid vaccines continue to be a high point of medical intervention. You can't spin that away.

The Trump clan were vaccinated, what better recommendation could you want?  :)



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 19, 2021, 11:14:40 am
Are you gloating that there were more deaths than people hoped for?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 11:52:23 am
F.U.D...

Or science.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 19, 2021, 12:10:17 pm
You baited people using a wildly inappropriate query that can only be deliberate. I find this despicable.

Me, too.  And I should know, having been recently accused of being despicable myself.

Unfortunately, that kind of baiting seems increasingly common.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 12:21:36 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 01:42:15 pm
And I should know, having been recently accused of being despicable myself.

There was little to reprimand given the 'either ...or' context of your post.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 01:45:23 pm
I should know, having been recently accused of being despicable myself.

He was personally insulting another poster.

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!

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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 01:53:31 pm
There was little to reprimand given the 'either ...or' context of your post.
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.

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. 

Regarding Jeremyrh, I called him out for the racist comment he made of indicating that black people were apparently not intelligent or capable of getting a photo ID as white people do, so they can vote.  He felt that like children, they needed to have special hand-holding treatment.  That was an insult to Black people who I defended stating they were just as capable as any other race to meet the standards of getting an ID.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 01:56:33 pm
By the way, your Der Kleine reference shows you still calling me a Nazi.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 01:59:02 pm
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!

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!
Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 02:11:39 pm
By the way, your Der Kleine reference shows you still calling me a Nazi.

Improve your language skills ,
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine

'little man'
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 02:27:22 pm
Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference.

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.

I don't speak German and apparently you don't either.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 02:34:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 02:45:33 pm
There are people in this world who are capable of bridging absolutely incredible distances when jumping leaping to conclusions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 03:02:23 pm
Improve your language skills ,
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine

'little man'

I don't speak German, except for a little bit of acquired travel language. I do recognize "kleine" as meaning small or little from Mozart's famous and widely recorded work Eine kleine Nachtmusik (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNRQ-DW7064) which translates literally to A Little Night Music—but in German actually means "a little serenade".

Looking up "der" it appears that it's a masculine article meaning "the" and because it is a masculine article when combined with "kleine" it would translate along the lines of the little man or the small boy or similar combinations—do I have that right?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 04:29:13 pm
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.

I don't speak German and apparently you don't either.
Sorry if it seemed that I accused you of saying it.  I was just pointing out to your post that someone called me that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 04:35:17 pm
Regarding Jeremyrh, I called him out for the racist comment he made...

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.

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.

You had some interesting responses in reply that attributed statements to him which differed substantially from what he actually said.

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.

Although your immediate reply was to project his thoughts...

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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 04:39:18 pm
Improve your language skills ,
https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/kleine

'little man'
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 04:41:48 pm
There are people in this world who are capable of bridging absolutely incredible distances when jumping leaping to conclusions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 04:42:14 pm
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 05:03:02 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 05:10:47 pm
Others have already left because of the nastiness and personal assaults by many members.

Yes, I know. I mentioned two of them earlier.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 05:12:11 pm
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.

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.
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 06:00:33 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 06:07:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 06:13:15 pm
... 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...

Please show those records. Show me that I actively participated in that thread around the time and instance the alleged "defamatory interchange" happened.

From day one of my participation on LuLa I voiced clearly my opinion that personal attacks via name calling is not ok. It is one thing calling someone an "idiot" and making inference what the other party's opinion might mean.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 06:20:42 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 06:36:25 pm
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?

Word play could be one explanation. An example of which would be the Oscar Wilde play The Importance of Being Earnest in which he uses the word earnest [meaning sincere conviction] in the title and whose main character named Ernest is leading a double life. See the play on words there?

Now, I don't know what another person's motives are in the words they use. I also generally prefer not to speculate, assert, infer, or assume. There's no need. I can read the words that are actually used without presuming them to have some camouflaged meaning.

Not to mention his last name is Klein, not Kleine.

Ernest, not Earnest—see above for explanation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 19, 2021, 06:42:37 pm
... Ernest, not Earnest—see above for explanation.

Thanks, Mr. DoubleTalk.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 06:44:46 pm
The whole fake outrage about an inference he made is manufactured

While, I could be insulted at the implication of your statement above, given I was one of those disgusted by his "inference" as you like to call it; I'd happily support your right to say it—here or anywhere else.

The same applies to his "inference" and subsequent statements. I expressed my disgust, on more than one occasion, but never called on a moderator or suggested that he be banned for saying those disgusting things.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 19, 2021, 06:50:36 pm
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.

You're welcome. You asked questions and I offered a possible explanation. You're not under any obligation to recognize that possibility, of course. (Although, it appears that when you want to recognize a play on words, you have a pretty easy time doing so. When you don't want to... not so much.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 07:03:14 pm
Calling me Der Kleine is a Nazi reference. 

No, it is not
More victimhood, more unadulterated bollocks. I enjoined you to ‘man up’, you didn’t . The Nazi ‘get-out-of-jail’ card is but another feeble attempt to deflect.
It won’t wash.


Edit:
By the way, your Der Kleine reference shows you still calling me a Nazi.

More bollocks. I've never called you a Nazi.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 07:04:45 pm
Looking up […] it would translate along the lines of the little man or the small boy or similar combinations—do I have that right?

You do indeed. Given the incident under discussion, it additionally has a certain onomatopoeic appeal as Alan has steadfastly refused to ‘man up’ and apologise for what is indisputably an uncalled for transgression.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 07:12:20 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 19, 2021, 07:27:57 pm
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.

Oh, please.
At least you got the 'inference' correct. They were his (Alan's) words, his conjecture. Explain it to him, could you ?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 19, 2021, 10:36:49 pm
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.

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.
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 20, 2021, 03:24:53 am
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, not insult  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 20, 2021, 06:48:51 am
Ok, Mr. Cannoli.

You see? When I do a play on words, I give you a compliment

And your play on words and compliment reference something sweet! I always suspected that in addition to your intelligence and acerbic writing style there was sweet side as well!

The only down side is that you reminded me that I haven't had a really good cannoli in years.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 20, 2021, 09:24:06 am
The 7-day avg of US daily Covid deaths is at about 1600+ and the curve seems to be rising still. The fight boils down to vaccinations, social distance and hygiene, this has not changed one iota since the outset. Neither political rhetoric, virtue signalling or forum semantic argument have any effect whatsoever on how a virus travels through a population.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 20, 2021, 12:15:26 pm
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 20, 2021, 12:22:35 pm
Nor vaccinations, social distance and hygiene. Lord moves in mysterious ways... so does the virus.

You're free to believe that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 20, 2021, 03:31:01 pm
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.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51431926054_222c509db4_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 20, 2021, 04:45:16 pm
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....

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.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 20, 2021, 05:21:33 pm
According to recent Ontario Public Health report, the number of cases in unvaccinated people is much higher than in partially or fully vaccinated people.

Quote
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.

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/covid-19-epi-confirmed-cases-post-vaccination.pdf?la=en


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 20, 2021, 05:48:45 pm

Alan Klein has been consistently one of the most polite and patient debater on this forum. And mostly correct.


The "polite and patient" part is certainly true. The "mostly correct" part is egregiously wrong.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 01:01:53 am
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 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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 03:25:13 am
Your text or a quote?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 03:28:18 am
The "polite and patient" part is certainly true. The "mostly correct" part is egregiously wrong.

The latter, of course, depends on your point of view. I tend to agree with Alan often, but fully understand that you, based on your world view, may not.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 05:39:37 am
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.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51431926054_222c509db4_c.jpg)

I don't see the infection or death rates only the vaccinations rates. Where is the former?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 05:50:02 am
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. 

Regarding, right or wrong, I happen to follow the Austrian economic model.  There are many who follow Keynesian.  There are "experts" with long economic histories on both beliefs who disagree with each other and how the economic system works best.   Which ones are "egregiously wrong"?  It's like trying to discern whether Nikon or Canon lovers are right or wrong about which one is the better camera.  Have you ever gotten a second opinion from doctors who are "experts" in their field? Which one is wrong?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 06:09:16 am
How did economic theories become part of a thread whose topic is vaccines?

"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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:13:06 am
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.

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.
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. 

If I was given Pfizer's two shots, I would take the third as I'm over 65.  Fortunately, I've been given Moderna and it seems to be holding its efficacy longer, so a third shot is not yet recommended.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:14:52 am
What's the accuracy of the antibody test to determine how effective your vaccinations are?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:18:23 am
How did economic theories become part of a thread whose topic is vaccines?

"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
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?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 06:18:37 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:30:20 am
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.

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.
Why would you feel they were accusing you of plagiarism?  They may have just wanted to read the original source.

I usually provide the link 90% of the time when I am quoting.  That's the right thing to do IMO because we all tend to cherry-pick our quotes to "prove" our beliefs.  Letting the reader see the full article or statement is the fair thing to do. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 06:35:22 am
I don't necessarily believe that vaccination reduces the spread.

Fortunately, science and the ability of vaccines to reduce the spread of contagious diseases don't rely on your beliefs. If you doubt the ability of vaccination to reduce the spread of viruses and other diseases, you can ask polio and smallpox what they think the next time you see them.

https://www.healthgrades.com/right-care/vaccines/14-diseases-nearly-eliminated-by-vaccines (https://www.healthgrades.com/right-care/vaccines/14-diseases-nearly-eliminated-by-vaccines)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 06:38:36 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:46:35 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 06:59:19 am
It's this kind of inconsistency that creates opposition to wearing masks.  The politicians seem to be playing games.  If you're on the left in California, then no masks are OK either for Hollywood or the governor.

Celebs DO get different Covid rules: Los Angeles Department of Health insists Emmy awards ceremony didn't violate restrictions because is 'classed as a TV production and stars are considered performers'
-LA County Health Department said 'exceptions are made for film and TV productions' with additional safety modifications
-All who were present including the guests and crew were fully vaccinated
-Those working behind the scenes had to show a negative test twice a week
-Entire event was ripped by Seth Rogen who mocked the awards show for packing a 'hermetically-sealed tent' and calling it 'outdoors '
-Hundreds of celebrities at the ceremony were seen sitting close together
-Those on social media called out the apparent hypocrisy that saw COVID-19 rules apply to ordinary people but not Hollywood elites
-LA has a mask mandate requiring attendees at an indoor event with more than 1,000 people  to wear masks at all times, except when eating

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10011495/LA-County-health-department-Emmys-exempt-mask-requirements-insists-award-COVID-safe.html#:~:text=Celebs%20DO%20get,except%20when%20eating
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 07:16:40 am
Maybe they didn't realize it was from you so they asked for the link.   Why assume they were accusing you of plagiarism?

Never mind.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 21, 2021, 07:27:32 am
Your text or a quote?

*deleted
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 07:32:36 am
Honestly, I don't mind being asked and took no offense or thought any was intended from it.

It's when a "polite" individual starts with "These don't sound like your words." and ends with "it would be appropriate to credit the original writer and provide a link", that I find it a little bit overly accusatory in tone.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 07:59:11 am
It's this kind of inconsistency that creates opposition to wearing masks.  ...

It does nothing of the kind. So what if some privileged person gets away with acting irresponsibly, it happens all the time, nothing new there.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 08:12:55 am
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. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 08:25:03 am
Honestly, I don't mind being asked and took no offense or thought any was intended from it...

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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 08:26:31 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 09:04:10 am
Having said that, it appears to rely on a set of assumptions, primarily based on how vaccines work historically.

It relies on scientists who have acquired knowledge of how viruses and vaccines work and are putting their knowledge to use daily for the benefit of all.

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.

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact check-fauci-vaccines-delta variant (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-fauci-spreading/fact-check-fauci-did-not-say-covid-19-vaccines-are-spreading-disease-idUSL1N2PJ1KZ)

Host John Dickerson asked Fauci about his understanding of the Delta variant, which has become the dominant variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the United States.

Fauci responded by explaining that no vaccine is 100% effective and that breakthrough infections can happen.

“When you look at the level of virus in the nasopharynx of people who are vaccinated, who get breakthrough infections, it’s really quite high and equivalent to the level of virus in the nasopharynx of unvaccinated people who get infected,” Fauci said in the interview. “That’s very different from the Alpha variant.”

Fauci then explained that the earlier Alpha variant presented an extremely low level of virus in a vaccinated person compared to an unvaccinated infected person, pointing out that we now know vaccinated people with breakthrough infections of the Delta variant can spread the virus to others.

He said that the level of virus in the nasopharynx of vaccinated and unvaccinated people with the Delta variant of the virus are similar and that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections can infect others.

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. In my opinion, if someone wanted to single out one individual (though I think that would be a silly thing to do) deserving the most credit for many of the COVID vaccines that we have today it would be Dr. Fauci for many reasons, some of which I have expressed in earlier posts regarding the history of COVID vaccines. He's someone that should be given serious attention and listened to regarding the current pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 09:23:49 am
Well, thank you for finding the quote I had in mind.

Your point?

Because the quote seems to confirm what I was saying, no?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 09:25:55 am
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2112981?query=featured_coronavirus&fbclid=IwAR34DjPpZgrEfUy1QtP62lCq79ysa7Uv8vkWHDF6EqL5ON-oRmulrrkQrrQ

"Resurgence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Highly Vaccinated Health System Workforce"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 09:39:56 am
... 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.

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).

So, which Dr. Fauci should we listen to?

Quote
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.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTyOJSUjxsG/?utm_medium=share_sheet&fbclid=IwAR3PcT9etyAs6p0TX-6xG7Lcy5MzRqbDf8qLQKfLOUkHA1XTibEPKF8KurQ
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 09:44:33 am
...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 09:45:01 am
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/why-measure-effectiveness/breakthrough-cases.html (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/why-measure-effectiveness/breakthrough-cases.html)

COVID-19 vaccines are effective at preventing infection, serious illness, and death. Most people who get COVID-19 are unvaccinated. However, since vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing infection, some people who are fully vaccinated will still get COVID-19. An infection of a fully vaccinated person is referred to as a “vaccine breakthrough infection.”

What We Know about Vaccine Breakthrough Infections

• Vaccine breakthrough infections are expected. COVID-19 vaccines are effective at preventing most infections. However, like other vaccines, they are not 100% effective.

• Fully vaccinated people with a vaccine breakthrough infection are less likely to develop serious illness than those who are unvaccinated and get COVID-19.

• Even when fully vaccinated people develop symptoms, they tend to be less severe symptoms than in unvaccinated people. This means they are much less likely to be hospitalized or die than people who are not vaccinated.

• People who get vaccine breakthrough infections can be contagious.

CDC is collecting data on vaccine breakthrough infections and closely monitors the safety and effectiveness of all Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized COVID-19 vaccines. Because vaccines are not 100% effective, as the number of people who are fully vaccinated goes up, the number of vaccine breakthrough infections will also increase. 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. Vaccines remain effective in protecting most people from COVID-19 infection and its complications.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 09:50:21 am
Once again, your verbosity and quoting masks the lack of point or the lack of answers to the points others raised. You are just regurgitating the known. Nobody is claiming that vaccines, in general, are not useful.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 21, 2021, 10:16:59 am
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.

If you say so, I’ll take you at your word.
I’ll retract the post and add an apology into the mix.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 10:26:46 am
Nobody is claiming that vaccines, in general, are not useful.

Great! Then the entire population will soon be vaccinated!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 10:38:44 am
Well, thank you for finding the quote I had in mind.

Your point?

Because the quote seems to confirm what I was saying, no?

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.

I added the verbose regurgitation, as you have framed it, from the CDC to better explain what is meant by a "breakthrough infection". The verbose regurgitation from the CDC which I posted says: "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". So, the statement "that the vaccinated are equally likely to be infectious as the unvaccinated" which you attribute it to Dr.Fauci is not accurate, due to the way you have edited what he actually said.

Perhaps you didn't find my verbose regurgitation helpful, maybe someone else will. Sorry, but I couldn't find an appropriate internet meme.

It would be worthwhile to watch the entire interview...

https://www.youtube.com/Fauci says unvaccinated Americans are "propagating this outbreak" as Delta spreads (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqySBH3y8pY&t=463s)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 11:14:33 am
So, which Dr. Fauci should we listen to?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTyOJSUjxsG/?utm_medium=share_sheet&fbclid=IwAR3PcT9etyAs6p0TX-6xG7Lcy5MzRqbDf8qLQKfLOUkHA1XTibEPKF8KurQ

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 21, 2021, 12:26:12 pm
They may have just wanted to read the original source.

It was crystal clear who wrote that post because of the very absence of a link.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 12:28:41 pm
The problem with technical experts is when they wade into politics.

Dr. Fauci is a career research scientist, educator training immunologists, and physician treating patients to this day. In addition to all of that, he has also been the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (https://www.niaid.nih.gov) (NIAID), which also includes the national Vaccine Research Center, since 1984. NIAID has a congressionally appropriated budget of slightly over $6 billion; the institute which he directs is part of the executive branch; and he has been called upon as a scientific advisor to multiple presidents. So, yes—regardless of what his interests and preferences might be—he is frequently in contact with a variety of political figures by the necessity of his work.

His flip-flopping on many subjects reduced his credibility among the general public (to which he is addressing his opinion, btw).

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.

I'm not sure how successful those efforts have been with the "general public" as a whole. I suspect those supporting those efforts believe they have been wildly successful.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 21, 2021, 12:36:56 pm
Once again, your verbosity and quoting masks the lack of point or the lack of answers to the points others raised. ...

However, his accurate and succinct curation of the truth is a cool breeze in the torrid climate of falsehood, rhetoric and disinformation.

Quote
I suspect those supporting those efforts believe they have been wildly successful.

They have indeed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 01:25:44 pm
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.

Complete hogwash by whoever "someone" might be. "Someone" is clueless.

Which was quietly confirmed recently by CDC changing the very definition of a vaccine.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 01:26:19 pm
... 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...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 01:27:49 pm
It was crystal clear who wrote that post because of the very absence of a link.

Which could be a consequence of a simple oversight or haste. Or pressing "post" too soon. Happened to me on occasion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 01:30:05 pm
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....

Fair enough, I accept the distinction.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 01:31:46 pm
... 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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 01:36:49 pm
There is only one Dr. Fauci ...

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 01:37:52 pm
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.

No he wasn't asked about "a seasonal cold" nor was he asked about a pandemic virus. What he was specifically asked about was "an infectious disease" which sounds pretty generic to me.

If you don't see a distinction between "an infectious disease" and a deadly pandemic. That's up to you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 01:43:31 pm
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.

I don't think the CDC has had a website for a 100 years. I could be wrong.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/09/vaccine-skeptics-claim-new-cdc-gotcha-moment-they-havent-got-much/ (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JhcVurrbLywJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/09/vaccine-skeptics-claim-new-cdc-gotcha-moment-they-havent-got-much/)

It’s interesting that the CDC changed the Web page. But as for the conclusions being drawn about its significance? Those leave a lot to be desired, and they rest upon continual misrepresentations and misunderstandings of what vaccination and “immunity” are supposed to mean.

From the start of the vaccination campaigns, critics have searched long and hard for evidence that the vaccines don’t work as well as they were supposed to. This has sometimes involved suggesting that 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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 01:51:04 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 02:02:24 pm
... 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]

Another straw man argument. No one of any significance argued it has to be 100%.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 02:03:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 02:14:06 pm
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

Talk about straw-manning. Kills me the way when someone changes their mind about how to handle something, especially something that's still developing, that it is referred to as flip-flopping.  Shitcan the loaded language, please. People change their minds on things when new evidence comes in that warrants it. That is exactly what routinely goes on at the forefront. This is understood and expected.

Besides which, I still don't really understand what flip-flopping you are talking about. From the get-go, maintain hygiene and social distancing and get vaccinated. So you say he changed his mind about mandates. So what. What were his reasons? Unless you present his reasons, your statement holds no real value.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 02:20:49 pm
...So what...

That sums it up... when faced with an argument you can't counter  ;D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 02:28:01 pm
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.

Two short paragraphs is verbosity?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 02:29:20 pm
That sums it up... when faced with an argument you can't counter  ;D

Take a phrase out of context and don't quote the rest of the sentence. Well done.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 02:40:12 pm
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.

There are many different vaccines for many different diseases. Influenza, has existed for so long, is so widespread, and is able to mutate so quickly that new vaccine formulations are required for new strains of the disease annually. Different diseases behave differently. Vaccines for some other diseases do not provide lifetime protection and will require booster shots at various times in your life, often years apart.

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?

I have no idea what you mean by a "(true) vaccine".

As to the rest of it, I don't believe that you have any of it right with regard to any vaccines, or immunity, or protection.

https://www.cdc.gov/ss1978/lesson3/Vaccine efficacy or vaccine effectiveness (https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson3/section6.html)

Vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness measure the proportionate reduction in cases among vaccinated persons.

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.


https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/09/vaccine-skeptics-claim-new-cdc-gotcha-moment-they-havent-got-much/ (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JhcVurrbLywJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/09/vaccine-skeptics-claim-new-cdc-gotcha-moment-they-havent-got-much/)

The Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary defines immunity as “a condition of being able to resist a particular disease.” Taber’s Medical Dictionary defines it as, “Protection from diseases, [especially] from infectious diseases.” Harvard’s medical dictionary defines it as, “The body’s ability to resist infection and disease.” The Oxford Concise Medical Dictionary echoes all of them, saying immunity is “the body’s ability to resist infection.”

(These definitions, it bears noting, have not been changed recently.)

The data clearly shows the coronavirus vaccines meet these definitions of providing immunity, as do other vaccines with less than 100 percent efficacy. Those include the flu vaccines, whose efficacy is generally around 40 percent. The flu vaccines are still vaccines and still provide immunity — just not complete immunity.

And to the extent this is some supposed grand conspiracy to move the goal posts on the coronavirus vaccines, it would also be a very incomplete one. Throughout its website, the CDC still refers to the coronavirus vaccines providing immunity.

The irony of all of this is that the theories about what the change really means actually reinforce the idea that it’s probably better to use “protection” than “immunity” — given that people don’t seem to understand what “immunity” actually means.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 02:47:00 pm
... 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 02:53:08 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 02:56:35 pm
You (TechTalk) have not answered this simple question? In other words, explain please to me what an 80% protection means.

Multi-tiered protection. No one solution is a magic bullet, so you mitigate that by implementing multiple tiers. Good analogy from Michael Lewis's book Premonition: A slice of Swiss cheese does not form a perfect barrier because of the holes. So you layer on several slices such that the holes don't line up and thus a barrier is formed. This has been the medical advice from the start, hygiene, vaccine, distancing..., etc. You put enough of these multiple tiers between enough people and you stop a pandemic.

You are on record saying that you not "believe" in such a thing as "public health". I think you need to give that some more thought. Besides, "belief" has nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 03:04:54 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on September 21, 2021, 03:09:21 pm
... hygiene, vaccine, distancing...

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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 03:39:55 pm
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.

I said in my response I don't "believe" you have it right, I'm not an immunologist. I think that saying one person will have total or "complete protection" and someone else "won't have any" isn't really how vaccines work. Vaccines work by giving your own immune system a head start in attacking a disease, by essentially providing it with a disease sample (which cannot replicate and cause disease) ahead of being infected to provide faster recognition if infected and priming the production of antibodies to attack and destroy it. That's my layman's understanding of how all vaccines of every type work—but I could be wrong or over simplifying.

For example, with the current COVID vaccines, some people who are vaccinated may become infected and become sick, but with far less severe symptoms and disease course than an unvaccinated person due to the boost in immune response, from vaccination, prior to infection. So while they may not have had "complete protection" from the disease, they did benefit from some protection in reduction of severity. As others have said, a vaccine isn't a shield that provides a complete barrier to infection. A vaccine isn't like an on/off switch where it's providing ""complete protection" or none at all.

If you really are looking for definitive answers, I would suggest Google. I'm getting worn out as a Google substitute. If it relieves me from more questions, I'll just say "yes, Slobodan, you got it right.", hand you your gold star, and take a nice nap.

https://www.nature.com/articles/A guide to vaccinology: from basic principles to new developments (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-00479-7)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 03:48:55 pm
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!

What do you mean "Enough!", that's hilarious. Are you going to stamp your feet and hold your breath now? Or are you still clinging to your original idea to let the thing rip through the population and do nothing about it. Do you still think that would work better?

"We gave you two weeks...", now that's precious.

Who exactly promised you a permanent immunity vaccine? Now THERE's a straw man!

The prescribed methods were not universally observed and so the outcomes were kind of predictable, weren't they. It takes all of those measures for a sustained period of time to achieve the desired result. That's just how it is. 

It might be best to think about this as an experiment. What happens if a new virus rips through a population? How should we respond? Did we fail? Are we prepared for the next one?  Was anything learned?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 03:56:29 pm
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!

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 04:26:44 pm
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!

No thanks, time to go prepare supper. It's sad how all the same old arguments keep popping up nearly 2 years later. Well, more boring than sad at this point.

With books like Michael Lewis's Premonition and probably many others to follow, there will soon be a good selection of popular books on the subject for people to pore over in the coming years. I'm pessimistic about us learning anything though, I'm not sure this culture can learn anymore. Even if some of us do learn something, when the next crisis comes along we'll likely repeat the same errors. Not only do we not have institutional or social memory, many don't even think those things are important.

I mean, take a step back, we (meaning the wider culture) turned a fight against a virus into a political argument. That was obviously the wrong thing to do and that's not the virus's fault. There was something wrong in the culture that enabled this.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:31:51 pm
Great! Then the entire population will soon be vaccinated!
You avoided addressing Slobodan's concern you and didn't address his point.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:38:00 pm
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.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:41:35 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:46:24 pm
Complete hogwash by whoever "someone" might be. "Someone" is clueless.

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.
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??
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 04:49:11 pm
So who was not being upfront to us?  The CDC, FDA, etc??

You?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 04:52:30 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:53:34 pm
Two short paragraphs is verbosity?

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 04:53:54 pm
You avoided addressing Slobodan's concern you and didn't address his point.

I did to my satisfaction. How many hours are in a day in your world?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 04:55:22 pm
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.

Baloney - with cheese - on stale bread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:57:43 pm
You?
A non-response to a point you can't argue against.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 04:59:13 pm
Baloney - with cheese - on stale bread.
Another non-response and silly putdowns. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 05:00:36 pm
Another non-response and silly putdowns.

It expressed my reaction perfectly.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 05:03:42 pm
You?

A non-response to a point you can't argue against.

I'll do it over with greater clarity.

So who was not being upfront to [with] us?  The CDC, FDA, etc??

You.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 21, 2021, 05:09:42 pm
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??

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 21, 2021, 05:14:11 pm
You (TechTalk) have not answered this simple question? In other words, explain please to me what an 80% protection means.

It means what you think, 80% of people are protected. There's no way an individual can be "80% protected," it makes no sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 05:16:58 pm
Things are worse in Germany.

Gas station clerk murdered for asking a customer to wear a mask
 
Berlin — Senior politicians in Germany expressed shock over the weekend killing of a young gas station clerk who asked a customer to wear a face mask, and they warned Tuesday against the radicalization of people who oppose the country's coronavirus pandemic restrictions. A 49-year-old German man was arrested in the fatal Saturday shooting of the clerk in the western town of Idar-Oberstein. The suspect is being held on suspicion of murder.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-mask-rule-germany-gas-station-clerk-murdered/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 05:19:17 pm
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.

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.
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 21, 2021, 05:20:51 pm
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 05:23:17 pm
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.

This attempt at creating a rabbit hole is just a frivolous distraction. Months ago, as the vaccines were completing final clinical trials and reporting results and when they first were given emergency use authorization, this was all discussed in great detail on this forum. What efficacy meant; what effectiveness meant; protection against infection vs protection against severe disease—it was all endlessly discussed. None of these current "CDC, FDA, etc??" accusations comport with any reality—it's pure fantasy. It is in no way deserving of serious time or response.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 21, 2021, 05:35:17 pm
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.

Please provide link where it states the vaccines will be 100% effective preventing you from getting Covid. I've always seen efficiency numbers quoted with the vaccine effectiveness.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 21, 2021, 05:37:36 pm
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?

again, please provide a link rather than just rattling things off.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 06:12:50 pm
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?

What do you mean by "getting Covid"? Do you mean "exposed to a viral load" or do you mean "get sick because of Covid?

Vaccinated people might be exposed to a viral load, why wouldn't they? A vaccine is not a force field. It arms the body to fight off invading pathogens. That they have been successful around the globe is by now beyond question. Why are we discussing this AGAIN.

In some people, vaccines might not work as well as in others, nothing in biology is 100% (or 0%). This is well-trodden ground. Why are discussing this AGAIN. These issues have been discussed many times and many references, articles or podcasts, have been provided discussing many aspects.

I can only describe your recent series of posts as trolling. This is boring.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 06:14:16 pm
Protected against what?  Getting it at all?  Or getting it as a mild case?  Or some combination of both?

Discussed many many times in many places online. Asked and answered many times over.  Why are you bringing it up AGAIN.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 06:27:51 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 07:39:12 pm
Vaccinated people might be exposed to a viral load, why wouldn't they?

A vaccinated individual could be exposed to a larger or smaller volume of virus at higher or lower concentrations; or one of a variety of different variants; or at a point when their health is generally better or worse; or their immune system generally is more or less vulnerable; exposed once or multiple times; exposed at different times in different locations; exposed by a passing stranger or someone with whom they have frequent close contact; etc.—so, would any person with normal common sense expect the effectiveness of protection to vary from one individual to another?

And if, at the end of controlled clinical trials, a vaccine is said to have say 90% efficacy in preventing mild disease and 100% efficacy in preventing severe disease, wouldn't common sense indicate that there is variability in the level of protective efficacy among the individuals in the control group?

And if, with enough repetition, you can eventually get thru to an information resistant individual that there is a difference between efficacy (a figure applied to controlled clinical trials with a limited number of healthy volunteers; monitored over a limited period of time; within a limited number of areas) and the frequently lower effectiveness (a figure applied to the entire population with varied levels of health; over an indefinite period of time; over the entire area of vaccination coverage; with whatever variety of mutated variants have emerged)—would it have any affect on their thinking? Nah... probably not. They'll more likely still believe that "the scientists" and "the press" [The narrower the mind, the broader the statement. - Ted Cook] are engaged in a con game increasing their doubts.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection (https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on September 21, 2021, 08:33:36 pm
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?

Have you been authorized to reveal all this seecrit stuff in a public forum?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 09:08:37 pm
Don't listen to anyone.

Someone said that social media and YouTube videos were a reliable way of evaluating to which people you should or shouldn't listen. I think it may have been the same Someone who has suggested that the COVID and flu vaccines shouldn't even be called vaccines at all. Someone has always been a reliable source of advice.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 21, 2021, 09:15:03 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 21, 2021, 09:22:13 pm
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.

FINILLY!  Some on with the corage to say the trth!  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 21, 2021, 09:22:22 pm
Have you been authorized to reveal all this seecrit stuff in a public forum?

Oops.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 09:40:54 pm
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.

Not an issue with Slobodan. We're good with each other.

Alan was replying to (I believe—it's sometimes hard to tell what he's replying to) my mention of a different instance where some "polite" individual questioned whether what I wrote was original or a "copy from someone else"—and started his reply with "These don't sound like your words." Finishing by telling me ""it would be appropriate to credit the original writer and provide a link". Hardly the worst thing that "polite" individual ever wrote to me.

It wasn't worth following up on Alan's replies about it. They were just spiraling down another rabbit hole.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 21, 2021, 09:57:05 pm
Don't listen to anyone.

I forgot to mention... Internet memes are apparently a good source of enlightenment too.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 04:39:38 am
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.

Your crusade against verbosity aside, your straw man argument has a glaring hole in it here. Robert was replying to Alan as quoted above.

Alan, who you took the liberty of speaking for, wasn't referring to someone "infectious" as you asserted. Alan spoke of "infected" people to which Robert was responding.

You appear to have gotten a little huffy with Robert over nothing but your own misreading.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 08:46:23 am
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 22, 2021, 09:03:53 am
... 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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 09:46:10 am
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.

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.
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. 

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.

Addtionally, that means that herd immunity which was claimed to include those vaccinated and those non-vaccinated but infected would stop the disease if we reached a high enough percentage.  Well, if vaccinated people can still spread the disease, that was an erroneous claim.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 22, 2021, 09:47:45 am
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 09:53:32 am
Just to clarify my point.  I'm not arguing to not get the vaccine. I support them.  I've had my two shots and would take a third if required.  My points are just to remind people that many things were said that turned out differently.  Some of it was deliberate and some inadvertent.  That has caused some people, whether because of politics or science or whatever, to feel they don't trust the vaccines enough to take them.  That's very unfortunate and I hope they change their minds.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 10:07:55 am
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.

I Got a ‘Mild’ Breakthrough Case. Here’s What I Wish I’d Known.
.... Is it time for a reality check about what the vaccines can — and can’t do?
The vaccines aren’t a force field that wards off all things covid. They were given the green light because they greatly lower your chance of getting seriously ill or dying.

But it was easy for me — and I’m not the only one — to grab onto the idea that, after so many months of trying not to get covid, the vaccine was, more or less, the finish line. And that made getting sick from the virus unnerving.


After all, there were reassuring findings earlier this year that the vaccine was remarkably good at stopping any infection, even mild ones.

“There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”

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.

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210920/i-got-a-mild-breakthrough-case-heres-what-i-wish-id-known


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 22, 2021, 10:46:32 am
This will be the most effective vaccination incentive:

Quote
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.

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/265667/20210921/amazon-vaccination-rewards-include-100k-payouts-or-free-cars-to-warehouse-and-whole-foods-employees.htm
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 11:54:47 am
This will be the most effective vaccination incentive:

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 22, 2021, 01:50:29 pm
Are those Teslas?

Maybe Rivians. since Amazon is invested in that outfit. Couldn't get a discount on Teslas from Musk.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 03:13:18 pm
You're either making this up or deliberately misunderstanding to create controversy where none actually exists.

Everywhere open commentary is found online you'll find both of these tactics. Frequently, it is the latter, but is often both. That's the game.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 03:39:58 pm
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!

They did know. Everybody knew—including those pretending otherwise in a childish game. It was discussed months ago at endless length.

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 04:56:20 pm
I was surprised to read that as many people who had the vaccine subsequently got the disease as people who didn't get vaccinated

Baloney. The difference in disease rate between the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations is enormous.

Why were you surprised to read it; when you're the one that wrote it?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: EricV on September 22, 2021, 08:10:10 pm
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. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 08:38:30 pm
Discussed many many times in many places online. Asked and answered many times over.  Why are you bringing it up AGAIN.

From a different thread at a different time, but it may, or may not, offer some insight...

I put it in there to get a rise from you.  Of course you took the bait...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 22, 2021, 08:46:11 pm
If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.

That 700K threshold came much earlier than expected. Over 2,200 US deaths just today. Even Canadian deaths are rising, 49 deaths today.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 09:27:42 pm
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 10:32:12 pm
They did know. Everybody knew—including those pretending otherwise in a childish game. It was discussed months ago at endless length.

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)
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.

“There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210920/i-got-a-mild-breakthrough-case-heres-what-i-wish-id-known
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 10:35:00 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 10:41:44 pm
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. 

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 10:44:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 10:48:13 pm
Quote from: TechTalk link=topic=137509.msg1224809#msg1224809 date=1632364500
[quote
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.

You attack me with your usual meaningless verbosity because you have no answer to the scientist's confirmation of my statement. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 22, 2021, 10:53:24 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 11:00:28 pm
Quote
[quote author=TechTalk link=topic=137509.msg1224814#msg1224814 date=1632365604
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. ]
The 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 22, 2021, 11:07:52 pm
You attack me with your usual meaningless verbosity because you have no answer to the scientist's confirmation of my statement. 

TechTalk is not attacking you, he’s educating you or at least attempting to.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 22, 2021, 11:48:27 pm
Moving on …

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

Quote
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.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/222553/self-amplifying-rna-covid-19-vaccine-technology-safe/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 11:50:27 pm
TechTalk is not attacking you, he’s educating you or at least attempting to.

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

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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 22, 2021, 11:56:16 pm
Moving on …

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/
Anything new that will help fight viruses is great. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 23, 2021, 12:44:24 am
What do think about what the doctor said about scientists over-selling vaccine's effectiveness to the general public? 

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.

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.

Quote
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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 23, 2021, 07:53:00 am
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.

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


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.

“There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210920/i-got-a-mild-breakthrough-case-heres-what-i-wish-id-known
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 23, 2021, 08:59:56 am
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.

I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 23, 2021, 09:08:32 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on September 23, 2021, 10:34:35 am
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.

Which is why, exasperated, I called Alan either the most skilled troll on Lula, or something much less complimentary.

“Despicable” or not, I’m not condoning my outburst, simply explaining its source.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on September 23, 2021, 01:17:43 pm
The full quote from the article you linked to is

There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.  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”. 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.“

Many average people believed him and similar claims from other experts in the field.

So it raises the question if so many people believed him, why didn’t you ?
Rhetorical question, we know the answer.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 23, 2021, 01:39:58 pm
Get the popcorn ready; "The Vaccine Mandate Show" is about to get interesting!

BLM organizer says de Blasio vaccine mandate weaponized against black community (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/blm-organizer-de-blasio-vaccine-mandate-weaponized-black-community)

“Seventy-two percent of black people in this city from ages 18 to 44 are unvaccinated ," Chivona Newsome said during a Monday protest in New York City. "So what is going to stop the Gestapo, I mean the NYPD, from rounding up black people, from snatching them off the train, off the bus? ... We’re putting this city on notice that your mandate will not be another racist social distance practice. Black people are not going to stand by, or you will see another uprising . And that is not a threat. That is a promise,” she said. “The vaccination passport is not a free passport to racism.”

If only this was something that could be foreseen as happening.   ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 23, 2021, 02:04:11 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 23, 2021, 03:23:30 pm
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.

There is a very big difference in human reaction in using "efforts to bring sound public health information and advice to the general public" to try and guide people in taking the vaccines vs. mandating, with malice ("our patience is running thin), a relatively new vaccine that many happen to be late bloomers on accepting.  The former is likely, albeit more gradually then the early bloomers would want, bring people into the fold, whereas the latter, something you winked and nodded in favor of, strengthens their resolve to not get it. 

Now the entertaining part is that so many on the left, as always, completely ignored the reality of what this was going to do and put themselves in between a rock and a hard place, which they are going to find very difficult to get out of.  You have on one hand the false notion, propagated by the left, that any neutrally applied mandate that effects minorities more then whites, which this does, is inherently racist.  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. 

All of this was perfectly foreseen, but they went ahead with it anyway instead of doing the smart thing and ignore the small calls for a mandate.  Now, though, they have people ginned up, and it is going to be hard to backtrack, but equally hard to stay course.  The fallout should be fun to watch, but hopefully the show is rather short, and by that I mean hopefully the left stops it with this BS. 

Businesses are not allowing for weekly tests, like Biden said they could, since it just cost too much money and going straight to vaccine requirements.  However, recent polling shows that 84% of the unvaccinated will just quit instead of getting the Fauci Ouchie, and they are already doing so.  This will not be good for the overall economy. 

PS. even in the medical field, there is strong vaccine hesitancy.  Some states, like Ohio, are predicting up to 30% of nurses quitting over this.  A hospital in a NYC suburb had to close down its maternity ward due to nurses walking out over the mandate. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 23, 2021, 03:45:53 pm
OK. If that's how you see it, you're naturally entitled to your view.

There's still no other way to control or reduce the: continued spread; subsequent evolution of potentially even more dangerous variants; hospitalizations; medical capacity overload; and needless deaths except by vaccination and common sense public health measures.

The best alternative to mandates is common sense. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be enough to go around.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 23, 2021, 05:22:06 pm
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. 


But they *ARE* Trump rubes.

https://www.coloradohealthinstitute.org/blog/data-show-politics-has-become-powerful-driver-vaccine-hesitancy

I think that any willfully unvaccinated covid patient should be at the very bottom of the list for medical care. Kick 'em out of the ICU if needed, and make them pay every penny of their costs out of their own pocket. A 40+ year old Alabama man with cardiac problems died because 43 hospitals had no space for him due to unvaxxed covid patients. Way to go, you vile assholes.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 23, 2021, 06:02:14 pm
So, you think there might be a hidden connection between the states with the lowest vaccination rate (Idaho, Louisiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Alabama, Wyoming)? Careful now Peter or you're going to be labeled as one of those "malignant white progressives" Joe's looking to expose.

I can't put my finger on it; but there may have been some slight ringing sound of a politically motivated attack in his post. Then again, maybe it's just my tinnitus.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on September 23, 2021, 07:10:31 pm
The history since December 2019 is one of record and really not open to debate.

This is a succinct and (as far as I can tell) accurate summary of what anyone paying reasonable attention should have understood all along.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 24, 2021, 12:00:04 am
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.

Are you comfortable sitting on that high horse (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbNDJRwXKGc)? The saddle can be pretty slippery. You want to make sure that you don't lose your balance.

I indicated that it was out of context. Your words were accurately quoted, however. The schmear on that bagel was your own recipe.

That was a cheap stunt.

Why over pay?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 24, 2021, 12:23:23 am
A 40+ year old Alabama man with cardiac problems died because 43 hospitals had no space for him due to unvaxxed covid patients.

My initial impression was that you were using hypothetical hyperbole. It's true!

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/13/A Man Died After Being Turned Away From 43 ICUs At Capacity Due To COVID (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/13/1036593269/coronavirus-alabama-43-icus-at-capacity-ray-demonia)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 24, 2021, 08:29:16 am
Michael Flynn said that covid vaccine is being added to the salad dressing.

Quote
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.

Speaking about salads, a few days before Flynn’s interview, University of California-Riverside announced a research program would attempt to “turn edible plants like lettuce into mRNA vaccine factories.”

Quote
“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.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/michael-flynn-claims-salad-dressing-is-being-infused-with-covid-vaccine/ar-AAOKpRF?ocid=iehp&li=AAggNb9
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 24, 2021, 08:45:46 am
Michael Flynn said that covid vaccine is being added to the salad dressing.
...

The best and the brightest in high office.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 24, 2021, 08:49:58 am
With respect to vaccine mandates, an idea I came across elsewhere was to take a page out of Texas's anti-abortion legislation. Just enable citizens anywhere using a $10,000 encouragement bounty to launch lawsuits against people who are not vaccinated. Write the legislation so that there can be multiple lawsuits from private individuals who were not anywhere near the site of the "infraction" and add the stipulation that even if that unvaccinated person wins the lawsuit, they are NOT permitted to sue the plaintiffs for costs. SCOTUS is already on board so there's one less hurdle already.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 24, 2021, 09:08:05 am
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!

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.

Quote
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.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8215655/alberta-coronavirus-update-september-23-2021/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on September 24, 2021, 09:21:53 am
Careful now Peter or you're going to be labeled as one of those "malignant white progressives" Joe's looking to expose.


To be fair, malignant white progressives have been pretty blasé about being exposed ever since women first got the right to vote, and then were allowed to qualify for credit without their husbands approval. After that it was a short jump to the inevitability of the plot's final resolution - Getting AOC into the Oval Office where she will mandate Critical Race Theory and demand that businesses fire all white men.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 24, 2021, 09:25:29 am
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 24, 2021, 10:34:02 am
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 24, 2021, 10:42:08 am
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.

It often seemed to me that I'd read reports about the "economy" re-opening in Alberta when it seemed pretty risky to do so. 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, but what's the point of giving the signal that it's safe to "open up" when infection rates are rising. What did they think was going to happen?

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 24, 2021, 03:01:35 pm
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...

I don't think that you're being hyperbolic at all. In fact, you're hitting the nail on the head. 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? Eating popcorn and enjoying the show?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 25, 2021, 07:58:01 am
According to Worldometer, the number of daily US Covid deaths stayed stubbornly close to 2000 this past week (above 2000 on weekdays but less than that on weekends, as usual). I don't know if there is a source for an accurate overall number, but from the media stories I've seen the number of infections in unvaccinated people seems to be roughly 10 times that of vaccinated people. Even for people who are afraid of statistics, this trend must be worrying.

I don't read Twitter posts but a friend sent me this link, https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1441395300002848769 (https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1441395300002848769), which points out a weird aspect of this. Anti-vaxxers claim to fear the vaccines for a variety of reasons but are perfectly willing to trust other quack or near-quack remedies. This is an odd combination of beliefs, why choose to trust one and not the other.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 25, 2021, 12:11:07 pm
The current numbers are pointing to 900K deaths by year end. Not counting other deaths caused by postponed surgeries, cancelled cancer treatments and other things due to increased ICU hospital usage due to covid.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 27, 2021, 09:39:17 pm
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/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 28, 2021, 08:19:06 am
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.

Quote: Among this last group, a common refrain I’ve heard to justify their renewed vigilance is that “vaccinated people are just as likely to spread the coronavirus.”

This misunderstanding, born out of confusing statements from public-health authorities and misleading media headlines, is a shame. It is resulting in unnecessary fear among vaccinated people, all the while undermining the public’s understanding of the importance—and effectiveness—of getting vaccinated.

So let me make one thing clear: 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 28, 2021, 07:58:52 pm
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.

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...

vaccines aren't 100% effective.

So despite claims to have read mysterious articles and studies—which are not linked nor any source cited—with various assertions like...

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.

It should be readily apparent that...

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 29, 2021, 10:59:29 am
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.

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...

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 29, 2021, 01:11:26 pm
So, you're expecting too much from the general public.

I don't expect anything from "the general public". I try to avoid sloppy language and broad generalizations. It's a sign of sloppy thinking. "The narrower the mind, the broader the statement." -Ted Cook

The general public consists of a vast array of individuals. They range from wise to foolish. There are those that possess some degree of common sense and those that appear to be lacking in it.

The best alternative to mandates is common sense. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be enough to go around.

When I use language like "If someone is able to comprehend these basic facts" and "It should be readily apparent", those specific words are chosen for a reason. Clearly, there is a segment of "the general public" unable (or unwilling) to comprehend basic facts regarding vaccination or other common sense public health measures. For those that are able and willing, it should be readily apparent that "vaccinated people are not as likely to spread the coronavirus as the unvaccinated" and that "the unvaccinated are responsible for the overwhelming majority of transmission."

To think that I expect anything from "the general public" is the product of sloppy reading.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 29, 2021, 01:47:23 pm
First, I've argued for 1 1/2 years that the whole Covid issue has been politicized on both sides.  ...

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 29, 2021, 02:10:48 pm
there is no simple or easy way to comprehend what's "apparent" especially when the experts themselves have been inconsistent with advice

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:

• 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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 29, 2021, 02:47:37 pm
So, you're expecting too much from the general public.

And from GOP.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 29, 2021, 04:17:26 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 29, 2021, 04:20:12 pm
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:

• 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
I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public.  You refuse to acknowledge it. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 29, 2021, 04:24:58 pm
Also, to state the only sensible response is to try to stop the disease does not take economics into consideration.

How does requiring masks and vaccination affect the economy except in a positive way?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 29, 2021, 04:28:39 pm
I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public.  You refuse to acknowledge it.

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.”

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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 29, 2021, 06:12:07 pm
I quoted the health official's direct statement acknowledging the "experts" were responsible for confusing the public.  ...

No one was confused unless they deliberately chose to pretend to be confused.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 29, 2021, 06:23:32 pm
Or, they lacked a basic understanding of vaccines and didn't pay enough attention to what was said to have more than a vague impression. There are also those who have given too much weight and attention to statements from people with an agenda to undermine public health officials.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 29, 2021, 07:09:56 pm
Right. It was not so much confusion on the part of experts, rather it was evolving understanding of all the facts and interpretation of latest stats. Nothing wrong with changing one's opinion if it leads to better results.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 05:59:07 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 06:06:32 am
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.”

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 06:55:14 am
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?

Another reply where it appears that you didn't read the post to which you're pretending to respond.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 07:02:17 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 07:04:30 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 07:09:33 am
I think we beat that one to death.  Let's try something different.

Twenty percent of border crossers tested positive amid delta variant surge, 'surprised' Mayorkas says
https://news.yahoo.com/twenty-percent-border-crossers-tested-141700059.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 30, 2021, 07:36:38 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 08:41:32 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on September 30, 2021, 12:51:13 pm
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.

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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 02:41:21 pm
it's interesting how you only agree with experts whose point of view you agree with.

Yes, isn't that interesting that I only agree with those where I find agreement. Here's another great revelation for you. I only disagree with those where I find a disagreement!

With regard to the advice given by public health officials during the pandemic, I've found their advice agreeable and sensible. I also didn't find any of it confusing. That might be explained by my not sleeping thru elementary english and science classes which aided in my understanding. It may also be that I'm not blinded by an agenda to undermine confidence in their knowledge or their character. Perhaps it's due to some other factors or a combination of them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 30, 2021, 03:11:03 pm
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 03:41:35 pm
What's the poor layman supposed to do?

They should give careful consideration to the consistent common sense advice from knowledgeable public health agencies.

• 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.

They should ignore unreliable sources of 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

For example:

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 04:09:48 pm
I think we beat that one to death.

No, it's only in a temporary state of coma—as are the readers of this repetitive merry-go-round. At regular intervals, you've been resurrecting the same theme of untrustworthy "experts" for months. I have little doubt that after an intermission, the play will resume again.

Let's try something different.

I've seen that movie too. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f8c1Fi5ya0)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 04:23:43 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 05:11:47 pm
Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on September 30, 2021, 05:13:19 pm
They should give careful consideration to the consistent common sense advice from knowledgeable public health agencies.

For example:

I'd stay away from "common sense" because it usually means "what I believe." Remember, common sense told us the earth was flat. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 05:15:33 pm
It appears you ignored the points I was making in my posts

You haven't read my posts and are wasting my time.

Many weary fingers and worn keyboards feel otherwise. As to who was wasting the time of others, individuals will decide that for themselves.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 05:20:29 pm
I'd stay away from "common sense" because it usually means "what I believe." Remember, common sense told us the earth was flat.

Nah, I'm very comfortable with common sense. Common sense: sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts — Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

It's common beliefs that sometimes require careful examination.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 05:33:11 pm
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.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 05:43:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on September 30, 2021, 05:51:26 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 06:00:07 pm
How does the constitution protect or not protect?  What are those limits?

Those are matters decided by elected legislators who enact laws, an executive branch tasked with their enforcement, and courts that rule on the legal and constitutional merits of legislative measures and their enforcement. — Junior High Civics Lesson #1
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 06:02:35 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on September 30, 2021, 08:19:23 pm
battles can be won or lost based on casualties from disease.  But it's different for civilians.

When civilians are the "casualties from disease", winning or losing the battle and the war, against the common enemy of a pandemic disease, doesn't seem all that different or any less important.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on September 30, 2021, 10:09:06 pm
...  Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.

That's hilariously over the top. We're talking about masks and vaccines here, get a grip, will ya. Are you suggesting that the people in countries who better followed public health measures are somehow less free?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on September 30, 2021, 11:41:55 pm
Freedom costs. No one said liberty is cheap.

Stupidity comes also with a high cost. For many, it is just one-time cost.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 12:33:49 am
The constitution allows people the freedom to be stupid.  it doesn't matter if you think you know what would be best for them.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 01:19:22 am
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.

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?
What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 01:25:16 am
The constitution allows people the freedom to be stupid.

It doesn't give you a blank check to become a menace to society as a result of your constitutionally protected stupidity.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 01:37:42 am
What are you going to do if you lose your job or your business that supports your family, God forbid?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 01, 2021, 07:14:27 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 09:17:49 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 09:19:42 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 01, 2021, 09:53:38 am
Because many here are nonchalant about people who have lost their jobs and businesses because of shutdowns. ...


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 01, 2021, 09:54:06 am
Easy for you to say if you haven't lost your job or business.

Stop gaslighting.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 10:03:09 am

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.’”
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 01, 2021, 11:22:40 am
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.’”

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 11:40:07 am

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on October 01, 2021, 11:51:24 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 11:57:01 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on October 01, 2021, 12:19:56 pm
It was the private industry that did it.

Again ?
I've lost count how many times you've tried to scavenge down that rabbit hole.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 01, 2021, 12:21:32 pm
Well, of course, we need an Army and a Coast Guard. 

... 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...

Do you understand the meaning of the term "governance" ?  GOVERNance?

Quote
I can't believe you used that disaster and picture to show off the government.


Why?  Who else is that helicopter representing?  Corporate America?


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 12:58:00 pm
You seem to only care about the health issue and want to ignore economic problems.

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.

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

No. You're completely wrong in your narrow short-sighted view. The economy has recovered from numerous disasters including a repetitive series of boom and bust cycles preceding a great depression, natural disasters, pandemic disease, a civil war and world wars.

Death is permanent. Many more that don't die will suffer permanent injury from the disease. This is what you continue to ignore in baiting people into your silly game.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on October 01, 2021, 01:22:06 pm
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 02:07:28 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 02:24:41 pm
... 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...

Do you understand the meaning of the term "governance" ?  GOVERNance?
 

Why?  Who else is that helicopter representing?  Corporate America?



The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 02:31:08 pm
Great. Put that bumper sticker philosophy on your car. This thread is about vaccines.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 01, 2021, 02:43:27 pm
Quote from: chez link=topic=137509.msg1225358#msg1225358 date[b
=1633108926]
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 02:49:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 01, 2021, 05:18:30 pm
Easy for you to say

It's also easy to begin a statement with "Easy for you to say" when you offer no solutions. It's easy to pose questions; it's the answers that are difficult. It's easy to indulge in criticism when your only interest is in hearing yourself repeat the same banal platitudes. When someone is a constant critic, but offers no ideas or advice, they're probably full of easy.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 01, 2021, 05:40:56 pm
The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.

That's a non-sensical statement.  Freedom and security are opposites.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 01, 2021, 05:42:40 pm
The more power you give the government, the less freedom and security you get.

Also, that doesn't answer my question:  If that helicopter doesn't represent the government, who does it represent?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on October 01, 2021, 07:39:51 pm
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.

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?

Come on, you are not that naive. The whole country would be in chaos with everyone locking themselves in their houses.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 02, 2021, 12:22:06 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 02, 2021, 12:31:04 am
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?

Come on, you are not that naive. The whole country would be in chaos with everyone locking themselves in their houses.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 12:50:58 am
But you have ignored the economy as if or [it] doesn't count.

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.

Well problems with it will long outlast health issues.

How long does death last? How long does a lung lost to COVID last?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 02, 2021, 09:12:23 am
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.

How long does death last? How long does a lung lost to COVID last?
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on October 02, 2021, 09:20:12 am
But you have ignored the economy as if or doesn't count.  Well problems with it will long outlast health issues.

Tell that to the 700,000 and counting that died a horrible death in the last year and a half.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on October 02, 2021, 09:23:38 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 02, 2021, 09:29:47 am
Tell that to the 700,000 and counting that died a horrible death in the last year and a half.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 02, 2021, 09:34:29 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 02, 2021, 10:50:16 am
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.

Compare Red states to Blue states.  The economies of the red states are better then the blue states and the COVID numbers are not different overall. 

So, although the economy would have taken a hit regardless, the hit would be less without the restrictions without a higher increase in costs/deaths. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 11:13:30 am
Your comments show that you still downplay the economic damage.

No it doesn't. You just repeat that over and over and over and....

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 11:16:01 am
The point I'm trying to remind people COvid has two major issues

No one needs the reminder. Everyone is aware of the 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 11:22:40 am
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.

How much better would the economy be and how different would the number of deaths and permanent injury be now? What are those numbers?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 02, 2021, 12:15:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 02, 2021, 02:59:36 pm
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.

(And yet, people in prisons always seem to be able to get drugs. How can that be?)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 04:29:29 pm
Freedom and security are opposites.

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with this as a blanket statement. I think that most of the time freedom and security go hand in hand.

The more insecure a person feels in a given situation, generally the more constrained they will feel regarding their freedom to act, as a lack of security typically includes some degree of fear. Conversely, a person that feels their freedom is restricted in a given situation, will generally also feel less secure to act as they might otherwise wish. As with most things in life, there may be exceptions and more importantly, there is the factor of what is reasonable for a given situation—and what is reasonable itself is subject to some degree of reasonable individual interpretation. Freedom can have reasonable limits. The same holds true for security.

Since this thread topic is vaccines—though some regularly try to hijack the thread to further their own agenda—let's use COVID as an example. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on October 02, 2021, 07:43:11 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 02, 2021, 09:57:56 pm
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.

Well, you know, Alan pointed out one of my faults. I only agree with people when I agree with them—or something to that effect. A common problem with me!

We're all entitled to alter our view. It raises my appreciation of people who are intellectually honest enough to do so—like yourself. Probably one reason that I enjoy reading your comments.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 03, 2021, 07:28:17 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 03, 2021, 11:48:36 am
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


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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 03, 2021, 12:18:17 pm

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?
From the same article. 

Quote:

When will the pills become available?

Merck said on Friday that it plans to seek emergency authorization from the Food and Drug Administration as soon as possible. Regulators could then authorize the drug before the end of this year, if all goes well.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, President Joe Biden’s top medical adviser for the coronavirus, said at a White House briefing on Friday that he could not give a specific timeline for approval.

“The FDA will look at the data, and in their usual very efficient and effective way, will examine the data as quickly as they possibly can, and then it will be taken from there,” he said.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 10, 2021, 10:19:20 pm
Three Americans explain why they won't vaccinate (article from BBC), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58851205 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58851205).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 11, 2021, 05:07:27 am
How real men do it (Elliott Erwitt):
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on October 11, 2021, 12:30:31 pm
Thanks for that chuckle, Slobodan!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on October 11, 2021, 04:05:48 pm
How real men do it (Elliott Erwitt):

That looks like a Gualoises cigarette without a filter. Very courageous.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 12, 2021, 12:46:41 pm

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.  First, if you are vaccinated, you are golden and can return to normal life regardless of anything else.  C-19 is less dangerous then the flu after you are vaccinated.  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.  I know a couple of people like this who have given up their reason for insanity.  We are currently planning a BBQ and inviting quite a few friends.  These two have asked that we make sure we only invite vaccinated people.  It is none of my business who is or is not vaccinated, and I will not be asking anyone just to satisfy a couple who have lost their reason. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 12, 2021, 12:56:12 pm
But anyway, speaking of vaccine mandates, don't book with Southwest anytime soon, or get sick in NY either.

Southwest CEO says he never wanted a Covid vaccine mandate but Biden forced his hand (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/12/covid-vaccine-southwest-ceo-gary-kelly-says-he-never-wanted-a-mandate.html)

Well at least they, partially, stopped gaslighting us and now admit that this was due to the vaccine mandate, kind of.  However, Biden did not force his hand as he claims.  Biden has not put into place a vaccine mandate, he only said he would, a month ago. 

As of right now, there is no new OSHA regulation requiring vaccines.  More then likely Biden stopped short of doing so to avoid being sued, and possibly causing Chevron Deference to be overturned.  This would be a major blow to the administration if this did happen, and we now have a Supreme Court that would probably do so. 

But anyway, all of this falls on him; his hand was not forced. 

FYI, this same story is being played out in many different industries, including with truckers and longshoremen.  Have you noticed the emptier shelves lately?  More "transitory" inflation is most like coming. 

I am not one to panic buy gold and silver, and have actually never done so, but I now am. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 02:10:30 pm
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.

Vaccination reduces risk of infection from contagious disease. The question is always to what degree the risk is reduced for an individual in a given environment.

C-19 is less dangerous then [than] the flu after you are vaccinated.

I'm sorry, but this statement is nonsense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 02:59:25 pm
First, if you are vaccinated, you are golden and can return to normal life regardless of anything else.

"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.

Therefore it does not matter how many people you are with or if they are vaccinated. 

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).

The number of people of unknown vaccination status with whom you interact and under what circumstances matters. If you don't understand why that is so, refer to 1) and 2) above.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 03:19:58 pm
Second, people who think otherwise, agreeing with your sentiment here, are mentally gone at this point...

Oh my! I guess you'll need to stock up on mops to keep up with their drooling.

and probably will not be engaging is any activities, regardless.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 12, 2021, 03:22:53 pm
"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).

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 this, you have lost your sanity if you insist on not returning to normal life after being vaccinated. 

Insofar as breakthrough cases, the severity of those cases are greatly decreased by the vaccine (not to mention each new variant is decreasing in severity, as always happens, albeit becoming easier to spread).  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.  We are not getting rid of it, that is especially the case for poor countries without the ability for mass vaccinations. 

It is here.  It is going to do what it does regardless of our actions.  The continued spread, even with all the lockdowns, proved this.  Sometimes you just need to except 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 12, 2021, 03:23:39 pm
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 drool?  That's not something I would think you want to so freely admit to. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 04:41:35 pm
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.

I'm sorry to say that your presumed knowledge regarding vaccines, COVID-19, and medical science in general underwhelms me. There are still a number of unknowns regarding the long-term effectiveness of the current COVID vaccines, not the least of which is how effectiveness may diminish over time: for each of the various vaccines; for various individuals; and against each of the variants. This will require time, data collection, and analysis.

Booster shots are now being given for some individuals who received the Pfizer vaccine as you may have noticed. Masks are also still recommended for vaccinated people when indoors in public gathering places. These additional measures and precautions, for people already vaccinated, are not due to public health officials or people that follow their advice being "mentally gone" or some perceived unreasonable panic.

Viruses and other contagious diseases all have their own characteristics. COVID-19 is not seasonal flu. Seasonal flu is not pneumonia. Pneumonia is not the common cold.

COVID-19 is a new and pandemic disease. Your continued comparisons of it to the flu or "any other disease" indicates a lack of comprehension of that basic fact among other things.

That is better than any other vaccine BTW.

No, it isn't.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 05:20:58 pm
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. 

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.

each new variant is decreasing in severity, as always happens

Could you point to which resource for medical knowledge or part of your anatomy from which this was pulled? Never mind, people might give you strange looks pointing like that.

This is supported by the fact that 99% of those currently being hospitalized are not vaccinated.

It is undeniably true that vaccination greatly reduces the chance of hospitalization if infected, which makes for a very strong case to get vaccinated! It is not a "fact" "that 99% of those currently being hospitalized are not vaccinated". There was one report from Cleveland Clinic back in May with a 99% unvaccinated hospitalization ratio. Otherwise, vaccinated to unvaccinated ratios for hospitalization have varied depending on region and the specific date range being reported. Putting accurate data together on vaccinated and unvaccinated hospitalization ratios is difficult as reporting of data varies from state to state, if they report that type of data at all.

CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7037e1-H.pdf) (MMWR) September 17, 2021 - COVID-19 Hospitalization Cases - Percentage Fully Vaccinated for All Ages in 13 U.S. Jurisdictions: April 4–June 19 = 7% / June 20–July 17 = 14%

ScienceNews report August 31, 2021 (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-coronavirus-vaccines-hospital-cases-rates-unvaccinated): "The weekly rate, on the other hand, is a bit like the speedometer on a car — providing a glimpse of what’s happening week by week as the coronavirus spreads. Its message is also clear: The risk of a vaccinated person becoming hospitalized remains low at any given time, while the risk for unvaccinated people can fluctuate, probably as a result of community transmission."

https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-cases-data-from-the-states (https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-cases-data-from-the-states/)

That reminds me, I'm still curious as to how you came to the false conclusions which misrepresented NYC's vaccination demographic statistics that you posted. Ever going to tell us whether it was your own confusion and misrepresentation or something you acquired from another source?

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.

Not this cold and flu comparison crap again. Sigh...

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.

No, hospitalizations aren't the only cases that matter. Infected individuals that are not hospitalized can have lifelong physical damage and disability as a result of the disease. Those that are infected and walking around are the ones that primarily enable the spread and continuing evolution of the disease.

Vaccines do provide a high degree of protection for those that take them. The cases of infection among people who are not hospitalized, but moving about and interacting with people, are now the root cause of hospital overload at various times in various places and those are mostly people who are unvaccinated. As a side note, an unfortunate number of the unvaccinated "freedom fighters" are also anti-mask, anti-restriction, anti-public health, anti-government zealots like the activists in Idaho. Thanks Ammon Bundy (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/03/16/ammon-bundy-arrested-refusing-wear-mask-appear-idaho-trial/4714734001/)!

https://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/news/Sept. 16, 2021 - Idaho expands Crisis Standards of Care statewide due to surge in COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization (https://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/news/idaho-expands-crisis-standards-care-statewide-due-surge-covid-19-patients-requiring-0)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 06:10:38 pm
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. 

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 09:40:09 pm
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...

You can draw any implications you like. The context of my statement that you're quoting was in response to your assertion: "Therefore it does not matter how many people you are with or if they are vaccinated."

My reply was: "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).

The number of people of unknown vaccination status with whom you interact and under what circumstances matters. If you don't understand why that is so, refer to 1) and 2) above."


I have no reason to change those statements.

by the fact that C-19 is never going away.  No matter what we do, this is now with us forever.

That may well be true. Then again, that's likely what many people believed, once upon a time, regarding polio and small pox. Predicting the future of COVID-19 (also known as SARS-CoV-2) and other SARS viruses past, present, and future "no matter what we do", I will leave to you. Some viruses science and medical professionals have been able to tame with the cooperation of governments and citizens. Some are still causing disease.

With some luck, the impact will become minimal over time as more people are vaccinated. If we're not so lucky, the idiots, the ignorant, and the misinformed in society will continue to facilitate its continued spread and potential evolution (https://www.tiktok.com/@epidemiologistkat/video/7002675587819064581) [Click The Link for an explanation, in less than a minute, of why that's important] into something even worse than what we have right now. As long as people lacking common sense refuse to be vaccinated, the future does not look promising regarding the impact of COVID-19 or any other potential pandemics that may come along in the future.

The fact that matters now is that it's here now and still causing deaths at a significant rate and still causing hospital capacities and medical providers to be overwhelmed in various locations. Those are the current facts that require our attention and efforts.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 12, 2021, 10:46:45 pm
The continued spread, even with all the lockdowns, proved this.

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?

Sometimes you just need to except [accept] there is nothing you can do.

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.

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.

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.

Get vaccinated and then get on with your life.

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"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 13, 2021, 08:41:17 am
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 13, 2021, 09:16:47 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 13, 2021, 09:51:48 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 13, 2021, 10:02:19 am
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.



In the beginning, sure.  Now though, with all we know, it is insanity or at the very least a complete lack of even trying to understand the stats and how it effects you. 

BTW, why no "Allspice?" 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 13, 2021, 01:29:28 pm
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)

You mean politicians?  LOL. 

It really is amazing how so many people on the left, yourself included, keep on trusting these public experts after they have been wrong so many times and openly lied to us over the last year.  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 crowd at this point.  To show just how large the disconnect is, see below.  FYI, that's the lowest audience score ever. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on October 13, 2021, 01:44:22 pm
The economic impact is not over.  You're getting ahead of yourself.

And about to get a lot worse. 

Biden, with this vaccine mandate, is turning it from a health issue into a liberty issue whether he knows it or not.  So many people are going to thumb their noise at it and quit just to prove their liberty bono fides.  Sure, it's a rash decision, but that is what is going to happen. 

And those that don't will just get a counterfeit vaccine cards.  It would not be that hard.  All you need is a good scanner to scan a legit card, a little bit of PhotoShop skill (to edit out what was already written), a decent printer, and (I would guess) some 90 pound cold pressed card stock with a 96% brightness.  30 minutes of work that would require a 15X loupe to figure out if it was fake.  Even so, I doubt most would know the difference between a dot matrix (on a home printer) vs a line pattern (from a Heidelberg). 

And even so, I would be willing to bet, most companies will just ask to see a pic on your phone of it and not even bother to make sure your name is the one on it, like what I recently experienced in New Orleans. 

But all of this is just going to continue to slow the economy and send us into an actual recession.  Like I said in another threads, the silver lining is that Biden's incompetence may very well give the republicans the presidency, the house and a 60+ senate in 2025. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 13, 2021, 02:28:13 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 13, 2021, 04:14:42 pm
You only talk about the health issue as if there's no economic issue.

My posts were all direct responses to statements from Joe. You ignore that fact and pretend that you're posting a reply to one of my posts. Why? In order to resurrect one of your oft repeated, but limited in scope, zombie themes in an effort to bait-and-switch to one of your circular merry-go-round arguments on ground that has been covered repeatedly.

It's not a game that interests me.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 13, 2021, 04:21:09 pm
An interesting 45-minute "Evening With Dr. Anthony Fauci" was held at the LBJ Library on October 6th. It covers a wide range of topics.

Please join us for a conversation with Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief medical advisor to the President and the nation’s leading voice on the COVID-19 pandemic. Mark Updegrove, President and CEO of the LBJ Foundation, will moderate the discussion.

About the speaker: Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, where he oversees an extensive research portfolio focused on infectious and immune-mediated diseases. As the long-time chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, Dr. Fauci has made many seminal contributions in basic and clinical research and is one of the world’s most-cited biomedical scientists.

He was one of the principal architects of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a program that has saved millions of lives throughout the developing world, and continues to be our country’s leading voice on combating the ongoing threat of COVID-19.


https://www.youtube.com/An Evening With Dr. Anthony Fauci (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLIx20hYws8)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 13, 2021, 10:22:42 pm
You mean politicians?  LOL. 

No, I mean the people that have spent their entire adult lives in the study and practice of medicine with specialties and subspecialties like epidemiology, immunology, virology, and public health and who are dedicated to improving the health and lives of the general public.

This reminds me, I suspect that a number of people may not be aware that there are eight uniformed services in the United States. They consist of the United States: Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Space Force, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps (NOAA Corps), and Public Health Service Commissioned Corps (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Public_Health_Service_Commissioned_Corps) (PHSCC).

USPHS Commissioned Corps (https://www.usphs.gov) history has roots which trace back to 1798 (https://www.usphs.gov/history) and the establishment of the first Marine Hospitals. Their uniforms are modeled after Navy uniforms and they are commissioned as officers ranging from ensign to admiral. The Surgeon General of the United States is the operational head of the service and holds the rank of vice-admiral.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 13, 2021, 10:24:16 pm
It really is amazing how so many people on the left...

Yeah, heard it all before.

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. 

That will probably come as a surprise to "Johns Hopkins and others". I know it does to me!

But you, and all of the self appointed elites, are in the loosing [losing] crowd at this point.

OK. You're a big winner. Congratulations to you!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 14, 2021, 06:31:09 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 14, 2021, 07:00:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 14, 2021, 07:31:06 pm
The parallel is between new software and new vaccines, not between software and the virus.

I was thinking about updating my antivirus software.

The theme of your post appeared to be about personal risk. The risk in remaining unvaccinated is not exclusively personal. Refusing to be vaccinated dramatically increases your risk of becoming infected and as a result, increases the risk of transmitting the virus to others. That risk is a double-edged sword which cuts both ways, as a personal and public risk, and is nothing like your personal safety razor.

The greater the transmission rate of this virus, the greater the risk of it evolving into something worse. The Delta variant is already an evolution with twice or greater the transmission rate seen previously and every bit as deadly. Future variants could give us a virus that is more lethal as well, if efforts to curtail transmission and spread are not successful.

The dangerous link between transmission and viral evolution explained in under a minute (https://www.tiktok.com/@epidemiologistkat/video/7002675587819064581)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 14, 2021, 10:04:27 pm
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.

Great, perhaps you can provide us with some links to Johns Hopkins, or other equally credible sources, that confirm some of the (mis)information that you've broadcast online. It would be interesting if you were to email Johns Hopkins (https://www.jhu.edu) a copy of your insights below and to read what, if any, response they might provide.

Let's start with just a small sample.

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 dangerous then [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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 15, 2021, 04:40:13 am
....Refusing to be vaccinated dramatically increases your risk of becoming infected and as a result, increases the risk of transmitting the virus to others....

This guy won an International Emmy award for his Covid response:
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 15, 2021, 04:48:29 am
... Refusing to be vaccinated dramatically increases your risk of becoming infected...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 15, 2021, 09:25:19 am
Looks like they're recommending a "booster" third dose for Moderna now as they did for Pfizer.  It will be a half dose. Both my wife and I have had our two initial Moderna doses more than 6 months ago.  I was thinking about getting the third as I'm over 65 and have other comorbidities.  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.

Quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 15, 2021, 11:39:41 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 15, 2021, 12:03:41 pm
...  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.

....

What legitimate concerns?

I'm not confused, why are you?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 15, 2021, 12:06:35 pm
Cases and deaths are in decline.  The article says it's not herd immunity, but I think it is.  What do you think?


Well, cases and deaths have declined before, was is herd immunity then?

What is herd immunity, exactly?

Why should we care what your opinion is? I don't mean that in a derogatory manner. I sensibly and reasonably ask, why should anyone go to YOU for such an assessment. And why would my opinion matter. My opinion is as unimportant as yours.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on October 15, 2021, 05:52:24 pm
What is herd immunity, exactly?

I think the important point is that it doesn't mean anything exactly: it is intended to describe a condition where the probability of becoming infected by a disease is becoming vanishingly rare.  The term is a simple, nontechnical way to refer to a situation in the propagation cycle of a pathogen where so many members of a given population have either died or become invulnerable to it—through an infection- or vaccine-induced durable immune reaction—that the pathogen essentially stops spreading because it cannot find new hosts.  It doesn't appear that any country or other identifiable geographical area has reached that state yet with respect to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and because some people who have been infected or vaccinated are still getting sick (although in most cases not sick enough to die or even require hospitalization), it seems unlikely that any will—at least, not in the immediate future.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 16, 2021, 07:58:21 pm
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 risk of exposure to the virus (SARS-COV-2) is the same whether you're vaccinated or unvaccinated. The risk of an exposure becoming an infection is NOT the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Exposure (the virus entering your body) and infection (a state of disease or an exposure which results in continuous viral replication and cell damage) are not the same thing.

Exposure does not immediately result in having an infection or being infectious to others, whether you are vaccinated or unvaccinated. That requires time known as the incubation period. It's early in that stage (incubation period) between exposure and infection (disease) when a vaccinated person's enhanced immune system targets the virus for elimination and prevents infection from occurring and therefore becoming infectious to others.

It is the critical time element, in the progression from initial exposure to becoming infectious to those around you, which is misunderstood by some. The bottom line is that if you are exposed and the virus is quickly eliminated thru immune response, you will not become infectious to others. If you have insufficient immune response following exposure, you probably will become infectious to others, and may never be aware of it (asymptomatic infection)—hence the need for widespread vaccination to mitigate widespread transmission and the continuing evolution of the virus. If you do become infected and develop symptoms, you may be infectious before you are aware of those symptoms—hence the need for public health agencies to conduct rapid contact tracing of known cases.

If breaking that chain of events: from exposure, thru incubation, to infection does not happen rapidly enough thru immune response, a vaccinated person becomes infected (breakthrough infection). This is relatively rare and infection occurs far less frequently in vaccinated persons than in those unvaccinated. That's the purpose of vaccines. They cannot prevent exposure; they can only assist your immune system in preventing infection from occurring.

The overwhelming majority of those vaccinated have a boosted immune response that is able to target and eliminate the virus before it has time for sufficient replication to cause infection. For the minority of vaccinated people that do develop an infection (COVID-19 disease) following exposure, the resulting infection is shorter in duration and with milder symptoms. Even in the case of a vaccinated person developing an infection, the shorter duration will still reduce the risk of transmission by reducing the length of time during which they are infectious.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/CDC COVID-19 Study Shows mRNA Vaccines Reduce Risk of Infection by 91 Percent for Fully Vaccinated People (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0607-mrna-reduce-risks.html)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 16, 2021, 09:33:22 pm
The article says it's not herd immunity, but I think it is.  What do you think?

I think that you're trying to bait people into a silly circular debate based on a frivolous assertion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 16, 2021, 09:43:12 pm
More confusing stuff from the medical community.

What legitimate concerns?

I'm not confused, why are you?

That record has a skip in it causing the needle to jump back and repeat the same phrase over and over endlessly. It may need to have the dust removed from the grooves.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 17, 2021, 06:30:46 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on October 18, 2021, 10:59:29 am
BREAKING: booster shots to become once-a-day, DIY event.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on October 18, 2021, 11:14:51 am
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 18, 2021, 06:59:05 pm
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/)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 18, 2021, 07:09:57 pm
I apologize that nothing above is conducive to giggles for the authors or the reader nor contains any flippant or entertaining remarks. Those who are still confused, however, regarding how transmissible diseases progress in an individual and spread thru a population may find illumination.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 18, 2021, 08:11:17 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 20, 2021, 02:32:02 pm
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).

Quite right, I really did phrase that badly. I was just trying to say that it is NOT approved for treatment of Covid and that's why it's a mystery to me why some people are suing to be able to use it that way.

In some article or other that I have lost track of, they traced the original article that indicated that it could be useful. That article was pretty flimsy and uncorroborated, and possibly also refuted (but I can't remember the details so not sure about that last point). There seems to be large numbers of people who lunge for magical cures whenever one comes up. Given that there are known, better and approved ways of dealing with Covid, it's a mystery to me why this happens. Contrarianism masquerading as scepticism?

It doesn't seem to me to internally consistent. If you believe that all experts are lying to you and so therefore you can't trust vaccines (leaving aside for the moment actual results), how do you then turn around and decide you trust some obscure other approach? I mean, if you aren't going to trust expert group No. 1, why would you trust expert group No.2?  Seems like knee-jerk contrarianism to me, purely ego-driven, though it's not clear to me why there exists ego gratification in doing so. Do they think they're being "rebels"? Is it some reptilian brain attraction to "magic"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 23, 2021, 12:13:10 pm
Here's a "sorry antivaxxer" site https://www.sorryantivaxxer.com (https://www.sorryantivaxxer.com), containing names and photos of anti-vaxxer activists who helped spread Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 25, 2021, 02:31:06 am
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.

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 25, 2021, 09:52:40 am
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.

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)
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 27, 2021, 01:49:42 pm
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.

There's a push on to bring criminal charges against Bolsonaro in Brazil for the way he handled (or didn't) the Covid pandemic, https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20211027-brazil-senate-committee-backs-criminal-charges-against-bolsonaro (https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20211027-brazil-senate-committee-backs-criminal-charges-against-bolsonaro). It's hard to know if that will lead anywhere, but some countries still seem to expect their governments to act in people's best interests. Go figure.

The mayor of Houston is at odds with the Texas governor on how best to handle Covid, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/houston-texas-mayor-turner-fights-abbott-517237 (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/houston-texas-mayor-turner-fights-abbott-517237), which isn't too surprising since the governor's plan is to not do much of anything.

Everywhere you look, dysfunction.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on October 27, 2021, 03:33:50 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 27, 2021, 04:03:05 pm
There's something to be proud of... Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Of course, without life, it's hard to enjoy the other two—but hey, two out of three ain't bad.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 27, 2021, 04:51:35 pm
Another well written and concise article from The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. This covers the types of immunity: active immunity, passive immunity, and community immunity.

https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/human-immune-system/types-immunity (https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/human-immune-system/types-immunity)

They have links within each of their articles to additional articles offering more specific details; so, you can dive more deeply into how immunity works with each article, if you're so inclined.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 27, 2021, 08:07:00 pm
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.  :) 

Freedom costs. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 27, 2021, 08:17:47 pm
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%.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 27, 2021, 08:30:15 pm
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%.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 27, 2021, 10:26:54 pm
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.

Surprising that more states don't apply to become protectorates. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on October 28, 2021, 05:25:48 am
Instead of taking multiple medications to treat one health problem, here is a wonder drug that fixes two problems:

Quote
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.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/28/health/fluvoxamine-covid-risk-study/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: DavidJ on October 28, 2021, 07:22:48 am
Here is the full article on fluvoxamine.  https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(21)00501-5/fulltext
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 28, 2021, 08:33:51 am
Instead of taking multiple medications to treat one health problem, here is a wonder drug that fixes two problems:


I think it's premature to declare it a wonder drug after one early trial with only 152 patients, and which hasn't been replicated yet.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on October 28, 2021, 10:07:29 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on October 28, 2021, 10:19:36 am
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. 

It's the same reason Democrats are letting in all those illegals from south of the border.  Democrats figure with all their giveaway legislation, they can buy loyalty from the illegals after they make them citizens so they can vote.  At least Puerto Ricans are citizens already. So if they decide they want to be a state, I think that's the right thing to do.  But it should be up to the residents of PR to decide not a bunch of hack politicians in Washington. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on October 28, 2021, 10:23:29 am
Is this the new Bear Pit thread now?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on October 28, 2021, 06:36:15 pm
Is this the new Bear Pit thread now?
It's been a sort of Bear Pit Junior for a while now.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on October 28, 2021, 10:38:51 pm
Is this the new Bear Pit thread now?

Yes, but you have to put on a mask when you post to this thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on October 28, 2021, 11:19:33 pm
Yes, but you have to put on a mask when you post to this thread.
:D
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on October 31, 2021, 12:56:59 pm
This article is about the science around Ivermectin so if you don't trust elites please do not read this, as it will only cause you pain: https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19/ivermectin-train-cannot-stop (https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19/ivermectin-train-cannot-stop).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on November 02, 2021, 08:38:46 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 02, 2021, 08:56:21 pm
So, Canadians, sitting quiet and minding our own business, aren't free?

I would encourage all Canadians—and those of us south of the border, as well—to feel free to ignore the off-topic senseless rants that appear all too often in this forum thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 04, 2021, 04:00:06 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 04, 2021, 05:41:28 pm
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.

Quote
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.

Sounds as though Gov doing it's duty to protect their citizens.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 04, 2021, 08:07:08 pm
For those that would like to read original source documents...

Fact Sheet: Biden Administration Announces Details of Two Major Vaccination Policies - November 4, 2021

https://www.whitehouse.gov/statements-releases/2021/11/04/fact-sheet-biden-administration-announces-details-of-two-major-vaccination-policies (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/04/fact-sheet-biden-administration-announces-details-of-two-major-vaccination-policies/)


WHITE HOUSE REPORT: Vaccination Requirements Are Helping Vaccinate More People, Protect Americans from COVID-19, and Strengthen the Economy - October 7, 2021

https://www.whitehouse.gov/2021/10/Vaccination-Requirements-Report.pdf (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Vaccination-Requirements-Report.pdf)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 04, 2021, 08:26:07 pm
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


People have a choice...but I sure as hell don't want my doctor, nurse or dentist that is looking after me to not be vaccinated. I would not want to be in a business meeting with someone not vaccinated. I sure in hell don't want to see children being taught by teachers that are not vaccinated. So yeh, people should have a choice about vaccinations, but that choice has consequences and one of them is they might not be able to perform the job they do today.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 04, 2021, 08:30:42 pm
Should we mandate vaccines?  Are these rules constitutional?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 04, 2021, 08:38:36 pm
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.

Quote
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.
Sounds as though Gov doing it's duty to protect their citizens.

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.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/1171032/pm-defends-latest-measures-rules-out-general-lockdown (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GHPRX6eH50kJ:https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/1171032/pm-defends-latest-measures-rules-out-general-lockdown/)

Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis has defended his government’s decision to tighten restrictions on unvaccinated people to stem the spread of coronavirus as new daily cases set a new record Tuesday, while ruling out the possibility of a new nationwide lockdown.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 04, 2021, 08:44:32 pm
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.

For the sake of accuracy, the article does NOT say "they exempted the assembly line workers". The article from Reuters that you linked says...

Ford was still evaluating its policy for "manufacturing locations, parts depots and Ford Credit, including analyzing federal and collective bargaining requirements."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 04, 2021, 09:19:20 pm
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.

Yes, the article is as reported by Kathimerini. I left out the specific country reference as these revised measures are either already active or in the process of being implemented in principle across several countries in the EU.  I can’t say definitively which ones, I haven’t followed it that closely, but you can add Italy to the list.

The point I was seeking to emphasize I highlighted in bold, as it’s a common thread, namely that these measures are not a step back but the next phase where economic and social activity for the (vaccinated) majority will not be restricted by way of renewed national lockdowns.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 04, 2021, 09:36:28 pm
Understood and thanks for posting. Because there are people in the world that are quick to assume and then jump to conclusions, I pointed out that it was a quote about Greece.

Again, thanks for posting it. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 04, 2021, 11:20:42 pm
The US constitution isn't concerned with common sense, only legality.  There are very many stupid laws on the books. Private firms are allowed to have rules requiring vaccines because they are, well, private.  The constitution does not prevent private firms from requiring them.  The main protection the constitution is concerned with is government overreach.  After all, it's the government that has the guns and jails. 

What happens in Greece and in Europe is beside the point.  America has a long tradition of more individual freedoms.  The president isn't a king.  Of course, Biden is trying to get around that by having OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Act) division institute a new safety requirement - getting the vaccine.  The courts will determine if it passes constitutional muster.

Ford is allowing workers not to get the vaccine probably because too many won't get it and they might have to shut down their production line.  They can ill afford less production.  As it is there are no new cars to buy, certainly few below MSRP sticker list prices.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 05, 2021, 06:58:36 am
But I'm not sure I'm in favor of mandates.  That's a slippery slope. 

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.

Your freedoms end when they begin to impinge on mine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 05, 2021, 07:14:54 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 05, 2021, 07:37:14 am
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.

Quote
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.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-diabetes-overtreatment/
 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 05, 2021, 07:42:32 am
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.

Well, I'm travelling tomorrow to Turkey (against my better judgement) so I'll be able to post a feedback by early next week.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 08:15:45 am
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.

Your freedoms end when they begin to impinge on mine.
You don't have to travel to my country and I don't have to travel to yours. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 08:22:50 am
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. 

The 16th Amendment of the US says the following:  (before 1913, when the US government tried to impose taxes, the Supreme Court threw it out leading to this amendment, a sorrowful day in American history.

The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. (passed by the States in 1913).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 08:26:27 am
Interestingly it says taxes on income, not wealth which means to me Congress can not have a wealth tax on stock and other asset appreciation that hasn;t yet been sold.  The liberals in Congress were suggesting that in this bill so that people like Elon Musk who's worth billions in Tesla stock, would have to pay taxes on them even though he hasn't sold them. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 08:34:41 am
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.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-diabetes-overtreatment/
 
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 08:39:37 am
Well, I'm travelling tomorrow to Turkey (against my better judgement) so I'll be able to post a feedback by early next week.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 05, 2021, 09:21:15 am
You don't have to travel to my country and I don't have to travel to yours. 

I really do not, unsurprisingly, follow your logic here.

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 :) )
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 05, 2021, 10:06:31 am
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 11:35:22 am
I really do not, unsurprisingly, follow your logic here.

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 :) )

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 11:37:55 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 05, 2021, 11:44:56 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 05, 2021, 12:04:41 pm
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 05, 2021, 12:54:52 pm
Why are you asking me?  Ask them.  :)

I wasn't asking you, it's just your phrase was the lead-in.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 05, 2021, 01:19:33 pm
Have fun in Turkey.

Than you, but some of us have to work!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 06, 2021, 06:15:48 pm
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

The federal appeals court has just held up this Biden vaccination mandate.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 09, 2021, 11:27:46 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 09, 2021, 02:47:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 09, 2021, 03:12:29 pm
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.

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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 09, 2021, 03:38:11 pm
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/


4 year old stats especialy in this context are meaningless. There is a good chance that the latest flu stats look very different.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 09, 2021, 03:59:26 pm
The 2019-2020 rate was 51.8% for the entire US.
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/flu-vaccination-rate/?activeTab=map&currentTimeframe=0&selectedDistributions=flu-vaccination-rate&selectedRows=%7B%22wrapups%22:%7B%22united-states%22:%7B%7D%7D%7D&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

Here's another comparison table.  They don't seem overly high especially for over 18 basically just under half.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/coverage-1819estimates.htm#table1



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 09, 2021, 08:21:57 pm
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/


Well given a COVID vaccination rate of 58%…that’s in the ballpark.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 13, 2021, 04:03:56 pm
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

The US Appeals Court has held up Biden's order for vaccinations for workers.

Federal appeals court calls Biden vaccine mandate ‘fatally flawed’ and ‘staggeringly overbroad’
A federal appeals court has called President Joe Biden’s vaccine and testing requirements for private businesses “fatally flawed” and “staggeringly overbroad,” arguing that the requirements likely exceed the authority of the federal government and raise “serious constitutional concerns.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in an opinion issued Friday evening, reaffirmed its decision to press pause on the implementation of the requirements, in another sign that they may not survive judicial scrutiny.

The appellate court, considered one of the most conservative in the country, originally halted the requirements on Nov. 6 pending review, in response to challenges by the Republican attorneys general of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah, as well as several private companies.

While the court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the requirements, the three-judge panel made clear that the lawsuits seeking to overturn the mandates “are likely to succeed on the merits.” They criticized the requirements as “a one-size-fits-all sledgehammer that makes hardly any attempt to account for differences in workplaces (and workers).”
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/13/federal-appeals-court-calls-biden-vaccine-mandate-fatally-flawed-and-staggeringly-overbroad-.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 17, 2021, 04:36:56 am
Wisconsin health officials recommend that hunters should wear a mask while handling deer carcass and submit deer head for covid testing.

Quote
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.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2021/11/16/wisconsin-hunters-mask-around-deer-due-covid/8643850002/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 17, 2021, 02:17:39 pm
Wisconsin health officials recommend that hunters should wear a mask while handling deer carcass and submit deer head for covid testing.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on November 17, 2021, 04:52:51 pm
I think we should make the deer wear masks.
And practice social distancing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 17, 2021, 10:51:52 pm
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.


Against my better judgement I'll weigh in here.  First I'll give some background to explain my POV.  I have a master's degree in medical science, sold pharmaceuticals for >20 years, have worked in hospitals & nursing homes as an OT, and my wife is a supervisor of pharmacy (doctorate in pharmacy) at our state's largest hospital system.  While I am well educated many of my local friends are not and resist vaccination.  This anti-vax thing has become a cult of sorts.  All year long their excuse was "Experimental drug!  Not FDA approved!"  When the Pfizer was FDA approved of course they changed their mantra to something else.  They will willingly take the MAB treatment (monoclonal antibodies) even though it does not have full FDA approval and cost $1,000.  Part of their cult has them demanding to take ivermectin despite it's not being approved, is very experimental, and to date has not been shown to help covid in any empirical study.  These are not rational people and have been swept up in a cult that disdains the vaccines despite they're being safely given to something like 190 million Americans now, and anyone can see that virtually all hospital admissions (and deaths) since June 2021 have been unvaccinated people.  It's the vaccines they have focused on.  They will readily believe anything someone on Youtube or Facebook tells them will cure covid be it a new tablet with exact same FDA conditional approval the vaccines had earlier this year or being told to swing a dead cat over their head three times.  I've come to believe that many of these people were "911 Truthers" in the previous decade.  They are suspicious of anything rational and only pay attention to the wacko fringe and anonymous postings on social media you can never fact check.  They have to have a family member or close friend get sick for weeks or die before reality can get through to them.  Will Rogers once said, "Some people learn by reading books.  Some learn by observing others.  The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 19, 2021, 09:00:28 am
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.

???

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 19, 2021, 09:35:38 am
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.

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. 

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 19, 2021, 09:58:46 am
I dont know about the rest of you, but I am finding that the vaccine mandates are really just a joke when it comes to enforcement, at least in the USA. 

I was in New Orleans in October for about a week for work, and they have a vaccine mandate in place for entering any restaurant.  Not going to lie, even though it was a business trip, I visited quite a few local establishments and imbibed a bit more then I probably should have, but I was still in bed by 10 every night.  ;)   Only half of the places checked my for my vaccination card, and a picture of my card on my phone was more then enough, which they only glanced at it.  Just one establishment insisted on actually taking the time to compare my ID with the picture of my card to ensure the names were the same. 

I have been to NYC several times since their mandate went into effect, and the same thing.  Recently I had a shoot at a major University in the Bronx where we needed a scissor lift.  Before I arrived, I found out the driver of the truck delivering the lift was not vaccinated and he was not even allowed to drive on campus to drop it off.  He had to leave it on the sidewalk and then it had to be driven into campus.  (The battery was dead too, so it was kind of a funny situation daisy chaining a half dozen extension cords to plug it in.) 

Initially I was worried they would be serious enough to want to see my physical vaccination card, which I did not have on me.  Nope, just like everywhere else, security just glanced at my phone just long enough to see a picture of a card and let me in.  That was it. 

That one dive bar in New Orleans has been the only place, whether I was working on a project or just out to eat/shop, where they actually took the time to confirm it was my card with my name on it.  I'm sorry, but the ease at getting around this is a joke.  Likewise, I highly doubt most employers, even those whom enacted a mandate themselves, are going to any further lengths to verify the authenticity of vaccination of their employees. 

Now I will be traveling to the UAE for a month on business soon, so I am expecting that their verification process will be a little more intense but we will see. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 19, 2021, 01:54:38 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 19, 2021, 02:07:50 pm
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.

Which "powers that be" do you believe determined the most effective interval between vaccine doses? How do you believe they arrived at those intervals? What science based knowledge or research do you have regarding optimum vaccine dosage intervals for mRNA vaccines? Why do you choose not to provide any evidence for your assertions?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 19, 2021, 03:39:22 pm
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.

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.

Lockdown and pandemic fatigue is here.

Online BS and ill-informed commentary fatigue is here.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 19, 2021, 07:18:14 pm
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. 



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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 19, 2021, 07:23:16 pm
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. 

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 19, 2021, 07:46:48 pm
For most, walking around without a vaccine or mask will result in a mild cold. 

Some statements are too asinine to merit a response.

For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu

    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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 19, 2021, 08:20:54 pm
. . . 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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 19, 2021, 08:49:42 pm
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 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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 19, 2021, 08:54:42 pm
???

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.

What hole do you dig your information from…it’s all junk.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 19, 2021, 09:12:54 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 19, 2021, 10:46:39 pm
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 would likely be much more than doubled.   According to my wife, a clinical pharmacist at a major hospital system, most all of the vaccinated people who are in serious condition in her hospital are on immuno-suppressing drugs (transplant patients, people with auto-immune diseases) or have an active disease that suppresses the immune system (leukemia, HIV, etc.)  It's more than people just dying though.  My nephrologist told me many of the younger covid patients are showing up with kidney damage that doesn't cause a problem right now but will as time goes on.  She said the main damage is being done to lungs and hearts.  Many will be needing transplants in the future that otherwise would not have.  I truly don't understand why someone would take chances on this disease for something as meaningless as politics.  Life is much more valuable than that.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 06:30:06 am
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. 

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. 
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. 

Despite all the hoopla on both sides of the issue, my personal feeling is you are better off getting at least the original vaccinations so if you actually do get sick for whatever reason the effects will not be as damaging or deadly. 

I respect people's right to decide, but I still think it's a good idea if they got vaccinated.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 07:02:54 am
Quote from: TechTalk on November 19, 2021, 07:46:48 pm
Quote
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

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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 07:09:06 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 07:26:15 am

"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
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.

Even in more ordinary activities, when I drive on the weekends to take pictures of the scenery, I put myself and my family and other people who I might crash into in danger just so I can get a photo of a tree to impress others what a great photographer I am.  Sounds pretty me-me-me to me. 

There are many things we do that can hurt others.  We agree or not to allow these things as part of normal society.  But we don't castigate those whose independence and activities we might not like.  We try to get along and take our chances like everyone else.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 20, 2021, 09:36:37 am
...  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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 10:08:21 am
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.

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.
Emotions are relevant when people are running out of money to put food on their table. Stopping economic activity has its consequences too. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 20, 2021, 10:29:28 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 10:49:54 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 20, 2021, 08:19:00 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 08:35:22 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 20, 2021, 08:44:06 pm
It's not only Americans that have problems with mandates.  It seems it's much more violent in Europe, more of a pot party in the USA.

EUROPE IN CRISIS Italian police clash with anti-lockdown protesters as violent street battles rage in Austria and Netherlands
About four thousand unmasked protesters were seen at the Circus Maximus in Rome, chanting "Freedom" and "No Green pass," while anti-vaxxers clashed with police at Piazza Duomo in Milan the Corriere reported.

Italian cops said that about sixty demonstrators were identified while added there were clashes during arrests, including a woman who bit a police officer.

It comes as the government is currently reviewing stricter measures for the unvaccinated as well as a push on the third dose amid Italy's high infection rates.

...Meanwhile, anti-lockdown protesters in Vienna gathered to protest after the far-right opposition Freedom Party called for demonstrations and vowed to fight new Covid restrictions.

...Protesters chanted "no to vaccination", "enough is enough" and "down with the fascist dictatorship" and waved Austrian flags as they stream into Heroes' Square.

...It didn't take long for the crowd - which swelled to about 35,000 people by mid-afternoon - to clash with police.

...Hours earlier, seven people were injured when Dutch police opened fire on anti-lockdown rioters who were setting streets ablaze.

Cops said they fired both "warning shots" and directly at protesters who were demonstrating against new lockdown measures in Rotterdam on Friday.

...Other videos showed burn-out police cars and rioters launching fireworks and rocks at cops.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4106515/dutch-police-shots-riots-covid-lockdown/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 21, 2021, 12:18:47 am
Yes, there are idiots in every country. They should round them up and send them to Mars. SpaceX estimates $200,000 for one way ticket. That could be cheaper than to keep them in ICU on a ventilator.
 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 21, 2021, 08:07:50 am
For those interested in reactions to vaccines, this is fourth day after Moderna booster and shoulder soreness is gone. That's it. How did others make out?   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on November 21, 2021, 08:56:58 am
I got all my Pfizer shots long ago and never felt a thing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on November 21, 2021, 09:46:57 am
Got my third Pfizer about two weeks ago on a Thursday afternoon.  Felt kind of run down by Friday evening, Saturday a little better, Sunday ok and Monday fine.  My wife got her third Pfizer about a month ago and was essentially unaffected.   (Much to my dismay, 5G connectivity inside our home remains unimproved, nor can I summon my silverware from across the room yet, so we'll be getting a fourth shot as soon as we can figure out how to make it happen.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 21, 2021, 10:02:08 am
I wish drunk drivers wouldn't drive too. Should we lock up those not vaccinated in jail like they do in China?

Nope, just don't let them use non essential services and don't let them into non essential facilities. No pubs, no restaurants, no sports, no theatre etc...

Very much like if you want to smoke, don't come in here.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 21, 2021, 07:13:06 pm
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.


Unfortunately I don't see that happening.  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.  Remember that delta came from India.  And, remember that flu cases (and also RSV, norovirus, etc.) cases were low last year when vaccines weren't even available.  The thinking is those diseases were low because people weren't gathering as much and washing hands.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 21, 2021, 07:36:20 pm
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.

No doubt that's true, but at least in parts of the world where vaccines are readily available, if almost everybody who can tolerate them becomes vaccinated, the infection case rate probably will become low enough that normal behavior—e.g., congregating indoors in public places without facemasks or physical distancing—will become a reasonable option for individuals who aren't at elevated risk of severe disease for other medical reasons.

The United States and Canadian governments should be doing everything they can to improve vaccine availability in México, the Caribbean, and Central America—and, after that, extending their efforts to South America and other continents.  The SARS-CoV-2 virus may never disappear, but the more we collectively reduce the reservoir of hosts, the better the likelihood of preventing an aggressive, vaccine-evading mutation from developing.  Not a perfect solution, perhaps, but a worthy goal.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: marvpelkey on November 21, 2021, 07:57:53 pm
Just returned from a driving trip to/from Vancouver BC/Denver Co and thought I would post a couple observations/comments.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 21, 2021, 11:32:48 pm
Just returned from a driving trip to/from Vancouver BC/Denver Co and thought I would post a couple observations/comments.

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
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.

Violent protests break out in Europe over vaccine mandates, lockdowns
Violent protests have broken out against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and lockdowns across Europe amid new tough rules to curb winter waves of the virus.

Demonstrators angry about the new measures gathered in Austria, Croatia, Italy, Northern Ireland, the French territory of Guadeloupe and the Netherlands to protest the moves.

https://nypost.com/2021/11/21/europes-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-spark-violent-protests/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 22, 2021, 09:12:21 pm

Austrian Chancellor: 'You don’t only have rights, you have obligations' (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-59378552)

Quote
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"

Austria is running at approximately 66% vaccination rate. Some states in the US are close to that , many substantially lower. Texas, barely 54%.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 22, 2021, 09:30:05 pm
Austrian Chancellor: 'You don’t only have rights, you have obligations' (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-59378552)

Austria is running at approximately 66% vaccination rate. Some states in the US are close to that , many substantially lower. Texas, barely 54%.

Are these Trump followers or what?  Why aren't they taking vaccinations?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 23, 2021, 01:07:55 am

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.....




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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 23, 2021, 09:50:11 am

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 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. 

As Virus Cases Rise in Europe, an Economic Toll Returns
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/23/business/economy/europe-covid-economy.html#commentsContainer
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 23, 2021, 09:55:31 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 23, 2021, 12:50:44 pm
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

Interesting observation! Could be that the virus dies quicker on the fresh air.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 23, 2021, 03:47:15 pm
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)? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 23, 2021, 03:53:28 pm
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.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 

Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.

https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital

The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a “Don’t try this at home” label.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-vaccine-natural-immunity-infection-israel-study-cdc-11632151556 

In “Covid Confusion at the CDC” (op-ed, Sept. 14), Dr. Marty Makary points out that public-health officials insist on vaccination for previously infected people. He disagrees with this policy, relying in large part on the evidence from a retrospective, observational Israeli study showing that “natural immunity was 27 times more effective than vaccinated ...

As you were saying. 

I think the problem for you, is that you live in a bubble and do not look at information that does not confirm priors. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 23, 2021, 03:59:07 pm

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

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. 

As a former teacher, I can tell you if you hold contempt for those whom you are trying to help and show it, they will fail just to spite you.  Sure, it makes no sense, but that is human nature. 

All of these mandates and shit-talk coming from the White House is only having the opposite effect of what they want.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 23, 2021, 04:00:39 pm
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

Very original Manoli. How long this take you to come up with?  Did you actually laugh when you did? 

Dont worry, my wife laughs at my bad jokes too. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on November 23, 2021, 04:26:26 pm
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)

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.  Not a far comparison. 

Second, it is no secret that we have had a very mild flu season since the pandemic began, meaning that the flu numbers for last year and half are outliers.  In case you don't know, in statistics, an outlier is a data point that differs significantly from other observations.  In statistics, I can tell you that we typically ignore outliers since they are so far off they do not warrant to be taken seriously. 

Third, not to mention we have years of data on flu deaths, meaning it would be incompetent to look at only one year of data, even if it was not an outlier, in trying to illustrate the fatality rate. 

Fourth, and let's do some math, 0 through 49 deaths are 50,491, 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%, which is ... wait for it ... similar to the fatality rate of the flu for those under 45 of 0.02%.  Sure, not a perfect compaison since not everyone 0 to 49 have caught C-19, but all data is showing significantly more then half. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 23, 2021, 07:02:09 pm
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?

I wrote "All the more reason why no one should look to you for sensible health advice" based on your notion which I quoted—"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."

If you or anyone else believes that "all the more reason" for making health decisions should take into consideration politics of any kind or "pissing them off", regardless of who that might be; I would consider that reason enough to advise that no one should look to you for sensible health advice.

My reply was a response to the notion that you expressed and was not based on any "notion" regarding your vaccination status or any assumed effectiveness of any public heath measures, but was based on your statement expressing your ludicrous notion alone.

Or are you writing this on your false notion that masks (besides KN95) and social distancing works (even though all studies are showing otherwise)?

You just can't seem to help yourself in assuming and asserting what "all studies" show. I have a nagging doubt that you have any idea what "all studies" show regarding any of the topics where you've made that assertion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 23, 2021, 07:27:24 pm
Or are you writing this on your false notion that masks (besides KN95) and social distancing works (even though all studies are showing otherwise)?

Social distancing definitely works. Just law of physics. The farther, the more effective.
Any study disputing this should be put really far away.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 23, 2021, 09:06:08 pm
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. 



I've actually had pretty good luck when dealing with them one on one.  I have a reputation as being a pretty honest guy.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 23, 2021, 09:40:59 pm
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.

Another example of what I just observed and noted, you just can't seem to help yourself in assuming and asserting what is shown in "all studies" or "all research". I cited, quoted, and linked two references which demonstrated that your statement regarding what "all research comparing natural immunity to vaccine immunity" shows was NOT what "all research" shows and is therefore a false assertion.

Your response was to cite one paper (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228983#msg1228983) from Israel and to provide three links from three different sources to that one single paper. It is the same paper from Israel that you mentioned earlier when you made the false assertion regarding "all research". That's four times, in total, that you've cited the same retrospective observational study from Israel. I hate to tell you this, but no matter how many times or how many different links you provide to one research paper; that one paper does NOT represent "all research" on the subject as I have already clearly shown (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228670#msg1228670).

Interestingly, you decided not to mention any of the limitations of that one retrospective observational study from Israel as discussed in your science.org link...

Like the small size of the comparison data in the study... "infections and other events analyzed for the comparisons were “small.” For instance, the higher hospitalization rate in the 32,000-person analysis was based on just eight hospitalizations in a vaccinated group and one in a previously infected group. And the 13-fold increased risk of infection in the same analysis was based on just 238 infections in the vaccinated population, less than 1.5% of the more than 16,000 people, versus 19 reinfections among a similar number of people who once had SARS-CoV-2."

Like the inherent weakness of a retrospective observational study which lacks testing compared to prospective (https://www.cognibrain.com/retrospective-vs-prospective-study-advantages-types-and-differences/) studies... "As for the Israel medical records study, Topol and others point out several limitations, such as the inherent weakness of a retrospective analysis compared with a prospective study that regularly tests all participants as it tracks new infections, symptomatic infections, hospitalizations, and deaths going forward in time. “It will be important to see these findings replicated or refuted,” says Natalie Dean, a biostatistician at Emory University. She adds: “The biggest limitation in the study is that testing [for SARS-CoV-2 infection] is still a voluntary thing—it’s not part of the study design.” That means, she says, that comparisons could be confounded if, for example, previously infected people who developed mild symptoms were less likely to get tested than vaccinated people, perhaps because they think they are immune."

Or the limitations noted by the authors (https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/scicheck-instagram-post-missing-context-about-israeli-study-on-covid-19-natural-immunity/) of the paper themselves... "Furthermore, the authors of the study acknowledged that it had several limitations. For one, they said that the analysis only assessed protection from the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine “and therefore does not address other vaccines or long-term protection following a third dose, of which the deployment is underway in Israel.” The authors also said that because they conducted an “observational real-world study,” where polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, screening for the coronavirus was not required, “we might be underestimating asymptomatic infections, as these individuals often do not get tested.” “Lastly,” the authors of the Israeli study wrote, “although we controlled for age, sex, and region of residence, our results might be affected by differences between the groups in terms of health behaviors (such as social distancing and mask wearing), a possible confounder that was not assessed.”

Or the concerns regarding the limitations of the study expressed by other scientists which I won't list, but for those actually interested in a more complete picture of this single study, I would recommend starting with the first 8-minutes of this video (https://echo360.org/media/df6327b6-1e39-401e-affb-5220eaedef8e/public) from the University of Nebraska Med Center which discusses the Israel study and potential statistical biases (which includes discussion of survivorship bias in statistical analyses, an interesting topic in itself) in addition to  a review of this article (https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/scicheck-instagram-post-missing-context-about-israeli-study-on-covid-19-natural-immunity/).

You concluded your response with...

I think the problem for you, is that you live in a bubble and do not look at information that does not confirm priors. 

You're free to assume whatever you like, clearly. But citing one paper from Israel multiple times has yet to convince me of your assertion that "all research" is in agreement with that study—likely because I already know that's false and other studies have come to the opposite conclusion. I know that because I bothered to research your claim. I did that because there may be others gullible enough to believe that claim without checking first, like yourself.

I already showed in my earlier post that your claim regarding "all research comparing natural immunity to vaccine immunity" is not true (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228670#msg1228670). Why you keep repeatedly offering the same study as evidence of your claim that this single study is representative of the conclusions of "all research", as if repeating it would somehow make it more true, only you know.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 23, 2021, 09:56:56 pm
Wow, you think you're smart don't you. 

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.

Well let's break this down. 

Well, let's...

First, you're posting the total deaths of Covid through the pandemic, while the flu deaths are only for this year. 

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 23, 2021, 09:59:39 pm
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.

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.  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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 23, 2021, 10:58:56 pm
Joe's point was that 2020/2021 was an anomaly for the regular flu.

Try reading AND comprehending. That is NOT what my reply (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229032#msg1229032) was referencing nor what it addressed. He made a specific claim regarding the data that I provided from the CDC for 2020/2021 and made a false assertion about that specific data—that was the statement to which my reply was addressed. His statement was absolutely not true.

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. 

I provided a link to the data that I posted. I'll provide it again. All one need do, in order to quickly see that the assertion made is false, is to scroll to Table 1 on the page, click on monthly, and scroll thru the data. You'll find that the time periods being reported are identical for both "All Deaths Involving COVID-19" and "All Deaths Involving Influenza"; it includes data for exactly the same time periods for influenza and COVID-19, both of which cover the same period from January 2020 thru November 17, 2021. The flu deaths reported in the CDC data that I posted are NOT "only for this year" as was falsely claimed.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)

In short, he jumped to a wrong conclusion by making an assumption and didn't bother to check whether what he stated was actually true or false. It's not an uncommon event with online forums—unfortunately!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 24, 2021, 05:02:05 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 24, 2021, 07:10:53 am
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.

Maybe if people will continue wearing their masks and keep practicing the social distancing, they can eradicate the flu.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 24, 2021, 09:01:59 am
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.

As I recall, the avg number of deaths from flu seemed to be about 30,000-35,000 over the years. That chart showed just under 10,000 for the 2020/2021. So yes it's lower than an avg year but it is still dwarfed by the Covid numbers.

The 7-day moving avg of Covid deaths in the USA is still about a 1000 people per day. The worst flu year (outside of the influenza epidemic of 1918) was about 60,000, as I recall from previous discussions. So the worst flu year in history (outside of 1918) is roughly equivalent to the 2 months worth of Covid deaths at the current rate.

I simply cannot believe that at this late stage people are still trying to push the argument that this is just another flu. Let's hope that one day it will be, that seems to be the best long-term expectation, but we ain't there yet.

Why do we keep having this same conversation?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 24, 2021, 09:07:08 am
...
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 air waves. It's simply amazing what those con artists can get away with. We don't put up with this elsewhere.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 24, 2021, 10:02:06 am
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. 

You can be sued if you defame someone with libel or slander. Web forums and other social media count.  ;)  But for regular people giving their nonsense opinion, then you have the right to argue your nonsense opinion as much as I can argue my mine. 

How are people stopped or limited from saying things in Canada?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 24, 2021, 10:09:21 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on November 24, 2021, 12:53:57 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 24, 2021, 03:18:59 pm

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 24, 2021, 04:19:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on November 24, 2021, 05:35:59 pm
  Your post is just an ad hominem attack.  You provided no meaningful arguments.

Calling Danny DeVito short is not ad hominem.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 24, 2021, 05:58:53 pm
  Your post is just an ad hominem attack.  You provided no meaningful arguments.

Not an attack...just my observation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 24, 2021, 06:25:46 pm
Not an attack...just my observation.
You attacked Joe, not his points.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 24, 2021, 07:51:41 pm
Might I be so bold as to suggest that these bilateral exchanges be moved to private messages.  This is a public forum.  If you are just arguing with one other participant, why inflict these screeds on everyone else who is following this thread?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on November 24, 2021, 11:21:23 pm
Since there has been nothing here in a long while having to do with a "Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine," I get some entertainment from watching this "discussion" develop.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 24, 2021, 11:42:26 pm
Scientists warn of new Covid variant with high number of mutations

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/24/scientists-warn-of-new-covid-variant-with-high-number-of-mutations?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 25, 2021, 08:44:19 am

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.

...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 25, 2021, 08:50:31 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 25, 2021, 06:34:00 pm
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.

Well, as of 1200hrs tomorrow Friday 26th, UKGOV has now red listed six South African countries. In practical terms, this means that anyone arriving in the UK from said countries will need to prepay and undergo 10 days of 'hotel' quarantine and those that have already entered the country within the last 10 days will, retroactively, be obliged to self-quarantine for 10 days starting tomorrow.

The Brits have, according to the Health Minister on national TV this evening, some 700 passengers a day arriving from South Africa, a number expected to increase over the Christmas holiday period. Obviously, the risk factor could not and should not be ignored. Experience dictates that these seemingly isolated discoveries can soon turn into national disasters. The UK / SPAIN experience of last year being but one example.

The oft repeated and imperative word in the minister's address was 'MAY'. No-one said it was a catastrophy. On a postive note, it should be welcomed that the health authorities are both transparent and co-operative in a free flowing exchange of information.

The post and the news article were but a heads-up.

Edit:
As of a few minutes ago, the NYT has also picked up on it.
Quote
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&regi_id=52648921&segment_id=75376&user_id=be36115a3afae717b744deeaf0c4c88b#variant-south-africa-covid)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 26, 2021, 07:59:21 am
According to Worldometer, US deaths are at 798,000+, so will probably reach 800,000 before December 1st.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 26, 2021, 09:38:16 am
NYT
Friday, November 26, 2021 9:25 AM EST

BREAKING NEWS
Fears over a new variant prompted at least 10 nations to limit travel from African countries, and sent markets around the world tumbling.  Scientists are still unclear on how effective vaccines will be against the new variant flagged by a team in South Africa, which displays mutations that might resist neutralization.

BREAKING NEWS: Fears over a new variant ... (https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/K_bGAwuk-_4zznFDeplNgw~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjg3N4P0TiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vbGl2ZS8yMDIxLzExLzI2L3dvcmxkL2NvdmlkLXZhY2NpbmUtYm9vc3RlcnMtdmFyaWFudD9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD02MCZlbWM9ZWRpdF9uYV8yMDIxMTEyNiZpbnN0YW5jZV9pZD0wJm5sPWJyZWFraW5nLW5ld3MmcmVmPWN0YSZyZWdpX2lkPTUyNjQ4OTIxJnNlZ21lbnRfaWQ9NzU0MDMmdXNlcl9pZD1iZTM2MTE1YTNhZmFlNzE3Yjc0NGRlZWFmMGM0Yzg4YlcDbnl0QgphjHjuoGEJlfTgUhNtbUBiZWFyLXJpdmVyLmNvLnVrWAQAAAAA)


And now add the USA to the list .
United States will place travel restrictions on South Africa and 7 other countries. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/26/world/new-covid-variant-omicron-travel-restrictions.html?)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 26, 2021, 09:50:02 am
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on November 26, 2021, 04:21:45 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 26, 2021, 04:38:42 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 26, 2021, 05:03:29 pm
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.   :-[
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on November 26, 2021, 05:26:51 pm
Cutting through the fluff, [an update] on the new variant from one Katelyn Jetalina. Highly recommended.

Indeed: a clear and comprehensive summary of what is known so far.

Quote
. . . 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. . . .

Assuming this is verified, it should facilitate rapid data collection on this variant, and greatly accelerate the analysis of how much of a threat it poses and how to deal with it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on November 26, 2021, 06:20:43 pm
All stocks tumbled today. Except Zoom and a few other covid-friendly companies.

Hell of a buying opportunity out there.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 26, 2021, 07:19:21 pm
Who's going to make new vaccines if you're going to steal their inventions? What a dumb idea.  Photos next?

Biden calls for intellectual property waivers on COVID vaccines
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/26/biden-calls-for-intellectual-property-waivers-covid-vaccines
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Two23 on November 26, 2021, 10:17:38 pm
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.


It was all over the news in August in the Pacific Northwest.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 27, 2021, 02:00:12 am
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 27, 2021, 02:30:36 am
A concise and to-the-point article on What do we know about the new ‘worst ever’ Covid variant? (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/25/what-do-we-know-about-the-new-worst-ever-covid-variant?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other)

And a graphic on the Omicron:

(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/11/26/17/51012135-10245769-image-a-6_1637948899224.jpg)

The Botswana variant has around 50 mutations and more than 30 of them are on the spike protein. The current crop of vaccines trigger the body to recognise the version of the spike protein from older versions of the virus. But the mutations may make the spike protein look so different that the body's immune system struggles to recognise it and fight it off. And three of the spike mutations (H665Y, N679K, P681H) help it enter the body's cells more easily. Meanwhile, it is missing a membrane protein (NSP6) which was seen in earlier iterations of the virus, which experts think could make it more infectious. And it has two mutations (R203K and G204R) that have been present in all variants of concern so far and have been linked with infectiousness.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 27, 2021, 09:40:36 am
Not good.

The Netherlands finds 61 Covid cases in air arrivals from South Africa, and is checking for the variant.
Sixty-one people from two flights from South Africa to the Netherlands have tested positive for the coronavirus, Dutch health officials said early Saturday. It was unclear as of late morning local time if the cases were linked to the newly discovered Omicron variant.

The health officials tested 600 passengers who arrived on Friday morning at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport. Those who tested negative were allowed to leave the airport and quarantine at home, or to continue their journeys.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/world/amsterdam-cases-covid-variant.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 27, 2021, 09:42:15 am
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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 27, 2021, 10:53:17 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on November 27, 2021, 11:15:03 am
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.

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.
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. 

U.S. President Biden calls for intellectual property protection waivers after Omicron discovery
"The news about this new variant should make clearer than ever why this pandemic will not end until we have global vaccinations," Biden said in a statement.

"This news today reiterates the importance of moving on this (waiving intellectual property protections) quickly."

The Biden administration faces fresh criticism over a failure to get vaccines to poorer countries while supplying free booster shots to Americans, after the new variant named Omicron was identified.

https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/us-president-biden-calls-for-intellectual-property-protection-waivers-on-covid19-vaccines-2691326
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: William Walker on November 30, 2021, 12:57:45 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on November 30, 2021, 04:52:40 am
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.

I've seen nothing in this variant that warrants Britain's extreme response to it: Dr ANGELIQUE COETZEE, the doctor who alerted the world to the Omicron Covid variant, says we are over-reacting to the threat (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10256373/Dr-ANGELIQUE-COETZEE-discovered-Omicron-says-reacting-threat.html)

Understandable although given the experiences since January last year - this time the Governments are pre-emptively acting with a hope that this new mutation will be contained and, more importantly, will not result in serious illness. Not helped by the CEO of Moderna …

Quote
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.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: William Walker on November 30, 2021, 07:51:47 am
Governments are criticised for being too heavy-handed at the start of a crisis and of not having done enough at the end... :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on November 30, 2021, 09:28:30 am

It was all over the news in August in the Pacific Northwest.


Kent in SD

Thanks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 01, 2021, 03:18:17 pm
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.

So I made one clerical mistake that you did not make clear in the data you posted and you lose you 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? 

PS
Just to preemptively respond to the probable observation that the time span for half of that data encompasses a period after already having vaccines, we have had a yearly flu vaccine that is accounted for in the modern fatality rate of 0.02% for 0 to 45 year olds. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 01, 2021, 03:23:25 pm
Just for the sake of keeping every one grounded, I think it should be noted that the discovering scientist in South Africa went on TV to say it is not something we should be really concerned about since it appears to only produce mild symptoms and no one has yet been admitted to the hospital because of it.  So, more contagious but, in all likelihood, less fatal, which is the natural trajectory of all pandemics that become endemic by the way.   

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. 

Lighting your hair on fire and having it put out with shovel every morning is no way to live. 

As for me, I am looking forward to spending a month in the Middle East starting Monday and being paid to do so.  And my only concern is whether or not the current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave will now do something that will make it impossible to leave the country.  Albeit, 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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 01, 2021, 07:16:42 pm
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. 

Hoping your test proves Covid-19 negative and wishing you safe travels.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 01, 2021, 07:23:23 pm
To better understand the coronavirus’s journey from one person to another, a team of 50 scientists has for the first time created an atomic simulation of the coronavirus nestled in a tiny airborne drop of water.

NYT - recommended.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/01/science/coronavirus-aerosol-simulation.html?referringSource=articleShare
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 01, 2021, 08:19:16 pm
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.   

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.

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. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 01:59:00 am
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? 

Specifically? Sure. Let's start with your previous post on the subject. I'll insert some comments [in brackets] and go from there. Perhaps by breaking it down into the various individual and differing types of statistical measurement, you and others can see the deception you're selling. It's actually similar in some respects to the way that you screwed up the NYC vaccination demographic statistics that you posted earlier.

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.]

So, you take the Mortality Rate (MR) for COVID-19, the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for flu, toss in a reference to Estimated Infection Fatality Rate (IFR), put them all in a bag and mix them together to demonstrate your commanding knowledge of statistics and epidemiology. Let's continue to examine your lecture professor.

If you want to make comparisons of COVID-19 and flu fatality rates, I suggest that you stick to comparing mortality rate to mortality rate and case fatality rate to case fatality rate. When you don't it looks foolish as well as deceptive. For instance, here's a link from last year (https://i.insider.com/5ef234caf34d051bc821d0d8?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp) to a chart showing CFR for flu (which shows a 0.2% for ages 18-49 like you do) to CFR for COVID-19 which is much higher (vastly greater depending on age range). This chart is from June 23, 2020 and is not meant to reflect current data. It's just an example of how data should be compared.

The chart that I provided from CDC compared Total Mortality to Total Mortality (All Deaths Involving COVID-19 vs All Deaths Involving Influenza) by age range for the same time periods under the same conditions. That is a valid comparison. You comparing the Mortality Rate (MR) for COVID-19 to the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for flu, not so much.

But, let's do what you and others would like. Let's compare an exceptionally bad previous flu season to COVID-19 and let's compare deaths for the 0-49 year age population instead of seniors that are most at risk of dying from either flu or COVID-19.

Robert Roaldi was correct when he stated "deaths from flu seemed to be about 30,000-35,000 over the years". CDC records flu data year-round and charts "flu seasons" from week 40 (about the beginning of October) thru week 39 (about the end of September) of the following year. Flu activity generally begins to increase in October with the peak months (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm) being from December thru March which is why flu season data isn't generally charted by calendar year. If you look at the previous 10-years of flu deaths from 2010 to 2020 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1124915/flu-deaths-number-us/) they range from 12,000 to 52,000 annually with a total of 334,000 deaths over 10-years for an average 33,400 total deaths per season.

Let's take the worst flu season of the past decade which was 2017/2018 (52-week period from October 2017 thru September 2018) with a recorded total of 52,000 deaths (51,646 to be precise) and let's look at the deaths by age group (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018.htm). Flu Deaths 2017/2018 - Ages: 0-4 = 110 / 5-17 = 416 / 18-49 = 2,255 (Total Flu Deaths 2017/2018 - Ages: 0-49 = 2,781). As I've mentioned, it should be considered that the mitigation efforts were not in place, during this time period, which we have seen over the past two years during which COVID-19 has existed. So we will be comparing flu without recent mitigation efforts to COVID-19 with recent mitigation efforts.

Now let's look at COVID-19 deaths. CDC hasn't charted COVID-19 death by "52-week seasons", but we do have 52-week calendar year totals. COVID-19 Deaths 2020 - Ages: 0-17 = 198 / 18-29 = 1,482 / 30-39 = 4,286 / 40-49 = 11,317 (Total COVID-19 Deaths 2020 - Ages: 0-49 = 17,283). COVID-19 Deaths 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) - Ages: 0-17 = 432 / 18-29 = 3,136 / 30-39 = 9,352 / 40-49 = 21,851 (Total COVID-19 Deaths 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) - Ages: 0-49 = 34,771).

For reference, Total COVID-19 Deaths for All Ages: 2020 = 385,338 / 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) = 394,064. Total Deaths Involving Flu for All Ages: 2020 = 8,786 / 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) = 676. Total Deaths Involving Flu - Ages 0-49: 2020 = 1,127 / 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) = 53.

Why have COVID-19 deaths more than doubled in the 0-49 year age range in 2021 compared to 2020? The best suspect, in my view, would be the emergence of the Delta variant in 2021 which became the dominant variant by mid-year. If you've seen or heard news reports that the Delta variant was not only more contagious, but also claiming younger victims; you can see its affect above.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 02:42:17 am
For those looking for a quick summary that cuts to the chase...

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.

Yes, I did. That's because you were 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.

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.

Would you care to respond to this point specifically? 

I did... in detail... above. It was more time consuming than I would like, but I guess somebody has to do it to keep the gullible from swallowing it or parrots from repeating it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 05:53:17 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 09:19:32 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 09:31:08 am
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 time with Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 09:37:39 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 02, 2021, 09:55:26 am
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.

Crowded indoor locations can be risky, especially if they have poor ventilation and are in geographical areas with high infection rates, but if you're "fully vaccinated" (in the United States, that means three doses of the mRNA vaccines or two of the Janssen vaccine) and you wear a respirator-type mask (KN95 with ear loops or, better yet, N95 with neck and head straps), everything I've read suggests you are quite effectively protected.  Wash your hands or use a liberal amount of hand sanitizer before eating.

In Europe, the EU-standard FFP2 respirator has similar filtering characteristics to the Chinese-standard KN95 and American-standard N95 versions.  Cloth masks and surgical masks primarily protect other people from virus particles you might be shedding, although there is some evidence that even these loose-fitting masks help protect the wearer.

In a restaurant, I wear a facemask until the food is delivered to my table, and try to get a table that is separated from other diners by at least one other table.  Many places clear out rather dramatically shortly after "regular" meal hours.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 10:21:55 am
Reminds me of the guy who was told a KN95 mask was enough to wear to the diner and was arrested for nudity. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 10:27:50 am
Reminds me of the guy who was told a KN95 mask was enough to wear to the diner and was arrested for nudity.

 :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on December 02, 2021, 11:27:45 am
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.

So long as Alan Thicke, Wayne Gretzky, & Celine Dion remain uninfected, Canada still has a chance!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 02, 2021, 03:47:58 pm
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.

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. 

But anyway, riddle me this, when does this end in your opinion?

Early this week, or perhaps it was late last week, the leftist high priest Anthony Fauci by holy decree announced that Covid is here to stay.  We are not going to get rid of it, aka it's now endemic. 

Fauci: Learn to Live With COVID Because ‘We’re Not Going to Eradicate’ It (https://www.thedailybeast.com/dr-fauci-says-we-need-to-learn-to-live-with-covid-because-were-not-going-to-eradicate-it)

Then, last night, at a CNN town hall he also suggested that anyone who is vaccinated against C-19 and has also gotten a booster shot recently should continue to wear a mask and socially distance. 

So, for a virus that he admits is never going away, no matter how many times we are vaccinated against it we still need to need to perform all of this? ???

What is the limiting principle here?  When does this end?  Because from my stand point he (and the rest of the left) is setting up the scenario where they can just keep on extending and extending and extending masking and lockdowns until the end of time. 

This is why I am so outspoken about traveling and not being afraid, because it is obvious those in power pushing this are doing so because they enjoy the extra power.  They have been corrupted by this, and I know this.  My brother works in far left wing democratic politics for far left wing democrats, and, in private, he openingly admits no one actually thinks these things do anything.  They are just pushing them to placate to a rabid base so they can win democratic primaries and maintain their power. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 02, 2021, 03:51:33 pm
Hoping your test proves Covid-19 negative and wishing you safe travels.

Thank you Manoli, and I mean that. 

I hope so too.  I have spent too much money on new shoes, linen pants and long sleeve dress shirts, and a whole new cache of underwear for it to go to waste. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 02, 2021, 04:10:34 pm
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.

So if I get Rabies and survive (after the on-sought of symptoms of course), can I then say, after getting over the virus, that based on the last minute we can conclude that Rabies is 100% survivable? 

No!  Because all past knowledge has taught us that Rabies is 100% fatal, and, if I did survive it, it was a fluke.  I was one of the dozen or so outliers in all of human history that survived Rabies, just like the last two years were outliers for the flu.

So no, the data of flu deaths for the last two years is meaningless due to the extensive data we have on the flu that has taught us its true IFR.  Likewise, insisting that we conclude that conditions that may have reduced the spread of the flu (which we can not actually prove) effected the spread of C-19 when nearly the entirety of the country has already caught it makes no sense.  Maybe the lockdowns help reduce the spread of the flu, but there is no correlation yet shown they had any effect on C-19.  Lock down heavy states and lock down lite states are all over the place with seemingly no logic to it what so ever.  CA and FL are right next to each other on death rates and they are at opposite sides of the spectrum with lockdowns. 

But more to the point.  Everyone by the time they are 50, whether they are vaccinated or not, will have caught the flu at least once by the time they are 50.  Everyone, whether vaccinated or not (it seems), is going to catch C-19.  I dont care when I catch either, just what are the chances I will survive it, and for those under 50 in good health the chances are very close to each other and zero. 

Likewise, I don't care when I may get bitten by a wild animal.  All I care about is what likelihood do I have of dying from Rabies.  100%, which is why I would get my ass to a hospital right at that moment in time. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 04:29:07 pm
CA and FL are right next to each other on death rates and they are at opposite sides of the spectrum with lockdowns. 

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 02, 2021, 04:30:08 pm

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.


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.  You turn on the news and see stadiums packed with kids and young adults, you walk down the street and see restaurant packed again, and it makes you nervous.  So you want some way to justify more lockdowns. 

The math is just not on your side though.  50K deaths form C-19 out of 211M is not enough for anyone to panic over in that age group.  Not to mention we have some very effective vaccines at preventing death regardless of age, but you are still living in paranoia.  Sure, if your over the age of 65 and want to be cautious, I wont judge, but dont expect me or anyone else to keep on doing this.  My parents are over 65, just got the booster and went right back to living a normal pre-Covid life like they have been since January. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 02, 2021, 04:33:56 pm
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?

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 04:52:22 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 05:21:11 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 05:23:36 pm
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.
Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 05:27:46 pm
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. 

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 05:28:55 pm
The Democrats must be telling Biden to back off.  They're getting really nervous about the 2022 mid-term elections when they probably will lose the house, maybe the senate.  If Trump did this, he'd be accused by the liberal media and Democrats of murdering Americans. 


Biden says he doesn’t want lockdowns and won’t expand vaccine mandates to fight Covid this winter
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/02/covid-news-biden-says-no-lockdowns-wont-expand-vaccine-mandates-this-winter.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 05:29:21 pm
Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating?

I suspect that 2021 flu numbers will be similar to 2020. Or did it get worse?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 05:31:22 pm
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?  :-[
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 02, 2021, 05:35:07 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 02, 2021, 05:46:59 pm
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.

JK is of course wrong - his stock in trade. Covid deaths the same as the flu? Let's see. According to the CDC, during 2020 and 2021 (to Dec 1) there were, in the 40-49 year old age group, 33,168 covid-related deaths and 514 flu-related deaths. Among 18-29 YO folks it was 4,618 vs 150.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#SexAndAge

And JK thinks these numbers are equal! Well, he's good for a laugh now and then.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 05:51:05 pm
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

Thanks for posting this link. Reading information from an expert epidemiologist like Katelyn Jetelina (https://www.linkedin.com/in/katelynkassarjian) is certainly a far more worthwhile use of time than reading BS that is posted online. It helps that she writes in an easy to understand style for the general public on her Your Local Epidemiologist blog.

Here is her latest Omicron update from today.

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/omicron-update-dec-2 (https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/omicron-update-dec-2)

She is also an editor for one of the BMJ (British Medical Journal) publications which prompted me to take a look at their primary website (https://www.bmj.com). BMJ is worth exploring.

They have an interesting new article which includes an interactive infographic for visualizing SARS-CoV-2 transmission routes and mitigations linked below.

https://www.bmj.com/content/Dec. 1 2021/Visualising SARS-CoV-2 transmission routes and mitigations (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-065312)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 02, 2021, 05:57:17 pm
Do you wear a mask when you dance at home or only when you have sex?  :-[

I thought that you are supposed to wear something else than mask when having sex.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 02, 2021, 07:25:58 pm
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 believe Tech had some comparisons...but again it would not be an equal to compare flu 2018/2019 to Covid 2020/2021 since with Covid we had some many restrictions in place that not only reduced the flu deaths...but most likely drastically reduced the number of Covid deaths. I'd think we would have at least twice as many Covid deaths if non of the restrictions were applied. In fact, we could get a pretty good approximation of how effective these restriction were on Covid by comparing the flu deaths of 20/21 with the flu deaths of 18/19.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 07:54:22 pm
I suspect that 2021 flu numbers will be similar to 2020. Or did it get worse?

I just posted on this topic yesterday with links to flu data from 2010 to now. Those posts are here (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229690#msg1229690) and here. (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229693#msg1229693)

For those that aren't following along...

U.S. Flu Deaths By Flu Season (52-Weeks from Oct. to Sept.) or  Calendar Year

• Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 = 36,656  (Ages 0-49 = 5,592 - 15.3% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2011-2012 = 12,447  (Ages 0-49 = 744 - 6.0% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2012-2013 = 42,570  (Ages 0-49 = 3,233 - 7.6% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2013-2014 = 37,930  (Ages 0-49 = 3,552 - 9.4% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2014-2015 = 51,376  (Ages 0-49 = 1,788 - 3.5% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2015-2016 = 22,705  (Ages 0-49 = 1,971 - 8.7% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2016-2017 = 38,230  (Ages 0-49 = 1,616 - 4.2% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2017-2018 = 51,646  (Ages 0-49 = 2,781 - 5.4% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2018-2019 = 27,619  (Ages 0-49 = 1,962 - 7.1% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2019-2020 = 20,342  (Ages 0-49 = 2,670 - 13.1% of All Flu Deaths)

TOTAL Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020 = 341,521 (Ages 0-49 = 25,909)

AVERAGE Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020 = 34,152 (Ages 0-49 = 2,591 - 7.6% Average of All Flu Deaths)

• Flu Deaths for Calendar Year 2020 = 8,786  (Ages: 0-49 = 1,127 - 12.8% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Deaths for Calendar Year 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) = 676  (Ages: 0-49 = 53 - 7.8% of All Flu Deaths)

• COVID-19 Deaths for Calendar Year 2020 = 385,338  (Ages: 0-49 = 17,283 - 4.5% of All COVID-19 Deaths)
• COVID-19 Deaths for Calendar Year 2021 (As of 12/1/2021) = 394,064  (Ages: 0-49 = 34,771 - 8.8% of All COVID-19 Deaths)

This page has links to statistics for all flu seasons from 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2012-2013.html (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2012-2013.html)

This page has statistics for Pneumonia/ Influenza/ COVID-19 for 2020 thru 2021 (updated frequently): https://www.cdc.gov/2020-2021/Pnuemonia-Influenza-Covid/weekly/index (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)

I'm done supplying anymore statistics for now. People can and will make of them what they wish.

If anyone looks at these death statistics and still wishes to push the narrative that COVID-19 is no deadlier or of more concern than the flu, for any age group, then in my opinion, you would be a fool spreading dangerous misinformation.

* Modified 12/4/2021 - All data now direct from CDC websites. Added percentages to data. Added Totals and Averages to seasonal flu data. Reorganized data to save space and make it easier to read.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 02, 2021, 08:05:31 pm
I'm desperate for a break and vacation.

This from a guy who's retired...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 02, 2021, 08:24:05 pm
This from a guy who's retired...

But us retirees have only limited number of vacations left. My wife has Parkinson’s and deteriorates every year. COVID so far has robbed us of two years of travel…very few left.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 02, 2021, 09:01:07 pm
Why do you keep using 2020 when there was little flu because everyone was isolating? 

Explained yesterday. For those that don't like to read, I've highlighted a few key observations.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 07:12:39 am
Explained yesterday. For those that don't like to read, I've highlighted a few key observations.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 03, 2021, 07:20:23 am
Believe whatever suits your fancy.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on December 03, 2021, 08:31:23 am
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???

Let's say I'm comparing, I dunno, sports car tires and I do all my testing in Santa Fe, NM where it's sunny for 304 days out of the year.

From previous testing I know Tire A will generate 1.04g of lateral grip on a dry day at about 75 degrees F.  That's been repeated and confirmed dozens of times.   I get Tire B in to test, and it's a wet day, and cold.  Tire B generates .75g and the tire tester slides off the road.  Then I mount and test Tire A again in the same conditions, on the same day but it only generates .70g

What you (and Joe, LOL) are trying to argue is that, because 90% of days aren't rainy and cold, that the second Tire A test is an "outlier" and should be disregarded, and therefore Tire A must be superior because, hey, after all, on a "typical" day (i.e. 90% of the time, days that AREN't "outliers") Tire A pulls over 1/3 more g than Tire B (which was, of course, never tested on a "typical" day).

I get (sort of) why this might make sense in a bizarre sort of rules-lawyery, goofy sort way, if you're trying hard to argue a basically untenable point and grasping at straws, but it's fundamentally irrational unless you want to make the idiotic claim that you just can't REALLY know what effect weather conditions have on Tire A or B.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 09:37:59 am
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.

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.

Think about it for a bit and it’ll come to you. You appear to be an intelligent person.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 03, 2021, 10:16:24 am

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???


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 11:07:08 am
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.

Think about it for a bit and it’ll come to you. You appear to be an intelligent person.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 03, 2021, 11:18:20 am
... The fact is he cherry-picked the statistics to make Covid look worse. ...

No, he didn't.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 11:20:35 am
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.

Motor Vehicle Deaths in 2020 Estimated to be Highest in 13 Years, Despite Dramatic Drops in Miles Driven
A 24% spike in roadway death rates is highest in 96 years; NSC calls on President Biden to commit to zero deaths immediately.
 
Itasca, IL – For the first time since 2007, preliminary data from the National Safety Council show that as many as 42,060 people are estimated to have died in motor vehicle crashes in 2020. That marks an 8% increase over 2019 in a year where people drove significantly less frequently because of the pandemic. The preliminary estimated rate of death on the roads last year spiked 24% over the previous 12-month period, despite miles driven dropping 13%. The increase in the rate of death is the highest estimated year-over-year jump that NSC has calculated since 1924 – 96 years. It underscores the nation’s persistent failure to prioritize safety on the roads, which became emptier but far more deadly. 

An estimated 4.8 million additional roadway users were seriously injured in crashes in 2020, and the estimated cost to society was $474 billion. With the alarming picture painted by these data, NSC is urging President Joe Biden and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg to commit to zero roadway deaths by 2050 – a call NSC and more than 1,500 other organizations and individuals made in January in a letter to the new administration.

https://www.nsc.org/newsroom/motor-vehicle-deaths-2020-estimated-to-be-highest
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 03, 2021, 11:25:04 am
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.

But you DON'T want to compare things to normalcy--when there was no covid. You want to compare one disease to another.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 11:32:30 am
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?   

So Tech picked one way of looking at it.  I say a better measure is to compare flu to normal years when the government isn't interfering.  After all, the measures taken in 2020 weren't for the flu but for COvid.  So let's compare to years when normal measures were taken for the flu against Covid when "normal" measures were taken for it. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 03, 2021, 11:36:18 am
... when the government isn't interfering ...

Well, at least you're not embarrassed to display your bias, I'll give you that. :)

It's usually better not to decide the outcome beforehand if you want to truly understand things.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 11:37:49 am
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 11:44:39 am
Well, at least you're not embarrassed to display your bias, I'll give you that. :)

It's usually better not to decide the outcome beforehand if you want to truly understand things.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 03, 2021, 11:48:10 am
...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.   

Actually, Alan, we ALL have a monopoly on the truth.  Truth is truth.  Truth is not a matter of opinion.

However, since you're a trumpist, you believe that only your "truths" are true.  Kinda like organized religion.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 11:53:20 am
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 12:07:46 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 12:20:13 pm
I gave you my answer but you don't want to accept my opinion. Read my last post again.

Unfortunately I reread your last post and I still ask you this question:

Do you really feel comparing one year where there are no restrictions in place against another year where there are numerous restrictions in place gives you an accurate view of things?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 03, 2021, 01:42:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 02:03:09 pm
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.   
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 02:25:17 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 02:43:41 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 02:56:59 pm
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.

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?

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 03:12:27 pm
Maybe Covid looks worse because Covid IS worse.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 03:15:51 pm
Yes and yes.

Then explain why you feel comparing flu and Covid deaths during 20/21 years so biased.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 03:31:31 pm
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 03:36:05 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 03:56:11 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 03, 2021, 05:10:23 pm
See my last post.

You win. You can outlast me on this merry-go-round.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 03, 2021, 05:37:35 pm
There will be plenty of additional opportunities for more rides. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 03, 2021, 05:39:02 pm
I gave you my answer but you don't want to accept my opinion. Read my last post again.

Why should we accept your opinion when it is factually wrong? Science does not care what you (or I) believe.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 03, 2021, 07:17:20 pm
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.

First, my "original post" was a response to this (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228682#msg1228682) ridiculous false assertion...

For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu

No matter how you try to slice the two pies for comparison, it's an absurd statement and false.

Secondly, I don't know who the "we" are for whom you presume to speak and I won't ask because I don't care. I also don't care what you believe regarding my motives and therefore am not looking for, nor desire, any apology.

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). Please note that I included all of the data available for both 2020 and 2021 and not just 2020 as you keep claiming. It will come up again later.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 07:51:45 pm
You still have not denied my assertion.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 03, 2021, 08:28:49 pm
You still have not denied my assertion.

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".

In the meantime, you can contemplate what I've already written...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 03, 2021, 09:30:11 pm
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.  ;)

An assertion comes from someone who stands up boldly with a point in opposition to the another, despite having valid evidence to support his statement. It is your daily lack of having valid evidence to support your statements that is so well understood by so many here.

"An empty head is not really empty; it is stuffed with rubbish. Hence the difficulty of forcing anything into an empty head." -Eric Hoffer

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 03, 2021, 10:21:52 pm
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".

In the meantime, you can contemplate what I've already written...

It appears then that you cherry-picked the data.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 03, 2021, 10:41:34 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 04, 2021, 08:02:13 am
In Canada, thousands of people died in 2021 because of delayed or cancelled medical procedures due to Covid-19. Direct C19 fatalities so far this year were over 25,000, compared with 353,000 in USA. 

Quote
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.

https://barrie360.com/pandemic-deaths-covid-canada/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 04, 2021, 11:59:04 am
You win. You can outlast me on this merry-go-round.

Motion sickness medications are available for those who need them.  Please enquire at the gift store.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 04, 2021, 02:20:27 pm
You still have not denied my assertion.

He certainly did, but it sailed straight over your head.

It appears then that you cherry-picked the data.

Same problem, and this from the man who can't read a wiki article to save his life.

As always,
read more, post less.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 04, 2021, 02:29:28 pm
He certainly did, but it sailed straight over your head.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 04, 2021, 03:00:33 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 04, 2021, 03:40:55 pm
Patients are suing hospitals because doctors won't prescribe ivermectin for Covid. Do these clowns actually think they know better than the doctors what meds they should take? If that's the case, why go to a hospital in the first place. Geez, just stay home and howl at the moon, leave the hospital beds for others.

It's very difficult to remain polite, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/some-covid-19-patients-want-ivermectin-so-badly-theyre-taking-hospitals-to-court/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/some-covid-19-patients-want-ivermectin-so-badly-theyre-taking-hospitals-to-court/).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 04, 2021, 04:35:36 pm
It's because there are fools who will believe misinformation spread online that I'm prompted on occasion to push back on misinformation posted in this little corner of the web. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 04, 2021, 06:14:16 pm
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.

The Brits would describe it as 'admirable restraint', as would I.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 04, 2021, 06:31:44 pm
New stats from '@OurWorldinData' , an Oxford University research group, shows Japan with almost ~80% of its population fully vaccinated, currently running with

~100 cases/day, 1-2 deaths/day, amongst a population of 126 million people,  (vs 100% Delta):
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 04, 2021, 10:14:52 pm
Here is a link to the data on daily confirmed COVID-19 cases in Japan which you posted from Our World in Data.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/japan (https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/japan)

I'm posting the link because it's also worth looking at the Log data in addition to the Linear data. The linear data shows the increase or decrease by daily volume of cases. The log data shows the rate of change in daily cases with each horizontal line in the graph representing a 10x increase or decrease. The rate of change indicated by the log graph is valuable to see the exponential increase or decrease in new cases over time. In the simplest terms, the linear graph shows the amount of growth and the log graph the rate of growth.

Using the link also allows you to select different countries and compare data.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 04, 2021, 10:17:34 pm
Our World in Data has a great deal of well organized data and is worth exploring.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus (https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus)

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations (https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 05, 2021, 04:50:09 pm
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

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 05, 2021, 05:04:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 05, 2021, 05:21:22 pm
They're definitely the deplorables.
Less and less each day (since you didn't read the best bits):
Quote
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.
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.
+1 for evolution!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 05, 2021, 05:31:03 pm
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

Thanks for the link to the article. For those that haven't or will not read it, here's a graphic that is informative.

https:///www.npr.org/graphics/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate (https://apps.npr.org/dailygraphics/graphics/unvaxxed-by-party-20211201/?initialWidth=1238&childId=responsive-embed-unvaxxed-by-party-20211201&parentTitle=Pro-Trump%20counties%20now%20have%20far%20higher%20COVID%20death%20rates%20%3A%20Shots%20-%20Health%20News%20%3A%20NPR&parentUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.npr.org%2Fsections%2Fhealth-shots%2F2021%2F12%2F05%2F1059828993%2Fdata-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 05, 2021, 05:37:24 pm
They're definitely the deplorables.

If they want to kill themselves, OK. When their actions kill others, then "deplorable" is too gentle a description.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 05, 2021, 05:39:29 pm
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.  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 05, 2021, 05:43:36 pm
If they want to kill themselves, OK. When their actions kill others, then "deplorable" is too gentle a description.

When the misinformation they spread has the potential to result in another's death, they're at the very least dangerous to others that believe their false assertions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 05, 2021, 06:57:32 pm
Now, I'll take some of my time to address the topic of "cherry-picking" data. I'll start with some general principles and in a later post address the specifics of the flu and Covid-19 statistics that I posted.

Others have already posted, as have I, that when you're attempting to make a comparison of two different things with some similar characteristics and some differences, to gather data and compare their difference in some aspect, you want to minimize the variables by making the the conditions for comparison as identical as you can for the items being compared. It's common sense as well as standard practice in making comparisons for the obvious reason that changing the conditions for one item will skew the results relative to the other. Others have used analogy to illustrate the principle and I'll have a go at it as well.

Let's take two different devices which receive broadcasts transmitted thru the air, a TV and a portable radio. You want to determine how many stations each will receive. Your TV is connected to your HDTV antenna and your portable radio has a built-in AM/FM antenna (one of several differences between the devices) and you're testing them as you use them to receive transmissions each day. You put them side by side in your living room, at the same time, and record the number of stations each receives clearly. You now have some data on the number of stations each receives under those specific conditions at that time and place. You have one valid data set relative to those conditions.

Your friend objects and says that it isn't a valid comparison because you have "cherry-picked" the location. Your television is typically stationary and viewed only at your home in the city, whereas the portable radio is typically mobile and could be used in a variety of locations outside of your home, he says. So, he borrows the radio and records data in the mountains, the valley, the desert, and other locations and gives you his data record. Thanks, but you didn't have the TV to compare under those conditions, you say. Sorry, I didn't have a generator to power the TV, he replies. You gratefully acknowledge the additional data, but you can't make any valid comparisons from it because there was no data for the TV under those same conditions. It's additional data, but it only tells you how one of the items you were looking to compare actually functioned under those different conditions. Seeing how the portable radio varied in reception is interesting, but it gives you no useful comparison data.

We have data on influenza from before the 1918 pandemic until now. It's useful for comparing and evaluating how the flu changes from one season to the next, how it is evolving over time, the variations in different influenza virus types and subclasses and their effects at different times in various places. It's useful data for comparing specific flu viruses or seasons to others due to the evolving nature of the virus and its multitude of variations over time.

COVID-19 is a different virus which shares some similar characteristics with the flu, like the modes of transmission and the fact they both mutate and evolve for instance. There are also differences between them, like the rates of transmission and mortality. Another major difference is that COVID-19 has only been circulating in the population for the past two years, which means that time period is all that is available with which to compare.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 05, 2021, 07:25:14 pm
Additionally, As I've stated before...

Frankly, I don't find comparisons of COVID-19 to seasonal flu very useful

I'll provide more details on why I find little value for the comparison in a followup.

I provided statistics comparing the two ONLY because of this potentially dangerous (to anyone foolish enough to believe it) bit of misinformation...

For those under 45, the fatality rate is comparable to the flu.

In the meantime... I have updated an earlier post of flu and COVID-19 death statistics to include some additional data and reorganized it for easier reading. If anyone is curious you can find it here (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1229791#msg1229791).

Perhaps someone who agrees that "Covid in 2020/2021 should be compared to earlier flu seasons like 2018/2019" can check the statistics linked above and tell me which is the most typical flu season to compare. Is it the one closest to the average for total flu deaths or the flu season closest to the average deaths for ages 0-49? Is it the season where the percentage of total flu deaths comprised of ages 0-49 is closest to the average percentage for that group? Hint: there is no flu season that's typical or average in all aspects. Flu seasons vary tremendously in a variety of ways from year to year as is readily apparent from the data linked above.

Also, which COVID-19 year should be used, 2020 or 2021? The ages 0-49 death rate is twice as high in 2021. I didn't "cherry-pick" any specific year in my original reply to Joe (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228682#msg1228682) which had both years combined for both flu and COVID-19 deaths, despite Joe's false claim (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=137509.msg1228990#msg1228990) of "you're posting the total deaths of Covid through the pandemic, while the flu deaths are only for this year".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 05, 2021, 09:12:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 05, 2021, 09:33:55 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 05, 2021, 09:41:53 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 05, 2021, 09:49:25 pm
Yes.  Democrats should continue to insult these people.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 05, 2021, 09:57:40 pm
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.

If by "infection" they mean absorbing a detectable viral load, then it makes some sense that this should happen. Vaccinations aren't force fields. What I don't know is how long it takes for the body to get rid of the viral load once it gets in you. If a vaccinated person gets tested before the immune system has eliminated the virus, will the test show up positive?

What I see here in Ottawa is that in general, people are becoming careless in their distancing and other measures. My wife and I met some another couple for lunch in a restaurant 2 weeks ago and we were not asked for proof of vaccination. I hear similar stories from others. Maybe it's a sign of increased complacency, which seems premature to me.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 05, 2021, 10:04:14 pm
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:
Quote
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.
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.”
https://apple.news/AmA4cqDMwQLCx6iE-YWvJ_w
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 05, 2021, 10:14:41 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 05, 2021, 10:25:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 05, 2021, 11:01:04 pm
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 05, 2021, 11:10:26 pm
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!

No fucking kidding.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 06, 2021, 10:42:24 am
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.

I’m more concerned about people getting sick and needing hospital care. That’s where I’m hoping the vaccines make a huge difference.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 06, 2021, 11:09:26 am
Yes.  Democrats should continue to insult these people.

Why "Democrats?" Unless you think that informed and intelligent people are all Democrats.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 06, 2021, 03:02:03 pm
Yes.  Democrats should continue to insult these people.
Better than infecting them with a deadly disease! From “The Hill” that left leaning news organization:
Quote
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.

​
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.

What a guy: and he does not “own it” but should.

https://thehill.com/regulation/administration/584460-trump-came-in-contact-with-500-people-between-first-positive-test

https://apple.news/ABlwPzR7iT66JM1xOjCfDuw
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 06, 2021, 03:54:43 pm
Why "Democrats?" Unless you think that informed and intelligent people are all Democrats.

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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 06, 2021, 04:02:11 pm
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?

Now... I have to run to my appointment for my booster shot and flu vaccination... and that's true as well.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 06, 2021, 04:04:02 pm
Well, at least that statement is true. Now, can the political discussions move somewhere else instead of trying to hijack this thread?

Now... I have to run to my appointment for my booster shot and flu vaccination... and that's true as well.
Good luck with your shots.  I took mine a few weeks ago.  We deplorable Republicans want to keep up with science, you know.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 06, 2021, 04:04:11 pm
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.

There's something in what you say, but why are they doing such crazy things with respect to a disease, especially when what they preach does not work? I mean, what's the upside here, just the fun of pissing off "lefties", that isn't hard to do and not very productive anyway.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 06, 2021, 04:09:32 pm
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:
Quote
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.
"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."
And their inability to pay attention is well known here.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 06, 2021, 06:18:09 pm
Greek Prime Minister speaking to Christiane Amanpour on CNN* regarding the recently introduced vaccine mandate.

https://twitter.com/amanpour/status/1467920138376826888?s=21

* in English, he was educated at Harvard and Stanford.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 06, 2021, 06:27:31 pm
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. 

  https://news.google.com/articles/CBMieWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnVzYXRvZGF5LmNvbS9zdG9yeS9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC8yMDIxLzEyLzA2L29taWNyb24tY292aWQtdmFyaWFudC10cmF2ZWwtcnVsZXMtYm9vc3Rlci12YWNjaW5hdGlvbnMvODg4MTU2NjAwMi_SASdodHRwczovL2FtcC51c2F0b2RheS5jb20vYW1wLzg4ODE1NjYwMDI?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 06, 2021, 06:31:09 pm
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
The science for Delta does, but of course, you didn't catch that fact.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 06, 2021, 09:46:09 pm
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. 


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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 06, 2021, 10:49:43 pm
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
Just to show how out of touch this guy is (not DeBlasio):
Quote
Almost 70% of Americans want vaccine mandates
And:
Quote
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 07, 2021, 08:00:43 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on December 07, 2021, 09:35:04 am
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.

How many small businesses are going under because people won't get vaccinated?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 07, 2021, 10:14:56 am
Good luck with your shots.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 07, 2021, 10:17:34 am
He doesn't care about that. His decision was political

Now... Why do you keep highjacking this thread to convert it into a political forum?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 07, 2021, 10:23:30 am
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.

POLITICS DEC. 6, 2021
De Blasio Blindsides Just About Everyone With New Vax Mandate
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/de-blasio-blindsides-nearly-everyone-with-new-vax-mandate.html#comments
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 07, 2021, 10:32:28 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 07, 2021, 10:41:38 am
How many small businesses are going under because people won't get vaccinated?
Or very sick or dead?
Why ask why? He's lost.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 07, 2021, 10:54:01 am
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
I know you can't.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 07, 2021, 10:57:11 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 07, 2021, 02:57:42 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 07, 2021, 03:01:50 pm
From Alan on Earth 2:
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:
Quote
Omnicron has not shown the danger of earlier variants.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on December 07, 2021, 04:42:02 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 07, 2021, 05:56:59 pm
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.  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.  But then again, how many Democrats would have bet their bottom dollar that Trump was in cahoots with the Russians? Americans like conspiracies. 

With A Month Left In Office And A Potential Run For Governor, De Blasio Makes A Political Bet On Vaccine Mandates
https://gothamist.com/news/month-left-office-and-potential-run-governor-de-blasio-makes-political-bet-vaccine-mandates#:~:text=With%20A%20Month%20Left%20In%20Office%20And%20A%20Potential%20Run%20For%20Governor%2C%20De%20Blasio%20Makes%20A%20Political%20Bet%20On%20Vaccine%20Mandates
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 07, 2021, 06:24:54 pm
It's not science, it's politics.
You got your degree in science or political science where? Or any degree, high school or otherwise.
Those of us who've followed you for awhile understand you can't and will never answer that simple question.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 07, 2021, 09:49:40 pm
... 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. 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. :)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 08, 2021, 09:54:25 am
I read one political commentary (sorry, no longer know the link or who wrote it) who separated anti-vaxxers into two broad groups.

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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 10:58:11 am
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. :)

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.  Isn't Elvis still walking around?  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 10:59:53 am
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 11:10:55 am
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.

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.
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. 

When I was in the military during the VietNam era and was sent to Japan, I took a whole series of vaccines.  Typhus, Typhoid, and others.  I can't believe so many military members are refusing to take Covid.  You can't refuse to take vaccines in the military especially knowing they can send you anywhere in the world where weird diseases are prominent.  The military can't afford sick troops to care for. So I agree those that who refuse should be disciplined.  They're stupid as well as insubordinate.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 11:14:27 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 02:02:49 pm
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):
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 08, 2021, 02:20:13 pm
... 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.

Heck there are even stupid people in Canada! :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 03:11:01 pm
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.
Dec 02, 2021
As of this week, federal data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that 70.2% of the total population in the United States have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.
https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-by-race-ethnicity/
The current population of the United States of America is 333,781,277 as of Wednesday, December 8, 2021, based on Worldometer. Just do the math.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 03:39:41 pm
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. 
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. 

The previous mayor, Bloomberg, tried to make New Yorkers healthier by declaring drinks over 16 ounces illegal under the theory they contain too much sugar. He also used the Health Department to provide credibility.  He probably was right about the health part. But the courts overruled him saying he isn't a king. 

Changing these things requires the City Council to vote which they never did.  This situation with Mayor DeBlasio regarding vaccination mandates smacks of the same issue.  He also is using the Health Department to support his mandate.  But, he isn't a king either and I suspect the courts will rule similarly and declare his mandate illegal. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 03:42:19 pm
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.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-week/watch/bringing-our-revolutionary-past-to-the-pandemic-117717573606

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 03:42:44 pm
The courts have been ruling Biden's mandates illegal as well for the similar reason it requires an act of Congress, at least.

Pavlich: Biden gets walloped by the courts
https://thehill.com/opinion/opinion/584818-pavlich-biden-gets-walloped-by-the-courts
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 03:49:41 pm
The courts have been ruling Biden's mandates illegal as well for the similar reason it requires an act of Congress, at least.

Pavlich: Biden gets walloped by the courts
https://thehill.com/opinion/opinion/584818-pavlich-biden-gets-walloped-by-the-courts
Too bad 'The Hill' didn't spell out the entire story:
U.S. court temporarily halts Biden’s vaccine mandate nationwide
It isn't over. Unlike all the courts and 60 odd cases that laughed Trump out of his silly Big Lie about the election.
Biden may lose. But the fat lady hasn't stop singing yet. Even if you and "The Hill" are not listening......
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 08, 2021, 06:00:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 06:21:41 pm
NY City does not have a constitution.
Funneling the inner Klein:
City, state, what's the difference? No one cares.” 😝
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 08, 2021, 09:13:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 08, 2021, 09:30:27 pm
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.
Rules as you “suggest”.
There is this you can ignore:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/executive-order/no-11-declaring-disaster-emergency-state-new-york
And:
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 09, 2021, 09:46:32 am
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.

Bloomberg's ban on big sodas is unconstitutional: appeals court
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s controversial plan to keep large sugary drinks out of restaurants and other eateries was rejected by a state appeals court on Tuesday, which said he had overstepped his authority in trying to impose the ban.

The law, which would have prohibited those businesses from selling sodas and other sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces (473 ml), “violated the state principle of separation of powers,” the First Department of the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division said.

The decision, upholding a lower court ruling in March that struck down the law, dealt a blow to Bloomberg’s attempt to advance the pioneering regulation as a way to combat obesity. Beverage makers and business groups, however, challenged it in court, arguing that the mayoral-appointed health board had gone too far when it approved the law.

A unanimous four-judge panel at the appeals court agreed, finding that the board had stepped beyond its power to regulate public health and usurped the policy-making role of the legislature.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sodaban-lawsuit/bloombergs-ban-on-big-sodas-is-unconstitutional-appeals-court-idUSBRE96T0UT20130730
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 09, 2021, 10:17:42 am
As predicted: he can't illustrate where in the NYS Constitution it states Bloomberg can not invoke such a vaccine mandate.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 09, 2021, 12:44:12 pm
No. But he did take a thread on vaccines and convert it into another forum for his political views... with the cooperation of others.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 09, 2021, 01:29:43 pm
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.
And he also showed how he talks out of both sides of his mouth via keyboard and posts here:
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 09, 2021, 07:30:31 pm
No, he wasn't vaccinated:
Quote
30-year-old with COVID loses arms, legs after being given choice to amputate limbs or die
https://www.newsweek.com/30-year-old-covid-loses-arms-legs-after-being-given-choice-amputate-limbs-die-1657822?amp=1
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:
Quote
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
I suppose it's safer than injecting bleach. 🤮
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 09, 2021, 09:26:35 pm

Edit: we (the US) are days away from 800,000 reported deaths from Covid-19.


I presume that's a CDC number. It has always been lower than the Worldometer number, which is currently at 815,000. The Worldometer 7-day moving average of US daily deaths is stubbornly staying at or above 1000, which is still a lot.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 09, 2021, 09:28:33 pm

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 09, 2021, 10:27:46 pm
Be interesting to find out if he or his family have been vaccinated.
He isn't and had Covid-19.
Quote
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 10, 2021, 07:33:56 am
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 10, 2021, 07:35:18 am
PS to my previous post.  Yes I am triple jabbed.

Jonathan

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 12:02:12 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 12:33:53 pm
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) than the US counts. (2443 deaths in USA vs 782 deaths in Canada - for 1 million population).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 10, 2021, 01:09:38 pm
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.  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.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 01:21:31 pm
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.
Old joke, worth repeating and with an edit:
"You know the good part about all those executions in Texas? Fewer Texans". -George Carlin
Seems he could have substituted anti-vaxers, anti-mask users, anti-science for Texans. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 02:36:07 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 02:37:52 pm
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.  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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 02:43:38 pm
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.....
Quote
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.
“‘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**.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/world/africa/omicron-covid-greek-alphabet.html

**Had they used Xi, Trump and his minions could have called it the ‘Chinese Virus’ AGAIN. 
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 02:44:22 pm
Over what period?  What is the link?

From the beginning of the pandemic. Here is the worldometer link:
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 10, 2021, 02:45:26 pm
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.

Epidemiologists everywhere reportedly will be closely monitoring what happens in the U.K. during the next few weeks.  Because of its high vaccination rate, reliable vaccine record-keeping, and large-scale genomic testing, they should learn a lot about the infectiousness of the Omicron variant, the severity of the illness it produces in different segments of the population, and its ability to circumvent both vaccine-acquired and infection-acquired immunity—as well, unfortunately, as how well patients with severe symptomatic illness respond to the various therapeutic agents that currently are available.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 02:47:33 pm
Rather than calling it Omnicron after the Greek letter, it would have been more appropriately called after the other Greek letter: Xi.

That was actually the next name (after Nu which would be pronounced as New), but going with that name would surely trigger a war with China.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 03:08:18 pm
From the beginning of the pandemic. Here is the worldometer link:
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.
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 03:14:21 pm
From the beginning of the pandemic. Here is the worldometer link:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
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.

'Lies are attempts to hide the truth by willfully denying facts. Fiction, on the other hand, is an attempt to reveal the truth by ignoring facts'. -John Green
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 03:15:23 pm
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/

The latest death stats look even worse (for USA). The shown numbers are absolute, so relative figures are around 4:1 or 5:1.
Dec 9 - USA 1088, Canada 24
Dec 8 - USA 1366, Canada 25
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 10, 2021, 03:17:37 pm
Or perhaps, more Canadians (and to Jonathan's post those in his country) actually accept data and science despite their political POVs. 

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.

Jonathan

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on December 10, 2021, 03:44:24 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 03:47:20 pm
As far as I know, you are the only one calling it "Omnicron."
Funneling my inner Klein again:
Quote
"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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 03:50:15 pm
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.
Jonathan
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.  :'(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 04:06:23 pm
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. :) 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 04:08:24 pm
It's all Greek to me. 
We (and I believe with solid evidence, others) are in violent agreement on that!
Quote
Xi would have been easier and more to the point
If Germany gets Omicron under control, is it OK to call it the Klein variant?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 04:08:28 pm
The latest death stats look even worse (for USA). The shown numbers are absolute, so relative figures are around 4:1 or 5:1.
Dec 9 - USA 1088, Canada 24
Dec 8 - USA 1366, Canada 25
If it wasn't winter, I might move to Canada to be safe.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 04:14:37 pm
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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 04:18:47 pm
New figures on Omicron cases in USA.

OMICRON VARIANT
The AP Interview: CDC Chief Says Omicron Mostly Mild So Far

More than 40 people in the U.S. have been found to be infected with the omicron variant so far, and more than three-quarters of them had been vaccinated, the chief of the CDC said Wednesday. But she said nearly all of them were only mildly ill.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the data is very limited and the agency is working on a more detailed analysis of what the new mutant form of the coronavirus might hold for the U.S.

“What we generally know is the more mutations a variant has, the higher level you need your immunity to be. ... We want to make sure we bolster everybody’s immunity. And that’s really what motivated the decision to expand our guidance,” Walensky said, referencing the recent approval of boosters for all adults.

She said “the disease is mild” in almost all of the cases seen so far, with reported symptoms mainly cough, congestion and fatigue. One person was hospitalized, but no deaths have been reported, CDC officials said.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/the-ap-interview-cdc-chief-says-omicron-mostly-mild-so-far/3441281/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 04:25:07 pm
One possible explanation for the difference between USA and Canda is that USA vaccination rate is 61% and Canada's rate is 77%.
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.  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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 04:45:03 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 05:04:05 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 10, 2021, 05:45:03 pm
OMICRON VARIANT
The AP Interview: CDC Chief Says Omicron Mostly Mild So Far
Meanwhile, reality and facts:
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 10, 2021, 06:26:46 pm
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?  Excellent medical infrastructure.  Always warm and just a short hop from Florida.

Enlarge your horizons and open your mind.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 06:32:47 pm
¿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.

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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 10, 2021, 06:59:05 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 10, 2021, 07:14:09 pm
Try Dukoral. Have travelled all over without any stomach problems.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 10, 2021, 07:29:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: marvpelkey on December 10, 2021, 07:46:19 pm
Thought I might make a couple comments as Mr Klein (jokingly) referenced moving to Canada.

The day of the opening (Nov 8) for S/B land travel from Canada to US, the wife and I headed down, by car, to Denver Co. Made sure all our Covid vaccination documents were in order to prove double-vaccination.

Arrived to the border where it was completely vacant, save for a single border agent. Took a quick look at our Nexus cards and waved us through, wishing us a great trip. Absolutely no mention/request of vaccination proof.

As we drove farther east/south, the use of masks and other protocols began disappearing. Wa. state was OK, Oregon a wee bit less so and by the time we reached Denver, I would estimate only about 5-ish percent of the people exhibited any form of protection. rarely was there any sign of Covid protocols and few wore masks. This included no masks by hotel and restaurant staff. In fact, the most egregious was a Build a Bear store which displayed signage requesting masks, social distancing and limiting customers to safe number (can't recall the exact number, off hand). The staff all wore masks but none of the customers did, the store was well above safe numbers (probably even for fire regulations) and everyone, including a large number of children, were crammed shoulder to shoulder. Quite shocking actually.

Returning across the border, we were required to mask up as we approached the border agent's station (while in our car), went through a third degree questioning (we had obtained a negative test enroute through Idaho, for the crossing) and proof of Covid safety and were even required to perform a take-home self-test by order of Health Canada (which had to be witnessed via remote conference with a lab staff member within 24 hours of arriving home).

Of note, I asked a hotel front counter staff member about why everyone was not masked up. She, a late twenties-ish lady, stated it was their right not to wear a mask. When I asked about the rights of, as-yet unvaccinated, children and those with medical issues, she just stared at me with a stupid grin.

I found the difference(s) between what I was used to in B.C. and what I experienced south of the border, to say the least, astonishing.

Only my anecdotal observations.

Marv
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: marvpelkey on December 10, 2021, 07:48:09 pm
Not sure how Nov 8th turned into an Emoji, but my apologies.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 09:05:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 10, 2021, 09:47:58 pm
$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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 10, 2021, 09:54:22 pm
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.

Off-topic for this thread, but I think it's because of free market forces, the same ones that compel health insurance companies to keep medical costs low. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 10, 2021, 11:53:52 pm
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.

I visited Kauai about 15 years ago and I think at that time we paid about $250/week for a car.
A friend of mine who has been going to Hawaii quite often for many years, prefers now Oahu, since they have there pretty good and cheap public bus network.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 11, 2021, 10:23:40 pm
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/).

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 12, 2021, 08:58:54 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 12, 2021, 09:47:58 am
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.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 12, 2021, 10:23:23 am
$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.
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? 

Try AAA.  They have deals too.  Of course, you have to join for a year but the savings may be worth it.  Some rental car companies charge for a second driver.  But with AAA, you don't have to pay that, at least I didn't a couple of years ago in California when I rented from Hertz.   Check with your credit card companies too.  They have deals as well. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 12, 2021, 05:36:09 pm
$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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 12, 2021, 05:40:34 pm
In the UK the COVID alert level as been raised the the 2nd highest. Boris Johnson has announced this evening that all adults (18+) will be offered a booster jab by the end of the month if 3 months or more since 2nd jab. The military is going to help. The pressure is on to get jabbed to save hospitalisations as Omicron is more infectious. This is to cut down the possibility of other treatments e.g. cancer being postponed if Covid demand goes up a lot.
Jonathan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 12, 2021, 07:25:54 pm
Seriously? The governor? I do not know that I have every heard a stupider comment.

Loosen up, don't take everything seriously. Or do you want me to attach those yellow emoticons to all my posts?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 15, 2021, 09:11:03 am
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/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 15, 2021, 09:33:51 am
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.

It's still not over.  We'll have to wait months, possibly years to get a real understanding of what results from different positions and actions taken by the states.

From the article you listed the link to:

Here are some core takeaways:

-States that imposed more restrictions such as stay-at-home orders and mask requirements did experience lower rates of death and hospitalizations. But they also tended to have worse economic and educational outcomes.
-States whose economies are heavily dependent on tourism suffered the most economically, with Hawaii and Nevada hit hardest.
-No state did well in every policy area.
-Overall, rural states tended to fare better than more urbanized states on economic and educational outcomes. Many rural states, despite being less densely populated, ranked poorly in health outcomes, however.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 16, 2021, 09:27:25 am
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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 16, 2021, 09:57:55 am
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.

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.


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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 16, 2021, 10:03:49 am
... people have "had it" with masks.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 16, 2021, 12:53:54 pm
Quote from: Alan Klein   Even here in NJ, the democrat governor Murphy has indicated people have "had it" with masks. 
[/quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 16, 2021, 01:32:27 pm
From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly.  Statistics soon will tell. 
So you don't know. You assume.
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 16, 2021, 02:26:51 pm
From what I have read, the new variant is not as deadly.

Who wrote that and where did you read it?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 16, 2021, 02:38:45 pm
It may turn out like the regular flu.

COVID-19 is not seasonal flu and comparisons to seasonal flu are of little to no use in understanding the disease, its potential health risks, or ongoing evolution and potential outcomes.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 16, 2021, 02:52:55 pm
Officials are not treating it like the flu however...

That's because it's not the flu and public health officials understand that fact.

...insisting on masking up again.

That makes sense.

The problem is many people are done with the mask.

The problem is that there are too many people in society making decisions from a base of ignorance, or worse, on the basis of false or misleading information from sources with no expertise or credibility. They represent a potential health risk to those around them and aid the virus in its mission to infect as many as possible.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 16, 2021, 04:32:37 pm
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 16, 2021, 04:51:41 pm
https://www.who.int/who-press-conference-on-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19) 14-december-2021 (https://www.who.int/multi-media/details/who-press-conference-on-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)---14-december-2021)

Omicron is spreading at a rate we have not seen with any previous variant. We're concerned that people are dismissing omicron as mild. Surely we have learned by now that we underestimate this virus at our peril. Even if omicron does cause less severe disease the sheer number of cases could once again overwhelm unprepared health systems.

I need to be very clear. Vaccines alone will not get any country out of this crisis. Countries can and must prevent the spread of omicron with measures that work today. It's not vaccines instead of masks. It's not vaccines instead of distancing. It's not vaccines instead of ventilation or hand hygiene.

Do it all. Do it consistently. Do it well.


https://www.who.int/news/item/28-11-2021-update-on-omicron (https://www.who.int/news/item/28-11-2021-update-on-omicron)

Severity of disease: It is not yet clear whether infection with Omicron causes more severe disease compared to infections with other variants, including Delta.  Preliminary data suggests that there are increasing rates of hospitalization in South Africa, but this may be due to increasing overall numbers of people becoming infected, rather than a result of specific infection with Omicron.  There is currently no information to suggest that symptoms associated with Omicron are different from those from other variants.  Initial reported infections were among university students—younger individuals who tend to have more mild disease—but understanding the level of severity of the Omicron variant will take days to several weeks.  All variants of COVID-19, including the Delta variant that is dominant worldwide, can cause severe disease or death, in particular for the most vulnerable people, and thus prevention is always key.

https://www.who.int/10 December 2021/enhancing-readiness-for-omicron-technical-brief  (https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/enhancing-readiness-for-omicron-(b.1.1.529)-technical-brief-and-priority-actions-for-member-states)

There are still limited data on the clinical severity of Omicron. While preliminary findings from South Africa suggest it may be less severe than Delta, and all cases reported in the EU/EEA to date have been mild or asymptomatic, it remains unclear to what extent Omicron may be inherently less virulent. More data are needed to understand the severity profile.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 16, 2021, 06:20:29 pm
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/

Deaths typically lag behind infections so the number of deaths caused by the Omicron variant is yet to be seen as the infections just started to take off.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 16, 2021, 10:39:35 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 16, 2021, 10:42:00 pm
Who wrote that and where did you read it?
Les said it's not as deadly,  See above.  ::)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 16, 2021, 11:48:16 pm
I didn't ask Les where he read the statement that he made. I asked you where you read the statement that you made.

If you won't or can't supply a source, it won't be a surprise or the first time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 17, 2021, 12:05:01 am
I didn't ask Les where he read the statement that he made. I asked you where you read the statement that you made.

If you won't or can't supply a source, it won't be a surprise or the first time.
Read his link. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 17, 2021, 12:06:43 am
Well... no surprise and not the first time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 17, 2021, 12:20:04 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 17, 2021, 12:38:14 am
Nothing incoherent, merely stupid.
Why is it stupid? People who have been vaccinated are not the ones dying in hospitals. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 17, 2021, 12:51:24 am
Why is it stupid? People who have been vaccinated are not the ones dying in hospitals.

I apologize. In my haste, I read it (of course, incorrectly) as unvaccinated.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 17, 2021, 02:00:07 am
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.
Jonathan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 17, 2021, 08:16:01 am
I apologize. In my haste, I read it (of course, incorrectly) as unvaccinated.
No problem.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 17, 2021, 08:33:49 am
Maybe,  but they can still get it though not so seriously. If they get it they can spread it. Very selfish.
Jonathan

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.

This interestingly raises the question of just what's selfish and stupid.  How many of us take our families on weekend drives into the country to photograph the fall foliage?  Of course, we make sure everyone's belted up.  And of course, the government mandates seatbelts to be installed and worn and air bags installed to put us in a bubble if we get into a crash.  Meanwhile, 40,000 Americans or so die every year, and millions more maimed.  Is it stupid to go drive into the country?  Should we risk our children?  What about how selfish it is to put other drivers, passengers and pedestrians into danger just so we can get our pictures to brag about on LuLa or to our friends? 

The point is we all assess risk, danger, and consequences in different ways.  We all risk our lives and the lives of others as well in our everyday activities.  We get out and take risks every day.  We risk others as well whenever we get into a car.  Who stays locked up in their basements? Trying to guilt shame people is getting old here in America.  We do it with everything people do if we disagree with it.  IF you're not in favor of electric vehicles, you're destroying the earth.  If you want voter ID cards, you're racist.  I think it might be more productive to get people to take the vaccines if you'd get off their backs and understand their points of views.  Then use non-personal attacks to enlighten them.  People get defensive when you attack them and will do the opposite.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 17, 2021, 09:30:48 am
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.
Jonathan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 17, 2021, 09:58:43 am
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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 17, 2021, 10:01:16 am
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.

I wonder if people have "had it" with condoms.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 17, 2021, 01:04:07 pm
The poor and low-income lose their jobs.  It snowballs. 

I'm sure NYC isn't alone in this.

Here in BC the unemployment rate is back to pre-Covid times and there are tons of help wanted signs everywhere. Many restaurants cannot run full time ( closed 2 / 3 days a week ) due to not having enough staff. McDonalds have signs offering $3 more than minimum wage ( $15 / hour ).

Yes, some sectors are hit hard...but if someone wants a job...they can cherry pick.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 17, 2021, 02:15:19 pm
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:
Quote
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."

In another forum, the other day, we heard this from the director fabulist of the Center for misinformation (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1230730#msg1230730):
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 17, 2021, 07:41:09 pm
Just today:
Quote
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.

Quote
Businesses, schools, venues shuttering as U.S. Covid cases rise

Quote
Southwest CEO tests positive for Covid days after unmasked Senate hearing with other airline chiefs

Quote
New York state reports highest number of daily Covid cases of entire pandemic at more than 21,000

On Earth2:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.

Edit; good news:
Quote
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.
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.
Speculation, like “now that Covid is on the way out”.🤮
Further:
Quote
"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:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/17/counties-voted-trump-higher-covid-death-rate?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1
Quote
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:
Quote
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey reissues executive order banning local vaccine mandates
Sadly, you can't make this up.😢
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 08:27:48 am
Here is a very good report on Omicron by Kevin Paffrath. 13 minutes long, well worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkormdO6m5M
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 08:43:18 am
How many people are dying from Omicron?  Hospitalized? Which groups? (vaccinated or not; with or without booster)?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 08:48:28 am
Here is a very good report on Omicron by Kevin Paffrath. 13 minutes long, well worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkormdO6m5M
I don't know if I should take a guy with pink hair as an expert about Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 09:31:07 am
Now it goes to the Supreme Court.

Appeals court lets Biden administration enforce vaccine rules for large employers
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/17/politics/appeals-court-vaccine-mandate-osha-large-employers-federal-contractors/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 09:48:55 am
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.
It's as pointless as pointing out or asking where you got this absurd “idea”:
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 10:05:18 am
For those on Earth, accept facts, understand the potential of variants, can critically think:
Quote
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.
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.
https://www.axios.com/omicron-coronavirus-cases-christmas-london-5ef22bcc-34e2-4b31-9d4e-534c9f395d00.html

On another planet:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 10:12:41 am
I don't know if I should take a guy with pink hair as an expert about Covid.

Never mind his orange hair. Last month it was green.
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.
 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 10:24:20 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 10:58:57 am
Never mind his orange hair. Last month it was green.
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.
 
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:00:44 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:19:52 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:23:27 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:27:57 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:35:12 am
He's a real estate and stock adviser, not a scientist.
What are you?
Again, you can't answer a simple question to back up this rubbish:
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???
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 11:41:21 am
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.
Regardless, he is much smarter than you and me combined.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:53:04 am
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.
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 12:02:04 pm
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.  :)

I am of the same opinion on crypto as you. But maybe because I don't understand it.
In the meantime, there are plenty of well known people holding some crypto, including investors like Elon Musk, Cathie Wood, and even Kevin O'Leary.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 12:46:35 pm
29 min ago:
More than 5,000 new coronavirus cases reported in NYC, according to mayor.
1 hr 9 min ago:
WHO: Omicron cases doubling every 1.5 to 3 days in countries where transmission is documented.
2 hr 17 min ago:
UK records more than 10,000 Omicron variant cases in the past 24 hours, health authorities say.

Sorry.  I'm following the science, 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...
You are not following the science. Or the facts. Nothing new.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 01:27:21 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 02:08:07 pm
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 02:30:11 pm
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.

Quote
What are you?
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???
All evidence points to the latter.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 02:30:54 pm
Personally, I could care less what some guy has to say regarding COVID-19 in a scattershot YouTube video or what is posted in online forums by random individuals. If I want information on the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, I prefer to get that from epidemiologists. For information on immunity, I'll listen to immunologists. For guidance on public health measures, there are excellent resources from public health agencies.

That said, if someone wants to sit back and listen to a video update on the current COVID-19 situation, there was a 30-minute video update from Johns Hopkins yesterday. The video doesn't start until 2-minutes in if you'd like to save a little time...

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/live/events/covid-19-briefing-expert-insights (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/live/events/covid-19-briefing-expert-insights)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 02:39:47 pm
With regard to what is currently known about the Omicron variant specifically, there is an excellent article from the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota which was published online yesterday.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/12/uncertainty-swirls-around-omicron-covid-19-severity (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/12/uncertainty-swirls-around-omicron-covid-19-severity)

The latest data and projections from the United Kingdom, closely watched as Europe's biggest Omicron hot spot, cast doubt on whether infections are less severe than Delta variant infections, with South African experts reporting that the milder illness they see might not be due to the virus itself but from preexisting immunity.

Though experts say it typically takes a while to assess severity, the uncertainties have experts on edge. The highly transmissible new variant is taking off in many locations amid holiday travel and gatherings. UK cases today soared to another daily record for the third day in a row, as officials added 93,045 new cases.

Also, the country added 3,201 more cases to its Omicron total, putting the total at 14,909, with about four out of five of the cases in London.

A cloudy crystal ball for severity
It its latest assessment, researchers from Imperial College London who examined data on people reporting symptoms and the proportion of cases needing hospitalization found no evidence that Omicron infections are less severe than Delta. They added, however, that hospitalization data are currently very limited.

The group also found that the risk of reinfection with Omicron is 5.4 times greater than with Delta, putting protection from earlier infection as low as 19%. They also estimate that Omicron cases doubled every 2 day up to Dec 11 and that Omicron's reproduction number was above 3 during the same period.

The experts found a different pattern for Omicron compared with Delta, with young adults, London residents, and those with African ethnicity more affected by Omicron.

They estimated vaccine effectiveness after two doses at 0% to 20%, and effectiveness after a booster dose at 55% to 80%.

In a statement from the college, epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, OBE, said the study adds more evidence of substantial immune evasion from both infection and vaccination. "This level of immune evasion means that Omicron poses a major, imminent threat to public health," he said.

The UK's Health Security Agency today in its latest weekly risk assessment also reflected the uncertainty about Omicron severity. "There are insufficient data to fully assess severity, which is expected in the early period of emergence of a new variant," it said. "However, on the data available in the UK, there is no signal that supports a difference in the intrinsic virulence of the Omicron virus compared to Delta."

Meanwhile, at a briefing today in South Africa, Health Minister Joe Phaahla said the early anecdotal reports of milder Omicron illnesses might not reflect a less virulent virus but may instead be due to natural immunity from earlier infection or vaccination, according to Reuters.

Michelle Groome, PhD, with the National Institute for Infectious Diseases, said hospitalizations and deaths are rising, but deaths are at a much lower level than in earlier waves.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 02:40:27 pm
If you check,  you'll see I didn't respond to your post but to Andrew's.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: DavidJ on December 18, 2021, 03:17:37 pm
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?

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%.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 03:19:56 pm
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.
Begging the question again, one you appear very afraid to answer: your expertise is in what field sir?  ???
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 03:43:29 pm
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%.

Your point is well taken and masks are much more effective when both an infected person and an uninfected are wearing them. This is one reason why mask mandates have been implemented during periods of high transmission and case rates.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 05:12:18 pm
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.

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.

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 reason for CDC now recommending mRNA vaccines; in addition, CDC noted that mRNA vaccines are 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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 05:26:33 pm
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.
Next assumption and generalization you'd like to post?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 18, 2021, 05:51:00 pm
... all the people here on the left told me I was nuts and biased...

"all the people on the left"

WTF are you talking about?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 18, 2021, 06:24:38 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 07:34:30 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 07:39:20 pm
And how do you know this?

As to Kevin Paffrath, I have followed him for a while and can vouch for quality of his information (not all but a good deal of his reports). If you can find time and listen to his video which I referenced in my post yesterday, you can see it for yourself. There are quite a few other serious youtubers who understand the current medical and technological projects and cover them in much more detail and with more scrutiny than some of the superficial mainstream media commentators.

On the other hand, I have seen and experienced countless "experts" in the medical, nutritional and financial areas with impressive titles who are rather clueless and spread out outdated, invalid and potentially hurtful information. The best example is the US president who recently stated that GM and Mary Barra are the leaders in the EV revolution when GM is actually the last one behind Tesla, Ford, and VW. I don't know whether he lies on purpose or if he doesn't have the correct information.
 
Of course, there are plenty of incompetent idiots and charlatans spewing BS on youtube and then there are many highly educated and respectable scientists who contribute greatly with their knowledge and experience in all kinds of media. Best recommendation I can give to you, is to consume as much information as you can can and with time you'll be able to discern whom to believe.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 07:42:33 pm
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.

If you can't research certain subjects in enough detail, then it is understandable that you don't get it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 08:03:38 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 09:48:44 pm
Your inability to understand and accept text, data, facts, from experts on many subjects is very well established here.
Begging the question again, one you appear very afraid to answer: your expertise is in what field sir?  ???
Common sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 18, 2021, 09:52:55 pm
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 10:04:56 pm
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.

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."
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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 10:13:57 pm
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.

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.
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. 

On the other hand, considering how rich Warren made Musk, he ought to be more polite, even thankful,  in his tweets.   ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 10:32:54 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 10:40:26 pm
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/

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 10:47:12 pm
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. 

They did the same thing with masks early on when they said the general public doesn't need them so people wouldn't buy up the remaining stock and prevent medical people from getting them.  They lied then too to fool the public.  So now, when so many people think they've been lied to, because they were, it's hard to argue against their feelings that scientists and politicians weren'tt upfront with the real truth about things. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 10:55:15 pm
Funny thing is that I was following the science.

That would be a funny statement were the subject not so deadly serious.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:15:34 pm
Common sense.
That would make perfect sense if you suspend all rational thought.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:17:19 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 11:19:11 pm
He may well have more typos in his titles than me in my LuLa posts.

There's nothing wrong with what he's typed or his titles... though his excessive use of all caps in the title is annoying in an attention seeking kind of way. I was commenting on his inability to pronounce the word thrombosis properly. He made it sound like he was about to say trombone each time.

"If you can't research certain subjects in enough detail, then it is understandable that you don't get it."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 11:24:26 pm
...it's hard to argue against their feelings that scientists and politicians...

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 18, 2021, 11:32:36 pm
Others here listened to the scientist's and politicians' BS and agreed with them that J&J was just as good.

How many lives were saved or serious health consequences avoided among the more than 16 million people that received the J&J vaccine is unknowable. Given that about 1 out of every 410 people in the U.S. has died from COVID-19, it is likely that many lives were saved.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:35:35 pm
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!
Quote
The scans are clipped but I don;t know if the originals are. I haven't checked.
Then...
Quote
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
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:39:12 pm
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 18, 2021, 11:43:02 pm
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/
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.  Back on my ignore list.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 18, 2021, 11:52:57 pm
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.
Ah, great excuse to avoid this again:
Quote
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.  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 19, 2021, 01:08:12 am
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:

Quote
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 02:19:12 am
I was following the science.  I read the trial results and picked Moderna and not J&J.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 02:33:52 am
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...

He's someone that I thought fit the description of YouTube celebrity, not hero.

...After Time magazine featured Elon Musk on their cover

Based on frequency of comments and the heat of reactions, here's where the hero worship might be found to be in play.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 19, 2021, 04:45:32 am
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.

As I mentioned, I listen to several youtubers. Rob Maurer from Daily Tesla and Sandy Munro are the favorite channels. 
Yes, Elon Musk would be much closer to a hero. Not a worshipping kind. more like a guy who doesn't need to lie and can get things done. Shawn James on Selfreliance is also amazing and he can get also things done, but on a different level. If you have time and want to see Ontario Wilderness, you might want to look at his videos.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 19, 2021, 06:49:37 am
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 19, 2021, 08:46:52 am
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:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59692776

Quote
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.
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.
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 19, 2021, 10:12:20 am
The bottom line is that scientists dealt a crooked hand with J&J.  ...

Change the record.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 19, 2021, 02:21:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 19, 2021, 02:36:13 pm
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.
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on December 19, 2021, 05:03:26 pm
Amen to that, Andrew.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 19, 2021, 06:10:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 06:17:37 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 19, 2021, 06:35:03 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 07:00:59 pm
In much more positive news, the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, which is the "Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine" news which began this thread, has made a great deal of progress. A couple of days ago the World Health Organization issued an emergency use listing (EUL) for the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine.

https://www.who.int/17-12-2021-who-lists-9th-covid-19-vaccine-for-emergency-use-with-aim-to-increase-access-to-vaccination-in-lower-income-countries (https://www.who.int/news/item/17-12-2021-who-lists-9th-covid-19-vaccine-for-emergency-use-with-aim-to-increase-access-to-vaccination-in-lower-income-countries)

Excerpts below:

Today, the World Health Organization issued an emergency use listing (EUL) for NVX-CoV2373, expanding the basket of WHO-validated vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The vaccine, named CovovaxTM, is produced by the Serum Institute of India under licence from Novavax and is part of the COVAX facility portfolio, giving a much-needed boost to ongoing efforts to vaccinate more people in lower-income countries.

“Even with new variants emerging, vaccines remain one of the most effective tools to protect people against serious illness and death from SARS-COV-2,” said Dr Mariângela Simão, WHO Assistant-Director General for Access to Medicines and Health Products. ‘This listing aims to increase access particularly in lower-income countries, 41 of which have still not been able to vaccinate 10% of their populations, while 98 countries have not reached 40%.”

Covovax is a subunit of the vaccine developed by Novavax and the  Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-statement-ceo-welcomes-emergency-use-listing-for-nvx-cov2373/) (CEPI). It requires two doses and is stable at 2 to 8 °C refrigerated temperatures. The vaccine uses a novel platform and is produced by creating an engineered baculovirus containing a gene for a modified SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

The originator product produced by Novavax, named Nuvaxovid, is currently under assessment by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). WHO will complete its own assessment of this vaccine once the EMA has issued its recommendation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 07:12:56 pm
Here's an article from the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota which was published online few days ago regarding phase 3 trial efficacy of the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/12/novavax-covid-vaccine-shows-90.4%-efficacy-against-infection (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/12/novavax-covid-vaccine-shows-904-efficacy-against-infection)

Excerpts below:

Novavax COVID vaccine shows 90.4% efficacy against infection

A phase 3 trial yesterday in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) finds that the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine is 90.4% effective against infection and 100% effective against moderate to severe illness, bringing yet another vaccine one step closer to approval.

Novavax is a new adjuvanted, recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine that has proven effective against COVID-19 infection in the United Kingdom and South Africa. This was the first such trial in North America.

The study, led by Novavax researchers in Gaithersburg, Maryland, involved 29,949 adults who received the Novavax vaccine at 113 sites in the United States and 6 in Mexico from Dec 27, 2020, to Feb 18, 2021, before the emergence of the highly transmissible Delta (B1617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variants. Participants were followed until Apr 19, 2021.

The study authors said that Novavax's ability to be stored for up to 6 months at normal refrigerator temperatures make it well-suited for international deployment.

"The efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 [Novavax] in preventing moderate-to-severe COVID-19 as well as any symptomatic COVID-19 in people at high risk for acquisition and complications of COVID-19 will make this vaccine a valuable tool in controlling the pandemic and its most serious health and economic consequences," they concluded.

In a related audio interview (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2119539), NEJM Editor-in-Chief Eric Rubin, MD, PhD, said that, in the context of great global COVID-19 vaccine need, it's good to have another effective vaccine candidate like Novavax. "For now, I think which vaccine is superior is less important than which vaccines work and are available," he said.

"I think we really need to get those vaccines out there, even if there are subtle differences among them in how effective they are or what side effects they have."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 19, 2021, 07:22:12 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 19, 2021, 07:27:35 pm
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?

Quote
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.

BTW, I never said anything to anyone about banning your dangerous lies about Covid-19. Another of your knee jerk assumptions.

Quote
If shutting this fool up means shutting down all discussions that don't have to do with photography, so be it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 19, 2021, 07:49:15 pm
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.

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.
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.

US panel recommends J&J shots be sidelined after clot deaths
A panel of US experts has voted unanimously to recommend the Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccines over Johnson & Johnson's, which has been linked to deadly side effects.

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.

Nine people are known so far to have died: seven women and two men.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59692776
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 07:51:42 pm
You may continue to spin around in circles. I'm moving on thanks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 19, 2021, 07:59:49 pm
The Novavax COVID-19 vaccine utilizes a different technology than the current mRNA vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna or the viral vector J&J vaccine. It is a protein-based vaccine which has some advantages, as do each of the other vaccine technologies. Here's an article from nature describing how it works and some advantages. You can click the link below for a graphic illustrating how protein-based vaccines work.

https://www.nature.com/articles/How protein-based COVID vaccines could change the pandemic (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03025-0)

How protein-based COVID vaccines could change the pandemic

Excerpts below:

So far, fewer than 6% of people in low-income countries have been vaccinated against COVID-19. Protein-based vaccines — with their inexpensive production protocols and logistical advantages, including stability at a broad range of temperatures — could help to narrow the immunization gap between rich and poor countries.

“The world needs these protein-based vaccines to reach those vulnerable populations,” says Nick Jackson, head of programmes and innovative technologies at the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which has invested more than US$1 billion in five protein-based COVID-19 vaccines in active development. The lion’s share is going to products made by Clover, Novavax and SK bioscience in Seongnam, South Korea. “Protein vaccines are going to beckon in a new era of COVID-19 immunization,” Jackson says.

From the earliest days of the pandemic response, researchers anticipated that protein-based designs would be slower off the blocks than other vaccine technologies.

Companies know how to manufacture gobs of purified protein at scale — using genetically engineered cells from mammals, insects or microbes — but the process involves many steps, each of which has to be optimized for making a specific protein. “There’s an intrinsic slowness,” says Christian Mandl, a former industry executive who now consults on vaccine-development issues. Most of the protein-based vaccines currently in testing have been crafted around some version of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein, which helps the virus to enter cells (see ‘Protein vaccines 101’).

Once authorized, protein shots are also expected to rapidly address supply shortages that have plagued efforts to vaccinate lower-income countries. Novavax and Clover, for example, have each pledged to donate hundreds of millions of doses of their jabs next year to COVAX, an initiative designed to distribute vaccines around the world.

The global health community has also been arguing that equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines could be achieved through local manufacturing of shots in the global south. To achieve this, more researchers should be looking to simple, inexpensive production systems that manufacturers in less-wealthy countries can readily implement, says Christopher Love, a chemical engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

In the earliest days of the COVID-19 crisis, vaccine platforms such as mRNA brought the advantage of speed, says Ralf Clemens, a vaccine-industry veteran and a scientific adviser to Clover. But now that a wave of protein-based vaccines is coming, he says, they will have a lot more to offer — and in the long run when it comes to protecting the world against coronavirus infections, “I think they will prevail.”
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 19, 2021, 09:41:55 pm
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.
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 06:19:31 am
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.

Both Alan and Joe can have strong opinions about topics they know nothing about or even lie about such things in a forum or elswhere. Alan and Joe can tell us "When I was a teenager, I saw the premiere of Citizen Kane at the theater and it was shown in Technicolor". What neither Alan or Joe can yell is "Fire" in that crowed theater when the sled burns!

This site has some responsibilities durning a deadly pandemic that in the US alone has killed at least Eight Hundred Thousand humans to tell users not to lie and yell "Fire".
Alan's guilty conscience jerks his knee in suggesting that "Opinions are not a reason to be banned from this site" when banning isn't necessary for all the stupid and wrong posts he makes. Yelling Fire, does call for intervention. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 08:55:34 am
Lies, inaccuracies or poorly chosen words, both are equally guilty of them.
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).
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 09:01:40 am
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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 09:36:33 am
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 don’t know if you are purposely trying not to understand this, or if you simply cannot understand it.   


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 20, 2021, 11:37:59 am
I'm sorry Les.  You're incorrect.  I haven't lied.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 11:41:33 am
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 don’t know if you are purposely trying not to understand this, or if you simply cannot understand 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 11:43:27 am
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.  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 20, 2021, 12:27:17 pm
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.

Alan,
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.

You definitely interpreted in past some things incorrectly or drew wrong conclusions and usually I responded right then with quoting the actual facts.  I also know that you, as well some others on this forum didn't do it intentionally, so that's why I always rectified it by stating actual or more accurate data rather than by calling anyone here a liar. When I posted something wrong and it was brought to my attention, I always acknowleged and apologized for it.   

And I'm aware as also Peter says, that you never made here personal attacks. I think also positively about your efforts to keep the forum alive. As you say, like everyone else here, you presented evidence information to support your point of view. Now, I wouldn't call it evidence. Others present their data or interpretation to support their point of view. Compared to other fora, I still find the interaction between the LuLa forum members quite civilized and filled with many interesting and useful facts.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 12:40:47 pm
Les thanks for clarifying those points.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 12:51:32 pm
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.
Quote
If they have a choice between the three, why would anyone take J&J?

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
Quote
"They allowed a bad product to be fostered on an ignorant  public killing a lot of people."

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 am
Quote
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. 

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.




Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 01:02:19 pm
Alan,
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.
So your initial answer to this is now different?

Quote
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.
*Since it really is a single and simple yes or no question, Yes or no is all I ask again.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 20, 2021, 01:18:03 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 01:26:36 pm
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.
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 20, 2021, 01:48:06 pm
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?

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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 04:32:05 pm
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.
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.





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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 04:34:19 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 04:34:54 pm
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.
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.
Too late.  You took his bait. Now, like me, you're on his sh!t list.  :o
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 04:35:29 pm
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

"Ignorance is brought about by assumption."-T. D. Jakes
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 20, 2021, 05:58:11 pm
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 your ass imagination which aren't facts

• Data or statistics acquired by the method described above
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 06:04:19 pm
New news.  I only had the half booster.

Moderna booster shot increases antibody levels against Omicron, company says
Currently, Moderna's booster is administered as a 50-microgram dose. The company announcement noted that this dose increased antibody levels 37-fold, compared with the levels seen when a fully vaccinated person does not receive a booster, and a 100-microgram dose increased antibody levels 83-fold.
It remains unclear what these increases mean as far as how well the booster doses clinically work against Omicron.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/20/health/moderna-booster-omicron-bn/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 20, 2021, 06:23:58 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 20, 2021, 06:46:47 pm
I'm not sure who this pleases the most. :)

My feeling about it in under 30-seconds...

https://www.youtube.com/my response (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLnTWxpTQt4)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 20, 2021, 07:07:53 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 07:13:02 pm
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.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-suggests-injection-disinfectant-beat-coronavirus-clean-lungs-n1191216
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 07:24:07 pm
Wow, that's a keeper that needs repeating with your permission. Brilliant. Succinct. Quote worthy.

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 your ass imagination which aren't facts

• Data or statistics acquired by the method described above
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 20, 2021, 08:35:22 pm
Wow, that's a keeper that needs repeating with your permission. Brilliant. Succinct. Quote worthy.

Feel free. It's my rewording of a meme that I received (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EM49HjvUwAA_1C8?format=jpg&name=small) recently from a friend.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 10:36:00 pm
Today, 7:55EST The Wall Street Journal
Quote
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.
Quote
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 20, 2021, 10:59:28 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2021, 11:17:19 pm
Yes, it seems that the Covid Classic is on the way out.
Speaking of classic:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/12/house-committee-details-political-interference-with-pandemic-response/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 21, 2021, 05:42:05 am
More on natural selection:

Quote
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."

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/omicron-infections-appear-no-less-severe-than-delta-covid-19-lowers-sperm-count-2021-12-20/

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 21, 2021, 04:20:53 pm
Good news from Biden.  I feel safer already.  Happy New Year everyone. :)

Biden assures Americans vaccinated against Covid-19 that they can go ahead with holiday plans despite Omicron surge
"I know some Americans are wondering if you can safely celebrate the holidays with your family and friends. The answer is, yes you can if you and those you celebrate with are vaccinated, particularly if you've gotten your booster shot," Biden said in a White House speech Tuesday.
The speech, which came just days before Christmas, reflects Biden's renewed focus on the coronavirus pandemic as anxiety rises around the country at the steep spike in cases and concerns about whether new restrictive measures will be needed to limit the spread.

Biden emphasized repeatedly throughout the speech that the current moment is different than March 2020, when the coronavirus solidified its grip on the US.
"The other question folks are asking is, 'Are we going back to March 2020?' ... The answer is absolutely no. No," Biden said.

The President told vaccinated Americans they should feel comfortable celebrating the holidays as they planned if they take the proper precautions, but he also warned the tens of millions of Americans who have so far declined to get shots that they run a high risk of becoming ill or hospitalized. And he also invoked the name of his predecessor to encourage Americans to get their booster shot.

"I got my booster shot as soon as they were available," the President said, "and just the other day former President Trump announced he had gotten his booster shot."
"It may be one of the few things he and I agree on," Biden added. "People with booster shots are highly protected. Join them, join us."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/21/politics/biden-covid-omicron-free-at-home-tests/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 21, 2021, 07:19:10 pm
[I inadverently posted this in the Bear Pit. I'm reposting the section focussed on the Covid-19 vaccine]

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. 

J&J and AstraZeneca are essentially the same vaccine. 50,000,000 in the UK received the AstraZeneca vaccine ( a 2-dose course v the single shot of the J&J vaccine) . Of the 50 million around 70 are believed to have died and of those, only 17 died from blood clots arising directly from complications induced by the vaccine. In the EU, vaccination was temporarily halted and then resumed but only for those below 60 years of age. It’s reasonably safe to assume that there’s at least another 50,000,000 on top of the UK figure. The US death toll seems to match the UK percentages.

17 dead out of 50 million. and the kink in the armour has probably been discovered:
Covid: Trigger of rare blood clots with AstraZeneca jab found by scientists (https://www.bbc.com/news/health-59418123)

--

By virtue of a fortunate coincidence, The Economist has just published an article on the subject:
The triumph of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (https://www.economist.com/britain/2021/12/16/the-triumph-of-the-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine?utm_campaign=the-economist-today&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=2021-12-21&utm_content=article-link-1&etear=nl_today_1)

Quote
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. ...


Edit:
Apologies, I'm obliged to delete the fuller quote and chart due to copyright restrictions.
Clicking on the link above should give guest access.



Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 21, 2021, 07:31:39 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 21, 2021, 07:54:06 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 22, 2021, 09:21:52 am
In the UK vaccinations are a mix of prebooked and walk in. Obviously prebooked are first queue. Yesterday there were just short of 1 million jabs given, of which 897,000 were boosters/third jabs. There is a real drive to get jabs in arms.
Jonathan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 09:24:30 am
Hospitalizations are not as prominent with Omicron.  80% vs 20% and less severe if hospitalized by 70%.

South African study suggests lower risk of hospitalisation with Omicron versus Delta
However, the study found that people who were hospitalised with Omicron in October-November were 70% less likely to develop severe disease than those admitted with Delta between April and November.
https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/safrica-study-suggests-lower-risk-hospitalisation-with-omicron-versus-delta-2021-12-22/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-22/omicron-has-80-lower-risk-of-hospitalization-new-study-shows
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 09:33:12 am
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.

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.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 01:18:16 pm
1 hr 47 min ago:
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..."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 03:29:47 pm
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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 03:45:09 pm
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.

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.


Good report.  Just some added information about the guy who died of Omicron in Texas.

The death reported this afternoon was of a man between the ages of 50-60 years old who was
unvaccinated and had been infected with COVID-19 previously. The individual was at higher risk of
severe complications from COVID-19 due to his unvaccinated status and had underlying health
conditions.

https://publichealth.harriscountytx.gov/Portals/27/Documents/HCPH%20Reports%20First%20Omicron%20Related%20Death%20sm.pdf?ver=oK77qT2qjHEIryPPhgBoog%3d%3d
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 04:05:41 pm
Reliable and credible sources of information are always important in attempting to understand anything.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 04:46:50 pm
1 hr 47 min ago:
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.  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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 04:48:20 pm
Covid is on the way out.  No one really cares anymore.
Worth pointing out again:
"I doubt you can understand the magnitude of the stupidity in your statement". - Robert Jordan, The Gathering Storm

Today: UK reports more than 100,000 daily Covid-19 cases for the first time since pandemic began.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 05:08:02 pm
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
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 05:20:19 pm
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."-Bertrand Russell
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.
The 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.  :)

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/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 05:28:57 pm
Also from The Atlantic article linked above...

"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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 05:34:46 pm
Also from The Atlantic article linked above...

"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."
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 05:39:35 pm
The Atlantic, a liberal magazine, seems to agree with me, not you.
Omicron Is the Beginning of the End
If one person and one magazine say a stupid thing, it's still stupid.
There are a lot of "ifs" in the article and very little science, not that you'd accept any if provided. But having you cherry pick text and make assumptions is to be expected here.
Meanwhile, the facts provided remain for you and the Atlantic to ingore.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 05:48:24 pm
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.

It isn't my point. It's a quote from an article that you linked for us to read. Did you only want us to read the part that you quoted?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 22, 2021, 06:03:23 pm

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/

Reading this over, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it?

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 06:38:38 pm
It feels strange having the left on my right side.
Science Is Not A Liberal Conspiracy.
A lack of science often here and elsewhere, is clearly quite different.
The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” -Neil deGrasse Tyson
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 06:43:57 pm
Reading this over, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it?

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.  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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 06:48:50 pm
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.


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 06:49:10 pm
I'm only reporting how it seems people feel about Omicron. 
You know how they feel do you.
Like speaking for everyong (or others) it seems. Are you so insecure you can't simply tell us how you alone feel, you have to assume and lump others into this; sad.
If fifty million people feel what they are doing isn't stupid, but it is, well there you go; it's stupid.
Quote
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.
Too bad they have to tax the health care system and those in real need, and infect others in the process.
Quote
It's just that a lot of people have had it
And died from it; and yet we hear: Covid is on the way out. Wishful ignorance will not solve this pandemic.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 22, 2021, 07:13:49 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 22, 2021, 08:31:22 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 08:56:26 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 09:10:34 pm
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.

https://www.statnews.com/2021/12/22/omicron-oddity-case-numbers-dont-predict-deaths/
https://www.statnews.com/2021/12/21/omicron-by-the-numbers-where-things-stand-now/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 09:16:44 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 22, 2021, 09:26:25 pm
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.  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.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/omicron-surge-cdc-estimates-more-than-90-of-current-ny-area-cases-are-new-variant/3463603/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 22, 2021, 09:48:22 pm
Celebrate and dance like it's 1999.  What did I miss in 1999?

You obviously don't appreciate the late great musician, Prince.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 22, 2021, 10:17:12 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 22, 2021, 10:35:12 pm
Considering the highly contagious nature of Omicron, are the pathogens bypassing mask protection?

Sometimes. That depends on a number of variables such as the type of mask, how it's worn, the distance from an infected person, and other behaviors. But, that is not unique to the latest Omicron variant.

When I was in NYC the other day, most people are walking around the streets with masks on.

Those are the reasonable people with common sense.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 23, 2021, 05:03:43 am
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?

The booster shot should lower the covid infection rate, but not by 100% and not for everyone.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 06:08:58 am
You obviously don't appreciate the late great musician, Prince.
Purple Rain - good movie and music.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 06:30:03 am
The booster shot should lower the covid infection rate, but not by 100% and not for everyone.

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.

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.

My wife and I use KN95 and N95 masks.  But I wonder just how more effective they are and will be against Omicron?  Most people use cloth, surgical, and other cheap masks, knockoffs from China, more for show than effectiveness.  So many don't wear them properly.  My son-in-law is back 5 days at home rather than switching to 3+2 working in Manhattan.  Buildings are empty there.   Frankly, I don't know if cities and countries will ever recover.  Meanwhile, inflation is hitting everywhere.  My HOA fees went up 7%, coffee 14%, etc. What are people doing who aren't working?  How do they pay for things?

I see even the US Army is developing vaccines.  I didn't even know they were working on them.

US Army claims it is close to developing vaccine against all Covid variants and coronaviruses
Army-developed SpFN vaccine completed phase 1 of human trials earlier this year
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/covid-vaccine-omicron-variants-us-army-b1980687.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 23, 2021, 03:21:52 pm
My wife and I use KN95 and N95 masks.  But I wonder just how more effective they are and will be against Omicron?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 03:55:24 pm
Stay at home, masks, nothing is going to hold it back.

I'd like to reassure you that the Omicron variant is no more capable of kicking in the door to your home or ripping the mask off of your face, in order to infect you, than previous variants. Yes, it is more transmissible. The higher transmission rate is all the more reason to follow public health mitigation recommendations to wear masks, preferably better and properly fitted ones; socially distance; avoid large gatherings, particularly indoors; increase ventilation where possible; and regularly wash or sanitize your hands. Most importantly—get vaccinated and get a booster, for anyone that hasn't already.

If you look only at masks, or only at social distancing, or other mitigation efforts in isolation from each other; each plays a relatively small part. When you combine all of the mitigation efforts, they become much more effective. Combined mitigation efforts plus vaccines are your best protection from the virus and disease.

I'm concerned that if people believe that "nothing is going to hold it back", they will give up on these efforts and place themselves at greater risk of being infected as a result.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 04:05:55 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 06:57:16 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 07:01:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 23, 2021, 07:03:15 pm
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!
But again Alan, don't wear one.
Quote
So masks may not be as effective with the Omicron variant.
But they still work far better than NO mask!
But again Alan, don't wear one.
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 have only imagined it, you haven't experienced it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 07:36:00 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 08:45:39 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 23, 2021, 08:46:06 pm
Repost of a twitter thread by a Bob Wachter, Chair at UCSF Dept of Medicine
https://twitter.com/Bob_Wachter/status/1473787861056901124

Quote
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.

And on that, boys & girls, I wish all fellow contributors, a safe and healthy holiday period.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 08:47:28 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 08:52:23 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 08:56:40 pm
What do people normally do when their business fails?

"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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 08:59:34 pm
What do people normally do when their business fails?

"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)
Well, let's hope they have a better year next year.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 23, 2021, 09:25:50 pm
One last question, my original reply was to your concern that...

Frankly, I don't know if cities and countries will ever recover.

When I replied that...

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.

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"?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 23, 2021, 09:40:02 pm
One last question, my original reply was to your concern that...

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"?
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 24, 2021, 01:16:39 am
I have sympathy year-round for people who have lost their business or their job and for others struggling to recover their lives, whatever the reason. I also have deep sympathy for the over 800,000 Americans that have died during the pandemic, who will never have a chance to recover their lives, and the 5.4 million that have died worldwide for whom life will not go on.

The sympathy that I have, for those grieving over their lost loved ones this holiday season, is beyond words.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 24, 2021, 05:20:50 am
*The power of R()*

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 07:30:34 am
*The power of R()*

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.
I have a feeling that Omicron is going through the populations so quickly, we won't have time to do much about it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 24, 2021, 07:42:09 am
Omicron infections are exploding also in USA. 267K cases yesterday, which is more than in December 2020. That compares with a low of 13K Delta cases in July 2021.
The peak last year (actually early this year) was on Jan 5, 2021 with 306K cases. Based on the shape of the current infection curve, the infections in the first week of January could reach 350-400K.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 24, 2021, 08:06:24 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 24, 2021, 08:17:20 am
Glad to see nothing has changed here. 

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. 

So, non-vaxed, vaxed, tripple vaxed and quadruple masked, I suggest mentally preparing that you will get it.  And no, if you do, it does not mean you are a bad person.  You just got a virus that went viral.  Not even performing all of the sacraments TechTalk is suggesting is going to ward it off, but smear goats blood on your transom if you want to. 

Now if this was Smallpox, I'd be heading to the nearest dairy farm and giving myself Cowpox. 

Anyway, 82 and sunny and low himidity here in Abu Dhabi and the locals are no more crazy then me over this. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 08:19:24 am
Send some pictures, Joe.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 24, 2021, 08:21:00 am
So, how do you suggest that people should respond? What action should government take at the local, state, and federal level?

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on December 24, 2021, 08:21:47 am
Send some pictures, Joe.

Next year, we need to strive to rise above the clouds!

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 08:26:58 am
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. 

If you're really worried for yourself, stay home and isolate for a month until it blows through.  Then you can come out again. 

Frankly, at 76 with comorbidities, I'm a little worried.  But not overly so.  I'm hoping that my vaccinations including the booster and the apparent mildness of the strain will protect me. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 08:30:53 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 24, 2021, 09:09:35 am
Glad to see nothing has changed here.

Nope. You still drop in to spread misinformation and wild assertions from time to time.

Glad that you're doing well.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 09:16:14 am
Nope. You still drop in to spread misinformation and wild assertions from time to time.

Glad that you're doing well.
That's strange.  I thought you were the wild one. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 24, 2021, 09:30:49 am
If you lost your business, the sky has already fallen.

Alan in my town we have restaurants and businesses closing and opening on a regular basis over the last 25 years. Don't make this sound as something new.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 24, 2021, 09:32:22 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 09:42:56 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 24, 2021, 10:08:44 am
I have a feeling that Omicron is going through the populations so quickly, we won't have time to do much about it.

Alan, my comment about being proactive snd pre-emptive referred to *then*, when a great majority were touting the ‘nothing to worry about’ line.  If you want good updates follow YLE and the head of UCSF that I’ve linked to above.

ITM, over 2,000 christmas flights already cancelled, hospitals and clinics losing staff by the hour, hospitality sector rocked by cancellations w/ many closing down permanently and BigBro governments haven’t even got involved other than to make masks and testing obligatory.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 24, 2021, 10:10:06 am
I've always argued that Covid is hitting us in two ways - our health and our economy.

Everyone recognizes that the economy has been damaged as a result of dealing with a pandemic. It's obvious to all, but you like to repeat this endlessly like you made a great discovery. It didn't require great insight to anticipate that a global pandemic was going to rock the world economy severely.

Can't we also have compassion for those who lost their livelihood and can't feed their families?

You underestimate the compassion and concerns of everyone on this matter except yourself. Keep patting yourself on the back for recognizing what is obvious to everyone, it might be good for your circulation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on December 24, 2021, 10:14:23 am
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.

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 24, 2021, 10:25:38 am
*/off-topic

Next year, we need to strive to rise above the clouds!

No time like *now*, Joe.
Photos and article on a Gerald Donovan who, until a few years ago, was a forum contributor

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2320641/Sandstorm-Burj-Khalifa-Watch-breathtaking-video-showing-sandstorm-engulfing-worlds-tallest-building.html

Quote
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.

(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/28/article-2269465-17374059000005DC-671_964x478.jpg)

(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/28/article-2269465-1736FC88000005DC-725_964x721.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 24, 2021, 11:02:29 am
They left out Tokyo SkyTree at 634 meters. Here is a photo I took from the top level.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 24, 2021, 11:12:48 am
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.

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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 24, 2021, 11:37:46 am
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.
Check your BMI or percentage of body fat first Alan  :P:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/08/health/covid-fat-obesity.html
Quote
The research may help explain why people who are overweight and obese have been at higher risk of severe illness and death from Covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 24, 2021, 11:55:16 am
For those that pay attention to science:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/24/health/cloth-mask-omicron-variant-wellness/index.html  Updated 11:28 AM ET, Fri December 24, 2021
Quote
"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".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 24, 2021, 09:20:16 pm
If you want to hear the facts about natural immunity vs vaccine immunity, how effective the vaccines are, and what we have learned in the last 2 years, rather than listen to people with a political agenda who keep repeating the same lies on the internet, a better use of your time is to listen to this nearly 3 hour podcast on the Making Sense podcast, in which Sam Harris interviews Nicholas Christakis. It is a very wide-ranging and nuanced discussion, with no simple answers.

Here is his bio from the landing: Nicholas A. Christakis, MD, PhD, MPH, is the Sterling Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University, where he directs the Human Nature Lab and is the Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. He was elected to the National Academy of Medicine in 2006, the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2010, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2017.

He is the author of several books—Connected: The Amazing Power of Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives, Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society, and most recently Apollo’s Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/270-what-have-we-learned-from-the-pandemic (https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/270-what-have-we-learned-from-the-pandemic)

A description of the contents of the podcast" In this episode, Sam Harris speaks with Nicholas Christakis about the lessons of the COVID pandemic. They discuss our failures to coordinate an effective response, the politics surrounding vaccination, vaccine efficacy, vaccine safety, how to think about scientific controversies, the epidemiology of excess deaths, transmission among the vaccinated, natural immunity, selection pressures and new variants, the failure of institutions, the lab-leak hypothesis, the efficacy of lockdowns, vaccine mandates, boosters, what would happen in a worse pandemic, and other topics.

This podcast is not behind the usual Making Sense paywall.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 24, 2021, 09:22:14 pm
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.

Utterly incorrect.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 24, 2021, 09:25:29 pm
...
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. 

...


Some people have been calling this just another flu for 2 years now and in the US over 1000 are still dying every day. Eventually of course, like previous respiratory pandemics, the killing phase will morph into the "just another cold" phase, and those people will say, "told you so."

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 25, 2021, 12:07:54 pm
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:
Quote
First Omicron Death in U.S. Was Reinfection
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.
** This is a cure too; natural seleciton.  :'(
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 25, 2021, 12:29:03 pm
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.  :'(

In that podcast above, Christakis explains that there are viruses for which acquiring "natural" immunity by getting sick provides better protection later on than vaccines, and that there are viruses for which man-made vaccines provide better protection than getting ill and recovering. He gives some examples of each, can't remember them now. But the Covid mRNA vaccines have been shown to provide better protection than recovering from being ill with Covid, and they do that without incurring a chance of death, which is usually seen as a negative outcome. With Covid, what they are discovering recently is that even better protection is provided by going both routes, so that if you had the bad luck of being ill with Covid and recovered, it is still recommended to be vaccinated because you'll be better off if you do so.

(Christakis doesn't get any money from the vaccine makers, btw, he is simply reporting on the data that shows this, just to head that objection off at the pass.)

The above is just one snippet of information (maybe 10 minutes worth) out of the nearly 3 hour discussion. There is lots more there. Real data and information is out there, and it is available for free all over the interweb, and from your doctors, and from public health authorities. Looking for magical solutions that everyone else missed is farcical.

Optimally handling pandemics is a time-varying multi-variate problem, I don't understand why there are always those who look for the magic bullet. This isn't a Hollywood movie, there is no lone hero with the "real" solution who is coming to save us.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on December 25, 2021, 05:31:47 pm
Utterly incorrect.

Of course it is incorrect. Look whom it's from!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 25, 2021, 11:10:35 pm
Hum... anthrax
Quote
Anti-Vax Podcaster Reportedly On Ventilator For COVID After Attending Right-Wing Rally
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.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/doug-kuzma-covid-ventilator-reawaken-america_n_61c7c6e4e4b0bb04a6308680?ncid=APPLENEWS00001
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 26, 2021, 12:24:44 am
Of course it is incorrect. Look whom it's from!
That's a personal attack.  Just state your opinion on the matter.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 26, 2021, 03:03:07 am
That's a personal attack.  Just state your opinion on the matter.

He just did.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 26, 2021, 04:18:12 am
That's a personal attack.
And like so many others, you'll report him. How's that working out for you?
Look up rhetorical question again.

"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."-GEORGE R. R. MARTIN
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 26, 2021, 04:37:43 pm
That's a personal attack.  Just state your opinion on the matter.

I don't think anyone needs your instructions on what to post nor permission to do so.

You might be of use in instructing others on how to write personal attacks or pretend to be the victim. You've done both on multiple occasions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 27, 2021, 05:03:43 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 27, 2021, 05:45:50 pm
Better vaccine mandates than quarantines and lockdowns.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 27, 2021, 06:52:36 pm
Fauci's getting too pushy, I think, even for Biden. 
No, you really are not.
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 27, 2021, 07:11:34 pm
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

Today alone over 2500 flights cancelled (I'm assuming that's worldwide) coming on top of at least two days when total flights cancelled exceeded 4500. The Omicron variant is sending daily flight crew shortages soaring and the outlook is , at least in the immediate term, bleak.

There comes a point where airlines will need to gauge loss of income from restricting access to flights by virtue of a vaccine 'requirement' prior to boarding an aircraft as against the loss of passengers who will freely elect NOT to travel due to insufficient safeguards.

Fauci just stating the 'bleeding obvious'.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 27, 2021, 07:22:37 pm
Interesting op-ed in The Guardian, extracted below.

Quote
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.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/27/best-masks-covid-tests-cloth-surgical-respirators

(*) fuller details in the article, but the EU FFP2, 3M with the 9152 (9105 in the US), amongst others.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 27, 2021, 08:09:21 pm
Interesting op-ed in The Guardian, extracted below.

Quote
In fact, simply wearing a high-filtration mask can buy you significant time if exposed to infectious individuals.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 27, 2021, 09:10:09 pm
Besides masks like the N95, 3M Corporation also makes HVAC filters called Filtrete.  I'm currently using the MPR 2200 (MERV 13 rating) in the return duct to my central air HVAC heating and cooling unit that picks up microbes and allergens as well as dust, pollen etc.   Here's a chart for their various filters if you're interested in selecting one to use. 
https://www.filtrete.com/3M/en_US/filtrete/about-us/mpr-vs-merv/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 27, 2021, 09:34:58 pm
The CDC is changing from blue to red.  They're now looking at the economy too.  Watch Fauci back off too as Biden puts pressure on him to shut up regarding mandatory vaccinations to fly. 

The C.D.C. shortened isolation periods as Omicron cases soared.
As daily coronavirus cases in the United States soared to near record levels, federal health officials on Monday shortened by half the recommended isolation period for many infected Americans, hoping to minimize rising disruptions to the economy and everyday life.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/us/quarantine-5-days.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 27, 2021, 09:49:42 pm
Watch Fauci back off too as Biden puts pressure on him to shut up regarding mandatory vaccinations to fly. 
More assumptions and fictional 'thinking'.
Fauci will continue to follow the science. Which is WHY the CDC is changing their recommendations.
This is what you don't know, that they do know:
Quote
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:
Quote
"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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 27, 2021, 09:55:33 pm
Besides masks like the N95, 3M Corporation also makes HVAC filters called Filtrete. 
Get the bluetooth optional version.
I'd try explain to you why I use that in my ERV, but it would be pointless.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on December 28, 2021, 07:24:47 am
Thanks Chris, I did !
But perhaps slightly beyond the scope of the article which presumably was meant to persuade those still refusing to mask-up (yes, they still exist and persist).

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 28, 2021, 01:22:49 pm
Not peer-reviewed but a initial hopeful sign:
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 28, 2021, 06:00:56 pm
Not peer-reviewed but a initial hopeful sign:

Quote
The immune response of people infected with omicron appears to increase protection against delta more than fourfold, according to a study from South Africa.

Indeed, it is interesting.  But, as you point out, the paper has not been reviewed yet and the authors of this study (which I've attached) offer an important qualification:

Quote
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.

Still:

Quote
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.

[Citations omitted.]

In other words, if you have been infected by the Delta variant, you are quite vulnerable to reinfection by the Omicron variant.  But if you're infected by the Omicron variant, you acquire considerable immunity to reinfection by the Delta variant.  Given that Omicron is much more likely to infect vaccinated individuals than Delta, the long-term effects of the surge in Omicron infections could provide a public health benefit—i.e., Omicron may infect many more people than Delta, but those who survive may be less vulnerable to reinfection by Delta.  But the medical infrastructure may still be overwhelmed by the Omicron variant in many places and, of course, given the larger number of infections that Omicron produces it may still result in a higher number of deaths.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 28, 2021, 06:13:48 pm
One wonders how much the CDC is telling us now is way off? It doesn't give confidence to the general public when their estimates are off 50%.

Covid Live Updates: C.D.C. Lowers Estimate of Omicron’s Prevalence in U.S.
Last week, the C.D.C. said that Omicron accounted for approximately 73 percent of variants circulating in the United States in the week ending Dec. 18. But in its revision, the agency said the variant accounted for about 23 percent of cases that week.

And Omicron is still spreading extremely fast.

Still, they said the C.D.C. did a poor job communicating the uncertainty of its estimates. The agency has had a series of missteps during the pandemic, including sending out botched tests early on and shifting guidance on masking. On Monday, when it halved the recommended isolation period to five days for those who test positive but show no symptoms, critics objected that there was no requirement to test before returning to work.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/12/28/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 28, 2021, 06:29:04 pm
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.


But after stating such a blanet misunderstanding of this pandemic, he has the gall to come here and question the CDC.
One does not have wonders how much Alan is telling us now is way off.

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt". -Bertrand Russel

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 28, 2021, 08:56:31 pm
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 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.

By the way, a great quote by Betrand Russel.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 10:05:57 am
While Omicron is very serious and deaths continue, the press has moved the goal posts focusing on escalating caseload and ignoring that deaths are declining despite that increase.  Before, cases and deaths were in the same headlines and stories.  Now they only discuss caseload and bury deaths at the bottom of the page.  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.  The more appropriate headline from the NY Times should have been: "While Omicron cases multiply exponentially, deaths continue to diminish showing that the variant is not as deadly."

Covid News: U.S. Daily Record for Cases Is Broken
The seven-day average of U.S. cases topped 267,000 on Tuesday, with Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia particularly hard hit. The C.D.C. lowered its estimate of Omicron’s prevalence in the U.S.

(towards the bottom of the article):
Tracking the Coronavirus ›
United States
Avg. on Dec. 28   14-day change
New cases   267,305   +126%   
New deaths   1,243   –3%   

World
Avg. on Dec. 28   14-day change
New cases 930,469   +51%   
New deaths 6,408   –10%   
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/12/28/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 29, 2021, 10:31:00 am
... 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?  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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 10:59:13 am
News reporting is biased, so people distrust scientists, is that the logic here? 
Why ask the logic impaired?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 11:29:14 am
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.

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.  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. 

My point is that media that has great influence and is supposed to be unbiased have been presenting slanted news.  It's why so many Americans of all persuasions, don't trust the media.   In such important areas of news such as our health, they should be impeccable in their fairness in the way they present it so we can understand all the implications and draw intelligent and knowledgeable decisions about what we should personally do.  Instead, even the NYT has an agenda.
 
That's unfortunate. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 11:45:43 am
It's not only the NY Times that covers the news unfairly.  The whole world is doing it.  Here is Goggle summary for Covid today and Omicron.  Articles from news around the world speak of cases, but not of deaths. Before they were always put together in the articles.  Why has this changed? Doesn't anyone care how many died?


Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 11:49:11 am
Besides bias, bad news sells.  No one wants to read an article that says deaths are down.  They'd rather read an article that says cases are up.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 12:05:58 pm
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.

That's unfortunate.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 12:07:05 pm
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...
Or this is another set of knee jerk assumptions. Of course. 🤫
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 29, 2021, 12:11:32 pm
The news is being biased to scare people.

Educating them doesn't seem to work, so this would appear an excellent strategy -- scare people into getting the jab so we're all safer. 


"I LOVE the poorly-educated!"
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 12:54:02 pm
Well of course you have watched both and can provide specific examples...
Or this is another set of knee jerk assumptions. Of course. 🤫
Allow me to start Alan:
Quote
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:

“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?"
What a dangerous moron.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 02:21:16 pm
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.

This is about as ludicrous as misinformation gets. No Delta was not "1,000 more contagious than Alpha" nor "40 times more then [than] Alpha". Omicron is not "70 times more transmissible" nor "2800 times easier to spread that the first strain". The Delta variant is estimated to be about 2x more contagious than previous variants, not 1,000x and not even 40x.

When the ridiculous claim was made that Delta was 1,000x more contagious, I pointed out that the replication rate of the virus inside an infected individual was completely different than the transmission rate from an infected individual to another individual. Ignorance is no longer an excuse for the spread of misinformation like this.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 02:38:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 29, 2021, 03:06:42 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 03:48:33 pm
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. 

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 03:54:08 pm
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.
Worth repeating, no doubt about it either:
"I doubt you can understand the magnitude of the stupidity in your statement". - Robert Jordan, The Gathering Storm

His above post is as untrue as when he told us here:
So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.
Often wrong but never in doubt!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 04:05:24 pm
While forum discussions are often a ride on a merry-go-round, COVID-19 deaths are a roller coaster ride.

U.S. 7-Day Rolling Average COVID-19 Deaths

• November 1, 2021 - 1,298

• November 14, 2021 - 1,205

• November 28, 2021 - 802

• December 1, 2021 - 956

• December 14, 2021 - 1,201

• December 28, 2021 - 1,522

Trends at:

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/global-covid-19-tracker (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/global-covid-19-tracker/)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 29, 2021, 04:13:12 pm
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.

High number of infections can cause other problems and deaths. People with compromised health can die even from common cold.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 04:20:56 pm
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!
Quote
People Without COVID Are Dying Because Hospitals Are Full of Unvaxxed Patients
The daughter of an Iowa man who died after waiting two weeks for a hospital bed blames unvaccinated COVID patients for “clogging” hospitals.
The selfish unvaccinated are killing others.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 04:36:05 pm
High number of infections can cause other problems and deaths. People with compromised health can die even from common cold.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 04:38:22 pm
That's a good point about more hospitalizations.
Facts always are.
FUD and misinformation never is.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 04:43:04 pm
U.S. COVID-19 Patients in Hospital

• November 1, 2021 - 42,619

• November 14, 2021 - 41,871

• November 28, 2021 - 50,451

• December 1, 2021 - 53,310

• December 14, 2021 - 63,244

• December 28, 2021 - 72,398

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital-country=USA (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital?country=USA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 05:04:57 pm
Dept. of Health and Human Services - U.S. Hospital and ICU Bed Utilization - Updated December 29, 2019

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 06:30:40 pm
Dept. of Health and Human Services - U.S. Hospital and ICU Bed Utilization - Updated December 29, 2019

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)
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 06:37:50 pm
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?
Quote
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:
Bernalillo County 2,174.0    84.7%   1,707.6 of 2,017.0 beds used    84.6%   315.5 of 373.0 beds used    
Santa Fe County    206.0    77.7%   160.1 of 206.0 beds used    73.3%   17.6 of 24.0 beds used
This is thankfully DOWN from two weeks ago.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 07:06:25 pm
For that fellow who lives in NJ, who told us” (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1230740#msg1230740)Covid is on the way out”:

New Jersey has reported more than 20,000 confirmed Covid-19 cases on Tuesday, which is almost double the over 11,000 cases reported on Monday and a new record. Tuesday's confirmed case count of 20,483 is the highest of the pandemic, beating out the previous high of 16,626 confirmed cases on Dec. 25, according to state data. The state's rate of transmission currently sits at 1.76.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 07:17:32 pm
Of course, these numbers are deceptive because they're averages.

They are not deceptive and they are not averages.

It could be worse in some states and areas than others.

The statistics do vary depending on state, county, or city. That should be obvious.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 29, 2021, 07:36:28 pm
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.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 08:55:58 pm
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.
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. 

Recently, within the last couple of months, I have had a PET CT scan and an echocardiogram within one or two weeks' appointment notice. So these seem back to normal.  Of course, these tests were normally more available before Covid in the USA compared to Canada.  So the question is how much more of a delay in Canada has Covid cases caused?  How much longer are the delays due to Omicron?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 09:06:14 pm
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 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.

From your post:
Dept. of Health and Human Services - U.S. Hospital and ICU Bed Utilization - Updated December 29, 2019

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on December 29, 2021, 09:13:19 pm
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 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 29, 2021, 09:21:25 pm
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 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.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 29, 2021, 09:37:06 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 29, 2021, 09:59:40 pm
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...

Why are you quoting my post? Nothing that you wrote is any manner whatsoever a reply to it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 29, 2021, 10:23:20 pm
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.

Another record today, and not only by a few percent. 465,670 new cases in USA and 32,124 in Canada. I'm staying in.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 30, 2021, 11:14:55 am
Well, the media keeps telling us how hospital beds are all loaded up due to Omicron. 

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/
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 30, 2021, 12:53:28 pm
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.  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 30, 2021, 12:57:32 pm
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.
Wait for it....wait for it....🥵

God isn't going to drop you now.
"There is no God. No one directs the universe." -Stephen Hawking
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 30, 2021, 08:46:34 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 30, 2021, 08:54:36 pm
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.

How many positive tests from self testing kits not included in those numbers?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 30, 2021, 10:48:28 pm
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.

Covid Live Updates: South Africa Says Its Omicron Wave Has Passed With No Big Spike in Deaths
The announcement offers cautious hope to other countries grappling with the fast-spreading variant. The U.S. hits yet another record for new daily virus cases.
The South African government said Thursday that data from its health department suggested that the country had passed its Omicron peak without a major spike in deaths, offering cautious hope to other countries grappling with the variant.

“The speed with which the Omicron-driven fourth wave rose, peaked and then declined has been staggering,” said Fareed Abdullah of the South African Medical Research Council. “Peak in four weeks and precipitous decline in another two. This Omicron wave is over in the city of Tshwane. It was a flash flood more than a wave.” The rise in deaths over the period was small, and in the last week, officials said, “marginal.”

Some scientists were quick to forecast the same pattern elsewhere.

“We’ll be in for a tough January, as cases will keep going up and peak, and then fall fast,” said Ali Mokdad, a University of Washington epidemiologist who is a former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention scientist. While cases will still overwhelm hospitals, he said, he expects that the proportion of hospitalized cases will be lower than in earlier waves.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/12/30/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests#south-africa-omicron-decline
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 30, 2021, 10:56:17 pm
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!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on December 31, 2021, 01:40:46 am
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.

Quote
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.”

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 31, 2021, 06:15:52 am
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. 

I watched the Mayor-Elect of NYC Adams yesterday, a retired NYPD Captain, who starts Jan 1st, respond to what he intends to do about Covid. He says we shouldn't shut down the annual New Years' Eve Times Square festivities.  Will he take responsibility if outbreaks occur because of it?  He said yes, emphatically. He's not only taking responsibility but he's going to lead New Yorkers out of this malaise and move ahead in a positive way.  He's a Democrat who I wouldn't vote for. But I'm pleasantly surprised by the leadership of this guy.  I think we really have someone who's tough and takes charge.  He takes responsibility.  He doesn't look to hide from challenges.  He's the kind of leader this country needs more of.  I've heard this guy talk a couple of times.  If his action matches his inspiring words, and he cleans up crime and New York's economic problems during these hard Covid times, this guy will be running for President in 2024. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li5pDthsWMM
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on December 31, 2021, 06:29:21 am
Just a clarification.  I wouldn't vote for him as mayor since I'm no longer a New Yorker, and can't do it.  But, if he does a good job, sweeps away the effects of Covid, and turns around NYC economically, I can see myself voting for this guy in 2024 for president.  I could see this guy easily beating an incompetent Biden in the Democratic primary.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on December 31, 2021, 10:47:53 am
Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta.  ...

Please stop, you're hurting my brain. ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on December 31, 2021, 10:49:43 am
Omicron seems to be pushing out the more dangerous Delta. . . . It seems like it will leave as quickly as it hit.

You forgot to mention that Trump deserves credit for predicting, waaay back in September, 2020, that "herd mentality" would make the coronavirus disappear.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 31, 2021, 11:58:55 am
I could see this guy easily beating an incompetent Biden in the Democratic primary.
You are a poor judge of competence.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/sets/

Just one picture is said to be worth a thousand words and for a few here, more than a thousand dollars.
Do remember if you can, this IS a photography site and forum.
Hone your hobby, post less, shoot more!
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on December 31, 2021, 12:18:36 pm
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:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/31/politics/2021-pandemic-year-new-years-eve/index.html
Quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 31, 2021, 01:57:29 pm
Infectious diseases don't spread uniformly. Spikes, surges, and waves of infection vary in time, place, and severity.

These are the six states in the U.S. where current hospital ICU occupancy is highest...

• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use - 91.59%
• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 25.02%

• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use - 91.52%
• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 40.61%

• Indiana ICU Beds in Use - 88.96%
• Indiana Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 37.78%

• Texas ICU Beds in Use - 88.12%
• Texas ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 20.66%

• Missouri ICU Beds in Use - 87.88%
• Missouri ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 34.82%

• New Hampshire ICU Beds in Use - 87.08%
• New Hampshire ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 37.92%
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 31, 2021, 01:59:41 pm
Just a clarification.  I wouldn't vote for him...

Who cares? This isn't the political thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 31, 2021, 03:06:50 pm
Bad news sells.

Monotonous repetition doesn't, it simply bores people to death.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 31, 2021, 03:17:00 pm
Data from South Africa is showing that it is spreading faster amongst the vaccinated than the un-vaxxed.

It appears that this data was compiled in the same anatomical location as the other misinformation being spread.

Turns out, looks like natural immunity is better...

This BS has also previously been addressed the first time it was posted.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on December 31, 2021, 03:40:16 pm
U.S. COVID-19 Patients in Hospital

• November 1, 2021 - 42,623 *

• November 14, 2021 - 41,871

• November 28, 2021 - 50,451

• December 1, 2021 - 53,310

• December 14, 2021 - 63,244

• December 28, 2021 - 79,261 *

• December 31, 2021 - 90,418 *

* Updated with revisions from previously unreported data

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital-country=USA (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital?country=USA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 02, 2022, 10:06:16 am
Interesting statistics from Puerto Rico where they had very high vaccinations rates but now have a 4600 percent increase in cases.  Coincidentally, my wife I were thinking of going there for vacation in February.  Now all travel plans everywhere are on hold.

Puerto Rico Faces Staggering Covid Case Explosion
The island had a 4,600 percent increase in cases in recent weeks after mounting one of the nation’s most successful vaccination campaigns.

...nearly 85 percent of those in Puerto Rico have received at least one vaccine dose, and about 75 percent have gotten both shots.

But in the face of a highly contagious new variant, a high vaccination rate is not that meaningful anymore, Mr. Irizarry said. Most in Puerto Rico have passed the six-month limit beyond which the vaccine’s effectiveness begins to wane, yet at least 40 percent have yet to receive their booster shots, health officials said

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/02/us/coronavirus-puerto-rico.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 02, 2022, 10:48:51 am
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 02, 2022, 11:03:52 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 02, 2022, 12:07:29 pm
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:
Quote
“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:
Quote
The superspreader concert helped usher in an explosion of Covid-19 cases in Puerto Rico...
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
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.
75% is too damn low! So again, the anti-vaccine morons are the problem, not the vaccine.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 02, 2022, 12:25:30 pm
What is kind of new, a new kind of shut down. 😢

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/02/health/us-coronavirus-sunday/index.html

Updated 12:13 PM ET, Sun January 2, 2022
Quote
“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.

Next we will hear it's the CEO of the USAs fault or similar rubbish.
Not new, not changing fast enough: the unvaccinated dying.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 02, 2022, 07:28:26 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 03, 2022, 12:15:50 pm
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)

I've replied to this on the political thread where it belongs.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 03, 2022, 06:33:00 pm
Scary article about the increase of deaths among "primarily working-age people" who have employer-sponsored group life plans through OneAmerica,

Quote
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.

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-40-among-those-aged-18-64-and-not-because-covid
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 03, 2022, 10:02:06 pm
The December holiday season wreaked havoc with data collection, judging by the wild swings in daily US deaths from Covid on Worldometer. But the 7-day moving avg of daily deaths has stayed steady at above 1000 per day. That's a lot. The US death toll should reach 850,000 soon.

We have not changed our living habits, still maintaining distance and not socializing, wearing masks in public, etc. I don't pay much attention to pro sports but I found out yesterday that the NFL and NHL (I think) are allowing full stadiums this season. That might be a mistake.

Ontario has just moved back into Stage 2 Covid opening, which closes restaurants for indoor service and also closes many other venues, including schools for the next 2 weeks at least.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 03, 2022, 10:21:41 pm
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 04, 2022, 01:18:58 am
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.

Perhaps from fringe conspiracy sites like ZeroHedge...

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/what-if-largest-experiment-human-beings-history-failure (https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/what-if-largest-experiment-human-beings-history-failure)

A seasoned stock analyst colleague texted me a link today, and when I clicked it open, I could hardly believe what I was reading.  What a headline.  “Indiana life insurance CEO says deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64”...

...AT A MINIMUM, based on my reading, one has to conclude that if this report holds and is confirmed by others in the dry world of life insurance actuaries, we have both a huge human tragedy and a profound public policy failure of the US Government and US HHS system to serve and protect the citizens that pay for this “service”.

IF this holds true, then the genetic vaccines so aggressively promoted have failed, and the clear federal campaign to prevent early treatment with lifesaving drugs has contributed to a massive, avoidable loss of life.

AT WORST, this report implies that the federal workplace vaccine mandates have driven what appear to be a true crime against humanity.  Massive loss of life in (presumably) workers that have been forced to accept a toxic vaccine at higher frequency relative to the general population of Indiana.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge)

Over time, Zero Hedge expanded into non-financial analysis, including conspiracy theories and fringe rhetoric associated with the US radical right, the alt-right, and a pro-Russian bias. Zero Hedge's non-financial commentary has led to a number of site bans by various global social media platforms, although its 2019 Facebook ban and 2020 Twitter ban were later reversed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 04, 2022, 07:32:53 am
Stats Canada reports similar numbers in some provinces.

Quote
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.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/211206/dq211206a-eng.htm
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 04, 2022, 09:54:58 am
Stats Canada reports similar numbers in some provinces.

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 04, 2022, 10:02:45 am
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.

Update: US tops one million new daily COVID-19 cases – a global record
Infections are spreading across the US, fuelled by the highly contagious Omicron variant.

Covid on the way out? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 04, 2022, 11:43:16 am
Stats Canada reports similar numbers in some provinces.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/211206/dq211206a-eng.htm

Anecdotal, but of all the people I see not taking basic precautions (masking in tight spaces, not distancing etc.) I'd say males under 40 are disproportionately represented.  So not altogether surprised.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 04, 2022, 11:54:05 pm
Politicians and scientists who ignored the economy before are recently trying to thread the needle between safety and keeping the country moving.  It's just sowing more confusion as many people don't know what's best.  My wife and I ordered tests that are on their way.  When we're supposed to use them is just not clear. But we're getting them just in case.  Meanwhile, in NYC, 1/3 of the students didn't show up at schools the first day, their parents unsure what the right thing is to do.  I get the impression everyone's winging it based on their pre-conceived notions or what the teas leaves seem to be saying currently.

CDC declines to add Covid testing recommendation to updated isolation guidance despite criticism
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/04/cdc-adds-testing-guidance-to-shortened-covid-isolation-recommendation-after-facing-criticism.html

Biden: Schools should stay open despite omicron wave
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/588237-biden-schools-should-stay-open
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 12:07:58 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 05, 2022, 12:47:14 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 06:46:34 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 05, 2022, 09:09:52 am
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.

That's unfortunate.
His endless, relentless, mind-numbing repetition is his energy source.

(http://www.searchinfluence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/092216-1024x650.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 05, 2022, 09:26:39 am
It seems the French are having a harder time with their president regarding taking the vaccines than in America.  The French are welcome to come here where the governor of Florida will honor them with open arms and a $10 coupon for a cocktail at the gay bar AOL drank at.

Macron under fire after arguing France should make life miserable for the unvaccinated.
President Emmanuel Macron of France drew fierce criticism on Wednesday after bluntly arguing that the government should make life miserable for the unvaccinated, as skyrocketing infection rates have put him under pressure to rein in the coronavirus pandemic ahead of a key presidential election.

“I really want to piss off the unvaccinated,” Mr. Macron said in an interview with the newspaper Le Parisien.  “And so we are going to continue doing that, until the end.”

Mr. Macron said that those who had refused coronavirus vaccines were part of a small minority. About three-quarters of France’s 67 million people are fully vaccinated, but roughly five million French people have not received a single shot.

“I’m not going to put them in prison,” he said. “I’m not going to vaccinate them by force.”

Instead, the government is pushing a bill through Parliament that will tighten the eligibility of France’s health pass by no longer allowing people to obtain one with negative tests. The pass grants access to restaurants, cafes, museums and other public spaces.

Once the bill is approved, only proof of vaccination — or, in some cases, of recovery from Covid-19 — will be accepted, effectively barring the unvaccinated from large sections of French social life.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/05/world/macron-france-life-miserable-unvaccinated.html

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 05, 2022, 09:38:46 am
“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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 11:55:27 am
I would place myself in the category of bored. Bored of hearing the same repetitive talking points recycled and resurrected like zombies at every opportunity.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 05, 2022, 11:56:04 am
Reuters and webmd reported nearly 1 million new coronavirus infections on Monday in US, the highest daily tally of any country in the world and nearly double the previous U.S. peak set a week ago as the spread of the Omicron variant showed no signs of slowing. Worldometer reported 515K infections on Monday (567K on Tuesday), although the real number could well be 1 million. Why such a variance between those the Worldometer and the other 2 sources?

Quote
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.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220104/one-million-cases
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 05, 2022, 12:04:19 pm
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
Quote
“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.”
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 12:07:08 pm
Why such a variance between those the Worldometer and the other 2 sources?

Perhaps it's confirmed cases compared to estimated cases, but I haven't looked into it. That would be my first guess, however. There are often differences in reporting time of cases from various locations. I have noticed that the numbers will change for a given date as new data is reported and recorded for those dates.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 12:26:52 pm
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

U.S. COVID-19 Patients in Hospital

• November 7, 2021 - 40,471

• November 28, 2021 - 50,451

• December 9, 2021 - 60,371

• December 27, 2021 - 74,644

• December 29, 2021 - 85,466

• January 1, 2022 - 96,350

• January 3, 2022 - 107,083

* Recent data may change due to variations in reporting times from different locations.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital-country=USA (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital?country=USA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 12:50:23 pm
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.

Perhaps what the media was trying to tell you was not the percentage of hospital beds occupied but the accelerating rate at which they were being occupied. Perhaps you weren't listening or heard what you wanted to hear.

And for hospitals in locations that are overloaded or their capacity strained, it is "really that bad". That's when they start refusing patients or transferring patients to other hospitals adding to the burden elsewhere.

Perhaps it's you that's trying to scare everyone with bad news about the media (whatever THE media is supposed to be). That kind of bad news sells in some circles.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 05, 2022, 06:54:31 pm
Getting a booster shot decreases Covid-19 mortality by 90% compared to being fully vaccinated, according to data highlighted Wednesday by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky.
During a White House coronavirus briefing, Walensky shared data on booster dose efficacy from studies conducted in Israel while the Delta variant was dominant.
The data Walensky presented indicated that a booster dose of a Covid-19 vaccine:

    decreased infection by 10 times compared to those who were fully vaccinated
    decreased severe disease by 18 times in people over age 60
    decreased severe disease by 22 times in people ages 40 to 59
    decreased mortality from Covid-19 by 90% compared to those who were fully vaccinated

Ivermectin is still on sale at Chewy.com
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 05, 2022, 08:10:42 pm
Getting a booster shot decreases Covid-19 mortality by 90% compared to being fully vaccinated.

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. Using the term fully vaccinated for 2 shots is misleading and may lead to overconfidence. 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.

Quote
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.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/11/11/science/vaccine-waning-immunity.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 05, 2022, 08:21:43 pm
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.
I got a flu shot two years ago, and last year, and this year, you see where this may be going. When the data and science says I need another vaccine, I'll get one.
I had 6 vaccines in 2021 alone. The two for Shingles was the worst for me in terms of feeling crappy, and the science so far says, I'm done with that.
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 08:55:12 pm
There have been two recent studies that show good results with two doses of the J&J vaccine providing protection against the Omicron variant.

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/30/1069053093/johnson-johnson-covid-booster-studies (https://www.npr.org/2021/12/30/1069053093/johnson-johnson-covid-booster-studies)

New COVID studies show promise for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine booster - December 30, 2021

Two new studies of a Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine booster showed promise against the omicron variant at a time when public health officials are urgently recommending booster shots against the fast-spreading variant.

One study was conducted in some 69,000 health care workers in South Africa. Results showed the vaccine reduced hospitalizations by 85% when comparing people who got two doses of the J&J vaccine to people who had a single dose.

Unlike Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which require two initial doses before a booster six months later, Johnson & Johnson is a single shot that can be followed by a booster dose after at least two months for people 18 and older.

The booster study was done at a time when omicron was the dominant variant in South Africa.

"This data should reassure health care workers who have not taken their booster to get vaccinated as soon as possible," said Dr. Nicholas Crisp, the deputy director general of the South African National Department of Health.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 05, 2022, 08:59:07 pm
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/01/05/1070744591/covid-19-boosters-pfizer-adolescents (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/01/05/1070744591/covid-19-boosters-pfizer-adolescents)

Children as young as 12 should get Pfizer COVID-19 booster vaccines, CDC advisers say - January 5, 2022

Advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention voted on Wednesday to recommend that adolescents age 12-17 should receive a Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine booster five months after being immunized.

The advisers voted 13-1 in favor of the change. CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky is expected to sign off on the recommendation, which could make the booster shots available for children as early as this week.

Earlier this week, the Food and Drug Administration also authorized the use of a Pfizer-BioNTech booster in adolescents, while also shortening the time between the completion of primary vaccination of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and a booster dose from six months to five.

"Throughout the pandemic, as the virus that causes COVID-19 has continuously evolved, the need for the FDA to quickly adapt has meant using the best available science to make informed decisions with the health and safety of the American public in mind," acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock, M.D., said in a statement on the agency's change.

In a statement Tuesday, the CDC's Walensky urged eligible Americans to get a COVID booster as quickly as possible.

"As we have done throughout the pandemic, we will continue to update our recommendations to ensure the best possible protection for the American people," Walensky said.

"Today's recommendations ensure people are able to get a boost of protection in the face of omicron and increasing cases across the country, and ensure that the most vulnerable children can get an additional dose to optimize protection against COVID-19," she continued.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 07, 2022, 10:57:21 am
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.

Quote
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.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/overwhelmed-by-omicron-surge-us-hospitals-delay-surgeries-2022-01-07/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on January 07, 2022, 12:02:00 pm
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/

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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 08, 2022, 09:54:52 am
How should children, schools, teachers, and politicians handle vaccinations and other Covid related matters?  Science begins to take a back seat to other political issues. As you make your bed, that's how you have to lie in it.

As More Teachers’ Unions Push for Remote Schooling, Parents Worry. So Do Democrats.
Chicago teachers have voted to go remote. Other unions are agitating for change. For Democrats, who promised to keep schools open, the tensions are a distinctly unwelcome development.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/08/us/teachers-unions-covid-schools.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 08, 2022, 10:29:42 am
Where was Biden a year ago? Where was BARDA?

Biden administration signs first contract for free rapid Covid-19 test distribution
The Biden administration has signed its first contracts with a Covid-19 test manufacturer as part of President Joe Biden's efforts to distribute half a billion free rapid tests throughout the country, a White House official confirms to CNN.

The Department of Defense awarded a $51 million contract to Goldbelt Security, LLC, "for delivery of over-the-counter COVID-19 test kits." With this contract, the administration is purchasing existing tests that the company has, according to a White House official. The administration plans to sign other contracts for manufacturing.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/07/politics/covid-19-rapid-test-contract-signed/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 02:42:14 pm
For those confused about in which thread they are posting, this is not the political thread.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 08, 2022, 02:49:23 pm
For those confused about in which thread they are posting, this is not the political thread.
Confused posting agenda indeed.
"When a man's knowledge is not in order, the more of it he has the greater will be his confusion."- Herbert Spencer
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 08, 2022, 03:17:10 pm
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. 

Why didn't you complain when Peter in his last post made a political statement knocking those who refuse to take the vaccine? It seems you have no problem with opinions and politics as long as you agree with them.  You're not consistent. You just want to silence those you disagree with. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 03:26:23 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 08, 2022, 03:37:37 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 03:44:33 pm
Because it isn't political.

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

Where is the politics in that? You sound like a child trying to spread blame for being too rowdy in the backseat of the car.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 08, 2022, 03:53:27 pm
Because it isn't political.

Where is the politics in that? You sound like a child trying to spread blame for being too rowdy the backseat of the car.
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 03:55:45 pm
Been there—done that. I'm moving on.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 08, 2022, 04:10:47 pm
Because it isn't political.

Where is the politics in that? You sound like a child trying to spread blame for being too rowdy the backseat of the car.
I suspect it's signs of his Dementia:

https://www.agingcare.com/articles/amp/154554

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 05:59:12 pm
What else are you going to discuss?

U.S. COVID-19 Patients in Hospital

• December 27, 2021 - 74,692

• December 29, 2021 - 85,514

• January 1, 2022 - 96,500

• January 3, 2022 - 108,759

• January 5, 2022 - 121,412

• January 7, 2022 - 131,774

* Data may change due to differences in reporting dates and times from different locations. Corrected data from sources may also be updated over time.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital-country=USA (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital?country=USA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 07:16:12 pm
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.

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 08, 2022, 07:46:22 pm
Worldometer stats for yesterday:
New cases - 870K in USA, 44K in Canada
Deaths: 2066 in USA, 84 in Canada

From my own personal observations (on the streets, stores, TV), it seems that Canadians mask more than Americans. That might explain why the US has (per capita) 220% more infections and 280% more deaths.

BTW, during the recent cold spell, I started to wear my mask also outside. The mask helps to warm up the cold air before it gets to the lungs. Works great.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 08, 2022, 08:07:56 pm
Canada also has a much higher percentage of its population fully vaccinated than the U.S. at 78.48% vs the U.S. at 63.20%. Undoubtedly, there are other factors that contribute as well.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 09, 2022, 12:06:53 am
Infectious diseases don't spread uniformly. Spikes, surges, and waves of infection vary in time, place, and severity.

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)

maybe the figures wouldn't be as bad if we had test kits. Why is the president holding them up?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 09, 2022, 12:11:13 am
Been there—done that. I'm moving on.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 10, 2022, 05:58:06 pm
Infectious diseases don't spread uniformly. Spikes, surges, and waves of infection vary in time, place, and severity.

These are the six states in the U.S. where current hospital ICU occupancy is highest...

• Texas ICU Beds in Use - 94.18%
• Texas ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 33.71%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.6
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 58.99%

• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use - 94.09%
• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 39.95%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.2
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 67.00%

• Delaware ICU Beds in Use - 91.67%
• Delaware ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 64.47%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.7
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 65.80%

• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use - 89.37%
• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 30.9%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.3
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.88%

• Missouri ICU Beds in Use - 88.52%
• Missouri ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 40.52%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.5
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.57%

• Alabama ICU Beds in Use - 88.41%
• Alabama Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 23.67%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.9
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 48.35%

* U.S. National Average ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.7

** U.S. Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 63.31%

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 10, 2022, 05:59:07 pm
Let's hope this happens to take the pressure off ICU's and hospitals.

The surge in cases related to the Omicron variant of Covid-19 could peak within a month in the U.S., with cases in the most impacted states starting to decline by the end of January, according to some experts.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/when-will-us-covid-cases-omicron-peak-51641544919
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 10, 2022, 06:21:11 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 10, 2022, 07:08:52 pm
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

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 10, 2022, 09:05:54 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 10, 2022, 09:41:48 pm
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)

Agreed. When you listen to the quote in context, she did not mean to say, nor did she say, that it was good news that people with co-morbidities were dying.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 10, 2022, 09:57:02 pm
When you don't have the context of the question being asked or the answer in full, you can clip out a couple of statements and take them for a spin.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 12:28:34 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 12:38:24 am
By the way, this is the point Joe Kitchen had been making here for over a year to keep the economy open because most people would survive or have little to worry about.  So now the administration is coming around to that "belief". They're using Walensky science to justify the change.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 03:11:00 am
Bait Shop — Now Open (https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/716++EoIeRL._AC_SL1010_.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on January 11, 2022, 04:22:03 am
https://youtu.be/GMA Interview New Study Vaccines Prevent Severe Disease Omicron (https://youtu.be/gxZT7ra-oxs?t=152)

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on January 11, 2022, 04:22:52 am
from the WP:

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 11, 2022, 04:37:27 am
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.

Meanwhile, Covid-19 hospitalizations reach levels not seen since last winter.

Quote
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."

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 05:18:27 am
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.

The term "comorbid" has three definitions:

1. to indicate a medical condition existing simultaneously but independently with another condition in a patient.

2. to indicate a medical condition in a patient that causes, is caused by, or is otherwise related to another condition in the same patient.

3. to indicate two or more medical conditions existing simultaneously regardless of their causal relationship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comorbidity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comorbidity)

As applied to comorbidities related to, or associated with, COVID-19 (Definition #2), see the link below from the CDC for detailed information for health care providers...

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-care/underlyingconditions.html (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-care/underlyingconditions.html)

... or for information written for the general public, see the link below.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 11, 2022, 08:43:42 am
Reuters reports 1.35 million new cases in USA just in one day. As Trump said 18 months ago, "rounding the corner".

Quote
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.

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://)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 11, 2022, 09:14:35 am
Meanwhile, Covid-19 hospitalizations reach levels not seen since last winter.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html
Meanwhile, folks are paying attention to the fool who wrote this, less than a month ago:

So now that Covid is on the way out, we're left with the economic damage.

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..."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 11, 2022, 09:33:41 am
Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid.

Quote
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.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/t-cells-common-colds-can-provide-protection-against-covid-19-study-2022-01-10/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 11, 2022, 10:00:04 am
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/

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 11, 2022, 01:20:30 pm
A short article about why it's a bad idea to deliberately catch Covid/Omicron with the aim of acquiring "natural" immunity, https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/deliberate-omicron-infection-wellness/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/deliberate-omicron-infection-wellness/index.html).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 02:47:21 pm
Meanwhile, Covid-19 hospitalizations reach levels not seen since last winter.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html
And...?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 02:58:03 pm
Reuters reports 1.35 million new cases in USA just in one day. As Trump said 18 months ago, "rounding the corner".

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://)
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.

If we're short hospital beds and ICU's, why isn't the current president getting the government or military to build temporary facilities and hospitals like Trump did?  Why doesn't he station the two hospital ships from our navy in harbors where most needed to help those short on beds and ICU facilities like Trump did?  Why did he wait 11 months to order test kits?  He was aware they have been short since he started his term. I seem to remember when we were short rebreathers, Trump expedited manufacturing to the point we supplied other parts of the world as well. 

The fact is Trump jumped in there with all these medical supplies and got the vaccinations going under Operation Warp Speed.  You would think Biden could have learned something from that.  He's doing nothing.  Yet you point to Trump as if he's in charge.  That's a distraction.  Sorry but Biden is president.  He's in charge and not doing his job.  What is he waiting for? It's not going to happen by itself.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 03:03:22 pm
from the WP:

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.

How effective are Sinopharm and Sinovac?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 03:08:17 pm
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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 03:08:35 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 03:10:02 pm
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/
Due to isolation and masks, I haven't had a cold in two years.  Neither has my wife. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 11, 2022, 03:11:25 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 03:12:52 pm
Due to isolation and masks, I haven't had a cold in two years.  Neither has my wife.

And...?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 11, 2022, 03:45:57 pm
A short article about why it's a bad idea to deliberately catch Covid/Omicron with the aim of acquiring "natural" immunity . . .

Unfortunately, once ideas of this kind start circulating widely on social media, there's almost no way that medically-sound advice will catch up with them—in part, I suspect, because people who rely on social media for general information are unlikely to read or watch conventional curated news outlets.

Another fallacy I've noticed—one that also afflicts even intelligent, well-educated people—is a tendency to believe that statistical information that is valid for large populations is a useful predictor of individual outcomes.  This leads to claims such as "I personally am fully-vaccinated, so if I get infected with the coronavirus that means I won't get very sick."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 03:55:28 pm

...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.

...and?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 03:59:40 pm
Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid.

Quote
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.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/t-cells-common-colds-can-provide-protection-against-covid-19-study-2022-01-10/

"Imperial College study concluded that making it through a common cold may protect you from covid." As you said, it may. Well, there may be some possibility of some degree of protection. I can understand why that's what a lot of people will take away from this general news article. But, it's dependent on too many unknown factors and the small sample study basically suggests that vaccines that can generate cross-reactive T-cells are worth exploring as a possibility. As always, the devil is in the details.

The first thing that I would point to is the term "common cold". The common cold is common among people and has a common set of symptoms, but has no common cause. There are over 200 different viruses that cause common colds including rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, adenoviruses, and enteroviruses. Within each of those virus types are several specific viruses which can cause common cold symptoms. Only about 15% of common colds are caused by coronaviruses, the family of viruses that causes COVID-19. The overwhelming majority of common colds are caused by some other type of virus, primarily rhinoviruses.

The study analyzed a group of 26 people that previously had a cold from a coronavirus and who were also exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19 disease, but did not become infected. The researchers looked at a specific type of cross-reactive memory T cell (IL-2-secreting) as one possible factor limiting infection in that group.

Like all small studies of this type, the researchers included in their study report a number of limitations of the study. I'll cite a few of those. "It should be noted that 19/26 exposed uninfected contacts had no appreciable IL-2 response (i.e. >22 SFC/106 PBMC) to our cross-reactive pool." [Only 7 of the group of 26 displayed the cross-reactive memory T cell response.] "This is consistent with the inevitability that the mechanisms behind the phenomenon of exposed uninfected individuals are polyfactorial." [They recognize that there are many other factors that could limit infection in individuals.] "Shedding characteristics of index cases and the behavioural choices of the contact will contribute to the level of exposure" [Individual behaviors and level of exposure are unknowns in the study.]

All of the above is just to caution against giving too much weight to general news reports with regard to small studies. The Reuters report is accurate, but limited in scope and could lead some to jump to unwarranted conclusions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cold (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cold)

https://www.nature.com/articles/Cross-reactive memory T cells associate with protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in COVID-19 contacts (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27674-x)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 05:28:42 pm
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.

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 05:54:57 pm
In recent vaccine news...

https://www.biospace.com/article/jpm-day-1-pfizer-bms-illumina-and-novavax (https://www.biospace.com/article/jpm-day-1-pfizer-bms-illumina-and-novavax/)

JPM Kicked Off with Fresh News from Pfizer, BMS, Illumina and Novavax - Published: January 11, 2022

The 2022 virtual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference got off to a roaring start Monday with deal announcements and plans to drive biopharma companies through the coming year. BioSpace takes a look at some of yesterday's presentations...

Novavax at a Turning Point

Maryland-based Novavax came into the conference with a bounce in its step as the company is poised to seek Emergency Use Authorization for its COVID-19 vaccine in the United States, as well as abroad. The company has already received authorization for the vaccine in several markets, including Europe, India, Indonesia and the Philippines. Within the next three months, the number of authorizations could include the U.S., the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan and others. Chief Executive Officer Stanley Erck said the company is at a major turning point.

"Over the past two years, we have built a company that is now a key player in the vaccines market. We have used our expertise with our validated and highly efficacious technology platform to make tremendous strides in delivering our protein-based COVID-19 vaccine to the world. Today, we have transitioned into a company that is poised to deliver our vaccines to all four corners of the world and we have expedited our progress in the last quarter of the year with broad authorizations and more to come," Erck said during his presentation Monday.

In addition to its COVID-19 vaccine, Novavax continues to develop its COVID-NanoFlu combination vaccine candidate, a significant component of the company's pipeline. The company plans to announce data from a Phase I/II study in the first half of this year. A Phase II study that will include a NanoFlu only arm is expected later this year.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 06:03:44 pm
And...

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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 09:10:44 pm
And...

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. 
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 11, 2022, 09:34:47 pm
Been there—done that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 11, 2022, 10:04:08 pm
You just can't make this (like Alan's) nonsense up:

Quote
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!”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/11/anti-vaxxers-covid-drinking-urine-misinformation?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

It goes on:
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 11, 2022, 10:20:19 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 10:24:40 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 11, 2022, 10:26:59 pm
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, 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.

Better money goes to them than Zuckerberg or Fox News.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 11, 2022, 10:27:58 pm
I was just pointing out that what is lucrative for the vaccine manufacturers means that the rest of the country is probably suffering.

Horse poo.  Economics: It's not a zero sum game.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 10:31:05 pm
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?

Decoding what Biden health officials told Congress about Omicron
In contrast to previous oversight hearings on the administration’s Covid-19 response, Dems raised sharp questions and complaints on the state of the resurging pandemic.
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 answers may not assuage their fears.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/11/covid-health-officials-congress-omicron-526950
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 10:37:08 pm
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.

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.)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 10:58:38 pm
This is in my home state here in New Jersey.  I have spoken to two friends just tonight who had Omicron and also both had the vaccines.  One said it was just like a bad cold but his wife got hit harder.  The other guy said he was down and out for four days.  I think I'm going to isolate but I have a feeling that this thing is going to hit everyone. 

Today, I had to go with my wife to NYC for some medical tests, standard stuff, not related to Covid.  The main highways are still relatively empty even during morning rush hour.  I flew through the Lincoln tunnel from NJ into Manhattan at 50mph.  No wait at the toll booth; just flew through. That's not a good sign for the economy. 

New Jersey declares state of emergency over omicron variant
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) declared a state of emergency on Tuesday due to the omicron variant of the coronavirus, which has caused cases to spike around the country.

The governor said the state of emergency will allow local hospitals to access state resources easier as facilities have begun to be overwhelmed.

Murphy said New Jersey was recording 35,000 new coronavirus cases a day with more than 10,000 current hospitalizations.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/589257-new-jersey-declares-state-of-emergency-over-omicron-variant
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 11, 2022, 11:02:07 pm
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.)

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 drugs

Quote
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.


https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/utah-sends-employees-mexico-lower-prescription-prices-68861516
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 11, 2022, 11:14:22 pm
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 drugs

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/utah-sends-employees-mexico-lower-prescription-prices-68861516
Here'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?

Covid: Quebec to impose health tax on unvaccinated Canadians
The Canadian province of Quebec announced Tuesday that residents who have refused a Covid-19 vaccine will soon have to pay a fine.

The fines will be a way for the unvaccinated to contribute to an overburdened public health care system, authorities said.
"Right now, these people, they put a very important burden on our health care network, and I think it's normal that the majority of the population is asking that there be a consequence," Quebec Premier François Legault said at a news conference Tuesday.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/americas/quebec-vaccine-mandatory-fine-canada-intl/index.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 11, 2022, 11:39:41 pm
That Quebec policy should work.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 05:41:09 am
Get comfortable, it's gonna be a long ride. (https://c8.alamy.com/comp/T198KE/people-children-playing-children-on-playground-during-summer-holidays-duesseldorf-1960s-additional-rights-clearance-info-not-available-T198KE.jpg)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 12, 2022, 07:49:47 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 12, 2022, 07:50:37 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 12, 2022, 08:55:55 am
Please stop.
Your request will be denied. Just as the sun will set in the west.
It is rude to silence a fool, and cruelty to let him go on. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on January 12, 2022, 09:20:23 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 10:47:38 am
Please stop.
Apparently, you didn't read the rest of my post.  Even Democrats agree with me. You have to keep up.

"Decoding what Biden health officials told Congress about Omicron
In contrast to previous oversight hearings on the administration’s Covid-19 response, Dems raised sharp questions and complaints on the state of the resurging pandemic.
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 answers may not assuage their fears."

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/11/covid-health-officials-congress-omicron-526950
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 12, 2022, 10:57:46 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 11:49:58 am
The senators might as well ask Biden to clarify the confusion who is the leader in the electric vehicles.
They should check with Fauci.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 01:28:19 pm
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'm happy to do so Robert. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 12, 2022, 03:14:02 pm
I like to slip in a little science once in awhile.

And it's greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 03:38:59 pm
Thanks. I'm just trying to increase the ratio of useful information to repetitious rhetoric from time to time. There are others doing this as well and I'm grateful for their contributions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 04:57:55 pm
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.

Life and viruses find a way to exist, except when they are unable and become extinct or eradicated—like dinosaurs and smallpox (https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html). The predecessor to SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19 disease, was SARS-CoV (also referred to as simply SARS or SARS-CoV-1) which appeared in 2003. SARS-CoV (https://www.cdc.gov/dotw/sars/index.html) was much deadlier than the current virus, but also far less easily transmitted and appears to have been eradicated thru containment actions coordinated by public health professionals working together globally. There have been no known instances of the disease since 2004. So, beyond natural selection, there are ways to combat viruses like containment and vaccination.

All viruses mutate (https://www.unitypoint.org/article.aspx?id=db428f77-6e61-497b-91ce-1317a3396dd8), it's the rate of mutation that varies. Viruses like influenza and SARS-CoV-2 mutate rapidly and can mutate to become deadlier, more transmissible, or both. Vaccination and other public health measures reduce the spread and therefore the opportunities for viruses to mutate. Governments have played a critical role in both vaccine development and deployment and the implementation of other public health measures in order to save lives and reduce the spread, evolution, and impact of viruses.

I do like the idea of getting our information from virologists, immunologists, and infectious disease experts rather than from blathering on the internet. I also like the idea of going back to bed.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 05:24:21 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 05:38:38 pm
"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."

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)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on January 12, 2022, 05:41:15 pm
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

The key is not to infect everyone at the same time and bring humanity to a standstill.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 05:55:47 pm
"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."

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)
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 06:00:32 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:04:28 pm
But Fauci said everyone's going to get it.  I gave you his quote.

"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."

Exposure and infection are not the same thing.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 12, 2022, 06:09:28 pm
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.

At those prices, the vegan hamburger patties should be soon competitive with the cholesterol versions.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:13:00 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 06:13:37 pm
"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."

Exposure and infection are not the same thing.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:16:51 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 12, 2022, 06:20:00 pm
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected?  Sounds like a distinction without a difference.

For a film or a person?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 06:21:18 pm
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.

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.
What did Fauci mean when he said "Maybe a lot of them"  will get infected?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:24:22 pm
For a film or a person?

That's actually not a bad analogy. You can expose film and never develop the images. You can also be exposed to a virus without developing an infection. In fact, we are frequently exposed to viruses and bacteria that cause diseases without developing an infection. That's the whole purpose of having an immune system.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 12, 2022, 06:42:40 pm
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:44:42 pm
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/)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 06:49:27 pm
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)

Above link is from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 12, 2022, 06:52:35 pm
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.
Easier to assume.
Education costs money, but then so does ignorance.”-Claus Moser
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 12, 2022, 07:16:52 pm
And McDonald's prices went up 9%, almost ten bucks for a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke.

This from a guy who also eats cream cheese bagels, pizza and has heart problems.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 07:18:19 pm
What is the difference between getting exposed and getting infected?  Sounds like a distinction without a difference.

This "distinction without a difference" line has, I confess, been annoying to me for some time now. It's been repeated numerous times as a favorite one-liner to dismiss whatever actual differences exist that he would prefer to ignore for whatever reason.

"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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 12, 2022, 07:25:20 pm
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. 🤮
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/dementia-and-diet-is-there-a-link
Quote
According to existing research, diabetes, obesity, and heart disease, which can increase the risk of developing dementia, are all rising in number.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 07:49:14 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 12, 2022, 08:01:03 pm
... 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.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 08:13:35 pm
The point, Alan, is, even though you may have been exposed, to avoid becoming infected from that exposure.

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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 08:16:46 pm
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. It falls on deaf ears and simply provides them with attention—which was the whole point from the beginning.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 12, 2022, 08:17:50 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 08:19:49 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 12, 2022, 08:25:08 pm
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.
No one else in his life appears to pay any attention to him, you guys are all the friends he has sadly.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 12, 2022, 08:57:55 pm
You can point out a misquote and provide an accurate quote multiple times and still get the same virtual blank stare with a repeat of the same misquote. You can explain the difference between two things until you are blue in the face and get nowhere. You can ride the merry-go-round until the bearings give out.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: chez on January 12, 2022, 09:56:33 pm
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.

That's a direct cause of so many people being away from work with Omicron.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 12, 2022, 10:16:24 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 12, 2022, 10:23:03 pm
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%"

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 07:06:49 am
"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.

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".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 13, 2022, 07:18:25 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 08:09:01 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 13, 2022, 09:22:53 am
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%"

Reminds me of the resident LuLa “virologist” who told us “Covid is on the way out” when today, we hear:
Quote
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.
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.
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..."
Often wrong, never in doubt, never afraid to let a complete ignorance of a topic get in the way of his strong opinions and assumptions.  :-X
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 09:33:32 am
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?

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

Herd immunity? I think not.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 13, 2022, 09:37:37 am
Three months ago, as the Delta surge was slowing, Alan said that he thought that we had reached herd immunity.
Herd immunity? I think not.
What you are pointing out with Alan’s comments is his herd mentality.
As to his herd, take your pick:
https://a-z-animals.com/blog/the-19-dumbest-animals-in-the-world/
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 09:44:49 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 13, 2022, 09:59:17 am
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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 10:08:06 am
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.

That's because you don't pay attention and only see what you want to see and understand what you want to understand. What I posted is crystal clear that exposure simply means that a pathogen, such as a virus, has entered your body. You may develop an infection from exposure or you may not. Exposure and infection are still two different things.

Vaccines reduce the risk of an exposure becoming an infection by preparing your immune system to attack the virus if you are exposed to it. Masks, social distancing, etc., reduce your risk from an exposure by reducing the concentration or amount of viral load to to which you are exposed, making it easier for your immune system to eliminate the virus before it becomes an infection.

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 10:56:20 am
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. :) 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 11:12:15 am
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 11:36:51 am
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.

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.
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. 

Finally, doctors, researchers, the CDC, have been wrong over and over about this disease.  Their expertise has not prevented them from making many mistakes, some  deadly.  Finally, even if someone uses only his feelings, they're entitled to their opinion.  This is a photo forum not a science journal for disease management.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 11:50:48 am
We've gone from the merry-go-round to dodgeball. It's a busy playground here folks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 13, 2022, 03:08:47 pm
You have no more knowledge than I do on viruses.

"Nobody knows more than I do about...<insert any topic here>"

Sound familiar?

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 13, 2022, 03:15:17 pm
You present your opinions as facts.  Usually erroneous.
Often erroneous, never in doubt.
That is factual but such facts he often ignores.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 04:25:42 pm
Of course, the OSHA mandate pushed by Biden requiring 84 million Americans to be vaccinated was rejected as unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.


Supreme Court Blocks Biden’s Vaccine-Or-Test Rule For Large Employers
The Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration from enforcing its emergency rule mandating that workers at large businesses get vaccinated or undergo regular testing for COVID-19, a major setback for the president’s national vaccination effort.

However, the court decided to allow the administration to proceed with a vaccine mandate for health care workers at federally funded facilities.

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-blocks-biden-vaccine-193719300.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 04:31:54 pm
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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 04:48:18 pm
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.

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.
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. :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 13, 2022, 04:48:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 04:53:01 pm
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.

Thanks for the informative post.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 04:58:28 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 05:12:12 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 13, 2022, 05:26:02 pm
Also, from the Supreme Court's majority opinion in the case...

"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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 13, 2022, 05:31:33 pm
In the dissent.
"When we are wise, we know not to displace the judgments of experts, acting within the sphere Congress marked out and under Presidential control, to deal with emergency conditions. "Today, we are not wise. In the face of a still-raging pandemic, this Court tells the agency charged with protecting worker safety that it may not do so in all the workplaces needed. As disease and death continue to mount, this Court tells the agency that it cannot respond in the most effective way possible"
Yesterday, today, and tomorrow, an unwise fellow will here post about this topic and make it political. Jerk knee, assume, misunderstand, hyjack.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 05:50:24 pm
Also, from the Supreme Court's majority opinion in the case...

"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."
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 08:31:09 pm
Good news:

Omicron 91 percent less likely to be fatal compared to Delta: CDC study
Omicron poses a “substantially reduced risk” of serious illness compared to Delta — and is more than 90 percent less likely to kill those infected, according to a federally funded study.

The study, released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Wednesday, said it proved “compelling evidence of an intrinsically less severe infection” from the variant that currently accounts for 90 percent of cases in the US.

The evaluation of more than 70,000 infected Californians saw those with Omicron less than half as likely to need hospitalization as those with Delta — and about 75 percent less likely to need intensive care.

Those hospitalized also needed to stay approximately 70 percent less time, with a median treatment time of 1.5 days compared to five days for those with the previous dominant variant.

Even though the study looked at three times as many people with Omicron, none of them needed to go on a ventilator in the hospital — compared to 11 in the far smaller group with Delta.

Most encouragingly, just one of the 52,297 people infected with Omicron died — a reduction of 91 percent compared to 14 deaths in the 16,982 studied with Delta. It did not say how old those who died were, or if they were vaccinated.

CDC director Rochelle Walensky told reporters that it likely means the recent increase in deaths is a lagging effect of the Delta variant, not the one rapidly replacing it.


“We may see deaths from Omicron but I suspect that the deaths that we’re seeing now are still from Delta,” Walensky revealed.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 13, 2022, 09:02:00 pm
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 US
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 13, 2022, 09:08:53 pm
Good news, indeed - only 2,000 combined Delta and Omicron deaths yesterday in US
I'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. 

From the article:
Most encouragingly, just one of the 52,297 people infected with Omicron died — a reduction of 91 percent compared to 14 deaths in the 16,982 studied with Delta. It did not say how old those who died were, or if they were vaccinated.

CDC director Rochelle Walensky told reporters that it likely means the recent increase in deaths is a lagging effect of the Delta variant, not the one rapidly replacing it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on January 14, 2022, 07:15:20 am
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?  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. 

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 14, 2022, 08:59:28 am
Is this really a thing; are people really testing at home regularly?   
Boom.
Try finding a test kit locally; boom, question answered.
Try searching for news articles about testing kit shortages, boom question answered.
Try Amazon, see how long it takes, even with Prime to get a test get (took me about 3 weeks, got one before leaving for a trip last week). Haven’t used it, feel fine. But glad I have one with me.
If you feel sick, wait at least 24 hours before using for the best results. If you still feel sick, test, boom you have an answer. If you feel better, save the kit.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 14, 2022, 09:32:16 am
States are scrambling to keep up with an increase in Covid-19 hospitalizations and the demand for testing
Quote
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 10:15:37 am
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. 

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: JoeKitchen on January 14, 2022, 10:55:02 am
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.   

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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 11:27:11 am
Well that is reasonable, especially given your age, and who likes to go hospitals unless you have to.   

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 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? 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 14, 2022, 11:30:57 am
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.
But hey, the truth, 846 thousand counted dead Americans this far: indeed why the non-stop hysteria.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 14, 2022, 01:21:34 pm
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 public health official in every country on earth. It was never about elimination.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 01:38:08 pm
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. 

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 14, 2022, 02:02:32 pm
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.

You can re-write history to suit yourself if you like. Once a virus enters the eco-system there was always a very good chance that it would spread, that was known right from the start by everyone, except you maybe. (And btw, all the experts told this to Trump early on, as we now know.) All the efforts have been about controlling the spread, that's all we ever do, to flatten the curve to give medical authorities time to come up with vaccines or treatments, to minimize the spread of virulent forms in hopes that less dangerous mutations eventually dominate. This is basic. There have been literally dozens of linked articles and podcasts given on these pages in which experts in these fields explained all these concepts. I remember listening to one such podcast in spring 2020 on NPR's Human Brain podcast summarizing what happened in 1918, and I provided the link to that here. There is no excuse for you or others not to understand, the info is all there.

But this discussion doesn't belong on this thread. I'm bowing out.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 02:29:29 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 14, 2022, 02:57:54 pm
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.

Blah, blah, blah fucking blah. 

We should make a list of all the topics of Alan's proclaimed expertise.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 14, 2022, 03:33:09 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 14, 2022, 04:57:45 pm
Infectious diseases don't spread uniformly. Spikes, surges, and waves of infection vary in time, place, and severity.

These are the eight states in the U.S. where current hospital ICU occupancy is 90%+...

• Rhode Island ICU Beds in Use - 94.85%
• Rhode Island in Use for COVID-19 - 37.5%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.8
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 77.8%

• Alabama ICU Beds in Use - 92.46%
• Alabama Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 27.77%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.9
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 48.47%

• Texas ICU Beds in Use - 92.26%
• Texas ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 34.21%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.6
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 59.19%

• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use - 91.99%
• Kentucky ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 32.6%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.3
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.99%

• Delaware ICU Beds in Use - 91.67%
• Delaware ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 64.47%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.7
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 66.08%

• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use - 90.83%
• New Mexico ICU Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 37.18%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.2
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 67.19%

• Georgia ICU Beds in Use - 90.92%
• Georgia Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 38.45%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.6
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 52.82%

• Indiana ICU Beds in Use - 90.38%
• Indiana Beds in Use for COVID-19 - 38.7%
• ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 3.6
• Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 54.00%

* U.S. National Average ICU Beds per 10,000 Population - 2.7

** U.S. Percentage of Population Fully Vaccinated - 63.61%

https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization (https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization)

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)

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 14, 2022, 06:07:32 pm
U.S. COVID-19 Patients in Hospital

• December 27, 2021 - 74,692

• December 29, 2021 - 85,514

• January 1, 2022 - 96,500

• January 3, 2022 - 108,762

• January 5, 2022 - 121,457

• January 7, 2022 - 131,822

• January 10, 2022 - 142,069

• January 12, 2022 - 149,253

* Data may change due to differences in reporting dates and times from different locations. Corrected data from sources may also be updated over time.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital-country=USA (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/current-covid-patients-hospital?country=USA)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 14, 2022, 06:39:20 pm
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!

 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 14, 2022, 09:38:45 pm
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)?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 10:11:41 pm
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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 14, 2022, 10:15:45 pm
Now they tell us.  Well, we kind of knew this anyway.  One thing about the N95 masks.  I heard that 60% of them were unapproved knockoffs.  I've been using the KN-95 type that is Chinese-made.  I hope they're better than some of the other stuff I've bought from them.

CDC urges Americans to wear most-protective mask or respirator that fits well and that they'll wear consistently
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its mask information for the American public on Friday, including clarifying that certain types of masks and respirators offer more protection from the coronavirus than others and offering tips on what consumers should look for when shopping for them.

"Masking is a critical public health tool to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask," the CDC said in a statement.
The updated guidelines recommends that Americans wear the most protective mask or respirator they can find that fits well and that they will wear consistently.
"Some masks and respirators offer higher levels of protection than others, and some may be harder to tolerate or wear consistently than others," the new guidelines say. "It is most important to wear a well-fitted mask or respirator correctly that is comfortable for you and that provides good protection."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/14/health/cdc-mask-guidelines/index.html

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 14, 2022, 11:03:04 pm
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.
So far, you and me have been careful, and we have managed to avoid the plague.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 08:46:31 am
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.
So far, you and me have been careful, and we have managed to avoid the plague.
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Frans Waterlander on January 15, 2022, 12:02:57 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 15, 2022, 12:13:06 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 01:04:26 pm
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.

Thanks. I haven't yet read the article in detail, but I will. I started making my own timeline of development milestones in mRNA vaccines from multiple sources and articles. I may post that at some point as a condensed timeline version of the events and people that have made the current mRNA vaccines possible. The article that you linked may provide additional information.

I've scanned the article briefly and it includes the important contributions to mRNA vaccine development from Dr. Pieter Cullis at the University of British Columbia, Dr. Katalin Karikó and Dr. Drew Weissman at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Barney Graham and Dr. Anthony Fauci at the NIAID Vaccine Research Center, and Dr. Jason McLellan's work at the NIAID Vaccine Research Center, Dartmouth College, and the University of Texas at Austin.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 01:22:44 pm
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?

Here's a link to a well written article from NPR that discusses some important topics surrounding the virus's evolution, Omicron, and how the future may look. It's alway nice to find articles on this subject where the author has a deep science background (the writer of this article has her PhD in chemistry), but is able to write in a way that's easy to understand for those that don't.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/14/1072504127/fact-check-the-theory-that-sars-cov-2-is-becoming-milder (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/14/1072504127/fact-check-the-theory-that-sars-cov-2-is-becoming-milder)

Fact check: The theory that SARS-CoV-2 is becoming milder - January 14, 2022

There's a growing narrative in the mainstream media, on social media — maybe even at your dinner table. That is: The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is weakening and evolving into a less deadly virus. In the future, each new variant that crops up will cause milder illness than the previous variant.

"There's this story that we're going to have variants that are progressively less severe," says Dr. Roby Bhattacharyya, who's an infectious disease specialist at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

But that's completely untrue, Bhattacharyya says. "It's comforting to think there might be some tendency for SARS-CoV-2 to evolve toward a milder form. That's not what we're seeing here."
...

More at link above

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 01:50:49 pm
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)?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 01:58:12 pm
Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate.

Textbook Frans Waterlander: pop up with some whining complaint once in awhile without engaging in meaningful debate. You're the fly at every picnic—now, where did I put that swatter?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 15, 2022, 01:58:49 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 02:52:27 pm
Textbook Saul Alinsky: attack and destroy the person, don't engage in meaningful debate.
Yes, there's a lot of that going on here. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 02:56:20 pm
Yes, there's a lot of that going on here.

Your personal attacks on other members being no exception.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 03:06:42 pm
As you can see below, while you can average deaths that occur from various flu seasons over a period of years, there is no typical flu season. This is true both for total deaths and deaths among those of ages 49 and younger. This is also true for COVID-19, which in 2021 caused over twice the number of deaths among those ages 49 and younger and nearly doubled the percentage of all COVID-19 deaths comprised by that age group compared to the previous year.

Annual Estimated U.S. Flu Deaths By Flu Season (52-Weeks from Oct. to Sept.)

• Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 = 36,656  (Ages 0-49 = 5,592 - 15.3% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2011-2012 = 12,447  (Ages 0-49 = 744 - 6.0% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2012-2013 = 42,570  (Ages 0-49 = 3,233 - 7.6% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2013-2014 = 37,930  (Ages 0-49 = 3,552 - 9.4% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2014-2015 = 51,376  (Ages 0-49 = 1,788 - 3.5% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2015-2016 = 22,705  (Ages 0-49 = 1,971 - 8.7% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2016-2017 = 38,230  (Ages 0-49 = 1,616 - 4.2% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2017-2018 = 51,646  (Ages 0-49 = 2,781 - 5.4% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2018-2019 = 27,619  (Ages 0-49 = 1,962 - 7.1% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Season Deaths 2019-2020 = 20,342  (Ages 0-49 = 2,670 - 13.1% of All Flu Deaths)

TOTAL Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020 = 341,521 (Ages 0-49 = 25,909)

AVERAGE Flu Season Deaths 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020 = 34,152 (Ages 0-49 = 2,591 - 7.6% Average of All Flu Deaths)

• Flu Deaths for Calendar Year 2020 = 8,786  (Ages: 0-49 = 1,127 - 12.8% of All Flu Deaths)
• Flu Deaths for Calendar Year 2021 = 944  (Ages: 0-49 = 75 - 7.9% of All Flu Deaths)

• COVID-19 Deaths for Calendar Year 2020 = 385,434  (Ages: 0-49 = 17,295 - 4.5% of All COVID-19 Deaths)
• COVID-19 Deaths for Calendar Year 2021 = 446,196  (Ages: 0-49 = 39,732 - 8.9% of All COVID-19 Deaths)

* Data above is current and updated as of today's date.

This page has links to statistics for all flu seasons from 2010-2011 thru 2019-2020: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2012-2013.html (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2012-2013.html)

This page has statistics for Pneumonia/Influenza/COVID-19 for 2020 thru 2021: https://www.cdc.gov/2020-2021/Pnuemonia-Influenza-Covid/weekly/index (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm)

If anyone looks at these death statistics and still wishes to push the narrative that COVID-19 is no deadlier or of more concern than the flu—for any age group—in my opinion, you would be a fool spreading dangerous misinformation.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 03:09:07 pm
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.   
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 15, 2022, 04:16:47 pm
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.

I appreciate those points. My interest is solely to have a reference or thread post at which to point to the next time someone says it's just a flu, since apparently approx 400,000 deaths per year isn't enough evidence. Luckily, I haven't seen that kind of statement lately so maybe there has been some progress.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 04:27:31 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 04:38:38 pm
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? 

I think going forward, if deaths from Covid continue every year with different strains but at a much lower rate, might be compared to regular flu and treated similarly.  People will die but there will be no shutdowns.  Masks will probably be recommended to be used.  And those most vulnerable will be told to isolate themselves.  Of course, we might get lucky and Covid will disappear altogether.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 05:11:00 pm
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%.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 06:14:28 pm
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%.

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.
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.  :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 06:17:26 pm
Your photography or advice on photography is not a serious health liability to others—so, far as I know.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 06:24:18 pm
I don't recall the original comparisons made as being dangerous, certainly not deliberately. It was early in the disease.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 06:27:41 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 15, 2022, 06:33:50 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 06:41:42 pm
...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...

Misinformation posted in one place online is routinely picked up and spread around other places online and thru social media with gusto and reckless abandon. That's why many members have given some of their time and energy to correct misinformation with information from knowledgeable and reliable sources. No degree is required to do that.

No one has ever suggested the need to "limit posts by people with degrees in the subject". Such drama! I'm moving on.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 15, 2022, 07:16:29 pm
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. 😝
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 15, 2022, 07:59:16 pm
If I've done it then I was wrong and I apologize.  But the personal attacks on me have been vicious and continuous.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 15, 2022, 08:07:47 pm
"We avenge intellect when we dupe a fool, and it is a victory not to be despised." -Giacomo Girolamo Casanova
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 15, 2022, 08:14:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 15, 2022, 08:17:24 pm
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 :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 15, 2022, 09:01:21 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on January 16, 2022, 03:32:44 am
I'm not saying anyone is free of blame.  I'm asking if a reset might be in order :)

Perhaps you should address that suggestion to the, now ex-members, egregiously and erroneously insulted by der Kleine’s antics.

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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 07:52:50 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 08:05:44 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 08:11:14 am
Perhaps you should address that suggestion to the, now ex-members, egregiously and erroneously insulted by der Kleine’s antics.

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.


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.

I'm not even asking for others to apologize to me for all the contempt, insults, and name calling they've made to me. Let's just drop the whole thing and reset as James suggested. I'm willing to do that and move forward. I would hope that you and others would be willing to do that as well. Thank you.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on January 16, 2022, 09:57:04 am
Alan,

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.

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 10:42:44 am
Alan,

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.


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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 16, 2022, 10:46:47 am
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.
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.
I’d provide the URL but someone Jeremy would hate to see who might show up so if you don’t know the location, goggle that name (so and so can’t figure out that process so Jeremy is safe).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 10:53:08 am
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.
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).
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.

Regarding, Jeremy, he still has his account here so I was able to send him an apology directly.  I hope he gets it and opens his mail.  I have no other way to contact him.  If you could pass it along or tell him of it, I would appreciate it.  Thanks for your forbearance.  Alan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Manoli on January 16, 2022, 12:12:23 pm
Based on the private messages I got from Jeremy, you will never see him on this site or forum again.

You weren't the only one to receive those private PM's, but I felt no need to advertise Jeremy's and those received, over a prolonged period, from other members too. It would also seem to be a genuine attempt/desire by Alan Klein to change the prevailing ambiance - and that, IMO, shouldn't be prejudged. It's good for them and certainly better for LuLa.

... the other photographic website that actually dedicates its forums to photographers and topics of photography, PhotoPXL.

Now you're taking the Michael.*  Spell 'MORIBUND' for me! [/on-the-floor].

--
*'Taking the Michael: a more polite British version of 'taking the piss'
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 16, 2022, 01:05:07 pm
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.

Only time I’ve had that problem is at that arches location where the sun comes up and lights the thing from below with reflected light.  What a GD mess that was.  Seriously never seen anything like it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 16, 2022, 01:06:43 pm
I, too, confess to going overboard sometimes when confronted with obvious disinformation. I'll join in with the apologies to any my posts may have offended.

Disinformation deserves to be contested and disproven wherever it appears.  TechTalk has done a remarkable job of confronting disinformation with well-researched and documented fact, despite relentless and repetitive pushback.  Sometimes, however, when the disinformation appears to be intentional, or done for simple contrarianism, it's difficult to remain civil, however unproductive those reactions might be.  I'll try to do better.

Hopefully, those providing the instigation of the incivilites will accommodate and adjust, too.

By and large, the discourse here is remarkably civil. I believe I've noted before the inexplicable rancor on my Sprinter van forum and in fact in the general populace. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 16, 2022, 01:54:52 pm
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.

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...
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 02:39:49 pm
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.

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...
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 16, 2022, 02:49:53 pm
... the inexplicable rancor on my Sprinter van forum ...

I'd be irritable too if I spent all my time in a van ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 16, 2022, 02:54:30 pm
I'd be irritable too if I spent all my time in a van ;)

You're right.  It does get lonely sometimes.  :)

Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 16, 2022, 02:56:05 pm
"I apologize for any insults I may have said".

Guilty as charged.  Poorly-written, me.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 16, 2022, 02:56:11 pm
You're right.  It does get lonely sometimes.  :)


Pretty scene. Why are you in a van all the time?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 16, 2022, 02:58:19 pm
I believe James was joking.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 16, 2022, 04:25:21 pm
I believe James was joking.

I was :)  But there's good lonely, and then there's "OHMYGODIFISPENDONEMOREDAYINTHISVAN... I just might hit the Sprinter Forums"  ;)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 16, 2022, 06:16:41 pm
. . . 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.  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.

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 16, 2022, 06:56:38 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 16, 2022, 07:04:55 pm
But this is a thread that is supposed to be about the coronavirus, not politics.

What doesn't make sense is turning it into a forum for political arguments.
+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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 16, 2022, 07:06:31 pm
Guilty as charged.  Poorly-written, me.

Sorry if you thought that I was referring to your post. I wasn't, so please don't give it another thought.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: James Clark on January 16, 2022, 07:55:47 pm
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.

That's an awesome idea.   I will follow suit :)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 17, 2022, 12:15:29 am
But this is a thread that is supposed to be about the coronavirus, not politics.  I started it almost exactly a year ago ...

Really good post, Chris.  You're dead right, of course.  It no longer matters where it came from ("MOM!  He started it!" ) We should all resolve to keep politics and, for that matter off topic opinions, where they belong.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 17, 2022, 08:03:51 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 09:26:57 am
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 09:41:29 am
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.

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.
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.

Having said that, I'm willing to try it to see how it goes.  I think what's going to happen is that all comments are going to wind up in the other thread.  Just posting statistics about this or that without opinion and comments on what they mean, is very uninteresting and has little value.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 17, 2022, 10:07:45 am
I think what's going to happen is that all comments are going to wind up in the other thread.

Excellent idea.  Implement immediately.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 17, 2022, 10:35:19 am
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 10:45:36 am
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 agree with you.  Discuss it with Chris.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 11:11:50 am
 How do you discuss tax on nonvaccinated people in Canada without discussing how their individual rights and property are being taken away by government edict? That's political. How do you separate policy from politics?  They come from the same root. "pol"  Whenever we discuss policies relating to Covid, we're in the realm of politics.  Even statistics are political in nature.  When we post statistics that reflect Covid policies in a good or bad light, aren't we winking and nodding and trying to make a political statement as to how it should be handled?  Well, that's policy and therefore politics.  You can't separate the two leaving little to post here.

Here's an interesting discussion on this below the dashed line. 
----------------------------------------------------

The answer is not easy because “policy” is one of those words that confuses. I’ve read hundreds of definitions. Not one seems to catch the reality of this important concept. After all, government policy can take away liberty, property and rights as well as protect them. Government policy affects everyday life in ways big and small.

“Policy” comes from the ancient Greek politikos (πολιτικός) denoting citizen, and giving rise to polis, the city. Latin adopted the Greek to form policia (citizenship). The family of English words from this root include: policy; politic; polity; and police.

My preferred meaning of policy? Frameworks for making decisions about public issues and public governance.
http://www.decisiveconsultants.com.au/the-poli-
words/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CPolicy%E2%80%9D%20comes%20from%20the%20ancient,politic%3B%20polity%3B%20and%20police.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 17, 2022, 11:59:17 am
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.

This thread seems to me to be an excellent place for news, discussion, policy, and political commentary on the Corona virus and on vaccination,
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 12:07:39 pm
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.

One of you above isn't thinking, just jerking your knee again. Working on hijacking the topic again. 
One of you is thinking and expressing it. Although asking a question to the first fellow is pointless. As you'll soon see.
It's all moot of course, the fellow who jerks his knee will get back to making this political. Maybe not today, but soon enough. He can't help himself.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 12:10:12 pm
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.

This thread seems to me to be an excellent place for news, discussion, policy, and political commentary on the Corona virus and on vaccination,
Your wish is granted.  Having a single place for all makes sense to me as well.

Here you go.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=140036.0
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 12:50:43 pm
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.

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 too would prefer to get all commentary in one thread. Here.
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 12:55:20 pm
Getting back on topic, specifically vaccines:
Moderna: Combined Covid-19 and flu booster could be available by fall 2023
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Peter McLennan on January 17, 2022, 01:00:53 pm
Getting back on topic, specifically vaccines:
Moderna: Combined Covid-19 and flu booster could be available by fall 2023

Fantastic. You go, boys!

I'll take a day of 1% flu/Covid symptoms over many days of 100% symptoms any time.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 01:48:51 pm
I too would prefer to get all commentary in one thread. Here.
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.

The other thread will give a person the ability to discuss all aspects of covid.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 04:34:55 pm
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.
Quote
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.

You are clearly unaware of the one forum for political discussions or this fact from the fellow who left due to abuse:
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.

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
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=136697.msg1193523#msg1193523
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 05:02:56 pm
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.

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
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.

If some of the posts are coincidentally political, so be it.  As others have suggested, it's difficult to split up discussions on a particular topic between two threads.  My new thread will cover the whole gamut to make things easier to post.  If it still bothers you, you can ignore that thread.  Thanks. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: PeterAit on January 17, 2022, 05:04:15 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 05:41:16 pm
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. 
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=140036.0
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 05:53:09 pm
First of all, as usual, you don't know what the f&*k you're talking about and that's utterly wrong. 
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. 
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 05:56:14 pm
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.
Perhaps you'll agree to stay off this thread. It's way better that way.
Of couse you can't.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Alan Klein on January 17, 2022, 06:15:31 pm
I have no intention of aiding you in your masterbation there. You're on your own bud.
Perhaps you'll agree to stay off this thread. It's way better that way.
Of couse you can't.

I think that's a great idea.  So you see, we can come to agreements about things.

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.  That site is open to any and all who wish to give data and express their opinions about anything Covid including policy, politics, the economy, masks, testing kits, including opinions and politics about vaccinations.  Thank you.
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=140036.0
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 17, 2022, 06:19:35 pm
Moderna: Combined Covid-19 and flu booster could be available by fall 2023

This would be a combination of three mRNA vaccines: for SARS-CoV-2, seasonal influenza, and another upper respiratory pathogen, respiratory syncytial virus (https://www.cdc.gov/rsv/index.html).

Moderna's chief executive, Stéphane Bancel, recently admitted to investors that the company's initial mRNA 'flu vaccine would not be best-in-class—"our goal has never been to have the best 'flu vaccine out of the gate"—and his announcement today suggests that the company's strategy is to offer a product that would appeal to individuals who are reluctant to get multiple annual boosters.

Quote
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.

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.

Bancel also said Moderna will have an Omicron-specific booster ready within weeks.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 06:57:43 pm
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:

A Plane with 5 passengers on board, Donald Trump, the Pope, Dr Anthony Fauci, Bernie Sanders, and a ten year old school girl.
The plane is about to crash and theres only 4 parachutes.
Dr Fauci, said “I need one. I have to help develop a cure for the global health crisis that is COVID19!”  He takes one and jumps.
The pope said “I need one, I have to help spiritually guide people through the global health crisis that is COVID19!” He takes one and jumps.
Trump said ‘‘I need one, I’m the smartest man in the USA.” He takes one and jumps.
Bernie said to the ten year old "you can have the last parachute. I've lived my life, yours is only starting".
The 10 year old said "Don’t worry, there are 2 parachutes left. The smartest man in the USA  took my school backpack."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 17, 2022, 07:06:57 pm
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) and I think you are going too far in your attacks on Alan. Live and let live! Or was it - post and let others post?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 07:10:19 pm
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.
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?
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 17, 2022, 07:19:24 pm
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?

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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 07:28:21 pm
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>.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 17, 2022, 07:49:27 pm
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 08:02:57 pm
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”.
Indeed, I am younger....  ;)
"The problem with assumptions is that we believe they are the truth." -Miguel Angel Ruiz
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: TechTalk on January 17, 2022, 08:44:46 pm
You'll have to take this comment to my thread. 

When you tell other people what they have to do, RuPaul says... (https://tenor.com/view/first-of-all-how-dare-you-rupaul-saturday-night-live-how-dare-you-how-could-you-do-that-gif-16354603)
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 17, 2022, 10:08:45 pm
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:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-021-00176-7
Quote
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Jonathan Cross on January 18, 2022, 04:43:29 am
In certain sectors of the UK there is a feeling that FOMO is being replaced by FOGO !!

FOMO Fear of missing out
FOGO fear of going out

Jonathan
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 18, 2022, 12:38:03 pm
FOGO fear of going out
Fear Of Getting Omicron? 🤔

Over here in the US as of today:
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 18, 2022, 04:12:16 pm
Any beta testers?
This hour:
Quote
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."
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 18, 2022, 08:19:19 pm
Any beta testers?
This hour:
Quote
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."

I haven't tried to order any tests from the federal website because I don't want to compete for the government-subsidized antigen tests with households that can't afford to buy them on the open market.

Having said that, it is important to understand that a positive result from an antigen test really is useful only for determining if the subject has a sufficiently advanced infection to potentially be shedding virus.

As far as I have been able to determine—admittedly, I have no expertise in virology or epidemiology—if you do get a positive from an antigen test it is strong evidence you are shedding virus and you should quarantine yourself immediately to avoid infecting others.  However, I haven't come across any evidence that a negative result from these tests yields any particularly actionable information.  In addition to having a fairly high rate of false negatives (I've seen estimates of 10-15 percent but I'm not certain anybody really knows), they are not sensitive enough to detect infections during incubation or toward the end of the infection.

For reliable information regarding whether you are infected or not, it appears you need a molecular test: one that collects a swab from the subject, amplifies the sampled RNA, and uses the RNA sample to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus if it is present.  Here in the United States, the federal Food and Drug Administration has issued Emergency Use Authorizations for at-home molecular tests which reportedly are roughly equivalent in accuracy to the PCR tests (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diagnostics/21462-covid-19-and-pcr-testing) that require laboratory analysis.  (Multiple sequential tests taken 24-48 hours apart reportedly should be used to get the most reliable results.)

A table that includes molecular home tests which currently are approved for use in the United States is available at this link (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics-euas-molecular-diagnostic-tests-sars-cov-2).  String search on "Home Collection" and—as always—exercise reasonable diligence before ordering any product.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Calohan on January 19, 2022, 03:37:54 pm
Perhaps a New Cure for Covid....Texas Pete
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 20, 2022, 12:37:24 pm
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
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 20, 2022, 02:05:53 pm
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 in bold. And then tweet it to a wider audience.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 20, 2022, 02:07:40 pm
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).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 20, 2022, 04:28:51 pm
JANUARY 20, 2022 / 11:59 AM / MONEYWATCH
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 20, 2022, 04:33:53 pm
And in the stupidity department more proof of natural selection:
Quote
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.
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.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60050996
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on January 20, 2022, 04:44:58 pm
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.

Yahoo Finance reports that US jobless claims rose to 3-month high. The market is dropping like a stone.

Quote
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.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/weekly-unemployment-claims-week-ended-jan-15-2022-200147927.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 21, 2022, 07:43:19 pm
My wife is upset as she was a fan.
The guy who had several underlying health conditions killed himself:
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: sf on January 22, 2022, 01:05:38 pm
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.

The concept is wholly different from suicide.

S
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on January 22, 2022, 01:55:02 pm
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.

The concept is wholly different from suicide.

S
Substitute anti-vax, overweight, underlying medical conditions for Texans:

"You know the good part about all those executions in Texas? Fewer Texans". -George Carlin
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on January 25, 2022, 11:29:14 am
Some research on "super-immunity" https://scitechdaily.com/researchers-discover-two-paths-toward-super-immunity-to-covid-19/ (https://scitechdaily.com/researchers-discover-two-paths-toward-super-immunity-to-covid-19/).
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on January 29, 2022, 05:27:46 pm
One of the mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, designated BA.2, is rapidly gaining "market share" in a number of countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, India, and Denmark.  Because it appears to be displacing the initial Omicron BA.1 strain—i.e., it is being identified in an increasing proportion of the infections subject to genomic sequencing—it may be more transmissible (https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/omicron-what-do-we-know-about-the-stealth-variant) than Omicron BA.1, but so far the evidence is sketchy:

Quote
“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.”

Gathering data about rate of spread of this variant is complicated because it is missing a couple of mutations in the coronavirus spike protein that make it more difficult to identify in PCR (and presumably other molecular) tests.  So far, however, there appears to be no reason to believe the differences between BA.1 and BA.2 would make the current vaccines significantly less effective in preventing severe illness or death from infections of the latter.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on February 03, 2022, 09:31:17 am
Interesting article:
Quote
Why do some people get Covid when others don't? Here’s what we know so far
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/03/why-do-some-people-get-covid-while-others-dont.html
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on February 05, 2022, 04:59:25 pm
The US hit 900,000 dead (that are recorded) third cause of death in the US, and the stupidity continues on, elsewhere : https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=140036.msg1233866#msg1233866
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on February 06, 2022, 01:52:36 pm
An old friend reports that when he asked his young granddaughter "are you positive?" about something she had told him, she didn't understand he was inquiring about her certainty regarding the statement but assumed instead that he was referring to her COVID-19 status.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on February 09, 2022, 08:01:47 am
I'm hoping that someone who understands the modelling better can answer. Several Canadian provinces are announcing an end to Covid restrictions in the very near future. But when I look at the Worldometer new infections and daily deaths graphs, the numbers are not much lower now than they were at the peaks of waves 1 & 2, although the numbers are obviously trending down rapidly after the holiday wave. We've relaxed restrictions before and have had to follow them with subsequent re-newed lockdowns. I assume that the idea is that vaccine penetration is high enough now, compared to earlier waves, that it makes sense to proceed. Is this the case?

Four years was about the length of time given for passage of a pandemic, as per the historical record. It seems as if the new vaccines have short-circuited that.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on February 09, 2022, 09:17:58 am
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
Quote
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on February 09, 2022, 10:12:09 am
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

It's safe to assume that the new infections are under-reported. Especially with the less fatal Omicron variant. The ratio between the deaths and (reported) cases in US has been steadily increasing. Yesterday's count: 2,777 deaths, 179,169 new infections.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on February 21, 2022, 02:53:40 pm
Some recent encouraging evidence of why three doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines are so remarkably effective in preventing hospitalization or death (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.14.480394v1.full.pdf).

Quote
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]

Also encouraging: the "memory" immune response produced by the current vaccines continues to be effective against the extremely-infectious variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that currently are circulating  after the initial vaccine-induced antibodies have begun to wane (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04465-y_reference.pdf).

Quote
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]
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on February 24, 2022, 09:20:35 pm
Some good news, the Worldometer 7-day average of US daily deaths seems to have finally dipped below 2000. The numbers still seems high to me, but the curve has been trending in the right direction.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 04, 2022, 01:16:54 pm
A good interview with Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch on the Deep Background podcast about the future of Covid, Harvard epidemiologist and recurring guest Marc Lipsitch (http://Harvard epidemiologist and recurring guest Marc Lipsitch).

It's about 40 min long. From the blurb on the landing page: "Harvard epidemiologist and recurring guest Marc Lipsitch discusses what we can learn from omicron surge. Lipsitch also addresses some common omicron myths and discusses the possibility of a 'master vaccine'.”  One of those myths is the often repeated idea that viruses become less virulent with time. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, it's a mistake to make the assumption.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: dreed on March 06, 2022, 09:29:20 am
What difference does the vaccine make, you might ask.

Back in 2020 I had covid-like symptoms but couldn't get tested - wasn't sure. From 2022 experience, turns out it was.
In 2022 (after being vaccinated twice), I was exposed to it by spending many hours working closely with someone and presented symptoms shortly thereafter.

In 2020, it took ~2 weeks for the very mild symptoms to progress.
In 2022, it took ~2 days for the symptoms to be resolved (4 months after vaccine #2.)

But that's just the visible symptoms from breathing. There are other internal organs that have suffered but that only got picked up because I do a regular thing with my doctor (full blood, urine, etc) at the start of 2021. Hopefully they can get back to normal in time.

Didn't being infected in 2020 protect me in 2022? No. Body defenses created as a result of infection lasts 6-12 months max.

SARS-CoV-2 is nasty. If you've had it, ask your doctor for a full checkup (bloodwork, urine, etc) to see if everything is "normal'.

Surviving COVID-19 without being vaccinated doesn't mean you're "OK".
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 08, 2022, 09:31:08 pm
The US 7-day avg daily deaths from Covid continue to decline as shown on Worldometer https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/), although it is still above 1000 per day. It is trending in the right direction though and at that rate is 3rd leading cause of death according to CDC stats https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm). The first two are cardiovascular and cancer and their rates are probably consistent with time, while the Covid numbers fluctuate a lot as waves pass.

Here in Canada more and more provinces are relaxing Covid restrictions. Ontario will probably be removing their mask recommendations by the end of March if the numbers continue to improve.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on March 11, 2022, 12:49:38 pm
From last week's "The Week Magazine":
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 11, 2022, 06:08:12 pm
From last week's "The Week Magazine":

This is off-topic for this thread, but is there no legal recourse (law suit if nothing else) available? It should NOT be ok for people in positions of authority to speak out irresponsibly about things they don't know anything about. I understand that politicians may do that very thing often when it comes to matters of opinion, but surely in this case where expert medical knowledge is easily available, there should be a way to discourage and maybe even punish such behaviour. This seems like a bug in the code.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: LesPalenik on March 12, 2022, 04:42:30 am
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,
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 12, 2022, 07:24:46 am
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,

I saw a report yesterday of new lockdowns in China, but I can't remember where I read it.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on March 19, 2022, 07:39:13 am
At week's end the Worldometer 7-day average of US daily Covid deaths is showing a consistent downward slope. It is still at about 1000 per day, not nothing, but it's going in the right direction.

I read that there's now an Omicron sub-variant on the loose, but I've read no dire warnings about it. Most Canadian provinces will have removed Covid protocols soon, but some specific places are keeping mask requirements in place for a few more weeks.

How lucky we are that vaccine researchers were hard at work in the last 10-20 years.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Robert Roaldi on April 08, 2022, 07:10:45 am
We missed noting that the US reached one million Covid deaths on Worldometer recently. The 7-day moving average daily deaths has continued to decline and is at around 400 deaths per day at the moment.

In at least Quebec and Ontario we are entering the 6th wave. Quebec has extended their mask mandate to the end of April from April 15th, but no new changes in Ontario, which is pretty open at the moment. Most employees in food stores and restaurants/cafés continue to wear masks, as do I when inside anywhere. About half the clients do. 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.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: Chris Kern on April 08, 2022, 04:00:48 pm
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.

Somewhat further south, we're also experiencing the beginning of a predicted spike in cases caused by the Omicron BA.2 subvariant; New York City and Washington, D.C. are the two most prominent epicenters.  In the Maryland county where I live, about a 30-minute drive north of Washington, the case rate has been increasing fairly rapidly for two weeks now.  However, we're not seeing a significant increase in deaths nor, as far as I can tell, hospitalizations.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized a fourth dose (second booster) of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines for people with compromised immune systems and anyone over 50.  There has been considerable debate among the medical experts about whether another booster makes sense at this time, especially since all the current vaccines were designed to protect against the variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that were circulating in 2020 and early 2021 rather than the mutations that are infecting people now.  (My wife and I decided to get the additional dose, anyway: we figured it might provide additional protection against severe disease and there seemed to be little reason to avoid it.)

A retrospective study of older patients in Israel that was published earlier this week in the New England Journal of Medicine (attached) suggests that an extra Pfizer-BioNTech booster may provide increased short-term protection from infection as well as longer-lasting protection from severe disease compared to a three-dose regime.  This came as a bit of a surprise precisely because the vaccine formulation was based on an old version of the coronavirus.

Quote
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.

It seems likely that similar benefits would accrue to a fourth dose of the Moderna product, which is also based on mRNA vaccine technology.
Title: Re: Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine
Post by: digitaldog on May 04, 2022, 07:40:24 pm
Well seems today, the US hit more than one million dead from Covid-19. Very likely higher of course.
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..."  :'(