Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine

[LesPalenik]

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

[TechTalk]

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. 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.

[TechTalk]

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.

[chez]

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. 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?

[TechTalk]

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 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.

[TechTalk]

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.

[LesPalenik]

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.

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

[TechTalk]

Thanks for linking that news story. I looked at the full report of their data and findings 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... 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. There has been a major reduction in hospitalizations for those vaccinated.

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.

[LesPalenik]

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.

"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

[Alan Klein]

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.

[TechTalk]

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.

[TechTalk]

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 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.

[TechTalk]

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.

[Alan Klein]

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.

[Robert Roaldi]

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.

[Robert Roaldi]

A little more on Florida, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/ron-desantis-joe-biden-covid-florida. This would be funny if it wasn't.

[chez]

A little more on 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.

[LesPalenik]

The horse dewormer seems to be flying of the shelves. At least in Alberta.

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

[Chris Kern]

The results of this study 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:

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.

[Robert Roaldi]

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.