« competition: from a Japanese perspective | Main | Spreading the love »

August 03, 2021

Comments

The whichness of why?

i'm about to go to my fourth tire shop to see if they can fix a slow leak in my 1300-mile-old tire, or if i have to buy a new one.

Many thanks Janie!

Working on an epic based on Apuleius' Amor and Psyche.
In German. I am no good at writing Latin hexameters (and English is in my experience not a good language to write hexameters in).

Cleek,

Warranty?

English is in my experience not a good language to write hexameters in.

English is more of a pentameter language.

Warranty?

not for a puncture. dealer said they'd fix it for $342.

this place handled it, for $30. i had to sit in the waiting room and listen to living fossil Pat Robertson tell his stupid audience that immigrants are to blame for C19 for 45 minutes, though.

.... $342 to replace the tire, that is. they refused to do a puncture repair.

they refused to do a puncture repair.

Sidewall, or tread? Almost no one will touch a sidewall puncture.

dealer said they'd fix it for $342.

and that, my friends, is how billionaires pay for their rides into space.

also, in the interest of establishing my personal non-partisan street cred, let me be the first to say it's time for Cuomo to go.

it's unethical to bug your subordinates for sex, no matter what letter comes after your name.

say goodbye, Andrew.

Bicycle ride with granddaughter #1 along the Poudre Trail this morning. We were 15 miles or so downstream from last week's burn scar flash flood and the river is still running nasty black with the occasional chunk of debris floating by. (Note, different flash flood from the one that has I-70 closed indefinitely.) Thunderstorms up in the mountains again this afternoon.

This was the first ride since I told my daughter to let me take the bicycle home, no one should be riding with that much stuff broken. So compared to last time, the front brake works, the rear brake works better, the broken twist-shifter is replaced, the derailleur is properly adjusted, and the chain is a whole lot cleaner and better lubed. We went faster today. When we hit the uphill stretch, she shifted down two gears and cackled as she took it without slowing (don't know how else to describe the sound; I don't recall our kids cackling when they were seven).

I'm reading a book of old Italian folktales, collected by Italo Calvino.

Last night I read a fable about a man who accidentally eats a viper (he thought he was eating an eel) and is granted the ability to understand the language of animals.

First conversation he hears is between a cat and dog. They're arguing about who should get the biggest portion of meat from the man they live with.

It's an entertaining book, perfect for bedtime reading.

it's unethical to bug your subordinates for sex, ...

Andrew Cuomo agrees with you...

A solution to a non-problem:
There are those who are hysterical on the subject of vaccine passports. OK, we can avoid that. After all, we've got huge supplies of vaccine. So just require that you get vaccinated every time you enter a restaurant or concert, etc. (Maybe, in time, any business open to the public.**) An extra vaccination may be useless, but it won't hurt you. And if it's trivial enough that a drug store can do it, a restaurant can.

Of course, hysteria over vaccine passports is stupid. But hey, we can work around stupid.

** Note that we're already discussing requiring vaccination to get on an airplane. Which, amusingly, may force certain members of Congress to admit that they've gotten the vaccine they are urging their followers not to get.

Boy, that section of I-70 being out doesn't leave many convenient alternatives for a route. Glad we made no plans to visit family this summer.

Andrew Cuomo agrees with you...

The horror of the Internet. Not only do dumb things you said remain around to haunt you. Intelligent things you said long ago can haunt you, too.

Michael Cain - I was delighted by the image (and the imagined sound) of your cackling granddaughter. Also, if it was you who recommended Alex Verus (as I think it was) because you liked a) magic and b) London, I think you might possibly like the King's Watch books by Mark Hayden.

Sidewall, or tread? Almost no one will touch a sidewall puncture.

first local place wouldn't answer their on-line appointment form.

second local place wouldn't even look at it because they thought Tesla 3's only came with run-flat tires. that's not true: it's not a run-flat, though it does have a stiff sidewall so it can hold up with low pressure for a while. but they were pretty certain about their info.

dealer said it was in the tread but at a "questionable angle". and they don't do repairs there regardless (beats me?) they almost got the $342 out of me, too. i almost gave in just to end the nonsense. but i figured it was worth trying one more place.

fourth place just fixed it.

and that, my friends, is how billionaires pay for their rides into space.

yep.

but not this time, Elon. not. this. time.

p.s. With any luck, she might be a witch. Although I may be succumbing to stereotypes...

Boy, that section of I-70 being out doesn't leave many convenient alternatives for a route.

Which says a great deal about why the first plans for the interstate highway system had I-70 stop at Denver. Going farther west was deemed too difficult and too expensive. Colorado called in every political favor they had, but it wasn't enough until the US Army decided they really wanted an alternate central route to I-80 across the Rockies. I-70 west of Denver was the last of the original system finished to four lanes (in the early 1990s), and is still the most expensive per-mile non-urban section of the interstate system. Even more expensive if some of the cantilevered parts through that canyon now have to be rebuilt.

Occasionally I speculate about how the history of the American West might have played out differently if the South/Bridger Pass in Wyoming didn't exist.

I was delighted by the image (and the imagined sound) of your cackling granddaughter.

It took me a minute to mentally process the sound. I was in "hovering grandpa" pose* right behind her, and was listening to each click of the shifter and whether the chain moved quickly and smoothly to the next gear (it did**).

* She's a bit small for her age, and I do hang close enough that we can talk as either of us feels necessary. Behind her, so that I know where she is (and puts her in charge, so "Oh, look, a frog!" and abrupt stop works. (Cool enough today to not worry about snakes. At the right combination of time/season here, there will be the occasional big rattlesnake sunning.) We (I?) get a lot of grins from adult cyclists we meet, and compliments from people passing when they realize she's there.

** My daughter would be unhappy if I simply spent money and had a bike shop do the work. It has been a long time since I adjusted a derailleur from scratch. I had forgotten what a slow picky process it can be to get it just right. (Note to self: would have been easier with an actual repair stand, which you know how to build for almost nothing from PVC pipe.)

How To Be A Detective (1936)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-vWOCCN_DE

@wj
As far as I understand, the main complication risk with a vaccination is an anaphylactic shock. You need to give an adrenadline injection if that happens.

In Finland, vaccination requires a registered nurse to do it. In USA, the requirement is clearly laxer, but I suppose that the pharmacist, being academically educated member of medical profession, has received instruction in handling emergencies in vaccinations.

I thought this, by Paul Sabin, was interesting, called How Liberalism Can Succeed:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/opinion/liberal-biden-infrastructure.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Opinion

In USA, the requirement is clearly laxer, but I suppose that the pharmacist, being academically educated member of medical profession, has received instruction in handling emergencies in vaccinations.

I'm not absolutely certain. But my impression is that our "drug stores" (as opposed to actual pharmacies) do not routinely have a pharmacist on site.

But it is also possible that I misinterpreted where shots were being given.

"Drug stores" in my area have actual pharmacies inside them. So, for that matter, do the bigger grocery stores. I get my shots mostly from a pharmacist in a "drug store." Now and then at the grocery store. It's always a pharmacist giving them.

wj, surely any place that fills prescriptions has a pharmacist attached to it.....?

And if it's trivial enough that a drug store can do it, a restaurant can.

I had missed this the first time through, and without your 11:06, I might have thought you were just being snarky. It's not trivial, and not just anyone can do it.

Here are Maine rules. Doesn't sound very "lax" to me. I would assume -- maybe wrongly -- that other states' frameworks are similar.

"she might be a witch"

does she weigh the same as a duck?

And now for something completely different:
a significant number of drugstores seem to have "minute clinic" type sidelines, thanks to USian healthcare 'system' craziness. So they'd have a nurse on site.

Of the various vaccines (Pfizer, AZ, Moderna) I'm tempted to 'collect the whole set'.
Except for the TrumpVAX bleach/lysol one; needz moar testing on MAGAts.

wj, surely any place that fills prescriptions has a pharmacist attached to it.....?

My possibly incorrect impression is that many drug stores around here only offer over-the-counter products. I may have made an u justified leap that, since you don't need a prescription for the vaccine....

I may have made an u justified leap that, since you don't need a prescription for the vaccine....

I didn't keep the link, but there is a list of medical care provider types that can administer the vaccine. It's longer than the usual list -- eg includes veterinarians who have experience injecting animals -- but the atypical people have to complete specific training first. My second Moderna shot, administered at a Kaiser facility, was given by one of those atypical people who stated her qualification and had a copy of the training certification available to view. An RN was also available if I was nervous about being stuck by an "amateur".

For enough money, I'm sure you could find qualified people willing to moonlight. The bigger problem, though, might be the requirements on record keeping and reporting.

"An extra vaccination may be useless, but it won't hurt you"

There is no longitudinal data supporting this assertion. Or that your original vaccine won't hurt you.

Daily vaccination could be a bad idea.

Not to mention they take a few weeks to be effective.

I got my COVID vaxes at a local hospital, but I have gotten plain old flu shots at a local pharmacy.

The shots at the pharmacy are given by a pharmacist. To be a licensed pharmacist in the US, you have to complete a PhD in pharmacology and then do an internship, typically 1500 hours worth.

It's not something you should be getting at a restaurant.

Or that your original vaccine won't hurt you.

People are free to get a vaccination or not. People who don't want to be vaccinated should wear a mask anytime they are around other people, and should probably avoid being around other people to the degree that is possible.

Freedom doesn't mean you can do whatever the hell you want and nobody else has anything to say about it.

My wife was speaking with a friend this AM whose daughter in law works as a doula. She doesn't want to get vaccinated because she doesn't think it's natural. My wife's friend has a number of co-morbidities, and her husband, the woman's father, is in his 80's.

The daughter in law was not invited to a family thing up in NH. She is highly pissed off.

What the hell did she think everyone's response was going to be?

I'm not even going to get into the risk factors for the daughter-in-law's clients - pregnant women and their families - and am curious to know if she discloses here non-vaxed status to them. If she doesn't, she by god ought to.

Do what you want, but exercise a basic level of responsibility. If you can't do that, you're going to piss people off, and you're going to deserve that.

People who don't want to be vaccinated should wear a mask anytime they are around other people, and should probably avoid being around other people to the degree that is possible.

i would prefer it if they wore bright red jumpsuits and flashing light on their heads. i don't want to be within 100 yards of any of them.

if you have no regard for the health of others, the least you can do is advertise it - don't be an incognito plague rat, own it.

With 70% of people in the US fully or nearly vaccinated, why would the 30% need to wear masks or distance? I'm not being argumentative here. The people they are likely to infect are others who have decided to not get vaccinated.

There are breakthrough infections though most have have shown muted symptoms.

It seems unlikely the virus will be eradicated based on anything I have seen. so there is a diminishing return over time in making the non vaccinated pariahs. And every one of them that gets it brings us closer to whatever level of herd immunity that can be achieved.

I'm just waiting for the annual covid/flu shot to be available at my pharmacy.

Don't know where you're getting your numbers.

As of today:

58% of the entire U.S. population has received 1+ dose..

The people they are likely to infect are others who have decided to not get vaccinated.

Including some who are at extra risk and can't get vaccinated. Including millions of children who can't get vaccinated yet at all.


Because 30% of people have not been vaccinated, so those 30% can infect each other.

30% of the population is almost 100 million people. That is a great big pool of humanity in which the virus can continue to thrive and mutate. It's enough people that COVID will continue to strain the resources of hospitals and health care providers in general. It's enough people that a small-ish percentage of them still amounts to a hell of a lot of people getting sick and dying.

Plus, I doubt that the folks who are not vaccinated have chosen not to be vaccinated in order to get COVID. So it would be a simple courtesy to anyone else around you - rhetorical 'you' - who is not vaccinated. Some of the folks who are not vaccinated have not failed to get vaccinated by choice. Children, for instance.

Breakthrough infections mostly show muted symptoms, but you're still communicable. And 'symptoms are muted' still means you can get pretty sick, sick enough to need care and sick enough to stay home from whatever your daily thing is. I know two people (that I know of) who were vaxed and got breakthrough infections, it kicked both of their @sses.

This isn't about 'making people pariahs', it's about trying to get rid of this fucking virus. How many more people have to get sick and die before we get it under control?

All of the people who refuse to get vaccinated make that goal that much further away. So hell yeah, a lot of people are going to be angry with them. They are putting people's lives at risk. It seems childish, to me, for people to decide to not get vaccinated, and then expect everyone else to not respond to that in any negative way.

Hey, I'm gonna go sneeze all over the salad bar, but nobody else better have anything to say about it! Right?

If folks don't want to get the shot, they are free to not get the shot. They should *take responsibility for their own behavior* and have the basic courtesy to not put other people at risk. I am at a loss to understand why that is in any way controversial or puzzling.

I also look forward to the day when we can manage COVID with a simple annual flu shot.

The people they are likely to infect are others who have decided to not get vaccinated.

J&J doesn't protect against lambda.

it will infect them, too. and the unvaccinnated will spread it, happily, like rolling coal on the saps who weren't manly enough to stand up for the freedom to kill others .

There's also a heavy cost to the health care system, and health care workers, both now and due to the long term cost of COVID, about which we have very little idea so far. But hey, I'm sure it's all these idiots' right to make themselves and other people sick, and then turn around and say it's also their right to be taken care of.

This needs to be stressed. COVID can set off a spiral. It can be long COVID. It can be hospitalization and after hospitalization in the elderly. There can be side effects from inappropriate antibiotics. Deaths can follow from that initial spark was a case of COVID.

From here.

I'm not being argumentative here.

Words fail.

It's worth noting that the various COVID vaccines have been available for 8+ months at this point. Over 4 BILLION shots have been given, almost 350 million of them in the US.

There are no guarantees, but it appears to be a pretty safe vaccine.

I'm not interested in forcing people to get it. I think the reasons many people have for not getting it are ill-founded, but so be it.

But if you don't get vaccinated, you are personally at much greater risk of getting COVID, and you are at much greater risk of passing it along.

Everyone who doesn't get vaccinated delays the point at which COVID turns into something like influenza - a health risk, especially for vulnerable people, but a manageable one. We have the means in hand to make that happen, at least in countries like the US. The only thing that delays that is all of the people who refuse to get vaccinated.

People make choices, and they are responsible for the choices they make. If you do things that put other people at risk of harm, those other people are likely to object.

You can't have it both ways.

So. Now I am argumentative. Here is a favorite line: I am at a loss to understand why that is in any way controversial or puzzling.

Of course you are. You believe it is my responsibility to make sure you and everyone else are safe. If they can't take a vaccine and want to be safe they can take steps to be distanced. If kids aren't vaccinated the question is what should their parents do. But no I should be vaccinated.

It's never the individuals responsibility to do what is necessary. Everyone should get vaccinated or be refused access to society, so other unvaccinated people can be safe?

The circular logic in all that is dizzying. I(the general I) should have to take an inadequaty tested injection that could cause long term ill effects, not because I decided the short term risk of not taking it is greater, but so I can maintain the freedom too participate in society in the semester of ways.

I am at a loss to understand why objecting to that is in any way controversial or puzzling.

Simplest of ways

Everyone should get vaccinated or be refused access to society, so other unvaccinated people can be safe?

That seems reasonable to me, except that I want vaccinated people to be safe too. Everyone who can be vaccinated should get vaccinated, or else stay at home. I just can't see what's wrong with this, any more than requiring people to be sober when driving.

clearly, the social contract is a commie plot.

It doesn't help that the messaging coming from politicians, bureaucrats, government agencies, experts, news media, etc. gives the impression that much of what people are being told is contradictory and being driven more by politics and agendas rather than by facts. A lot of people don't know who to trust. And a lot of people who think they know who to trust are wrong.

A lot of people don't know who to trust.

yes they do. they trust what their preferred politicians tell them.

Hi Marty, Don't want to make you a punching bag, but I think your attitude is why you get grouped with two others here. This isn't to set you on each other, I just think that this is a line between you three and the rest of us. (I'd also note that I find it quite interesting when you three don't agree, but that just may be me)

There are a lot of things we do in order to make things work. Drive on the right side of the street. Agree that the price marked on a package is the price we pay. Agreeing that 'Hi there' is an appropriate greeting and 'F you' isn't. Pro Bono's example of sober while driving is good except that it wasn't always a requirement. (folks interested in how this might be different here, check out
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/drunk-japan-9780190070847?cc=jp&lang=en& )

Now, you argue that the risk involved with the vaccine makes it something that we should cut more slack than usual. The vaccine is inadequately tested (Russell suggests 4 billion doses, I don't know the state, but if you had 4 billion doses of something totally inert, you'd probably still get reactions), the vaccine is being pushed on people because the government in order to promulgate some goverment plot (https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-784231435856), yada yada yada
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-myth-versus-fact
(I don't know if you accept that, but it is from Johns Hopkins, employer of Hilzoy, so seems to be an ok source)

I'm often on you to ask you for links. What are you basing your statements on? I realize that it may seen like I'm just picking a fight, but if it is something external, we can talk about that rather than talk about it as something in your head. Which then leads to feelings that people are talking down to you, or are picking on you.

Your last comment is a good example. Rather than a factual discussion trying to identify the risks, you move to suggesting that Russell is engaging in circular logic. But the logic is only circular if the questions of vaccine remain undiscussed. If those were settled, or at least addressed, it might go some way to resolving the contradictions. But leaping to why objecting to objecting is a problem, it is basically making things insoluble.

So I don't want to turn this into a full blown discussion of COVID risks and details, but if you could _link_ to things that explain why you think that the vaccine is inadequately tested and could cause long term ill effects, it might be better. I can't guarantee that people here won't take that as an opportunity to take a swipe at you, but absent that, you are sort of guaranteeing that someone will

but if you had 4 billion doses of something totally inert, you'd probably still get reactions

definitely.

the nocebo effect is very real.

With 70% of people in the US fully or nearly vaccinated, why would the 30% need to wear masks or distance?

Have you not seen the data one the exploding case rates, and hospitalizations, in Florida? (And Texas and Missouri and...) Almost entirely among the unvaccinated.

I might be OK with them killing off each other in pursuit of "free choice." But thete are some people who, for legitimate medical reasons, cannot be vaccinated. Endangering them is simply massively selfish.

Pfizer is likely to be officially approved in the US next month. a new excuse will instantly take over. i'm betting on a mix of "it's not effective! you can still get COVID if you're vaccinated! side effects!"

You believe it is my responsibility to make sure you and everyone else are safe.

not quite.

In general I believe that people are responsible for minimizing the harm that their actions cause to others.

In the context of a pandemic, specifically, I believe that people who don't want to get vaccinated are responsible for minimizing the chance that they will be a vector for the disease.

In practical terms, that means avoid being around other people, and wear a mask when that's not possible.

Nobody is asking you or anyone else to make everybody else on the planet 'safe'.

I am saying that if you make a choice that has the potential to harm other people, it is your responsibility to minimize the chance of causing that harm.

Basically, the ask here is don't be a dick. Don't sneeze on the salad bar.

You believe it is my responsibility to make sure you and everyone else are safe

it's not, like, my problem if my fire burns your house down, man. don't harsh my inferno.

I might be OK with them killing off each other in pursuit of "free choice."

I have reached the point (okay, it wasn't so very big a step) at which just shooting the deliberately unvaxxed & unmasked is OK.

You want to be a species-traitor? Fine, accept the consequences.

Shot in the arm, or two in the noggin. Your choice. Decide fast.

Marty stated that 70% of Americans were vaccinated in a tone that implied God said so on a stone tablet. I gave a source that said 58%, offering him an opening to at least back up the most basic of his facts.

Instead we get the usual condescending scorn because we don't follow Marty-logic.

Whistle for your supper, lj.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jil0WCh_UoQ

THe end of this slays me every time.

an inadequaty tested injection

Sez who, anyway? Not anyone who knows anything much about it, it seems to me.

For enough money, I'm sure you could find qualified people willing to moonlight.

FWIW, and for those who are interested in the NHS, all the vaccination centers that I know about in the UK (obviously including the local one where I got my two Pfizer shots) were staffed by volunteer doctors from the NHS on their days off. I saw one or two army types around, but as far as I could tell they were just organising entrances and exits. And I have just checked: as of yesterday, according to:

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=GBR

Percentage of the UK population who are partly vaccinated (i.e. just one dose) is 12.07% and fully vaccinated is 57.06%.

FWIW, the headline I saw was that 70% of USian *adults* have had *at least one dose of one of the vaccines.* That's well short of 70% of all USians. And even if it were 70%, that's still 10% below what researchers suggest is the threshold for herd immunity from COVID-19.

Meanwhile, the virus continues to mutate and the longer it takes to get to 80%, the greater the chances that we'll get a vaccine resistant mutation, which would then render my choice to get vaccinated moot.

Also the vaccination rate is quite different in different locations. Some are reaching herd immunity levels (at least for the earlier, less virulent strands) others are low enough that the vaccine could as well not exist. And those are the potential incubators for the next strain that will get around the protection of the current vaccine generation. And we can't simply wall off Abbott-and-deSantis land (however tempting that would be)and treat it as a leper colony or a plague ship.

I was not happy to be a beta tester for a new type of vaccine but it clearly seemed better than the alternative (and at least I had a choice of product and went for the one with the least amount of reported side effects that was also estimated to have a high effectiveness).
It had some side effects I hadn't had with any other vaccine in my lifetime (although they are on the list of about any other vaccine too) but it didn't render me hors de combat for days as some other people I know of.
As for longterm effects, one cannot ever exclude those unless one is willing to wait for a decade before seeking final approval which is not an option in a pandemic. As for now I am not aware of any other medication that got 'tested' on billions of subjects in such a short time ever and I am actually quite surprised that there were not significantly more problems, so the 'untested' argument goes out the window. If that's your (generic you) main reason then you should not take anything that got on the market after the turn of the century.
Taking the vaccine early was something of a gamble. In my estimate it no longer is.
As for risk: people have died from a single aspirine too. In medicine there is no zero risk.
Btw, although I would not encourage actually shooting the reckless I would have applauded some congresscritters, if the had beaten up certain colleagues (that came to work while knowing to be infected and refusing to even wear masks) hard enough to sent them to the emergency room. Not to forget the vaccinated bullhorn wielders that actively discourage others from taking the shot and start to foam at the mouth if someone so much as asks them, if they had taken the vaccine.

I should make my 8-year-old live like a hermit.

Right, hsh. Because if someone decides to swing his fist, or shoot his AR-15, or drive drunk out in a public place, it's up to you to get your kid out of the way, because heaven forbid we should expect to be safe in public spaces when FREEDOM is at stake.

I could spell it differently, but that would be casting aspersions. So I'll just think it instead.

If you think it's NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to NOT ENDANGER OTHER PEOPLE, you're a [posting rule violation deleted] and you can go [incredibly offensive verb deleted] yourself.

"You" need not equate to "Marty", but if the shoe fits, I don't give a [name of a gross bodily function deleted].

This is WRS, only without the civility sauce.

--TP

But the logic is only circular if the questions of vaccine remain undiscussed

the logic is not circular in any case or circumstance.

there are all kinds of reasons people might not want to get vaccinated. kids under 12, people with various medical conditions. some people just don't trust it.

I am not judging any of those people, or demanding that any of them get vaccinated. I find that some of the reasons folks choose to not get vaccinated are ill-founded, which is to say not based on good information. But whatever, I'm not interested in requiring anyone to get a vaccination against their will. I would oppose a public policy that required anyone to get vaccinated against their will.

What I'm saying is that not getting vaccinated makes you orders-of-magnitude more likely to get COVID and transfer it to someone else.

So if that's your choice, you should take it upon yourself to minimize the risk that your choice presents to others.

Minimize your contact with other people.
Wear a mask when that is not possible.

That's it.

If I read Marty right, his position is that, if you feel you are at risk and want to avoid COVID, it's on you to stay away from other people. If on the other hand you don't want to get vaccinated but are willing to accept the risk of getting COVID, that's your choice, people should respect that, and you should be free to come and go as you wish.

I disagree with that, because *the risk you incur is not just to yourself*.

If you want to do stuff that presents a high level of risk to yourself, but doesn't create a heightened risk to others, do your thing. Live your life, knock yourself out, go nuts.

The point at which that changes is when the risk is not just to yourself, but to others.

If you don't want to get vaccinated, minimize your contact with other people and wear a mask when that's not possible.

If there is a simpler, less intrusive thing that could be asked of people, I'm hard pressed to imagine it.

What we are dealing with here is a profoundly different set of basic values. It's 'I should be able to do what I want, and if that creates a problem for you, you need to figure out how to solve it', versus 'I am obliged to consider how my actions affect others'.

Marty appears to hold the first position, I hold the second.

From a column in today's New York magazine.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/08/andrew-cuomo-aides-smeared-lindsay-boylan.html

Surviving in Andrew Cuomo’s orbit always required more than competence.
...
To make it in Cuomoland, above all else, you need to be loyal. To the man, to the brand, the power that pulsed out of the capital and cowed legislators, county executives, and mayors alike.
Except for the name, sounds remarkably like Trump.

But that's GQP Conservatism in a nutshell, isn't it?

Free will for me, but not for thee.

Conservatives demand freedom to be in society without vaccination, to shoot dozens of civilians/schoolchildren/churchgoers so the Tree of Liberty gets watered, to be bigots, to be ignorant of basic scientific facts... to be, in short, colossal in-your-face assholes.

The rest of us need to scurry out of their way.

When a politician promotes and enforces policies that lead to the death of thousands, people just shrug their shoulders. After all, that's what politicians do. But if a politician plays non-consensual grabass with less than a dozen of his subordinates, people run around with their hair on fire.

The second is reprehensible. The first is far more consequential.

But if a politician plays non-consensual grabass with less than a dozen of his subordinates, people run around with their hair on fire.

Who's running around with their hair on fire?

Cuomo engaged in sexual harassment of subordinates. It's not ethical. He should be removed from office.

This isn't complicated.

Cuomo engaged in sexual harassment of subordinates. It's not ethical. He should be removed from office.

He's done worse things that he should be removed from office for.

… I'm not interested in forcing people to get it. I think the reasons many people have for not getting it are ill-founded, but so be it...

I am quite interested in the idea, even if I’m not 100% sold on it. Notable, for instance, that the NFL which has mandated it, has a vaccination rate of around 90%. There’s clearly a number who will refuse vaccination with great determination, but most people will just go ahead and get vaccinated if their employer requires it.

It should be an absolute requirement for healthcare, IMO. They are dealing with the most vulnerable on a daily basis, and this thing can kill those folk even if they’ve been vaccinated. As an example, asymptomatic Covid increases the mortality risk from a general anaesthetic by around 20x.

One wrinkle is that the infectious ness of the Delta variant means that most unvaccinated folk are going to get it.

He's done worse things that he should be removed from office for.

For example...?

For example...?

Stuffing COVID patients in nursing homes. Facilities with the greatest at-risk populations and limited abilities to isolate patients from each other.

As for longterm effects, one cannot ever exclude those unless one is willing to wait for a decade before seeking final approval which is not an option in a pandemic.

Very likely nil (if you exclude the training of the immune system to respond to the virus, which will persist in some form for decades).
The vaccine itself (and this goes for all of them) is completely eliminated from the body in a very short time. In very rare cases, there can be severe and even fatal side effects, but we’ve a pretty good idea of the mechanisms behind those.

In contrast, the long term effects of Covid are poorly understood, but it’s clear that they are fairly common, affecting a significant number of those infected.
And if you haven’t been vaccinated, you’ll probably get it, so the balance of risk for anyone older than a teen is very strongly in favour of vaccination.

KFF survey: Majority of unvaccinated adults think shot is riskier than contracting COVID-19
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/hospitals/kff-survey-majority-unvaccinated-adults-think-shot-riskier-than-contracting-covid-19

Couldn’t be more wrong, but it does account for a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
People are very bad at understanding relative risk - especially when subject to the misinformation campaigns we’ve seen.

"Sez who, anyway? Not anyone who knows anything much about it, it seems to me"

Well, the CDC. It has issued an emergency authorization. If it was adequately tested, for even short term safety, they would have approved it. And when they do, they are talking about Pfizer in 2022, it will still be without long term effects being tested.

What ‘long term effects’ do they test the annual flu jan for, Marty ?
And what long term effects have emerged for any vaccine, which were not already apparent within six months ?

And it’s the FDA, not the CDC, who authorise cavvines ( and are likely to do so for the Pfizer one next month).

I think your under several misapprehensions here.

You’re.

One largely unappreciated side effect of the AZN vaccine is the inability consistently to type the word 'vaccine'.

The Japanese is ワクチン (wakuchin), which took me quite a bit to figure out. Apparently from German rather than English.

As an example for risk assessment: Germany dicontinued polio vaccinations for several years because the risk to get infected had gone down so far that the tiny risk of the (life) vaccine began to outweigh it. When polio made a comeback (via former Soviet bloc countries iirc) vaccinations started again (this time with a vaccine without 'life' viruses that carried an even lesser risk than the previous).

'discontinued' ('dicontinued' somehow sounds like double effort).

It was late, meant FDA.

... it will still be without long term effects being tested.

What long-term effects could there conceivably be, by what mechanism?

It's like talking about the long-term effects of a ride on a Ferris wheel. I bet the FDA hasn't reported on those either.

all these conservative viral epidemiologists should realize their Trump U-issued degrees aren't worth the photons their email is printed on.

the side effects of the APPROVED shingles vaccine were several times worse for me than the COVID vaccine, which were more like the side-effects of the APPROVED novel flu vaccine i get every year.

If it was adequately tested, for even short term safety, they would have approved it.

Unless I’m mistaken (which is possible):

The Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J vaccines have all successfully completed Phase III trials. The next step to approval is normally monitoring for some period of time, at least several months if not longer. That period of observation and monitoring is underway now, and may be complete for at least the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines as soon as this fall.

Approval for emergency use was granted after clinical trials were complete, but before the full period of monitoring was done, because we’re in a pandemic. Emergency use for J&J was granted in February, and earlier for the other two. So the vaccines have been in widespread use for at least 6 months.

It’s inaccurate and harmful to claim that the vaccines were ‘in sufficiently tested’. The reality is that they have all been through all required clinical trials, and at this point have demonstrated their basic short-term safety via being administered to hundreds of millions of people over a period of at least half a year. Moderna and Pfizer are probably a couple of months from full approval, if that. J&J maybe longer, not sure about that.

If you don’t want the shot, don’t get the shot. But own responsibility for your choice and don’t put other people at risk for your personal decisions.

The problem is not people who don’t want the shot. The problem - the reason COVID numbers are trending back up and the variants are getting a foothold - is people who don’t want the shot, but also don’t want to make any other adjustments to their daily lives to mitigate the fact that they are potential vectors for the virus.

Those people are literally the reason we are having difficulty managing the virus. We have vaccines, we have the infrastructure to deliver them to people, however we have millions and millions of people who straight up will not get vaccinated. Some for good reason, some for reasons that are ill-founded, i.e. based on false or misleading information.

for the record: Cuomo sucks and needs to go, now.

Well, the CDC. It has issued an emergency authorization. If it was adequately tested, for even short term safety, they would have approved it.

Not how it works. Shorter russell: "Emergency" approval doesn't have to do with testing. It has to do with bureaucracy. It takes time to work thru all the hoops required for regular approval. Time we didn't have, given how many people were dying.

So the bureaucracy has no purpose?

It's great at foot-dragging...

Yes, the bureaucracy has a purpose. The period of monitoring is to insure that the drug or procedure demonstrates that it is safe in actual use, as opposed to the clinical trial.

As a practical matter, the vaccines have demonstrated that they are effective and safe. Over a billion people have been fully vaccinated, over four billion doses have been given, over a period of several months. There is not much that the full approval process will add other than another couple of months of observation. In the real world, they are as solid as stuff like this gets.

If that's not enough assurance for someone and they don't want the shot, nobody will make them get the shot. That is a choice, however, and people are responsible for the choices they make.

If rhetorical-you don't want the shot, take it on yourself to minimize the risk that your choice presents to other people.

If there is something about that that is problematic, you will need to explain it to me, because I'm not getting it.

It's great at foot-dragging...

And nonetheless has managed to deliver the vaccination to half the population of the United States in less than a year. And the reason it's only half has nothing to do with bureaucratic foot-dragging.

Bureaucracy is the way things get done in a consistent way at scale. That's the reality. It's not efficient, but it is effective.

In a perfect world, we might not need it. That's not the world we live in.

The next step to approval is normally monitoring for some period of time, at least several months if not longer. The next step to approval is normally monitoring for some period of time, at least several months if not longer.

There is also analysis, including very detailed on-site inspections, of the manufacturing and distribution processes that are required for a full license but not for an EUA. I have been told that this normally takes about a year, can be shortened to six months in a straightforward fashion, but gets difficult to shorten further than that. There was really no way for the FDA to start this part early, since IIRC both BioNTech and Moderna were futzing with their processes to speed them up and increase capacity until very shortly before they submitted the full license applications.

Read it and weep.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/08/05/alabama-hospital-delta-dejavu/

the freedom gathered from freeloading is for a fact the finest form of freedom.

freedom to chase farmers out of Vermont!

There was really no way for the FDA to start this part early, since IIRC both BioNTech and Moderna were futzing with their processes to speed them up and increase capacity until very shortly before they submitted the full license applications.

None of them had enough capacity to produce the amount we need worldwide, so the developers were securing production from competitors to meet demand. That's one of the additional wrinkles involved.

i love that "conservatives" are pretending to be hung up on government approval.

#chef'skiss.

To wrap this up, I think russell summarized our positions pretty fairly. Six mo ths ago we didn't want children in school because there were no vaccinations for the adults they may encounter, although the children were largely asymptomatic or mildly. Now those adults have easy access to vaccines that seems to be a minimal problem.

The vast .ajority of current cases are people who have chosen to take the risk.

As someone who is immunocompromised I understand assessing my own risk in a variety of settings from various threats, not just covid, and adjusting my lifestyle as I require.

I have great sympathy for people at risk because of those types of limitations. But everyone else getting vaccinated won't change their choices. Covid won't be eradicated and they will have to be careful on an ongoing basis.

Forcing someone to get vaccinated or lose the ability to participate in life is not akin to asking them to wear a seatbelt. Ot is akin to asking them to bungee jump, we all know its safe, almost no o e dies from it. We are asking people to assume a risk when we can protect ourselves so they don't have to.

It is my opinion. I dont need a link, I chose being vaccinated. Since I did that I don't need them to.

when we can protect ourselves

By losing the ability to participate in life, which by not getting vaccinated people have taken away from other people.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad