These Days Continue  
Go Back   These Days Continue > The Continuation > nDMBc
Register Donate FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-02-2021, 06:09 PM   #8481
Jack
Grand Army of Letters
 
Jack's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stage Roi
Posts: 23,753
Where is that chart from, and how do they know that? Pfizer said the other day their vaccine was effective against all variants to date.
__________________
Aims To Try
jack@thesedayscontinue.org

Another child that's grown old
Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 06:29 PM   #8482
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack View Post
Where is that chart from, and how do they know that? Pfizer said the other day their vaccine was effective against all variants to date.
Off DrudgeReport.

Edit: [Only registered users can see links.]
__________________
-John

Last edited by Dubs; 04-02-2021 at 07:13 PM.
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 06:33 PM   #8483
DMBCLSTJ
 
DMBCLSTJ's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by mario View Post
You can keep lying to yourself, but literally every single time restrictions are tightened anywhere, case counts go down.

It's the most simple, logical, thing in the world, so simple that it's the old Doctor joke:

Patient: Doc it hurts when I ____.
Doctor: Then don't ______.

Cases go up when people gather, cases go down when people aren't allowed to gather.
Lockdown, cases go down. Open up cases skyrocket. Yes, real logical. Or maybe open up and not lockdown and have the same result.
DMBCLSTJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 06:41 PM   #8484
Tomacco
 
Tomacco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 24,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by mario View Post
You can keep lying to yourself, but literally every single time restrictions are tightened anywhere, case counts go down.

It's the most simple, logical, thing in the world, so simple that it's the old Doctor joke:

Patient: Doc it hurts when I ____.
Doctor: Then don't ______.

Cases go up when people gather, cases go down when people aren't allowed to gather.
In theory that’s true. Yet, Toronto has been in “lockdown” for months and cases have been going up for weeks now. We are the most locked down city in North America, and people are done with it and not obeying it. The lockdowns no longer work.
Tomacco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 07:34 PM   #8485
Josh.0
 
Josh.0's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Parts unknown
Posts: 14,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomacco View Post
In theory that’s true. Yet, Toronto has been in “lockdown” for months and cases have been going up for weeks now. We are the most locked down city in North America, and people are done with it and not obeying it. The lockdowns no longer work.
It’s true for droplet-based viruses, like the flu.

It’s not true for aerosolized viruses. I heard someone explain it very well the other day: imagine inhaling from a cigarette and then putting a mask on. Then exhaling. The way the smoke travels outside of the mask, that’s how COVID-19 travels. Hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of virus particles. Then it remains suspended in the air for some time in enclosed spaces (apartment buildings, condos, retail stores, etc.). Then others come in contact with it.

There’s still a fundamental mistake some folks make in thinking this spreads similarly to the flu. It doesn’t. Do masks help when it comes to COVID-19? Sure - but very minimally. It’s like taking one of those tiny umbrellas from an umbrella drink and holding it over your head in a rainstorm. Will it block some of the rain and technically offer some protection? Sure. But you’re still going to get absolutely drenched. When it comes to COVID-19, that’s the effect that masking and social distancing has - particularly in highly-populated areas.
__________________
tolerance
noun
US /ˈtɑː.lɚ.əns/ UK /ˈtɒl.ər.əns/
tolerance noun (ACCEPTANCE)
willingness to accept behavior and beliefs that are different from your own, although you might not agree with or approve of them.

Last edited by Josh.0; 04-02-2021 at 08:36 PM.
Josh.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 09:31 PM   #8486
mario
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 19,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomacco View Post
In theory that’s true. Yet, Toronto has been in “lockdown” for months and cases have been going up for weeks now. We are the most locked down city in North America, and people are done with it and not obeying it. The lockdowns no longer work.
And without lockdowns their be going up faster and higher.



Diabetics continue eating candy bars and get sick all the time. We don't tell doctors to start telling diabetics they can eat candy bars.


People ignoring science and medicine don't justify changing science and medicine. Start enforcing it instead.
mario is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 06:57 AM   #8487
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh.0 View Post
It’s true for droplet-based viruses, like the flu.

It’s not true for aerosolized viruses. I heard someone explain it very well the other day: imagine inhaling from a cigarette and then putting a mask on. Then exhaling. The way the smoke travels outside of the mask, that’s how COVID-19 travels. Hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of virus particles. Then it remains suspended in the air for some time in enclosed spaces (apartment buildings, condos, retail stores, etc.). Then others come in contact with it.

There’s still a fundamental mistake some folks make in thinking this spreads similarly to the flu. It doesn’t. Do masks help when it comes to COVID-19? Sure - but very minimally. It’s like taking one of those tiny umbrellas from an umbrella drink and holding it over your head in a rainstorm. Will it block some of the rain and technically offer some protection? Sure. But you’re still going to get absolutely drenched. When it comes to COVID-19, that’s the effect that masking and social distancing has - particularly in highly-populated areas.
This is why dbl masking was being suggested. Personally, when I have to go anywhere like a Dr’s office or pharmacy I use a KN-95 and a surgical mask.
__________________
-John
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 08:03 AM   #8488
DMBCLSTJ
 
DMBCLSTJ's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by mario View Post
And without lockdowns their be going up faster and higher.



Diabetics continue eating candy bars and get sick all the time. We don't tell doctors to start telling diabetics they can eat candy bars.


People ignoring science and medicine don't justify changing science and medicine. Start enforcing it instead.


Wow what a horrific Comparison on the Diabetes front. Apples To Oranges.

Tell me Mario, my state of Georgia the cases are plummeting, we haven’t been locked down since April 2020. Hmm perhaps it’s because lockdowns delay the inevitable?
DMBCLSTJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 09:38 AM   #8489
mario
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 19,140
It's only inevitable without social distancing. Social distancing turns "inevitable" into "avoidable".

Lockdowns delay until you can get vaccinated. That's the exact fucking plan.


Also, how did Georgia do from April 2020 and January 2021 with no lockdown???
Spoiler:

Last edited by mario; 04-03-2021 at 10:13 AM.
mario is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 10:18 AM   #8490
Josh.0
 
Josh.0's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Parts unknown
Posts: 14,955
Literally almost identically to your home state of Pennsylvania, with a lockdown:

__________________
tolerance
noun
US /ˈtɑː.lɚ.əns/ UK /ˈtɒl.ər.əns/
tolerance noun (ACCEPTANCE)
willingness to accept behavior and beliefs that are different from your own, although you might not agree with or approve of them.
Josh.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 12:03 PM   #8491
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
I think pairing true lockdowns (not half assed) like we’ve been doing with some kind of other containment precautions (test, trace, isolate) is needed. If we continue to let the virus spread freely, they’ll be never ending mutations. The mutations we have now are a direct result of not trying to contain this at all.
__________________
-John
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 12:48 PM   #8492
Josh.0
 
Josh.0's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Parts unknown
Posts: 14,955
Quick thought experiment:

Let’s pretend America completely locked down on day 1. This is while we still didn’t know if there’d ever be a working, long-term vaccine. All 330 million people, individually, live in a box for two or three weeks.

Let’s pretend all of Europe did as well. All 750 million people, individually, live in a box for two or three weeks.

Let’s pretend somehow most of the world follows suit. This is all literally impossible for a multitude of reasons, but let’s just go with it.

But 5-10 countries don’t lock down so hard. Eventually, asymptomatic people from those countries travel elsewhere when we believe the world is safe again. They infect people there, then those people infect other people, and the exponential growth curves simply begin to kick off again.

News starts to break soon after our two or three week lockdown that the virus is spreading again in “X” part of the world.

So we lock down again, hard, for two or three weeks.

We open up again. Then once again, a similar outbreak happens elsewhere.

So we lock down for two or three weeks again.

And this perpetuates indefinitely. Why? Because we we cannot control who travels in and out of other countries, that then spreads the virus there, and then people from that country travel elsewhere, until someone from someplace that’s allowed to travel here when we “reopen” comes here again.

Soon, a two or three week lockdown becomes a series of endless two or three week lockdowns. The economy collapses. Tens of millions in the US are without work, and millions more lose their jobs with each repeat lockdown. The global supply chain is destroyed (again, people cannot travel internationally for any reason - including shipping goods and supplies - or the virus can re-emerge in the USA). Illegal immigrants cannot visit hospitals (due to the possibility that they could become a new untracked patient zero), and deaths rise across the country from a multitude of other health issues. Again, the goal is to stay in your box to eradicate the virus.

In that above scenario - which is literally impossible in the practical world - when do we stop locking down for good? Again, we’re unsure of a vaccine ever coming into existence and, in fact, it’d be hard to conduct double-blind studies testing the efficacy of vaccines because no test groups would even exist, in the USA, that could prove vaccines protect against public exposure of COVID-19.

With all of the above in mind, how, in any reasonable or practical way, could people still be saying “we wouldn’t be in this mess if we locked down hard on day 1.”

Yes, we would. Even in a perfect country with perfect compliance, because the virus is global, either today or tomorrow it would make its way back into the country. And if we somehow stopped it in its tracks, without knowledge of a certain vaccine, we’d be agreeing to theoretically:

1) Suspend international travel forever
2) Suspend the global supply chain forever
3) Somehow ensure no illegal, untracked person ever makes it into America (because they may have the virus and spread it)
4) Somehow expect to develop a vaccine where we cannot test its efficacy
5) Disallow any servicemen/women stationed internationally to come home, possibly ever, due to the prevalence of false-negative PCR tests.

Can we please let the argument “if we locked down hard from day 1” die and then agree to bury it out of respect for rational/logical thinking, including the very idea that the world is inherently filled with endless variables that we cannot 100% control?

Please?

I’m okay saying Trump could have been a better leader in that he should have, I dunno, encouraged masking early on, and maybe asked people daily to respect social distancing, or told people every hour of every day “this is pretty serious, folks, don’t take it too lightly.”

But “locking down hard on day 1” being offered up as some valid - and feasible - argument is rooted in so much intellectual dishonesty that I don’t even know what to do with it anymore. It’s simply a bad argument, and I’m not saying that to be demeaning - none of this is meant to be demeaning - I’m stating it as a matter of fact.

You cannot lock down as THE global superpower, with 330 million people, land borders along two countries, and expect that to outsmart Mother Nature. It can’t and it won’t. Ever.
__________________
tolerance
noun
US /ˈtɑː.lɚ.əns/ UK /ˈtɒl.ər.əns/
tolerance noun (ACCEPTANCE)
willingness to accept behavior and beliefs that are different from your own, although you might not agree with or approve of them.
Josh.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 02:02 PM   #8493
jeff1818
 
jeff1818's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,218
Got my Mod #1. Sore arm and a bit tired. Overall a good experience.
jeff1818 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 04:00 PM   #8494
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff1818 View Post
Got my Mod #1. Sore arm and a bit tired. Overall a good experience.
Congrats! In 14 days you’ll have 80% effectiveness.
__________________
-John
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 05:16 PM   #8495
gweeps
homesick android
 
gweeps's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kingston ON, Canada
Posts: 28,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh.0 View Post
Quick thought experiment:

Let’s pretend America completely locked down on day 1. This is while we still didn’t know if there’d ever be a working, long-term vaccine. All 330 million people, individually, live in a box for two or three weeks.

Let’s pretend all of Europe did as well. All 750 million people, individually, live in a box for two or three weeks.

Let’s pretend somehow most of the world follows suit. This is all literally impossible for a multitude of reasons, but let’s just go with it.

But 5-10 countries don’t lock down so hard. Eventually, asymptomatic people from those countries travel elsewhere when we believe the world is safe again. They infect people there, then those people infect other people, and the exponential growth curves simply begin to kick off again.

News starts to break soon after our two or three week lockdown that the virus is spreading again in “X” part of the world.

So we lock down again, hard, for two or three weeks.

We open up again. Then once again, a similar outbreak happens elsewhere.

So we lock down for two or three weeks again.

And this perpetuates indefinitely. Why? Because we we cannot control who travels in and out of other countries, that then spreads the virus there, and then people from that country travel elsewhere, until someone from someplace that’s allowed to travel here when we “reopen” comes here again.

Soon, a two or three week lockdown becomes a series of endless two or three week lockdowns. The economy collapses. Tens of millions in the US are without work, and millions more lose their jobs with each repeat lockdown. The global supply chain is destroyed (again, people cannot travel internationally for any reason - including shipping goods and supplies - or the virus can re-emerge in the USA). Illegal immigrants cannot visit hospitals (due to the possibility that they could become a new untracked patient zero), and deaths rise across the country from a multitude of other health issues. Again, the goal is to stay in your box to eradicate the virus.

In that above scenario - which is literally impossible in the practical world - when do we stop locking down for good? Again, we’re unsure of a vaccine ever coming into existence and, in fact, it’d be hard to conduct double-blind studies testing the efficacy of vaccines because no test groups would even exist, in the USA, that could prove vaccines protect against public exposure of COVID-19.

With all of the above in mind, how, in any reasonable or practical way, could people still be saying “we wouldn’t be in this mess if we locked down hard on day 1.”

Yes, we would. Even in a perfect country with perfect compliance, because the virus is global, either today or tomorrow it would make its way back into the country. And if we somehow stopped it in its tracks, without knowledge of a certain vaccine, we’d be agreeing to theoretically:

1) Suspend international travel forever
2) Suspend the global supply chain forever
3) Somehow ensure no illegal, untracked person ever makes it into America (because they may have the virus and spread it)
4) Somehow expect to develop a vaccine where we cannot test its efficacy
5) Disallow any servicemen/women stationed internationally to come home, possibly ever, due to the prevalence of false-negative PCR tests.

Can we please let the argument “if we locked down hard from day 1” die and then agree to bury it out of respect for rational/logical thinking, including the very idea that the world is inherently filled with endless variables that we cannot 100% control?

Please?

I’m okay saying Trump could have been a better leader in that he should have, I dunno, encouraged masking early on, and maybe asked people daily to respect social distancing, or told people every hour of every day “this is pretty serious, folks, don’t take it too lightly.”

But “locking down hard on day 1” being offered up as some valid - and feasible - argument is rooted in so much intellectual dishonesty that I don’t even know what to do with it anymore. It’s simply a bad argument, and I’m not saying that to be demeaning - none of this is meant to be demeaning - I’m stating it as a matter of fact.

You cannot lock down as THE global superpower, with 330 million people, land borders along two countries, and expect that to outsmart Mother Nature. It can’t and it won’t. Ever.
Yeah, the world realized pretty quickly there is no easy solution to this barring natural infection and vaccination. Mitigating is all we could ever hope for until then. Everything else is handwringing.
__________________
"If we do not believe in freedom of expression for those we despise we don't believe in it at all." ~ Noam Chomsky
gweeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 05:55 PM   #8496
Josh.0
 
Josh.0's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Parts unknown
Posts: 14,955
Exactly. We can’t even agree as a society - with 100% compliance - not to murder each other. Not to beat children. Not to steal from each other. Not to blast Dreamgirl in the lots before DMB shows. Fundamental human decency. Yet we think we’d get 100% compliance in a national lockdown?

Let’s say we did. The rest of the world won’t, and the virus doesn’t know borders. As soon as we’d open back up we’d have to lockdown again, indefinitely. The other choice is to lockdown forever. When you consider the 0.15% IFR of COVID-19, are either of those options actually intelligent?

Pretending that locking down “hard” (whatever that means) on “day 1” (whatever that means too as the virus was here weeks before we realized it) would have halted exponential spread is literally a fantasy.

Can we please please please stop treating fantasies as if they can function in the real world? Please? Criticize anything I say about COVID, whatever. But this “if we locked down hard from day 1!” fist pounding is so disillusioned and disconnected from reality I’m not sure why folks (not just here, everywhere) keep trying to bring it up with a straight face. It’s a false narrative and it needs to die in the name of honest conversation.
__________________
tolerance
noun
US /ˈtɑː.lɚ.əns/ UK /ˈtɒl.ər.əns/
tolerance noun (ACCEPTANCE)
willingness to accept behavior and beliefs that are different from your own, although you might not agree with or approve of them.
Josh.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 06:30 PM   #8497
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
Once the variants become dominant vaccine efficacy will plummet. B117 and P.1 look to be dbl the mortality rate of wild type and 60-80% more contagious.
__________________
-John
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 06:33 PM   #8498
gweeps
homesick android
 
gweeps's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kingston ON, Canada
Posts: 28,280
What do you mean by "plummet"? 10-15% less efficacy wouldn't be a dealbreaker. That's still a hell of a lot more reliable than an influenza shot.
__________________
"If we do not believe in freedom of expression for those we despise we don't believe in it at all." ~ Noam Chomsky
gweeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 06:45 PM   #8499
Dubs
 
Dubs's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by gweeps View Post
What do you mean by "plummet"? 10-15% less efficacy wouldn't be a dealbreaker. That's still a hell of a lot more reliable than an influenza shot.
The immunologist I follow believes it’ll reduce it more than that. One of them drops the AstraZeneca shot to 10% efficacy.

After she did updated research on the new variants and which ones would likely become dominant she started crying in her video. Seems the impending doom comment from the CDC director wasn’t far off.
__________________
-John
Dubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2021, 06:58 PM   #8500
jeff1818
 
jeff1818's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubs View Post
The immunologist I follow believes it’ll reduce it more than that. One of them drops the AstraZeneca shot to 10% efficacy.

After she did updated research on the new variants and which ones would likely become dominant she started crying in her video. Seems the impending doom comment from the CDC director wasn’t far off.
Well, we will just have to take the booster shots that will inevitably come out. Some studies say the current vaccine is pretty damn powerful against variants while others have doubts.

PS: I wish "variants" still referred to colored vinyl and not this BS
jeff1818 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

These Days Continue > The Continuation > nDMBc


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:37 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2006 thesedayscontinue.org

Page generated in 0.07776 seconds with 13 queries