CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

[Anastasis 23718]

6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I assume he means documented infection

That would be correct. I don't think that I have ever talked about seroconversion in this exchange in any other way than as lab-based confirmation of seroconversion. 

[Dahobbs 18321]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Except that the public health policy (at least as implemented by OSHA) is going to apparently allow for entering into a weekly testing protocol as an exemption.  It's as simple as allowing an employee to demonstrate seroconversion via a lab test as an option. But the logistics, I guess.  

My apologies, I wasn't meaning to discuss a particular policy. I didn't track back y'alls argument to the beginning. I was just providing an example of why the technical answer to a question might not necessarily dictate a related public policy decision.  

I went back a couple of pages and I don't see OSHA mentioned until right now by you, so I'm unsure where it fits in this argument. If your primary point is that some entity somewhere is going to allow exemptions via testing and therefore exemptions via testing can be an effective and practical public health policy compromise, my response is maybe. It may simply increase the cost without providing benefit in the form of increased economic activity or increased Covid-19 protections. That said, I have no particular problem with such a compromise so long as it can be adequately administered. But I do know that any additional complexity can have a way of spiraling out of control in unpredictable ways. What seems simple, such as "allowing an employee to demonstrate seroconversion via a lab test," may be much more complicated once implemented. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19587]

4 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

My worst customer passed away last month.

 

Dude was a real dick to anyone and everyone. He had also drank himself so silly he couldn't really keep up with what he had in his account on a day to day basis. He'd come in at 9AM on a Wednesday lit as fuck screaming about "That mother fucker Trump is coming back to take care of us" at the top of his lungs or he'd call me from AT&T saying to cancel everything they've ever done out of his account after they kicked him out for sexually assaulting their in store rep. Well being an alcoholic, smoker, and 40lbs overweight is not good for a 60 year old unvaccinated racist. On the 7th he was spending $78 at the liquor store and by the 11th he was dead. The death certificate says nothing but Covid and time was listed as days....oh well.

One of my Trumpkin coworkers passed away last week. Sounded awful, too. They had to remove a bunch of blood clots from his legs while he was on the vent, and had to leave the incisions open to drain. Then one of his lungs collapsed, and he hung on for another 3-4 days. So he died an awful death from a liberal hoax, alone, unconscious, on a vent, with both of his legs laid open. 

[shakahorn 1656]

Does any organization requiring other-than-covid vaccinations accept prior infection in lieu of vaccination?  For example, can your kid go to public school if they have had measles, but not the vacccine?

[MonkeyDoughnut 10803]

24 minutes ago, shakahorn said:

Does any organization requiring other-than-covid vaccinations accept prior infection in lieu of vaccination?  For example, can your kid go to public school if they have had measles, but not the vacccine?

The CDC considers you protected just like getting the measles vaccine, but they don't set the vaccine requirements. So science here doesn't translate to policy. Kid would have to get it even if laboratory confirmed they are naturally immune to measles. (Some people are)

[Neonmoon 38130]

2 hours ago, Satoshi said:

We can also tease this out further a few months. Will people that have had two shots and recovered from an infection be restricted from certain public spaces or subject to termination if they don’t get a mandated booster shot? If immunity doesn’t matter for unvaxxed why should it matter for just double vaxxed? You’re not doing everything you can. 
 

And don’t forget the kid angle. Even better than punishing your enemies personally, is punishing them as parents and forcing their kids to be vaccinated for a disease that causes them almost no harm, even after they already have recovered from it. Thank God I live in Texas. 

More anti-vax posts from GRhorn. 
 

And for the both sides camp. This bullshit has already been explained hundreds of times to this fucking troll yet he continues to spew his anti-vax shit all other this thread, 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Neonmoon

[pantone159 728]

4 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The Venn diagram overlap of “people who are arguing for natural immunity” and “people who are searching for bullshit excuses to not get vaxxed” is a near perfect circle. 

And a key lesson— caving to a demand offered in bad faith is simply an invitation to surrender to more bad faith arguments

This. It is why I personally do not have any more patience for people arguing about natural immunity.

Even though it probably is true that people who *actually* got COVID have protection at least as good as vaccinated people. They got vaxxed the hard way. (And measured antibodies do not tell the whole story about amount of protection.) Where it ranks in the Moderna, Pfizer, J&J standings I don't know. But that is not really what those people are arguing, in reality it is just oppositional toddler syndrome.

[Satoshi 129]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

More anti-vax posts from GRhorn. 
 

And for the both sides camp. This bullshit has already been explained hundreds of times to this fucking troll yet he continues to spew his anti-vax shit all other this thread, 

There’s nothing anti-vax about discussing the future practical policy considerations that go with disregarding natural immunity. It’s the direction we’re moving.  

[Anastasis 23718]

4 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

That said, I have no particular problem with such a compromise so long as it can be adequately administered. But I do know that any additional complexity can have a way of spiraling out of control in unpredictable ways. What seems simple, such as "allowing an employee to demonstrate seroconversion via a lab test," may be much more complicated once implemented. 

That's fair.  But maybe you and some others also recognize that that is the same argument form that Satoshi is laying out wrt (and what I believe is a reasonable point) the booster treadmill. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Anastasis

[Captainant 28538]

DAE slippery slope??? Amirite?

[Dahobbs 18321]

57 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

That's fair.  But maybe you and some others also recognize that that is the same argument form that Satoshi is laying out wrt (and what I believe is a reasonable point) the booster treadmill. 

I haven't paid attention and don't know what point you're referring to. 

[956 Worldwide 35594]

Yes, let’s take very seriously booster treadmill concerns expressed by people who won’t get vaccinated to begin with. 

[Anastasis 23718]

3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Yes, let’s take very seriously booster treadmill concerns expressed by people who won’t get vaccinated to begin with. 

Low effort posting isn’t really your style man. 

[Anastasis 23718]

29 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I haven't paid attention and don't know what point you're referring to. 

Fair enough. 

[brakeman 28750]

Will commercial air travel get more convenient and cheaper in the future? 

They really took it in the ass. Will they change?

 

[956 Worldwide 35594]

47 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Low effort posting isn’t really your style man. 

I’m just done with concern trolling. You can play the game forever in this information environment. It’s time to flip the script and ask: under what conditions and with what information would these people be willing to take the vaccine. 
 

If you give a rational response (which includes having a standard similar to that you use for other medical decisions), then OK, let’s talk.

But it’s funny, you never see that. There’s not a lot of people out there willing to say in concrete terms: this will convince me. And for those people— yes, absolutely, willing to use coercive measures (not punishment). 
 

Bioethics are great and I know professionals take them seriously. Tell me, though, what is ethical about taking an ICU bed and sucking resources when you could have a free shot instead. We’re tripping over ourselves to respect the principles of people who quite literally have none at at all. 

[brakeman 28750]

covid gansta!

Edited October 21, 2021 by brakeman

[brakeman 28750]

 

Edited October 21, 2021 by brakeman
dp

[brakeman 28750]

 

[Anastasis 23718]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Bioethics are great and I know professionals take them seriously. Tell me, though, what is ethical about taking an ICU bed and sucking resources when you could have a free shot instead. We’re tripping over ourselves to respect the principles of people who quite literally have none at at all. 

 

I guess that it is good to know that you think ethical medicine is great and some people take it seriously. Is there actual evidence that the tens of millions of people that have convalesced will be taking up ICU beds as we project forward?  If so, just post that data and I will concede the point and we can move on. There seems to be a persistent failure to acknowledge that there is a difference between unvaccinated covid naive individuals and individuals that have had covid and recovered. You want to treat the two as equivalent in terms of public health policy making. I really do get the fact that some posters just want to punish the people that had the opportunity from early 2021 to date that rejected vaccination,.  I understand the basic human emotives involved.  But retribution doesn't serve as a sound basis for public health policy making. At least it does not in a society that appreciates biomedical ethical considerations. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Anastasis

[washparkhorn 9973]

Is long-Covid controversial? 

[Anastasis 23718]

Just now, washparkhorn said:

Is long-Covid controversial? 

Is long COVID a distinct clinical entity differentiable from from long post-critical care syndrome or long post-acute viral infection syndrome?

[washparkhorn 9973]

We are pouring out some rather significant disability after Covid into systems that don't provide much for humans similarly-disabled. Misery, Inc. 

[washparkhorn 9973]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Is long COVID a distinct clinical entity differentiable from from long post-critical care syndrome or long post-acute viral infection syndrome?

So it is. 

I had no idea. 

[Anastasis 23718]

Just now, washparkhorn said:

So it is. 

I had no idea. 

Not really.  From public health perspective, it appears to primarily an issue of magnitude of cases and resulting affected individuals, rather than a unique phenomena to COVID. Perhaps more substantial differences to be appreciated in particular segments or wrt to specific PASC conditions, but on the aggregate hard to disentangle from other post-acute illness phenomena.   

[washparkhorn 9973]

Got it enough to understand "post-Covid symptoms" is a catch-all.

This  segment  worries me given my kids' ascent into adulthood. 

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpheart.00368.2021

Does Pharma have a fix that doesn't involve a de-wormer (unless it turns out worms are involved because, who the hell knows these days). 

[956 Worldwide 35594]

3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

I guess that it is good to know that you think ethical medicine is great and some people take it seriously. Is there actual evidence that the tens of millions of people that have convalesced will be taking up ICU beds as we project forward?  If so, just post that data and I will concede the point and we can move on. There seems to be a persistent failure to acknowledge that there is a difference between unvaccinated covid naive individuals and individuals that have had covid and recovered. You want to treat the two as equivalent in terms of public health policy making. I really do get the fact that some posters just want to punish the people that had the opportunity from early 2021 to date that rejected vaccination,.  I understand the basic human emotives involved.  But retribution doesn't serve as a sound basis for public health policy making. At least it does not in a society that appreciates biomedical ethical considerations. 

I don’t think they are equivalent. I can see how a system could work and some countries have implemented it. They have things that make it work, like a national health system where doctors can upload and validate diagnoses and recovery. And that’s the only thing that works as a certificate— a diagnosis and recovery certification from the national provider.
 

We can’t have that of course, we can’t even roll out a nationwide digital vax certificate. I’m unaware of any country that has some bizarre system of regularly testing various antibodies and although you say it’s logistically as easy as giving a shot and writing down when it happened, I frankly don’t believe you. I lived through the before regime of regular testing and the after regime (for me) of vaccination and it takes some serious fuzzy logic to not see that “after” is easier and cheaper for everyone involved. 
 

My other issue is that we’re talking about crafting this intricate and nuanced policy based on medical evidence for the sake of people who are absolutely removed from logical thinking. It can’t be stressed enough— the reasons for NOT getting the vax are entirely spurious. Even if you had COVID, the shot will not hurt you and will probably help. In fact, the most logical rationale  is the adolescent “I don’t want to and you can’t make me,” all the others are grounded in a mishmash of disinformation, superstition, and incoherence.

And this isn’t in a vacuum, either. It’s been building for a while. We get to enjoy 19th century Victorian ailments again because we extend this sort of tolerance to the confused and disingenuous. We could give a nod to it when it was a tiny fragment of known kooks who could coast on herd immunity. What happens when the next, deadlier pandemic comes along and we’ve established this pattern of deference to lunacy?

I see vaccine mandates as not only public health, but a line in the sand in the battle for a shared reality of facts against alternative truth.  You can believe junk, but we’re not going to give it a place in policy making.

You keep talking about “punishment”. Getting a vaccine is not punishment, any more than brushing teeth is punishment to a three year old who doesn’t want to.  To the contrary, loons and assholes are punishing the rest of us by needlessly prolonging this shit. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t think they are equivalent. I can see how a system could work and some countries have implemented it. They have things that make it work, like a national health system where doctors can upload and validate diagnoses and recovery. And that’s the only thing that works as a certificate— a diagnosis and recovery certification from the national provider.
 

We can’t have that of course, we can’t even roll out a nationwide digital vax certificate. I’m unaware of any country that has some bizarre system of regularly testing various antibodies and although you say it’s logistically as easy as giving a shot and writing down when it happened, I frankly don’t believe you. I lived through the before regime of regular testing and the after regime (for me) of vaccination and it takes some serious fuzzy logic to not see that “after” is easier and cheaper for everyone involved. 
 

My other issue is that we’re talking about crafting this intricate and nuanced policy based on medical evidence for the sake of people who are absolutely removed from logical thinking. It can’t be stressed enough— the reasons for NOT getting the vax are entirely spurious. Even if you had COVID, the shot will not hurt you and will probably help. In fact, the most logical rationale  is the adolescent “I don’t want to and you can’t make me,” all the others are grounded in a mishmash of disinformation, superstition, and incoherence.

And this isn’t in a vacuum, either. It’s been building for a while. We get to enjoy 19th century Victorian ailments again because we extend this sort of tolerance to the confused and disingenuous. We could give a nod to it when it was a tiny fragment of known kooks who could coast on herd immunity. What happens when the next, deadlier pandemic comes along and we’ve established this pattern of deference to lunacy?

I see vaccine mandates as not only public health, but a line in the sand in the battle for a shared reality of facts against alternative truth.  You can believe junk, but we’re not going to give it a place in policy making.

You keep talking about “punishment”. Getting a vaccine is not punishment, any more than brushing teeth is punishment to a three year old who doesn’t want to.  To the contrary, loons and assholes are punishing the rest of us by needlessly prolonging this shit. 

Very well said. At the end of the day anti vaxxers just want the freedom to be assholes without suffering any consequences for it. That’s not how society works. Or it’s not how sane societies work like ours used to be until we started tolerating their lunacy. 

[workswithseed 2204]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Very well said. At the end of the day anti vaxxers just want the freedom to be assholes without suffering any consequences for it. That’s not how society works. Or it’s not how sane societies work like ours used to be until we started tolerating their lunacy. 

Wouldn't the consequence be dying from Covid? I wonder if you think Australia is a sane society? When is the end of this? Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it. As Dr. Fauci said, humanity has only been able to get rid of one disease. 

[956 Worldwide 35594]

26 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Wouldn't the consequence be dying from Covid? I wonder if you think Australia is a sane society? When is the end of this? Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it. As Dr. Fauci said, humanity has only been able to get rid of one disease. 

Maybe it’s time to start asking— what if there is no end? This would not be the first time in our lifetimes that the emergence of a new disease brought about fundamental changes in human behavior. In our lifetimes, AIDS ended the dream of consequence free unprotected casual sex and made condom wearing a norm. Before that, people genuinely thought that there was nothing that antibiotics, the Pill, or at worst an abortion couldn’t take care of. Most everyone can confirm that uncovered jimmies are more fun; the responsible among us moved on.

I think a big part of this is serious unease with the idea of something big and irreversible and uncontrollable happening in real time. The good news is that it is manageable. Let’s imagine the very worst- you need to get a booster once a year and we keep masks on in places like airplanes and really cramped spaces and that’s just how it is. 
 

Is it really worth it to kick against those pricks? Is this really the collapse of a world worth living in? 

[Neonmoon 38130]

I believe the end is after kids are vaccinated, or had the opportunity to be vaccinated and when the deaths per day are to below a certain threshold. 2,000 people dying per day is unacceptable. Before anyone says of course, and moves on, realize one large portion of this country is okay with the virus burning through the population, with the attitude of if you die, you die philosophy because their freedoms will not be impeded by your parents dying. 

The booster treadmill argument is a worthless mental exercise of slippery slope fallacy. 

[TXSG8R 3362]

37 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Maybe it’s time to start asking— what if there is no end? This would not be the first time in our lifetimes that the emergence of a new disease brought about fundamental changes in human behavior. In our lifetimes, AIDS ended the dream of consequence free unprotected casual sex and made condom wearing a norm. Before that, people genuinely thought that there was nothing that antibiotics, the Pill, or at worst an abortion couldn’t take care of. Most everyone can confirm that uncovered jimmies are more fun; the responsible among us moved on.

I think a big part of this is serious unease with the idea of something big and irreversible and uncontrollable happening in real time. The good news is that it is manageable. Let’s imagine the very worst- you need to get a booster once a year and we keep masks on in places like airplanes and really cramped spaces and that’s just how it is. 
 

Is it really worth it to kick against those pricks? Is this really the collapse of a world worth living in? 

I would love to believe we can learn to live with it, but watching all the bullshit around masks and vaccinations plus our comorbidity and obesity rates tells me the US is going to struggle worse than a lot of industrialized countries. Many Asian countries normalized mask wearing for respiratory illness a long time ago.  If you feel sick, you wear a mask when you go out, and no one bats an eye. We no longer put collective or societal good over tribal identity, and that’s going to lead to more suffering. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

Wouldn't the consequence be dying from Covid? I wonder if you think Australia is a sane society? When is the end of this? Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it. As Dr. Fauci said, humanity has only been able to get rid of one disease. 

From a societal perspective a worse consequence than dying is you and many others like you get really sick and take up a hospital bed for months. It’s why we have seatbelt laws, helmet laws, speeding laws, etc.

Do those laws eliminate people from driving without seatbelts, riding motorcycles without helmets or stop speeding? Of course not. The idea is to discourage idiotic behavior because if it’s allowed it imposes an unnecessary and therefore unacceptable cost on society. 
 

Thanks to the initial failed response to it and the willingness to tolerate anti vaxxers we will never get rid of Covid. That doesn’t mean we just throw up our hands and say oh well. Just like people who speed or refuse to wear seatbelts, there should be a cost and consequences when people act like idiots when it comes to the vaccine. Your employer fired you for not getting the vaccine, then either get the vaccine or start your own company or find a fellow idiot like minded employer to work for. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by JimmyJames

[bad_teammate 13523]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it. 

The Statistical Probability Understander has logged in.

[TXSG8R 3362]

I should also add, that if the war on science isn’t over, science is definitely boxed in and low on ammo.  The antivax movement wasn’t a right wing thing in genesis, but the right certainly did a lot of heavy lifting in eroding public trust in science to lead to the explosion of antivax sentiment that is prolonging Covid. You would think that having so much access to information would lead to an enlightened period, but the opposite is true. Lack of processing power or critical thinking, too much contrarianism, all of it contributes to something bigger than dunning-kruger in how we are getting so far apart in how to respond to crises. Our shit is very broken.

[TXSG8R 3362]

Topical:

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Japan-and-South-Korea-never-did-full-lockdowns-16550763.php
 

Quote

But unlike many other countries, neither Japan nor South Korea imposed a full lockdown and have been trying to coexist with the virus all along.

They pursued a middle ground - consider it lockdown lite - that relied on the cooperation of citizens already accustomed to mask-wearing and social distancing in response to previous respiratory epidemics. Businesses, more or less, voluntarily closed early to help keep the virus at bay.

*heavy sigh

[jimmyjazz 47195]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it. 

Correct.  In a similar vein, if I wear my seatbelt, I can die in a car accident.  Should we get rid of seatbelt laws?

[workswithseed 2204]

48 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The Statistical Probability Understander has logged in.

That's not the reason for my question. You go ahead and be a fuckhead though, it suits you. Unless you're here to tell me that it can't happen, then what is the end goal? Do we wear masks till it's gone for good, or go more extreme like Australia where they're allowed an extra hour of being outside for being vaxed? 

[JimmyJames 12271]

17 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

That's not the reason for my question. You go ahead and be a fuckhead though, it suits you. Unless you're here to tell me that it can't happen, then what is the end goal? Do we wear masks till it's gone for good, or go more extreme like Australia where they're allowed an extra hour of being outside for being vaxed? 

Actually I think we put all the anti vaxxers in a large field and then start chasing them with needles until we drive them to stampede over a cliff like they used to do with the buffalo. 

[TXSG8R 3362]

13 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

That's not the reason for my question. You go ahead and be a fuckhead though, it suits you. Unless you're here to tell me that it can't happen, then what is the end goal? Do we wear masks till it's gone for good, or go more extreme like Australia where they're allowed an extra hour of being outside for being vaxed? 

How about we wear masks if we feel sick, Covid or otherwise, while in public?  I would suggest staying home when sick as well, but with our stellar employment sick policies that’s not possible for many, so at a minimum masking up to reduce spreading would be helpful. No, we won’t eliminate Covid or Covid deaths, but we can reduce them (see seatbelt example above). The side benefit is we would also reduce other respiratory illness and death like flu, which would lower the number of sick days people take, the number of hospital beds that get filled up, etc. The only downside is one group of people who’s feelings are hurt about wearing a chin diaper. 

The biggest problem is it’s an honor system, and a significant % of the population has shown they have none. That’s why mandates are being used.  We tried the carrot and it failed. Now it’s the stick. 

[workswithseed 2204]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Correct.  In a similar vein, if I wear my seatbelt, I can die in a car accident.  Should we get rid of seatbelt laws?

What?

 

1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

From a societal perspective a worse consequence than dying is you and many others like you get really sick and take up a hospital bed for months. It’s why we have seatbelt laws, helmet laws, speeding laws, etc.

Do those laws eliminate people from driving without seatbelts, riding motorcycles without helmets or stop speeding? Of course not. The idea is to discourage idiotic behavior because if it’s allowed it imposes an unnecessary and therefore unacceptable cost on society. 
 

Thanks to the initial failed response to it and the willingness to tolerate anti vaxxers we will never get rid of Covid. That doesn’t mean we just throw up our hands and say oh well. Just like people who speed or refuse to wear seatbelts, there should be a cost and consequences when people act like idiots when it comes to the vaccine. Your employer fired you for not getting the vaccine, then either get the vaccine or start your own company or find a fellow idiot like minded employer to work for. 

I never said to throw up hands and give up. I asked what should be the end goal? I agree with you on your ending paragraph for sure. If the employer wants everyone to vax up, you need to leave and look for something that works with what you're looking for. The best thing to come out of all this is that people who can stay at home to work should just stay home unless important meetings. I don't get why this wasn't a thing beforehand. Fewer people on the roads, fewer people in contact with each other to spread communicable diseases.

[Biff Tannen 46165]

We are over 1.5 years into this pandemic and this thread is still going strong.  Unbelievable.

 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Biff Tannen

[Sawbonz 28220]

9 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

It’s time to flip the script and ask: under what conditions and with what information would these people be willing to take the vaccine. 

If you’re talking about people with documented infections I think if we had information that shows vaxed (with periodic boosters) have a clinically significant increase in protection from symptomatic illness than recovered infections they would be persuaded. No study yet demonstrates that. I’m not sure why some of you refuse to acknowledge that fact. 
 

And do not misconstrue this as an argument for not being vaccinated. One can acknowledge facts that support the other side on an issue without taking that side. It actually increases the likelihood you can get fence sitters to consider your argument.

To be clear: there is no question that a covid naive person is at a substantially higher risk of severe illness/death from Covid-19 (as well as spreading the virus to others) than either a person who is vaccinated or a recovered person. 

According to available data, at least WRT delta, recovered people appear at least equivalent to and possibly better protected than Vaxed/non booster group

Vaxed/booster group may be better than recovered but to my knowledge there are no data yet comparing these cohorts.
 

Public health policy is messy, but at this point there is no medical basis not to allow documentation of covid infection or documentation of vaccination status as proof of protection. 
 

If it becomes clear that booster status is superior to recovered infection then by all means require it. 
 

In the interim we should focus on the unvaccinated who are covid naive 

[Sawbonz 28220]

3 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Even if vaxed, and everyone else was vaxed you would still be able to pass it on and catch it.

[Anastasis 23718]

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

You keep talking about “punishment”. Getting a vaccine is not punishment, any more than brushing teeth is punishment to a three year old who doesn’t want to.

Getting a vaccine is not the punishment.  Taking away the livelihood of the people that you find intransigent and unreasonable via a government mandate under cover of "grave danger" that fails to take into account the totality of the available science in assessing the actual extent of that danger is the punishment.

 

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t think they are equivalent. I can see how a system could work and some countries have implemented it. They have things that make it work, like a national health system where doctors can upload and validate diagnoses and recovery. And that’s the only thing that works as a certificate— a diagnosis and recovery certification from the national provider.

More red herring.

 

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

We can’t have that of course, we can’t even roll out a nationwide digital vax certificate. I’m unaware of any country that has some bizarre system of regularly testing various antibodies and although you say it’s logistically as easy as giving a shot and writing down when it happened, I frankly don’t believe you.

 

The OSHA rule will allow for an exemption for regular testing of active COVID. We are already going there. Testing for seroconversion is much easier, would only require a single instance, and could be done in a easily auditable fashion.  The "it's too logistically hard" argument is total nonsense in the context of the proposed OSHA rule. There is really nothing to disbelieve here in that regard. Again, just more red herring. 

 

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

My other issue is that we’re talking about crafting this intricate and nuanced policy based on medical evidence for the sake of people who are absolutely removed from logical thinking. It can’t be stressed enough— the reasons for NOT getting the vax are entirely spurious. Even if you had COVID, the shot will not hurt you and will probably help. In fact, the most logical rationale  is the adolescent “I don’t want to and you can’t make me,” all the others are grounded in a mishmash of disinformation, superstition, and incoherence.

The policy I would propose here is not particularly intricate, it is pretty straightforward and sound based on the totality of the scientific evidence at hand. If there is compelling clinical data from well designed studies that tilt that calculus in a different direction, I would gladly reconsider the position. I do agree that getting vaccinated if you are naive is clearly beneficial.  There is no question. And all indications are that hybrid immunity is even better. I would strongly encourage any one that has not been vaccinated do so, whether they are post-convalescent or not. But it's quite different to jump from that recommendation to a government mandate of "You need to take away the livelihood of this set of particular people that have already seroconverted if they do not take the vaccine based on the grave danger they pose to people in the workplace." Especially when that "grave danger" standard does not appear to be clearly met. Taking away the ability of an individual to provide food and shelter for their family on the basis of tenuous and illogical scientific reasoning in the frame of a government mandated public health intervention is curious, to say the least. 

You allude to anti-vaxxers as acting like children multiple times. By and large, I agree. But in this particular case, this is like the parent yelling at their kid to brush their teeth cause they will get cavities otherwise, and threatening them to take away all their toys if they don't. Except they already brushed their teeth and are asking why they need to do it again, and the parent just keeps screaming "Cause I said so, damnit". I myself haven't found that to be a productive parenting style, but your mileage may vary. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Anastasis

[workswithseed 2204]

7 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

[Brisketexan 106894]

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Not really.  From public health perspective, it appears to primarily an issue of magnitude of cases and resulting affected individuals, rather than a unique phenomena to COVID. Perhaps more substantial differences to be appreciated in particular segments or wrt to specific PASC conditions, but on the aggregate hard to disentangle from other post-acute illness phenomena.   

That may be the case (not sure, data is still early -- remember, we're only 1.5 years into this shit....sure feels like longer).

I think the problem her is the sheer volume, based on the gigantic number of overall cases.

For example, my son had "long mono" a couple of years ago.  And it sucked.  It was physically, mentally, and emotionally brutal on him.  A small percentage of people who get mono have long mono, but we're not dealing with a flood of people so afflicted because the annual number of mono infections (annually) isn't huge (although over time, it actually is).  We are up to over 45 MILLION COVID cases in the US (and that's just the documented ones).  Even at a low percentage of "long viral recovery," the sheer number and front-end loading of these cases means we're dealing with a lot of long-COVID cases all at once.  And while that outcome isn't as negative as death, trust me, it's a shitty state of affairs.

2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

From a societal perspective a worse consequence than dying is you and many others like you get really sick and take up a hospital bed for months. It’s why we have seatbelt laws, helmet laws, speeding laws, etc.

Do those laws eliminate people from driving without seatbelts, riding motorcycles without helmets or stop speeding? Of course not. The idea is to discourage idiotic behavior because if it’s allowed it imposes an unnecessary and therefore unacceptable cost on society. 
 

Thanks to the initial failed response to it and the willingness to tolerate anti vaxxers we will never get rid of Covid. That doesn’t mean we just throw up our hands and say oh well. Just like people who speed or refuse to wear seatbelts, there should be a cost and consequences when people act like idiots when it comes to the vaccine. Your employer fired you for not getting the vaccine, then either get the vaccine or start your own company or find a fellow idiot like minded employer to work for. 

Functionally, we're managing to do the worst of all worlds.  We are gonna "individual liberty and freedoms!" ourselves to death, because we are a hyper-individualistic society to the point of sociopathic selfishness perhaps being our last remaining "American ethic."  But, we're also going to continue to restrict ourselves and our activities just enough to break people.  We are experiencing a massive, across-all-lines, social depression.  Here, in other countries, everywhere.  The COVID experience has been mentally and emotionally devastating, and remains so.  Shit, just last night, was texting with my daughter, and discussed some plans (that were having to change because of shifting restrictions and such), and she lamented "I feel like a year was just taken from me."  And she's not wrong.  I was talking with another friend who works in our court system, and he's depressed for different reasons -- the rhythm of his life, of seeing his colleagues, has been on hold for 1.5 years.  He's a social animal, and it's killing him.  He is seriously depressed.

We're trying to strike a balance.  And we're doing a poor job of it.  If we gave a fuck about each other on one end, that might help us do much more to alleviate the restrictions and isolation on the other end.  But we won't.  We'll just yell at each other from across the chasm as we continue to fall into it from either side.

This experience -- among so many others -- is why I have very little hope for our future.

[Anastasis 23718]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I think the problem her is the sheer volume, based on the gigantic number of overall cases.

Agreed. 

[bad_teammate 13523]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

That's not the reason for my question. You go ahead and be a fuckhead though, it suits you. Unless you're here to tell me that it can't happen, then what is the end goal? Do we wear masks till it's gone for good, or go more extreme like Australia where they're allowed an extra hour of being outside for being vaxed? 

To reduce COVID to the status of the normal seasonal illnesses we commonly deal with.

That's my answer, what is yours? What is the end goal of these forces at work (scientists, doctors, etc...)? (Please answer.)

[jimmyjazz 47195]

When @Anastasis and others refer to "seroconversion", is that shorthand for "presence of IgG and/or IgM antibodies in the blood"?  Assuming this to be true, do those markers decline as immunity wanes?  Is there a known, quantitative threshold that could be implemented as "passing" a test?