you'd think when developing this website forum that they'd make it impossible to alter a quoted post. By the way, I love the Backstreet Boys.
I'm more of an N'SYNC guy myself.
Just so you're aware, I've seen people banned over doing that. the mods don't like it (I'm not reporting you, or threatening you, just letting you know)
CNN brass caught onto the fact that people like Tucker and Hannity create massive ratings and therefore, cash. That's why CNN's primetime has very little to do with actual reporting anymore. It's all, as dankind said, commentators. Chris Cuomo, Keilar (although she might still be in the afternoon), and Don Lemon. all unwatchable.
In the weeks and months after people get vaccinated we will indeed see people die. Some will die to myocardial infarcts, some will die of strokes, some of pulmonary emboli, some of pneumonia, some of cancer, and some of dementia. Some will also die of motorvehicle crashes, gunshot wounds, and food poisoning. In addition, some people will get married, some will get divorced, some will change job and some will move house. You might even get a few who write a book or record a song. That's because all of these things happen as life goes on - the pandemic doesn't make them stop, and vaccination doesn't make them stop.
It's just as silly to argue that vaccination is causing novels to happen as it is to argue that it's causing all of the deaths that occur afterward.
We have data from tens of thousands of people in controlled trials, and now we are gathering data from millions of people. At this point the data do not show an increased risk of death related to vaccination.
Now, when I TAKE YOUR POST and substitute "coronavirus" for "vaccinated" (or some variant thereof) you absolutely nailed what I was trying to say.
"In the weeks and months after people get coronavirus we will indeed see people die. Some will die to myocardial infarcts, some will die of strokes, some of pulmonary emboli, some of pneumonia, some of cancer, and some of dementia. Some will also die of motorvehicle crashes, gunshot wounds, and food poisoning. In addition, some people will get married, some will get divorced, some will change job and some will move house. You might even get a few who write a book or record a song. That's because all of these things happen as life goes on - the pandemic doesn't make them stop, and coronavirus doesn't make them stop.
It's just as silly to argue that coronavirus is causing novels to happen as it is to argue that it's causing all of the deaths that occur afterward.
We have data from tens of thousands of people in controlled trials, and now we are gathering data from millions of people. At this point the data do not show an increased risk of death related to coronavirus.
Correlation is not causation."
If we are counting covid deaths one way, why can we not vaccine deaths the same?
One is a pandemic, the other is a cure to a pandemic not proven to cause any of the byproducts you're referring to. In addition - one causes burdens on health care systems, health care workers, the econoomy, unprecedented logistical overhead, costly precautions for most industries, and the other relieves these same burdens.
Your logic is nonsensical, and if you're here to even insinuate that the vaccine carries even a fraction of the risk of the disease, don't be surprised when you refer to this place as an echo chamber and those on here refer to you as illogical (if it weren't for euphemisms I'd be banned here already). After four years of harmful misinformation being spread, it's infuriating to see people taking the torch from the former POSOTUS, but it's great to know that these kinds of opinion no longer hold weight with anyone that matters.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
you'd think when developing this website forum that they'd make it impossible to alter a quoted post. By the way, I love the Backstreet Boys.
I'm more of an N'SYNC guy myself.
Just so you're aware, I've seen people banned over doing that. the mods don't like it (I'm not reporting you, or threatening you, just letting you know)
Ha, thanks. I figured if it was obvious enough there'd be no harm.
For all the "Follow the science" crowd, can you explain the science behind California having the harshest lockdowns and mandates of any state, and now has a new strain causing a surge...
It has never been about "the science", it has always been about the "political science".
Yes. Stay at home Dec 6 would probably have led to a reduction in cases two weeks later. But that is when Christmas and New Years occurred, and plenty of people still got together thru Jan 1. That almost perfectly explains the downward curve on your graph beginning on Jan 13th. I know many people who got together and got covid during the holidays.
Your graph is also comparing the original covid (pre December) to the new covid (December and later). The newer versions of covid spread much easier, explaining why cases exploded in the late fall. The US medical community was clearly caught off guard by the new variants. If it were not for Boris Johnson’s speech in late December, we probably might not even know about it yet.
This is insane. Arguing with a person who a few days ago suggested that we can end this now that Biden is elected is not worth the time. After a year of this shit, nothing is going to change your warped view now. Understandable to be unsure back in April last year, but now is just ignoring reality. But sure, the democratic hoax continues!
Please explain California to me. The "science" does not suggest they should open back up. Why are they?
And for the record, I consider myself a moderate on a lot of things, left leaning on some and right on the rest. As many "right wing", "Q", or 'Trumpers" that I read on twitter, I search out the Andy Slavitts, Eric Fiegl-Ding, and the likes as well. None of anything I am saying does not come from one point of view, however on this issue I guess I align with all the conspiracy theorists. I am begging of y'all, change my mind..
For someone who links a lot of Tweets I would assume you have the same capabilities as I do to use the Google machine to determine why CA is lifting stay-at-home-orders. I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads. This country showed long ago that we aren't willing to do what is necessary to curb the disease and have instead gone all in on half-measures, vaccines and hopes of herd immunity.
From the NYT morning blast:
Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most
effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict.
John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.Spencer Platt/Getty Images
‘Viruses don’t care
what passport you carry’
One of the biggest lessons
of the pandemic has been the success of travel restrictions at reducing its
spread. And this is a moment when they have the potential to be particularly
effective in the U.S., given the emergence of even more dangerous coronavirus
variants in other countries.
President Biden seems to
realize this, and has reinstated some travel
restrictions that President Donald Trump lifted just before
leaving office.
It’s not yet clear whether
Biden will impose the kind of strict rules that have worked best elsewhere.
So far, he has chosen a middle ground between Trump’s approach and the
approaches with the best global track record.
Many of the places that
have contained the virus have relied on travel restrictions. The list
includes Australia, Ghana, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam and Canada’s four Atlantic
provinces. At key points, they imposed severe restrictions on who
could enter.
There is a crucial word in
that sentence: severe. Travel bans work only when countries don’t allow a
lot of exceptions.
Barring citizens of other
countries while freely allowing your own citizens to return, for example, is
ineffectual. “Viruses don’t care what passport you carry,” my colleague Donald G. McNeil Jr.,
who’s been covering infectious diseases since the 1990s, told me.
Voluntary quarantines
generally don’t work either, since many people don’t adhere to them. Some
take mild precautions and still describe themselves as “quarantining.” As
Donald says: “For it to work, it has to be mandatory — and actually enforced.
And not at home.”
Australia versus the U.S.
Australia crushed the
spread of the virus in the spring partly by ending its voluntary quarantine
and requiring all arrivals, including Australian citizens, to spend two weeks in a
hotel. The military then helped enforce the rules. China and some
other Asian countries took similar steps. In eastern Canada, tough entry
rules were “one of the most successful things we’ve done,” Dr. Susan Kirkland,
a Nova Scotia official, has said.
Travel bans had such a big
effect, Dr. Jared Baeten,
a prominent epidemiologist, told me last year, that public-health experts
should re-examine their longtime skepticism of them. “Travel,” he said, “is
the hallmark of the spread of this virus around the world.”
Last year, the U.S. became
a case study in the ineffectiveness of limited travel rules after Trump
announced a ban on entry from China. Because it didn’t apply to U.S.
citizens or their immediate family members, among others, and
because Trump did little to restrict entry from Europe, the
measures had little effect.
The Biden administration now risks a repeat.
Infectious variants of the
virus that are spreading in Brazil and South Africa could be even more dangerous
than a strong new variant found in Britain, scientists say. In response,
Biden is restricting entry from Europe, Brazil and South Africa, but the
policy has multiple exceptions: Americans can return home from these places
if they have recently tested negative, even though the test result may not be
current.
The politics of travel bans
are certainly thorny.
Businesses worry about the economic impact (as The New Yorker’s Lawrence
Wright noted in a fascinating radio
interview with Terry Gross). Progressives worry about stoking
anti-immigration views. And it’s already too late to keep the variants out of
the U.S. entirely.
Yet travel restrictions can
still save lives. The U.S. is in a race to vaccinate as many people as
possible before they contract the virus, and the new variants are the biggest
new challenge in doing so. “I am worried about these variants,” Dr. Vivek
Murthy, the co-chair of Biden’s virus task force, said on the first episode of Ezra
Klein’s Times podcast.
The U.S. travel
restrictions will almost certainly have some impact by keeping out some
infected people. But Biden’s policy stops short of minimizing the virus’s
spread.
THE
LATEST NEWS
THE VIRUS
Salisbury Cathedral in England functions as a vaccination
center.Tom Jamieson for The New York Times
Minnesota’s health department said it had detected a variant found in Brazil
in someone who recently traveled to the country. “With the world travel
that you have,” Dr. Anthony Fauci said, “it’s not surprising.”
The drug maker Merck abandoned two vaccines because neither
produced a strong immune response. The U.S. has authorized two vaccines
and will probably need more to subdue the virus this year. Here’s how quickly countries are vaccinating
their populations.
If Merck has abandoned their vaccines, could the Biden Administration use the Defense Protection Act to utilize their production capabilities for expanding manufacturing of one of the existing vaccines? I will freely admit I don't know anything about vaccine production, but I would assume that Merck had their production plants gearing up for the production of their own vaccine. Those plants could be retooled to produce subcontracted vaccines.
Alright, try to answer some of your questions/articles... Not all of the things quoted are your response, but rather some of the other things you linked.
"Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict."
Remember New Zealand, they absolutely crushed the virus! They just announced today that the measures they took DID NOT do enough so they are suspending travel for most of this year.
A year and a half of travel restrictions? Could y'all imagine that here? Hell, DJT suspended travel to China and was called "xenophobic" by our current President. And the thing is, it still is having problems with the virus. Virus gonna virus.
"I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads."
Not trying to be a dick, but you exactly proved my point. Very little science involved, but really heavy on the political science. Show me where science references the economy? And again, there is this new strain(s). If everything worked before, shouldn't we lockdown harder, or double mask, to take out the new strain?
Finally, just a little PSA for any of you with pregnant significant others, the WHO is now recommending that they do not take the Moderna vaccine. If most are like and probably are judging by the age of the band, this will not affect many, but be careful out there.
While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).
Individuals with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine should not take this or any other mRNA vaccine.
While vaccination is recommended for older persons due to the high risk of severe COVID-19 and death, very frail older persons with an anticipated life expectancy of less than 3 months should be individually assessed.
The vaccine should not be administered to persons younger than 18 years of age pending the results of further studies."
Alright, try to answer some of your questions/articles... Not all of the things quoted are your response, but rather some of the other things you linked.
"Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict."
Remember New Zealand, they absolutely crushed the virus! They just announced today that the measures they took DID NOT do enough so they are suspending travel for most of this year.
A year and a half of travel restrictions? Could y'all imagine that here? Hell, DJT suspended travel to China and was called "xenophobic" by our current President. And the thing is, it still is having problems with the virus. Virus gonna virus.
"I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads."
Not trying to be a dick, but you exactly proved my point. Very little science involved, but really heavy on the political science. Show me where science references the economy? And again, there is this new strain(s). If everything worked before, shouldn't we lockdown harder, or double mask, to take out the new strain?
Finally, just a little PSA for any of you with pregnant significant others, the WHO is now recommending that they do not take the Moderna vaccine. If most are like and probably are judging by the age of the band, this will not affect many, but be careful out there.
While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).
Individuals with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine should not take this or any other mRNA vaccine.
While vaccination is recommended for older persons due to the high risk of severe COVID-19 and death, very frail older persons with an anticipated life expectancy of less than 3 months should be individually assessed.
The vaccine should not be administered to persons younger than 18 years of age pending the results of further studies."
I don't disagree with your assessment in the lack of science in the balancing act, but that is where we are as a country after some moronic idiot was in charge and demonized scientists and mask wearing for 10 months. Of course it's a balancing act because the little we are doing caused a bunch of morons to storm the capitol. I think we should be locked down, but I am 1 out 350 million and each governor has to consider the will of the moronic or be out of office and replaced with some nut who thinks we should be completely open. The last election proved we have 75 million people who don't really give a fuck.
Alright, try to answer some of your questions/articles... Not all of the things quoted are your response, but rather some of the other things you linked.
"Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict."
Remember New Zealand, they absolutely crushed the virus! They just announced today that the measures they took DID NOT do enough so they are suspending travel for most of this year.
A year and a half of travel restrictions? Could y'all imagine that here? Hell, DJT suspended travel to China and was called "xenophobic" by our current President. And the thing is, it still is having problems with the virus. Virus gonna virus.
"I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads."
Not trying to be a dick, but you exactly proved my point. Very little science involved, but really heavy on the political science. Show me where science references the economy? And again, there is this new strain(s). If everything worked before, shouldn't we lockdown harder, or double mask, to take out the new strain?
Finally, just a little PSA for any of you with pregnant significant others, the WHO is now recommending that they do not take the Moderna vaccine. If most are like and probably are judging by the age of the band, this will not affect many, but be careful out there.
While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).
Individuals with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine should not take this or any other mRNA vaccine.
While vaccination is recommended for older persons due to the high risk of severe COVID-19 and death, very frail older persons with an anticipated life expectancy of less than 3 months should be individually assessed.
The vaccine should not be administered to persons younger than 18 years of age pending the results of further studies."
I don't disagree with your assessment in the lack of science in the balancing act, but that is where we are as a country after some moronic idiot was in charge and demonized scientists and mask wearing for 10 months. Of course it's a balancing act because the little we are doing caused a bunch of morons to storm the capitol. I think we should be locked down, but I am 1 out 350 million and each governor has to consider the will of the moronic or be out of office and replaced with some nut who thinks we should be completely open. The last election proved we have 75 million people who don't really give a fuck.
You forgot, "and jettisoned the pandemic response plan that was sitting on the shelf and knew the consequences and severity of doing nothing, lied to the American people about it and then admitted to knowing the same to a renowned journalist." And 75 million people still voted for him after that. And some think there's hope with the current crop of repubs. Please.
I hear Mexico is living large. A little Spring Break should be in someone's future.
Alright, try to answer some of your questions/articles... Not all of the things quoted are your response, but rather some of the other things you linked.
"Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict."
Remember New Zealand, they absolutely crushed the virus! They just announced today that the measures they took DID NOT do enough so they are suspending travel for most of this year.
A year and a half of travel restrictions? Could y'all imagine that here? Hell, DJT suspended travel to China and was called "xenophobic" by our current President. And the thing is, it still is having problems with the virus. Virus gonna virus.
"I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads."
Not trying to be a dick, but you exactly proved my point. Very little science involved, but really heavy on the political science. Show me where science references the economy? And again, there is this new strain(s). If everything worked before, shouldn't we lockdown harder, or double mask, to take out the new strain?
Finally, just a little PSA for any of you with pregnant significant others, the WHO is now recommending that they do not take the Moderna vaccine. If most are like and probably are judging by the age of the band, this will not affect many, but be careful out there.
While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).
Individuals with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine should not take this or any other mRNA vaccine.
While vaccination is recommended for older persons due to the high risk of severe COVID-19 and death, very frail older persons with an anticipated life expectancy of less than 3 months should be individually assessed.
The vaccine should not be administered to persons younger than 18 years of age pending the results of further studies."
it's ALWAYS been about what the medical system can sustain without collapsing society. once you start having to choose who lives or dies, you have a real problem on your hands. if you shut down to the point that everyone is losing their homes, you also have a real problem on your hands.
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
it's ALWAYS been about what the medical system can sustain without collapsing society. once you start having to choose who lives or dies, you have a real problem on your hands. if you shut down to the point that everyone is losing their homes, you also have a real problem on your hands.
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
No man, I get it. I am glad we can have civil debate here. I guess I go back to the states who have been wide open. Hell, I even took my family to Florida over Christmas (Hail! Hail! the lucky ones). Why have the healthcare systems in those states not crumbled? Everything I have read says that if you are running a hospital and the ICU is not at 85%, you are doing something wrong and losing money.
If we were truly to the point of hospital collapse, do you not think our media would have been all over it? Not showing the same hospital bed and same person on a ventilator (remember those?) over and over, yet doing some on the ground reporting of people getting turned away?
it's ALWAYS been about what the medical system can sustain without collapsing society. once you start having to choose who lives or dies, you have a real problem on your hands. if you shut down to the point that everyone is losing their homes, you also have a real problem on your hands.
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
No man, I get it. I am glad we can have civil debate here. I guess I go back to the states who have been wide open. Hell, I even took my family to Florida over Christmas (Hail! Hail! the lucky ones). Why have the healthcare systems in those states not crumbled? Everything I have read says that if you are running a hospital and the ICU is not at 85%, you are doing something wrong and losing money.
If we were truly to the point of hospital collapse, do you not think our media would have been all over it? Not showing the same hospital bed and same person on a ventilator (remember those?) over and over, yet doing some on the ground reporting of people getting turned away?
I understand your point, I just don't see it.
Nice solid debate here. It s nice to hear an opposing view. Let s all be nice and not chase this person away because they have our opposite opinion.
Nice solid debate here. It s nice to hear an opposing view. Let s all be nice and not chase this person away because they have our opposite opinion.
For sure man! This is great! And I probably came on too strong initially but I hope I have at least given people something to think about.
We are ALL in this thing together. Let's try to find some common ground and work to a solution to end this thing for good, get people back to work, and get our children back in the classroom.
it's ALWAYS been about what the medical system can sustain without collapsing society. once you start having to choose who lives or dies, you have a real problem on your hands. if you shut down to the point that everyone is losing their homes, you also have a real problem on your hands.
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
No man, I get it. I am glad we can have civil debate here. I guess I go back to the states who have been wide open. Hell, I even took my family to Florida over Christmas (Hail! Hail! the lucky ones). Why have the healthcare systems in those states not crumbled? Everything I have read says that if you are running a hospital and the ICU is not at 85%, you are doing something wrong and losing money.
If we were truly to the point of hospital collapse, do you not think our media would have been all over it? Not showing the same hospital bed and same person on a ventilator (remember those?) over and over, yet doing some on the ground reporting of people getting turned away?
I understand your point, I just don't see it.
I'm not sure where you heard about ICU's losing money if not at 85%. Not every hospital is having capacity issues based on where it is located and what the current outbreak percentage. The goal is to keep numbers low and manageable to not over burden our healthcare systems. I live near a metro area that has hundreds of ICU beds, but if I travel out state that may well turn in to just 20 beds for an entire region. Neither of those numbers are extremely large when considering the population they need to support in the event of an outbreak. As I posted earlier, the main point of many lockdowns is to limit spread and help hospitals ease surge capacity so they don't have to turn people away. ICU's aren't just for Covid patients.
I'm not sure where you heard about ICU's losing money if not at 85%. Not every hospital is having capacity issues based on where it is located and what the current outbreak percentage. The goal is to keep numbers low and manageable to not over burden our healthcare systems. I live near a metro area that has hundreds of ICU beds, but if I travel out state that may well turn in to just 20 beds for an entire region. Neither of those numbers are extremely large when considering the population they need to support in the event of an outbreak. As I posted earlier, the main point of many lockdowns is to limit spread and help hospitals ease surge capacity so they don't have to turn people away. ICU's aren't just for Covid patients.
That was straight from a local hospital executive to me. And "losing money" was probably a bad choice of words. When ICU's are not at 85% capacity, they are really not making money were his words.
it's ALWAYS been about what the medical system can sustain without collapsing society. once you start having to choose who lives or dies, you have a real problem on your hands. if you shut down to the point that everyone is losing their homes, you also have a real problem on your hands.
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
No man, I get it. I am glad we can have civil debate here. I guess I go back to the states who have been wide open. Hell, I even took my family to Florida over Christmas (Hail! Hail! the lucky ones). Why have the healthcare systems in those states not crumbled? Everything I have read says that if you are running a hospital and the ICU is not at 85%, you are doing something wrong and losing money.
If we were truly to the point of hospital collapse, do you not think our media would have been all over it? Not showing the same hospital bed and same person on a ventilator (remember those?) over and over, yet doing some on the ground reporting of people getting turned away?
I understand your point, I just don't see it.
it all depends on services per state or region. some states might have a shitload of available ICU beds, and others not much. I don't know. All I know is, where I am, we are running at 110% ICU capacity. now, it's not 100% COVID cases, but my understanding is that most are.
interestingly, i also heard this morning that last year at this time, the ICU had nearly the same capacity of flu cases, because apparently 3 strains of the flu all converged at the same time, causing a kind of perfect storm for seasonal flu.
but the flu has a much smaller mortality rate, and doesn't have the same lasting debilitating effects on people that we are now seeing in some people, even young ones who haven't been symptomatic.
social distancing and lockdowns have basically prevented ANY community transmission (at least where I am) of this year's flu virus. which is good, otherwise our ICU's would be at 150% to 200% capacity.
I talked to my Mom earlier today. She’s 78 and a cancer survivor of 4 years. Her health hasn’t been great since her treatments.
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
I talked to my Mom earlier today. She’s 78 and a cancer survivor of 4 years. Her health hasn’t been great since her treatments.
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
that's gotta be heartbreaking dude. sorry to hear.
I talked to my Mom earlier today. She’s 78 and a cancer survivor of 4 years. Her health hasn’t been great since her treatments.
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
I talked to my Mom earlier today. She’s 78 and a cancer survivor of 4 years. Her health hasn’t been great since her treatments.
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
I talked to my Mom earlier today. She’s 78 and a cancer survivor of 4 years. Her health hasn’t been great since her treatments.
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
Does her PCP not have any information to give her? I am going through a similar situation with my mother in law and her PCP got her scheduled fairly easily. While we are waiting we also went ahead and signed her up at multiple locations that announced they were offering the vaccine in case they call first. Hope she is able to get it soon.
We’ve have this school discussion a few times. Interesting data.
The UK has said their new variant spike is partly due to youth in school settings.
I couldn't agree more ive been saying this and was so sure I took my kids out. And had to sign them off the school registration. But I believe its right
brixton 93
astoria 06
albany 06
hartford 06
reading 06
barcelona 06
paris 06
wembley 07
dusseldorf 07
nijmegen 07
this song is meant to be called i got shit,itshould be called i got shit tickets-hartford 06 -
Swedish Prime Minister Admits Strategy to Stop Virus Fell Short Frances Schwartzkopff
(Bloomberg) --
Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven said his government should have taken more aggressive steps and moved more quickly to stop the spread of the pandemic, and he takes full responsibility for the initial strategy that led the country to suffer a disproportionately high number of deaths.
In an interview with Dagens Nyheter, Lofven said the government’s response to the spread of the virus among the elderly was inadequate, and that testing should have begun earlier.
“As prime minister, I take full responsibility for the strategy that we have,” Lofven said.
Sweden began stepping up its response to the virus only recently, after deaths, particularly among older people, rose to per-capita levels that are more than three times those of its closest regional peer, Denmark. Even King Carl XVI Gustaf has called the nation’s response a failure, a rare rebuke of the government by a Swedish monarch.
In what many characterized as a too-little, too-late response, Sweden earlier this month enacted a new law that restricts private gatherings and allows for fines and shuttering of businesses that don’t follow restrictions such as caps on the number of visitors. Previously, authorities relied on voluntary compliance with general recommendations.
Lofven also tried to defend the government’s approach at the outset of the pandemic, arguing that no one really knew back then how the situation would develop. Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top epidemiologist and the chief architect behind the country’s Covid strategy, proposed the light-touch approach from the get-go, based on an idea that the virus would be around for a long time and that recurring lockdowns weren’t a practical long-term solution.
Lofven told Dagens Nyheter that the government’s initial priority was to increase the amount of intensive care available. That shifted focus away from testing, including delaying the creation of the infrastructure needed to conduct extensive testing.
Not to defend Sweden or prime minister Löfven or slag your news sources named after some rich dude - but that headline and text is reaching compared to the actual interview in Dagens Nyheter.
He says, that in hindsight two (2) areas should have worked better - the elderly care system which wasn't as prepared as it should have been and that we should have gotten a structure up earlier for high volumes of testing.
He is not criticizing the strategy as a hole, as the headline - to my ears - wants it to sound like in all of its "summarizing".
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Comments
Cheers,
HFD
Cheers,
HFD
Your logic is nonsensical, and if you're here to even insinuate that the vaccine carries even a fraction of the risk of the disease, don't be surprised when you refer to this place as an echo chamber and those on here refer to you as illogical (if it weren't for euphemisms I'd be banned here already). After four years of harmful misinformation being spread, it's infuriating to see people taking the torch from the former POSOTUS, but it's great to know that these kinds of opinion no longer hold weight with anyone that matters.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Your graph is also comparing the original covid (pre December) to the new covid (December and later). The newer versions of covid spread much easier, explaining why cases exploded in the late fall. The US medical community was clearly caught off guard by the new variants. If it were not for Boris Johnson’s speech in late December, we probably might not even know about it yet.
From the NYT morning blast:
Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict.
‘Viruses don’t care what passport you carry’
One of the biggest lessons of the pandemic has been the success of travel restrictions at reducing its spread. And this is a moment when they have the potential to be particularly effective in the U.S., given the emergence of even more dangerous coronavirus variants in other countries.
President Biden seems to realize this, and has reinstated some travel restrictions that President Donald Trump lifted just before leaving office.
It’s not yet clear whether Biden will impose the kind of strict rules that have worked best elsewhere. So far, he has chosen a middle ground between Trump’s approach and the approaches with the best global track record.
Many of the places that have contained the virus have relied on travel restrictions. The list includes Australia, Ghana, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam and Canada’s four Atlantic provinces. At key points, they imposed severe restrictions on who could enter.
There is a crucial word in that sentence: severe. Travel bans work only when countries don’t allow a lot of exceptions.
Barring citizens of other countries while freely allowing your own citizens to return, for example, is ineffectual. “Viruses don’t care what passport you carry,” my colleague Donald G. McNeil Jr., who’s been covering infectious diseases since the 1990s, told me.
Voluntary quarantines generally don’t work either, since many people don’t adhere to them. Some take mild precautions and still describe themselves as “quarantining.” As Donald says: “For it to work, it has to be mandatory — and actually enforced. And not at home.”
Australia versus the U.S.
Australia crushed the spread of the virus in the spring partly by ending its voluntary quarantine and requiring all arrivals, including Australian citizens, to spend two weeks in a hotel. The military then helped enforce the rules. China and some other Asian countries took similar steps. In eastern Canada, tough entry rules were “one of the most successful things we’ve done,” Dr. Susan Kirkland, a Nova Scotia official, has said.
Travel bans had such a big effect, Dr. Jared Baeten, a prominent epidemiologist, told me last year, that public-health experts should re-examine their longtime skepticism of them. “Travel,” he said, “is the hallmark of the spread of this virus around the world.”
Last year, the U.S. became a case study in the ineffectiveness of limited travel rules after Trump announced a ban on entry from China. Because it didn’t apply to U.S. citizens or their immediate family members, among others, and because Trump did little to restrict entry from Europe, the measures had little effect.
The Biden administration now risks a repeat.
Infectious variants of the virus that are spreading in Brazil and South Africa could be even more dangerous than a strong new variant found in Britain, scientists say. In response, Biden is restricting entry from Europe, Brazil and South Africa, but the policy has multiple exceptions: Americans can return home from these places if they have recently tested negative, even though the test result may not be current.
The politics of travel bans are certainly thorny. Businesses worry about the economic impact (as The New Yorker’s Lawrence Wright noted in a fascinating radio interview with Terry Gross). Progressives worry about stoking anti-immigration views. And it’s already too late to keep the variants out of the U.S. entirely.
Yet travel restrictions can still save lives. The U.S. is in a race to vaccinate as many people as possible before they contract the virus, and the new variants are the biggest new challenge in doing so. “I am worried about these variants,” Dr. Vivek Murthy, the co-chair of Biden’s virus task force, said on the first episode of Ezra Klein’s Times podcast.
The U.S. travel restrictions will almost certainly have some impact by keeping out some infected people. But Biden’s policy stops short of minimizing the virus’s spread.
THE LATEST NEWS
THE VIRUS
"Good morning. Travel restrictions have been one of the most effective pandemic responses — if they’re strict."
Remember New Zealand, they absolutely crushed the virus! They just announced today that the measures they took DID NOT do enough so they are suspending travel for most of this year.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/26/asia/new-zealand-covid-borders-shut-intl-hnk/index.html
A year and a half of travel restrictions? Could y'all imagine that here? Hell, DJT suspended travel to China and was called "xenophobic" by our current President. And the thing is, it still is having problems with the virus. Virus gonna virus.
"I don't live there, but based on what is happening in the rest of the country it comes down to a balancing act of keeping the economy from collapsing and from rampant spread of the virus all while trying to make sure the hospitals can manage their patient loads."
Not trying to be a dick, but you exactly proved my point. Very little science involved, but really heavy on the political science. Show me where science references the economy? And again, there is this new strain(s). If everything worked before, shouldn't we lockdown harder, or double mask, to take out the new strain?
Finally, just a little PSA for any of you with pregnant significant others, the WHO is now recommending that they do not take the Moderna vaccine. If most are like and probably are judging by the age of the band, this will not affect many, but be careful out there.
https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-moderna-covid-19-mrna-1273-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know
"
Who should not take the vaccine?
While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).
Individuals with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine should not take this or any other mRNA vaccine.
While vaccination is recommended for older persons due to the high risk of severe COVID-19 and death, very frail older persons with an anticipated life expectancy of less than 3 months should be individually assessed.
The vaccine should not be administered to persons younger than 18 years of age pending the results of further studies."
I hear Mexico is living large. A little Spring Break should be in someone's future.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
not trying to be a dick, but this isn't difficult to understand.
Cheers,
HFD
If we were truly to the point of hospital collapse, do you not think our media would have been all over it? Not showing the same hospital bed and same person on a ventilator (remember those?) over and over, yet doing some on the ground reporting of people getting turned away?
I understand your point, I just don't see it.
We are ALL in this thing together. Let's try to find some common ground and work to a solution to end this thing for good, get people back to work, and get our children back in the classroom.
interestingly, i also heard this morning that last year at this time, the ICU had nearly the same capacity of flu cases, because apparently 3 strains of the flu all converged at the same time, causing a kind of perfect storm for seasonal flu.
but the flu has a much smaller mortality rate, and doesn't have the same lasting debilitating effects on people that we are now seeing in some people, even young ones who haven't been symptomatic.
social distancing and lockdowns have basically prevented ANY community transmission (at least where I am) of this year's flu virus. which is good, otherwise our ICU's would be at 150% to 200% capacity.
Cheers,
HFD
She broke down over the phone. Weeping uncontrollably because she has no idea when she will receive the vaccine. Her state (KS) and mine (MO) are doing a terrible job of providing the public with basic vaccine information. She’s terrified and lonely and it simply breaks my heart.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Cheers,
HFD
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
astoria 06
albany 06
hartford 06
reading 06
barcelona 06
paris 06
wembley 07
dusseldorf 07
nijmegen 07
this song is meant to be called i got shit,itshould be called i got shit tickets-hartford 06 -
He says, that in hindsight two (2) areas should have worked better - the elderly care system which wasn't as prepared as it should have been and that we should have gotten a structure up earlier for high volumes of testing.
He is not criticizing the strategy as a hole, as the headline - to my ears - wants it to sound like in all of its "summarizing".