Coronavirus thread

[Mandryka]

There's an interesting discussion of this here from a Danish political scientist, Michael Bang Petersen -- it starts with some observations about cooperation with the mask mandate has reduced in Denmark, and then starts to propose some hypotheses about why

https://twitter.com/m_b_petersen/status/1477409916214255619?s=21

[Madiel]

Some scientists, not all. At least in Romania's case, back then almost all scientists and doctors either sitting in the Covid committee or appearing on TV sang the same aria: "Get vaccinated, it's the only way to return to normal life." The very few who were skeptic about that were either ignored or derided as conspiracy theorists. Today the latter are fully vindicated by reality. It's quite probable, though, that this is a scenario which many other countries have seen.

I'm obviously not going to go through the transcripts of a Romanian committee to argue with you about this and to examine exactly what people said, but I'm not for a second suggesting it's appropriate to be skeptical about vaccination in general. Vaccinated is better than not vaccinated. Even now with omicron, vaccination is significantly improving the course of an infection when it hasn't actually prevented an infection.

Half the issue is people not having a clear idea of exactly what "normal life" means and not having a clear idea about what vaccination was supposed to achieve. I've certainly seen plenty of statements by health professionals, over quite a lengthy period, saying that the goal of vaccination was not to prevent infections, but to reduce deaths. Which seems to be working. But vaccination on its own could never determine whether "life" would be "normal", because there's a huge mass of social and political questions in there as well as medical ones. We have to decide what level of illness we're prepared to accept. "Normal life" includes influenza killing people, and if we get to the point where the rate at which covid-19 kills people is about the same as the rate at which influenza kills people... are we going to be okay with that? That's a policy/social decision, not a medical one.

We don't constantly report numbers of flu infections. We're used to it. We do report in some years that the cases are up, and the deaths are up. An increase is news. But we have a background level of flu, and flu deaths - with flu vaccination available - that we don't consider terribly newsworthy.

People who kept saying from the start that covid was no different to flu were wrong. But I've seen health professionals suggesting for a long time that the ultimate goal is to make it that we live with covid-19 much as we live with the flu. In which case, "normal life" is going to involve people getting infected and sick. Just not as many people dying as has been the case.

EDIT: Events like this do change what people consider 'normal' anyway, and later generations tend to forget what caused the change. One of the podcasts I listen to recently had the rather startling story of how the invention of the bicycle is directly connected to the "year without a summer" in 1816. People riding bicycles nowadays are mostly completely unaware that they were invented because of a lack of horses, after people were forced to kill and eat their horses.

[Florestan]

I'm obviously not going to go through the transcripts of a Romanian committee to argue with you about this and to examine exactly what people said, but I'm not for a second suggesting it's appropriate to be skeptical about vaccination in general. Vaccinated is better than not vaccinated. Even now with omicron, vaccination is significantly improving the course of an infection when it hasn't actually prevented an infection.

I was perhaps unclear. The scientists I mentioned were / are skeptical not about vaccination in general. They were / are skeptical about the idea that vaccination alone can solve the problem --- exactly the idea that has been aggressively promoted in the early phases of vaccination, and to which some people still cling to. An idea which, as you correctly pointed out, is entirely false.

Half the issue is people not having a clear idea of exactly what "normal life" means and not having a clear idea about what vaccination was supposed to achieve. I've certainly seen plenty of statements by health professionals, over quite a lengthy period, saying that the goal of vaccination was not to prevent infections, but to reduce deaths. Which seems to be working. But vaccination on its own could never determine whether "life" would be "normal", because there's a huge mass of social and political questions in there as well as medical ones. We have to decide what level of illness we're prepared to accept. "Normal life" includes influenza killing people, and if we get to the point where the rate at which covid-19 kills people is about the same as the rate at which influenza kills people... are we going to be okay with that? That's a policy/social decision, not a medical one.

We don't constantly report numbers of flu infections. We're used to it. We do report in some years that the cases are up, and the deaths are up. An increase is news. But we have a background level of flu, and flu deaths - with flu vaccination available - that we don't consider terribly newsworthy.

People who kept saying from the start that covid was no different to flu were wrong. But I've seen health professionals suggesting for a long time that the ultimate goal is to make it that we live with covid-19 much as we live with the flu. In which case, "normal life" is going to involve people getting infected and sick. Just not as many people dying as has been the case.

Eminently sensible points, both from you and from the health professionals you mention.

[Florestan]

The really interesting question for me is what happens when the population lose confidence in the politicians, because they feel they have been misled, or (in the case of the Government here in the UK), because their members have broken the very rules which they have imposed on the people.

My feeling is that it may make people much less cooperative, much more reluctant to comply with imposed rules. I think the situation is saveable, by lots of discussion and two way communication and much greater openness. But time may be running out, and it may be hard in those countries where the state/population relationship is not very open, not very trusting.

Such as Romania, where we have centuries-old extensive experience with untrustworthy, greedy, arrogant, egotistic, mendacious governments.

There's an interesting discussion of this here from a Danish political scientist, Michael Bang Petersen -- it starts with some observations about cooperation with the mask mandate has reduced in Denmark, and then starts to propose some hypotheses about why

https://twitter.com/m_b_petersen/status/1477409916214255619?s=21

Interesting indeed.

[Karl Henning]

With the omicron surge (Massachusetts has now reached the grim milestone of 20K COVID deaths, and omicron accounts for 95% of our cases) we have decided to pause our church choir for a few weeks.

[Karl Henning]

I was perhaps unclear. The scientists I mentioned were / are skeptical not about vaccination in general. They were / are skeptical about the idea that vaccination alone can solve the problem --- exactly the idea that has been aggressively promoted in the early phases of vaccination, and to which some people still cling to.

To my knowledge, no health official in the US has said this, of course.

[Florestan]

To my knowledge, no health official in the US has said this, of course.

December 16, 2020:

"So if we can get the overwhelming proportion of the population vaccinated by let's say the end of the second, the beginning of the third quarter – by the time we get into mid-fall of 2021, we can be approaching some level of normality," Fauci told CNBC's Meg Tirrell during a special edition of the "Healthy Returns" conference.

To get back to normal, however, Fauci said between 75% and 85% of the population will need to to get inoculated against Covid-19. That would create an "umbrella" of immunity to prevent further spread of the virus, Fauci said.

"That would be able to protect even the vulnerables who have not been vaccinated, or those in which the vaccine has not been effective," Fauci said.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/dr-fauci-says-us-could-return-to-normal-by-mid-fall-if-most-people-get-covid-vaccine.html (emphasis mine)

[Karl Henning]

December 16, 2020:

"So if we can get the overwhelming proportion of the population vaccinated by let's say the end of the second, the beginning of the third quarter – by the time we get into mid-fall of 2021, we can be approaching some level of normality," Fauci told CNBC's Meg Tirrell during a special edition of the "Healthy Returns" conference.

To get back to normal, however, Fauci said between 75% and 85% of the population will need to to get inoculated against Covid-19. That would create an "umbrella" of immunity to prevent further spread of the virus, Fauci said.

"That would be able to protect even the vulnerables who have not been vaccinated, or those in which the vaccine has not been effective," Fauci said.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/dr-fauci-says-us-could-return-to-normal-by-mid-fall-if-most-people-get-covid-vaccine.html (emphasis mine)

Specifically, you said "vaccination alone." Andrei. Every health official in the US has said that vaccination is a key element of returning life to normal. If you're bucking against that, you're bucking against good sense and reality. For only one thing, the widespread emotional vaccine-denial has interfered with the return to normal life, and does not "prove" that vaccination is not efficacious.

[Florestan]

Specifically, you said "vaccination alone." Andrei.

Precisely, Karl. Nowhere in that article is Fauci cited as saying you will still have to wear masks, keep the social distancing, work or school online etc even at a high vaccination level. All he said is that by reaching between 75% and 85 vaccination level you will get back to normal because even the unvaccinated or those in which the vaccine has not* been effective will be protected.

* notice the singular: he did not mention any boosters.

Looks like a clear case of "Get vaccinated so that we can all get back to normal" to me.

And I think that the vast majority of people in any given country would agree that "normal" means no more lockdowns, restrictions, mask mandates, online work and schooling etc.

[Karl Henning]

Precisely, Karl. Nowhere in that article is Fauci cited as saying you will still have to wear masks, keep the social distancing, work or school online etc even at a high vaccination level. All he said is that by reaching between 75% and 85 vaccination level you will get back to normal because even the unvaccinated or those in which the vaccine has not* been effective will be protected.

* notice the singular: he did not mention any boosters.

Looks like a clear case of "Get vaccinated so that we can all get back to normal" to me.

To me, it looks like a clear case of Andrei tendentiously misreading and misrepresenting. You appear here not like a person seeking the facts and the truth, but like a champion of misinformation.

Since your pointlessly argumentative, emotional assertion is that Fauci's claim that by reaching between 75% and 85 vaccination level you will get back to normal is somehow "a lie, big time," let me guess, you're also asserting that this vaccination level has been reached?

Anyone with intelligence who has lived through the pandemic, yourself included, knows that the situation is continually evolving. So your "gotcha" about Fauci not mentioning boosters in 2016 does not merit the effort of rebuttal.

[Mandryka]

To me, it looks like a clear case of Andrei tendentiously misreading and misrepresenting. You appear here not like a person seeking the facts and the truth, but like a champion of misinformation.

Since your pointlessly argumentative, emotional assertion is that Fauci's claim that by reaching between 75% and 85 vaccination level you will get back to normal is somehow "a lie, big time," let me guess, you're also asserting that this vaccination level has been reached?

Anyone with intelligence who has lived through the pandemic, yourself included, knows that the situation is continually evolving. So your "gotcha" about Fauci not mentioning boosters in 2016 does not merit the effort of rebuttal.

To some extent you're right, and to some extent you're missing the point. If Fauci or whoever were writing a report or a paper for McKinsey, then of course you would be right. But he's not - he's speaking to the general public via the media, supported by experts in communications - people who can make informed professional judgements about how it will be reported and received and understood. Andrei may well be right to think that many people, most even, thought that the deal was « vaccinate to get back to normal. » - i.e. vaccination is a sufficient condition - even though he didn't strictly and literally say that. And it may also be right to think that was planned for, the desired outcome, in order to nudge more people to offer their arms to the needle. Some would say that this is, while not a lie, deliberately misleading - and I would say that it was calculated paternalistic disingenuousness, justified in the Government's thinking by the immediate results of increased vaccination take up.

[Florestan]

To some extent you're right, and to some extent you're missing the point. If Fauci or whoever were writing a report or a paper for McKinsey, then of course you would be right. But he's not - he's speaking to the general public via the media, supported by experts in communications - people who can make informed professional judgements about how it will be reported and received and understood. Andrei may well be right to think that many people, most even, thought that the deal was « vaccinate to get back to normal. » - i.e. vaccination is a sufficient condition - even though he didn't strictly and literally say that. And it may also be right to think that was planned for, the desired outcome, in order to nudge more people to offer their arms to the needle. Some would say that this is, while not a lie, deliberately misleading - and I would say that that it was  calculated paternalistic disingenuousness, justified in the Government's thinking by the immediate results of increased vaccination take up.

Thank you.

[Florestan]

To me, it looks like a clear case of Andrei tendentiously misreading and misrepresenting. You appear here not like a person seeking the facts and the truth, but like a champion of misinformation.

Karl, please, either you cease calling me names or I'll cease replying to your posts.

Since your pointlessly argumentative, emotional assertion is that Fauci's claim that by reaching between 75% and 85 vaccination level you will get back to normal is somehow "a lie, big time," let me guess, you're also asserting that this vaccination level has been reached?

I don't know about the USA but in some European countries yes, that level has been reached  --- and guess what, they still have restrictions and mask mandates and some of them even lockdowns.

[Florestan]

On the humorous side: has anyone else noticed how close Que's avatar (Louis XV if I'm not mistaken) resembles a coronavirus? 

[Que]

On the humorous side: has anyone else noticed how close Que's avatar (Louis XV if I'm not mistaken) resembles a coronavirus? 

It isn't called "corona" virus for nothing... 

[Florestan]

It isn't called "corona" virus for nothing... 

[Madiel]

December 16, 2020:

"So if we can get the overwhelming proportion of the population vaccinated by let's say the end of the second, the beginning of the third quarter – by the time we get into mid-fall of 2021, we can be approaching some level of normality," Fauci told CNBC's Meg Tirrell during a special edition of the "Healthy Returns" conference.

To get back to normal, however, Fauci said between 75% and 85% of the population will need to to get inoculated against Covid-19. That would create an "umbrella" of immunity to prevent further spread of the virus, Fauci said.

"That would be able to protect even the vulnerables who have not been vaccinated, or those in which the vaccine has not been effective," Fauci said.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/dr-fauci-says-us-could-return-to-normal-by-mid-fall-if-most-people-get-covid-vaccine.html (emphasis mine)

Part of what you have in bold is not a Fauci quote. It is text written by a journalist.

The other part that you have in bold refers to a level of vaccination that I believe the USA has never reached, and makes no reference to normality or to vaccination being the total answer.

But the first point is the more important one: you are taking a news report, written by a journalist, which has bits and pieces of sentences from Fauci, and treating it as "this is what Fauci said". It isn't. It's how a journalist interpreted and boiled down what Fauci said. And from both extensive knowledge of the problems in the ways science is reported and some experience of getting to hear Fauci in his own words, I would be EXTREMELY cautious about treating those as the same thing.

[krummholz]

Thanks for asking PD.
Not too bad I think. No more coughing, but she feels tired/exhausted a lot of the time. She's currently asleep in front of the fire in the living room, which is why I'm left to contact my 'cat group' in peace. 
All strength to those of you struggling with this.

Much strength to her, and to you also.

[krummholz]

Some say the virus can give a postive test up to 12 weeks afterwards. I haven't investigated further on that, though.

A positive PCR test, yes, I have heard the same thing. It is why a negative PCR test is not required (at least here, in the US) to break quarantine once one has recovered from COVID, and why it is generally recommended not to test again (once again, by PCR) for 90 (or some similar number) days afterward.

This doesn't apply to antigen tests.

[SimonNZ]

EDIT: Events like this do change what people consider 'normal' anyway, and later generations tend to forget what caused the change. One of the podcasts I listen to recently had the rather startling story of how the invention of the bicycle is directly connected to the "year without a summer" in 1816. People riding bicycles nowadays are mostly completely unaware that they were invented because of a lack of horses, after people were forced to kill and eat their horses.

Which podcast is that?