Vaccine

dad4 said:
That sentence only makes sense if you are using the royal “we”. You may be dismissive of the people who have degrees and work experience in epidemiology. I am not.

I am dismissive of people with degrees outside epidemiology, who then tout their humanities or surgery credential while pretending to understand viral population growth. That is like me saying you should buy my poetry book because I have a degree in mathematics.
Click to expand...

Errr.....some of the best poets had no formal education. My mother is a published poet back in the old country with no college, only a nursing, degree. My 13 year old just had one picked up in a national mag despite not even having hit high school For all I know you'd be great at poetry. Despite your degree in mathematics, for example, you are one of the most worldclass preachers I've ever seen (J/K...it was too good to let pass :) )

But that's fundamentally were we disagree. I take experience wherever I find it...in my case, for example, is my training in logic (which BTW is 1/2 of the LSAT). I'm also willing to embrace experts with degrees and experience that go against the establishment, while you dismiss them as quacks. But in the end, paraphrasing your own words, credentialism while one factor, can be overrated.

p.s. if you are dismissive of people with degrees outside epidemiology, you must have hated the troika of Fauci, Redfield and Birx and wondered why they were running things. Atlas himself wondered about it give his health policy credential
 
Grace T. said:
Uk showing no signs of leveling off yet.

www.worldometers.info

United Kingdom COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

United Kingdom Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info www.worldometers.info
Click to expand...

Probably over the top in London, which is where the party started. Click on 1m view for best resolution.

 
Grace T. said:
Uk showing no signs of leveling off yet.

www.worldometers.info

United Kingdom COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

United Kingdom Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info www.worldometers.info
Click to expand...
We read that graph differently.

I see UK as past the inflection point. Still growing, but more slowly now. On course to peak at roughly 5x previous case peak. (roughly 300K cases per day.)

Parts of the East Coast are also getting close to max. Keep an eye on DC, NY, NJ the next 4-7 days. I expect all three to bend concave down.
 
dad4 said:
Credentials can be overrated.
Click to expand...

TV scientists are like TV lawyers-that is where and to whom the credentials seem to matter most. For the people cranking out the data that others pontificate about on the TV the saying is "you are only as good as your next paper". In some ways, if we are arguing about media experts, that means everything is going fine.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
TV scientists are like TV lawyers-that is where and to whom the credentials seem to matter most. For the people cranking out the data that others pontificate about on the TV the saying is "you are only as good as your next paper". In some ways, if we are arguing about media experts, that means everything is going fine.
Click to expand...
Those who can do, those who can’t talk about it.
 
Grace T. said:
The t-cell portion of the equation. Remember y'all when some (not necessarily here on the forum) were calling t-cells conspiracy theories? Ahh 2020 we miss you already.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478113164533190657
Click to expand...

OK, this is what I was trying to wade back to. Thanks for digging that up. T cell conspiracy theories? Weird.

This is one of a group of recent reports showing that the T cell repertoire that gets locked down in immune memory by vaccination responds robustly to omicron. Its good news and completely consistent with earlier characterization of robust immune memory afforded by vaccines.

The question I had was a bit different-does omicron, with it's milder symptoms, evoke a strong immune response, ie does it actually stimulate Ab production and proliferation of quiescent immune memory cells populations. It might not, for example, if there wasn't really the clean up on aisle 5 associated with more virulent strains-omicron infection seems to kind of linger like a stubborn cold. To gauge the nature of the immune response you need to look at omicron convalescents. And its a bit early to be getting that data, although I did find one preprint linked below. The message from a detailed characterization of the immune response of two omicron convalescents is encouraging, albeit at this point a very small sample. Despite relatively mild symptoms there was a strong adaptive immune response both in terms of elevating circulating antibodies and in stimulating anti-S directed cytotoxic and helper T cell populations. Notably the antibodies produced now reacted with high affinity to omicron S, and additionally cross-reacted with S from earlier variants, including delta. So that's also a good news story.


If it holds up that most people who gets omicron mount a reasonably robust immune response, that may in turn shape the selective pressure on the virus on the backside of the wave. Back of the envelope say the absolutely mind blowing proliferative potential of omicron leads to a 10X increase in total cummulative case load around the globe in the first half of 2022. The planet goes from 300 million cases to 3 billion. If its true that most of those convalescents are reasonably resistant to re-infection for 6 months or so, there may be less advantage to being a fast replicator trying to out compete the rest of the swarm for immunologically accessible targets, which seems to have been the major selective pressure to date. As the global population gets increasingly exposed the main selective pressure may change to circumvention of the immune response. Whether the virus can generate combinations that meet that demand will be an interesting question.
 
NorCalDad said:
I mean.....

wayofmartialarts.com

How Much Money Does UFC Pay Joe Rogan As A Salary?

You will be surprised that UFC commentator Joe Rogan makes more money than some of the UFC fighters, isn’t that amazing? This is a motivation for those that
wayofmartialarts.com wayofmartialarts.com

GRIFT ON BROTHER!!!!!
Click to expand...
The drama! Most UFC fighters don't make a ton of money. So yes, he makes more than some UFC fighters. The article is quite silly. UFC made Joe Rogan? Like he appeared out of nowhere?

Check out how much NFL broadcasters make.
 
watfly said:
Or teach it.
Click to expand...

Unless you are a money bag at some big famous place beholden to sucking at the tit of think tanks, etc, most of those who can also have to teach. And teaching helps keeps it real. Here's my rule of thumb. You want to claim to be a working scientist, can you diagnose your own plumbing problems and are you willing to fix them yourself? Or have you become soft and lazy? Want to see what soft and lazy looks like? Watch the experts on the TV.
 
what-happened said:
The drama! Most UFC fighters don't make a ton of money. So yes, he makes more than some UFC fighters. The article is quite silly. UFC made Joe Rogan? Like he appeared out of nowhere?

Check out how much NFL broadcasters make.
Click to expand...

He's a grifter -- plain and simple. Just a guy trying to make a buck (a lot of them).

And yes, I've seen his standup and his stints on Fear Factor.

The left has grifters as well. Just calling a spade a spade.
 
I'm not a Joe Rogan apologist, I've probably listened to a handful of his podcasts. He is an entertainer and to his credit he gives a platform to people from both ends of the spectrum. Alex Jones to Bernie Sanders for example. This is unlike other traditional news or entertainment news programs that follow a strict narrative and when they do allow an opposing opinion to be voiced, the person voicing that opinion is usually outnumber 4 to 1 and their opinion basically gets quashed.

More power to him finding his own niche which is obviously appealing to many. Its funny that some people resent his success.

It seems the most threatening thing to many people these days is an opposing opinion.
 
NorCalDad said:
He's a grifter -- plain and simple. Just a guy trying to make a buck (a lot of them).

And yes, I've seen his standup and his stints on Fear Factor.

The left has grifters as well. Just calling a spade a spade.
Click to expand...
Call it what you want. He's not trying to make a buck, he's made a buck or two.

Funny that you use the term left, he's certainly a "leftie". I woudn't consider him a right wing conservative... Anyway, doesn't really matter I guess. He's making a pretty penny, just like all opinion people in the media. At least he's a legit black belt in jujitsu. Not too many "grifters" can make that claim.
 
NorCalDad said:
He's a grifter -- plain and simple. Just a guy trying to make a buck (a lot of them).

And yes, I've seen his standup and his stints on Fear Factor.

The left has grifters as well. Just calling a spade a spade.
Click to expand...
Why do you resent his success? What makes him a grifter?

Are you implying he is right wing?

 
watfly said:
Why do you resent his success? What makes him a grifter?

Are you implying he is right wing?

Click to expand...

I only made the "left" comment to emphasize grifting happens across the spectrum.

I don't resent his success. Good on him for making a buck. But it's a grift. People are buying what he's selling....and he knows what sells. Not unlike Howard Stern and all the other podcast/radio hosts.
 
what-happened said:
Call it what you want. He's not trying to make a buck, he's made a buck or two.

Funny that you use the term left, he's certainly a "leftie". I woudn't consider him a right wing conservative... Anyway, doesn't really matter I guess. He's making a pretty penny, just like all opinion people in the media. At least he's a legit black belt in jujitsu. Not too many "grifters" can make that claim.
Click to expand...

Wonder if Dana White would pay him more than $12k to get into the cage.
 
Funny how politics and reality changes ones perspective.

For 2 yrs the NY Times has been peddling fear. Many articles about risks to kids without acknowledging that have no risk.

Better late than never...but they should still be held accountable for the fear they spread.


For the past two years, large parts of American society have decided harming children was an unavoidable side effect of Covid-19. And that was probably true in the spring of 2020, when nearly all of society shut down to slow the spread of a deadly and mysterious virus.

But the approach has been less defensible for the past year and a half, as we have learned more about both Covid and the extent of children's suffering from pandemic restrictions.

Data now suggest that many changes to school routines are of questionable value in controlling the virus's spread. Some researchers are skeptical that school closures reduce Covid cases in most instances. Other interventions, like forcing students to sit apart from their friends at lunch, may also have little benefit.

One reason: Severe versions of Covid, including long Covid, are extremely rare in children. For them, the virus resembles a typical flu. Children face more risk from car rides than Covid.

The widespread availability of vaccines since last spring also raises an ethical question: Should children suffer to protect unvaccinated adults -- who are voluntarily accepting Covid risk for themselves and increasing everybody else's risk, too? Right now, the United States is effectively saying yes.

To be clear, there are some hard decisions and unavoidable trade-offs. Covid can lead to hospitalization or worse for a small percentage of vaccinated adults, especially those who are elderly or immunocompromised, and allowing children to resume normal life could create additional risk. The Omicron surge may well heighten that risk, leaving schools with no attractive options.

For the past two years, however, many communities in the U.S. have not really grappled with the trade-off. They have tried to minimize the spread of Covid -- a worthy goal absent other factors -- rather than minimizing the damage that Covid does to society. They have accepted more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults, often without acknowledging the dilemma or assessing which decisions lead to less overall harm.

Given the choices that the country has made, it should not be surprising that children are suffering so much.

www.nytimes.com

No Way to Grow Up (Published 2022)

For the past two years, Americans have accepted more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
Desert Hound said:
Funny how politics and reality changes ones perspective.

For 2 yrs the NY Times has been peddling fear. Many articles about risks to kids without acknowledging that have no risk.

Better late than never...but they should still be held accountable for the fear they spread.


For the past two years, large parts of American society have decided harming children was an unavoidable side effect of Covid-19. And that was probably true in the spring of 2020, when nearly all of society shut down to slow the spread of a deadly and mysterious virus.

But the approach has been less defensible for the past year and a half, as we have learned more about both Covid and the extent of children's suffering from pandemic restrictions.

Data now suggest that many changes to school routines are of questionable value in controlling the virus's spread. Some researchers are skeptical that school closures reduce Covid cases in most instances. Other interventions, like forcing students to sit apart from their friends at lunch, may also have little benefit.

One reason: Severe versions of Covid, including long Covid, are extremely rare in children. For them, the virus resembles a typical flu. Children face more risk from car rides than Covid.

The widespread availability of vaccines since last spring also raises an ethical question: Should children suffer to protect unvaccinated adults -- who are voluntarily accepting Covid risk for themselves and increasing everybody else's risk, too? Right now, the United States is effectively saying yes.

To be clear, there are some hard decisions and unavoidable trade-offs. Covid can lead to hospitalization or worse for a small percentage of vaccinated adults, especially those who are elderly or immunocompromised, and allowing children to resume normal life could create additional risk. The Omicron surge may well heighten that risk, leaving schools with no attractive options.

For the past two years, however, many communities in the U.S. have not really grappled with the trade-off. They have tried to minimize the spread of Covid -- a worthy goal absent other factors -- rather than minimizing the damage that Covid does to society. They have accepted more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults, often without acknowledging the dilemma or assessing which decisions lead to less overall harm.

Given the choices that the country has made, it should not be surprising that children are suffering so much.

www.nytimes.com

No Way to Grow Up (Published 2022)

For the past two years, Americans have accepted more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...
I can't give this a "better late than never". This has been obvious since at least a year and half ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top