Vaccine

interesting piece on what we were talking about yesterday. science is becoming less innovative because of a trend in researchers to limit original research and instead rely on a handful of popular topics and engage in the citation game. follows the trends we discussed in journalism and entertainment too. this guy Iirc is a lefty.

 
Things in Germany are teetering. Merkel has retired and Germany is trying to put in place a vaccine mandate. There's been large protests against mandates. the incoming chancellor has to rely on a coalition to rule and the libertarian leaning free democrats are opposed to vaccine mandates. they are talking about a lockdown of the unvaccinated (but that lasted in Austria only a few days before they went to full restrictions).

 
More on the criticism of the numbers released on the Bangladesh study. Very top line: they made their claims based on a differences of 20 or so cases, that could be accounted for by differences in survey, and which nevertheless showed no difference in cloth masks or for the younger people surgical masks.

It is rather irresponsible to mention the difference in positivity counts without mentioning the difference in sample size.

If you allow that argument, there are all sorts of bullshit things you can prove. For example, driving fast is safer than driving slow. Just compare the total number of car crashes in formula one racing to the total number of car crashes in California each year. Every year, far more people die in ordinary car crashes than in Formula One racing. Clearly, slower driving is more dangerous.
 
It is rather irresponsible to mention the difference in positivity counts without mentioning the difference in sample size.

If you allow that argument, there are all sorts of bullshit things you can prove. For example, driving fast is safer than driving slow. Just compare the total number of car crashes in formula one racing to the total number of car crashes in California each year. Every year, far more people die in ordinary car crashes than in Formula One racing. Clearly, slower driving is more dangerous.


fair...but that cuts both ways. Given the difference in sample size, and the sample size is small to begin with, it's hard to do a comparison to both, and that's compounded by the fact you have different protocols in both groups. It is another criticism of the study that is mentioned.
 
fair...but that cuts both ways. Given the difference in sample size, and the sample size is small to begin with, it's hard to do a comparison to both, and that's compounded by the fact you have different protocols in both groups. It is another criticism of the study that is mentioned.
Sample size variation? It’s not difficult. It is a standard question in problem sets for introductory undergraduate statistics classes. Any biostatistician can handle it without difficulty.
 
Sample size variation? It’s not difficult. It is a standard question in problem sets for introductory undergraduate statistics classes. Any biostatistician can handle it without difficulty.

yes but apparently not them, given the criticism.
 
yes but apparently not them, given the criticism.
How would you know?

A machine learning expert is having a public disagreement with a biostatistician. You don’t know jack about either field.

Instead, you approve of whichever opinion is closest to the opinion you held in April of 2020. In this case, the machine learning guy.
 
How would you know?

A machine learning expert is having a public disagreement with a biostatistician. You don’t know jack about either field.

Instead, you approve of whichever opinion is closest to the opinion you held in April of 2020. In this case, the machine learning guy.

how's that any different from what you are doing, in which you discount any criticism that contradicts your stated beliefs....Mr. I Never Met an Establishment Expert I Didn't Like.

I'm not the one advancing the argument....which is why I posted it instead of making it myself. Take it up with the author of the criticism.

My only point is that there has been criticism that has arisen of the study, which wasn't great for masks to begin with (again cloth masks nothing, surgical under 50 almost nothing, unproven assumption that the modest effects on a small sample size can scale if more people masked). I find it interesting, partially because of folks like you and the media that have taken the study to signify "Masks Work!" (which BTW I've said i think against the alpha they probably did a little on a micro basis....less so on a macro basis because of the scaling problem)
 
The JP Morgan analysis out this am notes that the concern about omicron is probably overblown. Their clients are less worried about omicron than the impact of government reactions to the omicron.
 
More on the criticism of the numbers released on the Bangladesh study. Very top line: they made their claims based on a differences of 20 or so cases, that could be accounted for by differences in survey, and which nevertheless showed no difference in cloth masks or for the younger people surgical masks.

Ever notice how there seems to be no real strong studies showing masks make much of a difference?
 
Some don't think they'll be able to produce an omicron specific vaccine, given the transmissibility, before it overwhelms the world. Therefore they hope: a) natural/vaccine immunity holds up against severe disease and/or b) it's mild. Everyone's going to get it.

 
Some don't think they'll be able to produce an omicron specific vaccine, given the transmissibility, before it overwhelms the world. Therefore they hope: a) natural/vaccine immunity holds up against severe disease and/or b) it's mild. Everyone's going to get it.

Funny how we are always a step behind viruses.
 
Natasha Bertrand has made a career of being wrong , and she keeps failing upwards
Some don't think they'll be able to produce an omicron specific vaccine, given the transmissibility, before it overwhelms the world. Therefore they hope: a) natural/vaccine immunity holds up against severe disease and/or b) it's mild. Everyone's going to get it.

Seems like we will be perpetually “buying time” for forever

I’m hearing some of the same phrases used at the start, we need 2 weeks , we need to prepare for the worst
 
this isn't good news considering how south africa skews younger. As I outlined above, there's two possible futures right now. One omicron isn't very lethal, the vaccines do their job against severe disease, more of the same with the blue checks pushing for restrictions and the 2/3 of the rest of the population ready to move on. Two, omicron is as lethal or more lethal than the Delta: widespread social unrest as things get reset basically to square 1 and governments try to impose restrictions on populations and economies nearing breaking points.

 
Some don't think they'll be able to produce an omicron specific vaccine, given the transmissibility, before it overwhelms the world. Therefore they hope: a) natural/vaccine immunity holds up against severe disease and/or b) it's mild. Everyone's going to get it.


SF patient was vaccinated, and his contacts are coming back negative. Not much transmission.

South Africa cases are doubling in 3 days. Lots of transmission.

It may be that the unvaccinated areas have a lot more to worry about than vaccinated areas.
 
SF patient was vaccinated, and his contacts are coming back negative. Not much transmission.

South Africa cases are doubling in 3 days. Lots of transmission.

It may be that the unvaccinated areas have a lot more to worry about than vaccinated areas.

fingers crossed either vaccines hold up or that it's very mild. because as I've said, society is at a breaking point...going back to square 1 march 2020 topples the whole thing over.
 
Back
Top