Vaccine

You’d feel a lot different if your income was impacted. Yet you can’t see or relate to the impact of the extended lockdowns because your life was fairly normal working from home.
Our business BOOMED during Covid which was not expected but makes sense now in hindsight. We never closed during Covid. We were all back in the office a week after the mid-March lockdowns. We took precautions but were open and exposed to the public and indoors. We had zero spread of Covid at our home office or our individual facilities for two years. It ultimately caught up with us in the home office in spring of this year.

We were lucky, many businesses (like hospitality industry) were devastated. It's easy to sit in an ivory tower and say lockdowns were no big deal when your pay checks kept coming. We locked down, and then threw money at the problem. According to one economist, the government gave out 3x the amount of money that was lost. I know people that bought new boats and homes with their PPP money. Like the health policies the money should have been targeted, but this is what happens when you let the government run a giveaway program. We're paying for that now with runaway inflation and supply chain interruptions.

Add it to education interruption and mental health issues to name a few others. The full ramifications of which will not be known for years. Was it worth it? Dad4 claims we saved 1 million lives with lockdowns and restrictions. I suspect that deaths might have been higher had we not had lockdowns, but I have a hard time believing that it was a 1 million. I think comparing states is a fools errand, there is really no common denominator that either increased or decreased deaths between states. The virus did as it pleased. Those that died were not demographically the go out and eat and drink crowd. That group tended to be home bodies.

The people most impacted by the lockdowns and restrictions were the least vulnerable to the virus. Our health policies just didn't add up. The virus was a "Darwin disease"; however, we treated it as if it was the plague. Bad call. History will not look back kindly on our policies.
 
One you could protect yourself from and another was forced upon you……
Really? You’re talking about lockdowns, and that was 2020. How were people supposed to protect themselves back then?

No vaccines. N95 masks were not yet available. And cloth masks are not effective as PPE.
 
Really? You’re talking about lockdowns, and that was 2020. How were people supposed to protect themselves back then?

No vaccines. N95 masks were not yet available. And cloth masks are not effective as PPE.
That's ironic since cases (and I think deaths) were more prevalent post vaccines and with much greater N95 availability. Although even now with N95 availability I rarely see anyone wearing one, I'd put it at less than 5% of mask wearers. You and I understand the benefits of N95 over cloth or surgical masks but the majority of the general public do not.

The protections pre-vaccine are still the best protections post vaccine (by a wide margin)...outdoors and distance.
 
That's ironic since cases (and I think deaths) were more prevalent post vaccines and with much greater N95 availability. Although even now with N95 availability I rarely see anyone wearing one, I'd put it at less than 5% of mask wearers. You and I understand the benefits of N95 over cloth or surgical masks but the majority of the general public do not.

The protections pre-vaccine are still the best protections post vaccine (by a wide margin)...outdoors and distance.
N95 are more common up here. Still under 20% of masks.

Some of that is selection bias. People who rely on N95 masks will also do more to avoid indoor/crowded spaces. So, when you’re at a restaurant and see bare faces, those who prefer N95 masks may be having a picnic in the park.
 
That's ironic since cases (and I think deaths) were more prevalent post vaccines and with much greater N95 availability.
It will depend on when you run the numbers, but I chose May1, 2021 as a cutoff date as that is when 50% of adults were vaccinated and the vaccine was widely available. Pre 5/1/21 there were 31,814,850 reported cases and post 5/1/21 there were 54,650,658 reported cases. For deaths it was 574,871 pre 5/1/21 and 438,010 post. Makes sense since the vaccine is effective against serious illness (and omicron tended to be more mild) and not very effective against infection (and omicron tended to be more contagious.)
 
Really? You’re talking about lockdowns, and that was 2020. How were people supposed to protect themselves back then?

No vaccines. N95 masks were not yet available. And cloth masks are not effective as PPE.
We knew about 2 months in who was at risk.

We didn't need to shut down or close schools.

Most people have no real risk.

A substantial percentage of deaths were and still are nursing homes. Ie the places people get sent when they are typically a short time away from dying.

We knew you didn't need to close schools that fall.

We knew we were not going to stop a respiratory virus.

It was pretty clear early on this was going to be endemic....and as you hated to hear... something we are going to have to live with.

The policies you prefer screwed the poor, the kids, biz etc. We are experiencing the highest inflation in 40 plus yrs etc. All due to bad policy.

You keep trying to defend the indefensible.
 
N95 are more common up here. Still under 20% of masks.

Some of that is selection bias. People who rely on N95 masks will also do more to avoid indoor/crowded spaces. So, when you’re at a restaurant and see bare faces, those who prefer N95 masks may be having a picnic in the park.
A lot of factors for mask wearing. I attended a state association conference last week in Newport. The demo was primarily self-made, small to middle market business people. People that are used to assuming risk. Over 400 people for the conference which set a new record. I only saw 2 people wearing mask indoors. I suspect if that were an academic conference you would have seen far more people wearing masks and attendance wouldn't be at an all-time high.
 
It will depend on when you run the numbers, but I chose May1, 2021 as a cutoff date as that is when 50% of adults were vaccinated and the vaccine was widely available. Pre 5/1/21 there were 31,814,850 reported cases and post 5/1/21 there were 54,650,658 reported cases. For deaths it was 574,871 pre 5/1/21 and 438,010 post. Makes sense since the vaccine is effective against serious illness (and omicron tended to be more mild) and not very effective against infection (and omicron tended to be more contagious.)
May 1 is a nice cutoff. It also breaks it into two roughly equal time periods.

The other big factors are that almost all of us were more social during the second period than the first, and our hospitals had access to much better treatments.
 
We knew about 2 months in who was at risk.

We didn't need to shut down or close schools.

Most people have no real risk.

A substantial percentage of deaths were and still are nursing homes. Ie the places people get sent when they are typically a short time away from dying.

We knew you didn't need to close schools that fall.

We knew we were not going to stop a respiratory virus.

It was pretty clear early on this was going to be endemic....and as you hated to hear... something we are going to have to live with.

The policies you prefer screwed the poor, the kids, biz etc. We are experiencing the highest inflation in 40 plus yrs etc. All due to bad policy.

You keep trying to defend the indefensible.
I can’t take you seriously until you actually discuss the deaths, and what could and could not have been done to prevent them using the tools available at the time.

You’re still beating this drum of “hound was not personally at risk, therefore hound had no responsibility to be part of the solution.”
 
The non-Covid death side of the ledger has been given short shrift from the beginning. A holistic consideration/discussion of all possible ills vs. possible benefits of mandates would have been great to have from the beginning.
That reeks of scrambling for an out to me. Yes that is part of the picture but not that meaningful, unless you need it to be.
 
N95 are more common up here. Still under 20% of masks.

Some of that is selection bias. People who rely on N95 masks will also do more to avoid indoor/crowded spaces. So, when you’re at a restaurant and see bare faces, those who prefer N95 masks may be having a picnic in the park.
Restaurants have mostly gone to crap post Covid. So precautions or not I prefer the picnic, much more consistent that way.
 
I can’t take you seriously until you actually discuss the deaths, and what could and could not have been done to prevent them using the tools available at the time.

You’re still beating this drum of “hound was not personally at risk, therefore hound had no responsibility to be part of the solution.”

The record is becoming very clear on that. You just refuse to accept it. Short of Australia/NZ lockdowns, it wasn't a million to be saved. We know now that those are the really hard lockdowns that worked (see also China). Once you lift the lockdown, as they experienced initially in Europe, the virus will just build again.

Other than that it's just biting away at the edges: masks worked a little at first until the thing hit Delta levels contagions, cloth masks didn't work very well at all let alone the horrible advice re bandanas and gaiters, mandates would fail to make differences population wide because people didn't wear them properly; indoor dining wasn't responsible for huge numbers (as Los Angeles proved in its failure to control the virus...your excuse was new variant); schools probably helped a little but then you had the alcohol and weed stores and work and residence were the places most passing along the virus; hardening nursing homes like Florida did.

The thing that most controlled the deaths was how quickly and to whom the vaccine was rolled out. As you yourself have said, some other factors like density and the structure of nursing homes was baked in. Then there was just serendipity....Peru had the longest lockdowns, mask mandates, and martial law yet finished where it finished....Norway didn't do masks and got away in the early hits.

So will you fess up to the question you've danced around all these years....do you think Australia and New Zealand (let alone Vietnam and China) had the right idea?
 
BROWN CENTER CHALKBOARDThe pandemic has had devastating impacts on learning. What will it take to help students catch up?
Megan Kuhfeld, Jim Soland, Karyn Lewis, and Emily Morton Thursday, March 3, 2022

As we reach the two-year mark of the initial wave of pandemic-induced school shutdowns, academic normalcy remains out of reach for many students, educators, and parents. In addition to surging COVID-19 cases at the end of 2021, schools have faced severe staff shortages, high rates of absenteeism and quarantines, and rolling school closures. Furthermore, students and educators continue to struggle with mental health challenges, higher rates of violence and misbehavior, and concerns about lost instructional time.

 
In my local haunts itself staff shortage and employee turnover. That and new employees just aren’t that into it. Even my last stop at Point Loma Seafoods was a bit disappointing.
I've always found PL Seafoods to be inconsistent.

Our turnover is not from our long term employees but our employees that have been with us less than 6 months. Here is how hiring goes for us these days:

-Place ad on job listing website
-Wait weeks to get enough decent resumes to have a interview after sorting through resumes with gross misspellings, 10 jobs in last year or email address is sexkitten@hotmail.com
-Schedule and confirm 5 interviews. Two people show up, one shows up in a t-shirt and jeans drinking a Monster energy through the interview
-Run background check on one potentially suitable candidate 50% chance that there is restraining order against them, their license is suspended and/or a failure to appear in court
-Find a candidate whose background check is not awful (just multiple filed claims for non-payment), offer them the job
-50/50 chance new hire shows up for 1st day of work
-Get lucky and shows up for work, 50/50 chance after the 1st week of work new hire informs us they can't work the hours assigned and gives some millennial reason
-New hire makes it a month and 50/50 chance they inform us that they will only do certain tasks and not others, claiming "that's not what they signed up for". We can't accommodate, they quit.
 
I've always found PL Seafoods to be inconsistent.

Our turnover is not from our long term employees but our employees that have been with us less than 6 months. Here is how hiring goes for us these days:

-Place ad on job listing website
-Wait weeks to get enough decent resumes to have a interview after sorting through resumes with gross misspellings, 10 jobs in last year or email address is sexkitten@hotmail.com
-Schedule and confirm 5 interviews. Two people show up, one shows up in a t-shirt and jeans drinking a Monster energy through the interview
-Run background check on one potentially suitable candidate 50% chance that there is restraining order against them, their license is suspended and/or a failure to appear in court
-Find a candidate whose background check is not awful (just multiple filed claims for non-payment), offer them the job
-50/50 chance new hire shows up for 1st day of work
-Get lucky and shows up for work, 50/50 chance after the 1st week of work new hire informs us they can't work the hours assigned and gives some millennial reason
-New hire makes it a month and 50/50 chance they inform us that they will only do certain tasks and not others, claiming "that's not what they signed up for". We can't accommodate, they quit.
Sounds about right. I have seen pretty much the same lately and actually heard the “that’s not what I signed up for”.
 
Back
Top