Vaccine

Hüsker Dü said:
Lotta red there.
Click to expand...

Like dad4 said, 16 out of twenty were non-mandate/mask optional.

it was also mentioned that the areas above are in the higher BMI tiers… Well, 16 out of twenty of them.

If there are ‘age-adjusted’ numbers (still interested in that definition), shouldn’t we also be able to derive BMI adjusted numbers.

Since we already know age and BMI are the greatest risk factors for hospitalizations and deaths, Why can’t we back both of those population driven factors out and finally see something about policy impacts? Assuming that hospitalizations and deaths are the bar… not zero sniffles.

I know some will argue about seasonality of the sample window, regional variants, vaccination rates, population density, etc…Kinda like we argue about ECNL club rankings mid season due to strength of schedule in other threads…but at the end of the day, don’t we really want to know what works so we can actually do a cost/benefit analysis?

(We don’t yet fully know the costs, nor can we measure the benefits)
 
N00B said:
Like dad4 said, 16 out of twenty were non-mandate/mask optional.

it was also mentioned that the areas above are in the higher BMI tiers… Well, 16 out of twenty of them.

If there are ‘age-adjusted’ numbers (still interested in that definition), shouldn’t we also be able to derive BMI adjusted numbers.

Since we already know age and BMI are the greatest risk factors for hospitalizations and deaths, Why can’t we back both of those population driven factors out and finally see something about policy impacts? Assuming that hospitalizations and deaths are the bar… not zero sniffles.

I know some will argue about seasonality of the sample window, regional variants, vaccination rates, population density, etc…Kinda like we argue about ECNL club rankings mid season due to strength of schedule in other threads…but at the end of the day, don’t we really want to know what works so we can actually do a cost/benefit analysis?

(We don’t yet fully know the costs, nor can we measure the benefits)
Click to expand...
There are people who do exactly that kind of analysis. They've consistently told us what works: vaccines, masks, distance, and being outside.

Is it their fault if some people here would rather repost Twitter memes than listen to someone who actually knows something?
 
dad4 said:
There are people who do exactly that kind of analysis. They've consistently told us what works: vaccines, masks, distance, and being outside.
Click to expand...

Are you sure they’re doing that kind of analysis? If so, then they have enough data to do cost/benefit analysis as well.

So what works optimally from a cost/benefit point of view? …

What you just described is a zero sniffles ‘what works’… the rest needs to be filled in.
 
dad4 said:
There are people who do exactly that kind of analysis. They've consistently told us what works: vaccines, masks, distance, and being outside.

Is it their fault if some people here would rather repost Twitter memes than listen to someone who actually knows something?
Click to expand...

You mean the same people that lied to us about masks and immunity thresholds? The same ones that were wrong about their mathematical models? The same ones that let the teachers union set masking and school reopening policy? The same one that told us the BLM protests were somehow exempt from distancing but Trump rallies were bad? The same ones that said being outside wasn't good in the first place and closed the beaches? The ones that somehow think that masks only work for them while in front of the cameras, and that masks magically protect you from the door to your table? Yeah, let's trust them.

Amazing you are back to "trust the experts".
 
Grace T. said:
You mean the same people that lied to us about masks and immunity thresholds? The same ones that were wrong about their mathematical models? The same ones that let the teachers union set masking and school reopening policy? The same one that told us the BLM protests were somehow exempt from distancing but Trump rallies were bad? The same ones that said being outside wasn't good in the first place and closed the beaches? The ones that somehow think that masks only work for them while in front of the cameras, and that masks magically protect you from the door to your table? Yeah, let's trust them.

Amazing you are back to "trust the experts".
Click to expand...
You seem to be confused about the difference between epidemiologists and Democratic politicians.

And no one lied to you about immunity thresholds. The 70% number was accurate for the disease that existed at the time of the estimate. It just isn‘t valid for Delta, because Delta didn’t exist back then.

Did you think they had a crystal ball that could predict what kind of mutations would happen 8 months later?
 
Grace T. said:
You mean the same people that lied to us about masks and immunity thresholds? The same ones that were wrong about their mathematical models? The same ones that let the teachers union set masking and school reopening policy? The same one that told us the BLM protests were somehow exempt from distancing but Trump rallies were bad? The same ones that said being outside wasn't good in the first place and closed the beaches? The ones that somehow think that masks only work for them while in front of the cameras, and that masks magically protect you from the door to your table? Yeah, let's trust them.

Amazing you are back to "trust the experts".
Click to expand...
Who do you trust?
 
dad4 said:
You seem to be confused about the difference between epidemiologists and Democratic politicians.

And no one lied to you about immunity thresholds. The 70% number was accurate for the disease that existed at the time of the estimate. It just isn‘t valid for Delta, because Delta didn’t exist back then.

Did you think they had a crystal ball that could predict what kind of mutations would happen 8 months later?
Click to expand...
Oh faucis a democratic politician. Yeah that seems about right

stop making excuses for him though. He admitted he fibbed about the thresholds Because we weren’t ready to hear about it, even pre delta

and even if you are talking just pure epidemiologists they were guilty of bad models (remember exponential growth) and politics (blm good, religion bad) from the beginning.

indeed it’s hard to see who was more responsible for the wrongness— the d politicians or the experts whispering in their ear
 
Grace T. said:
Oh faucis a democratic politician. Yeah that seems about right

stop making excuses for him though. He admitted he fibbed about the thresholds Because we weren’t ready to hear about it, even pre delta

and even if you are talking just pure epidemiologists they were guilty of bad models (remember exponential growth) and politics (blm good, religion bad) from the beginning.

indeed it’s hard to see who was more responsible for the wrongness— the d politicians or the experts whispering in their ear
Click to expand...
For a self-described non-politico you sure are biased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top