The Politics of Covid 19, mask wearing and the vaccination process

[Smoove_B]

I think I can one-up that. I think this Tweet summarizes a the short press conference yesterday:

Yo how tf did we get to a place where the literal White House puts out a graph like this and we just keep it all moving like this shit is normal???

It's a little fuzzy, but the top line represents projected deaths during the Winter of 2023 if we continue on our current path with vaccinations. Yellow is if we hit the recent historical levels of Flu vaccination (just over 50%), historically much, much lower. The red is if they hit 80% of the population boosted.

Then during the Q&A there was this exchange:

Q In the first vaccination campaign, before you took this role, the Biden administration set goals for the percentage of Americans that they wanted to get vaccinated was 70 percent. Right now, it’s less than 4 percent of U.S. adults. I’m wondering — around that number. I’m wondering if you guys are setting a new target for what you’d want to hit by Halloween or if there’s the goal that you guys are setting (inaudible).

DR. JHA: Yeah, at first glance, we’ve said: No internal goals, no external goals. We just have — my feeling on this is we want to get as many Americans vaccinated with the updated vaccine. We think it’s, clearly, a better vaccine, an important upgrade from what we had before. And the more Americans, the better.

No specific goal, just feelings. Are you kidding me right now? This isn't a car wash to raise money for a class trip.

So yeah, Blue/Green line. Prepare.

[Unagi]

Politically speaking, they don’t want to ‘own this’. It doesn’t turn into votes, it’s been made to turn into hate.

[LawBeefaroni]

Re: the Singapore question.

Do we believe China's death rate reporting? Because they have an extremely low [reported] death rate too. Singapore is around 80% ethnic Chinese. Is there a genetic/biological component at work? In populations but maybe also in the virus?

Compare to their reported total cases, China's death rate is not extremely low.

5226 / 254066 = 2.05%.

Worse than US's death rate. Around twice the chance of dying if someone got COVID-19 in China compare to getting COVID-19 in US.

Per WHO:

In China, from 3 January 2020 to 5:59pm CEST, 11 October 2022, there have been 8,122,054 confirmed cases of COVID-19 with 27,044 deaths, reported to WHO. As of 13 September 2022, a total of 3,455,225,743 vaccine doses have been administered.

0.3% rate.

[El Guapo]

I think I can one-up that. I think this Tweet summarizes a the short press conference yesterday:

Yo how tf did we get to a place where the literal White House puts out a graph like this and we just keep it all moving like this shit is normal???

It's a little fuzzy, but the top line represents projected deaths during the Winter of 2023 if we continue on our current path with vaccinations. Yellow is if we hit the recent historical levels of Flu vaccination (just over 50%), historically much, much lower. The red is if they hit 80% of the population boosted.

Then during the Q&A there was this exchange:

Q In the first vaccination campaign, before you took this role, the Biden administration set goals for the percentage of Americans that they wanted to get vaccinated was 70 percent. Right now, it’s less than 4 percent of U.S. adults. I’m wondering — around that number. I’m wondering if you guys are setting a new target for what you’d want to hit by Halloween or if there’s the goal that you guys are setting (inaudible).

DR. JHA: Yeah, at first glance, we’ve said: No internal goals, no external goals. We just have — my feeling on this is we want to get as many Americans vaccinated with the updated vaccine. We think it’s, clearly, a better vaccine, an important upgrade from what we had before. And the more Americans, the better.

No specific goal, just feelings. Are you kidding me right now? This isn't a car wash to raise money for a class trip.

So yeah, Blue/Green line. Prepare.

FWIW the graph doesn't bother me. I take it the point is that the blue line is bad, so we want to do what we can to avoid the blue line. So get vaccinated people. That doesn't tell me that we're accepting lots of people dying, but rather that we're trying to avoid it.

Now, is there enough urgency around trying to avoid the blue line? That seems like the bigger issue.

[Smoove_B]

FWIW the graph doesn't bother me. I take it the point is that the blue line is bad, so we want to do what we can to avoid the blue line. So get vaccinated people. That doesn't tell me that we're accepting lots of people dying, but rather that we're trying to avoid it.

Are we though?

Now, is there enough urgency around trying to avoid the blue line? That seems like the bigger issue.

It's unpossible to build demand for a booster when you're simultaneously telling everyone its NBD and to just get back out there and consume.

They said, here's where we'd currently headed and when asked what specifically was being done to not follow that current bad-state projection, it was a shoulder shrug. "Get more people vaccinated." Terrific. How many? By when? Doing what specifically? Shoulder shrug.

[Victoria Raverna]

Re: the Singapore question.

Do we believe China's death rate reporting? Because they have an extremely low [reported] death rate too. Singapore is around 80% ethnic Chinese. Is there a genetic/biological component at work? In populations but maybe also in the virus?

Compare to their reported total cases, China's death rate is not extremely low.

5226 / 254066 = 2.05%.

Worse than US's death rate. Around twice the chance of dying if someone got COVID-19 in China compare to getting COVID-19 in US.

Per WHO:

In China, from 3 January 2020 to 5:59pm CEST, 11 October 2022, there have been 8,122,054 confirmed cases of COVID-19 with 27,044 deaths, reported to WHO. As of 13 September 2022, a total of 3,455,225,743 vaccine doses have been administered.

0.3% rate.

Strange that Worldmeter's data for China is so different from the WHO one. For most other countries, the numbers are very close but not for China's.

I think worldmeter got the data directly from China's publicly available government data while WHO got data from what China reported to them. Maybe worldmeter's data is from fake number for China's internal consumption while the data for WHO is more accurate one.

[Zaxxon]

It absolutely sucks, and it feels gross to frame it this way, but it's mid-October and we've got elections in less than a month. The consequences of that going poorly are greater than the consequences of taking a pass on a likely-doomed attempt to own this particular vaccination campaign.

[Unagi]

“Look, at least we are willing and wanting to show you this graph. We’ve been told (and it’s become clear) that if we ever want to be re-elected, we can’t come out here and tell you all what to do, so ya know… do what you must. We just want you to know what’s coming. “

This is the best we are going to get.

[El Guapo]

FWIW the graph doesn't bother me. I take it the point is that the blue line is bad, so we want to do what we can to avoid the blue line. So get vaccinated people. That doesn't tell me that we're accepting lots of people dying, but rather that we're trying to avoid it.

Are we though?

Now, is there enough urgency around trying to avoid the blue line? That seems like the bigger issue.

It's unpossible to build demand for a booster when you're simultaneously telling everyone its NBD and to just get back out there and consume.

They said, here's where we'd currently headed and when asked what specifically was being done to not follow that current bad-state projection, it was a shoulder shrug. "Get more people vaccinated." Terrific. How many? By when? Doing what specifically? Shoulder shrug.

All I'm saying is that I take "Jawn Quincy Adams" to be taking issue with the graph because he's suggesting that the White House is just saying "here's how many people are going to die, whatevs." When the message of the graph as I read it is the opposite - "here's how many people will die if we don't vaccinate more people, so let's vaccinate more people so that doesn't happen."

Though I agree that there isn't much evidence that enough is being done to make those vaccinations happen. I don't envy the task of messaging this stuff or of getting stupid people to do stuff that they should be doing, to be sure, but I don't get the sense that there is all that much of a plan to execute on this.

[Kraken]

I thought 1,200 deaths a day was a foregone conclusion for this winter, so that graph is somewhat more optimistic. Given that deaths are mostly self-inflicted among the unvaxxed, who are mostly Republicans, it's hard to care. They know what they're supposed to do but they're too free to do it.

[The Meal]

Given that deaths are mostly self-inflicted among the unvaxxed, who are mostly Republicans, it's hard to care. They know what they're supposed to do but they're too free to do it.

[Smoove_B]

All I'm saying is that I take "Jawn Quincy Adams" to be taking issue with the graph because he's suggesting that the White House is just saying "here's how many people are going to die, whatevs." When the message of the graph as I read it is the opposite - "here's how many people will die if we don't vaccinate more people, so let's vaccinate more people so that doesn't happen."

Though I agree that there isn't much evidence that enough is being done to make those vaccinations happen. I don't envy the task of messaging this stuff or of getting stupid people to do stuff that they should be doing, to be sure, but I don't get the sense that there is all that much of a plan to execute on this.

See, I think they are saying "whatever", but maybe that's because I watched the press conference. And the reason I'm all rankled is because I've been in positions where we come up with a graph like that and then actually do something (measurable) to try and address it. That is...part of our fundamental existence. All they did yesterday was say, "Yeah, this looks bad and if more people were vaccinated it would be better." But then *nothing* was offered as to how that will happen. No money to states and locals to offer large-scale clinics. Nothing about outreach and education. Nothing about temporarily hiring more public health nurses. Nothing about getting mobile vaccination units. Nothing about focusing on specific unvaccinated communities or populations with partners in public health (like hospital systems). Just, "Yeah, we need to vaccinate more people." No shit. He's the head of a task force and that's the best he can come up with? I'm the lowest of low on the totem pole and seeing this is beyond frustrating. Is that coming through?

[LawBeefaroni]

Given that deaths are mostly self-inflicted among the unvaxxed, who are mostly Republicans, it's hard to care. They know what they're supposed to do but they're too free to do it.

Yeah, even if you're willing to let the ignorant/misled get what they get, "mostly" is a big caveat.

[Smoove_B]

From a few weeks ago, an overview of who's dying of COVID-19 in California:

Recent COVID-19 deaths have been heavily concentrated among senior citizens. In California, about half of those who died this summer were at least 80 years old. Another third were people between the ages of 65 and 79.

Throughout California, Black residents had the highest COVID-19 death rate, pretty much regardless of age. And in L.A. County, men have been more likely to die than women.

The article opens with the story of a 59 year old woman that died. For her:

Gutiérrez was a typical COVID-19 victim in one respect: She already had a health problem that made her vulnerable to a serious case of COVID-19. For people like her, an encounter with the coronavirus can be like dry brush encountering a lit match, said Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

...

Here in L.A. County, nearly half of the people who died of COVID-19 between May and July were contending with at least three health conditions before the coronavirus came along, and almost all had at least one. Those conditions weren’t necessarily as serious as ovarian cancer; typical examples include obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease.

In summary:

“The elderly, the immunocompromised, and the unvaccinated or under-vaccinated — they are the ones that account for the vast majority of deaths due to COVID-19,” said Dr. Thomas Yadegar, medical director of the intensive care unit at Providence Cedars-Sinai Tarzana Medical Center.

“We’ve sacrificed the lives of our most vulnerable for our own convenience,” he said.

No politics, just numbers. And when you think about the 4% of eligible adults that have been fully boostered as of this week, the overwhelming number of adults then are in that opening sentence above.

[Isgrimnur]

Well, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick says he's willing to die for the economy. I say he should join the trend.

[Little Raven]

Well, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick says he's willing to die for the economy. I say he should join the trend.

We should be so lucky.

[Kurth]

It absolutely sucks, and it feels gross to frame it this way, but it's mid-October and we've got elections in less than a month. The consequences of that going poorly are greater than the consequences of taking a pass on a likely-doomed attempt to own this particular vaccination campaign.

This. 100 times this.

[Daehawk]

Ive given up on politics. ill vote but it goes the same way...back and forth back and forth . GOP will get in and try to ruin life and fake their way to stay in. People are stupid and crazy.

[Smoove_B]

Can't make this stuff up anymore.

Earlier this year, after Biden administration distributed millions of N95s to given out for free

They partnered with @VaccineFinder to help Americans find nearby pharmacies providing the respirators

Now, @CDCgov says webpage will be retired

But also, it's urgent you get a booster. I mean, if you feel like it.

[Pyperkub]

Because of course. This is what the Soviet, er Republican, Political Officers do...

The Trump administration regularly interfered with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) process for developing and issuing guidance about the coronavirus, changed scientific reports and undermined top public health officials, a congressional panel said Monday.

[Smoove_B]

I don't pretend to have political insight on this, but this is the first I'm seeing something like this being reported:



Article:

Because Latinos often face important inequalities, they represent a key sub-group for understanding the toll of long COVID.

A statewide survey of Latinos in Colorado identified that nearly one-fourth (23%) of Latinos in that state are suffering from long-term COVID symptoms. One of the most important findings from this study is that Latino parents are three times as likely to suffer from long-term COVID symptoms relative to Latinos without children (23% compared to 7%). This finding suggests that Latino families are particularly vulnerable to economic challenges associated with long COVID and motivates the deeper investigation of Latino families taken during the webinar.

That is...something.

[Smoove_B]

Warp Speed, but for share holders:

Pfizer's plan to as much as quadruple U.S. prices for its COVID-19 vaccine next year is beyond Wall Street's expectations and will spur its revenue for years despite weaker than anticipated demand for the new booster shot so far, analysts said.

The drugmaker, which developed and sells the vaccine with Germany's BioNTech (22UAy.DE), said on Thursday evening that it is targeting a range of $110 to $130 a dose for the vaccine once the United States moves to a commercial market next year.

...

Wells Fargo analyst Mohit Bansal said the new pricing range for the vaccine could add around $2.5 billion to $3 billion in annual revenue for Pfizer.

"This is much higher than our assumption of $50 per shot, and even assuming $80 per shot net price in high-income countries, we see $2 per share upside to our estimates" from the new prices, Bansal wrote in a research note.

Global vaccine access group the People’s Vaccine Alliance, which has pushed for Pfizer to allow cheaper copies of the vaccine to be made, called the proposed price hike "daylight robbery."

[Zaxxon]

Are Pandemic School Closures to Blame for America’s Historic Learning Loss?

(As with most headline questions, the answer seems to be 'not entirely.') But there's no question they were a big part of the achievement drop, it seems.

[Smoove_B]

This will probably be debated for the next decade. As the author kinda glosses over, not all losses were equal (big surprise) so painting it (not you) with a broad brush (what I see happening everywhere) and suggesting that all kids and all communities suffered the same is disingenuous. This likely also impacted learning loss, but oddly enough you don't hear about that one as much. Or how the death of teachers (and what was asked of them in general) influenced the issue.

Regardless, I'm not really sure I'm picking up what this author is putting down.

With little evidence that school closures saved lives and ample evidence that they hurt kids, this is a policy that failed. To make government work better next time, we have to see reality clearly.

In truth school closures impacted communities and individuals quite differently. To suggest that closures were a failure or that they didn't save lives is laughable (to me). I'm sensing big "my kid started reading late because of COVID-19" energy from this author.

Regardless, once again we're taking the wrong lessons away from this and articles like this one fuel the "Schools must be open at all costs" mentality instead of hving people demand that schools be safe and equitable spaces for everyone attending.

[Zaxxon]

As the author kinda glosses over, not all losses were equal (big surprise) so painting it (not you) with a broad brush (what I see happening everywhere) and suggesting that all kids and all communities suffered the same is disingenuous.

FWIW, the author specifically mentions that the impact disproportionately hit lower-income / minority communities, and fueled the inequality gap.

[Smoove_B]

Right, he does, but he glosses over it (imho). The whole point of the article is that school closures were bad. And sure it was much, much worse for marginalized communities but lets not forget it was also bad for white upper middle class kids too.

I think my general irritation is that instead of using this as a way to highlight failures/issues/shortcomings with the educational system overall it's largely been wealthy white people complaining about pandemic-related schooling. I say this anecdotally and from reading the various OpEds that have been circulating for over a year now.

[Zaxxon]

Lets not forget it was also bad for white upper middle class kids too.

No chance I forget that.

I think my general irritation is that instead of using this as a way to highlight failures/issues/shortcomings with the educational system overall it's largely been wealthy white people complaining about pandemic-related schooling. I say this anecdotally and from reading the various OpEds that have been circulating for over a year now.

Fair.

[Kurth]

In recent local news, my company rolled back its vaccine mandates. Employees and visitors no longer need to provide proof of vaccination.

The explanation is that we had a vaccination mandate in place when it was thought that getting vaccinated was an effective measure to slow community spread. Now that the data suggests vaccination is effective to prevent severe illness but not to prevent transmission, that justification for a mandate is no longer in play. So no more mandate.

Thoughts on this? It caught me off guard and was surprising. Seems like a very bad move to me.

[Smoove_B]

Thoughts on this? It caught me off guard and was surprising. Seems like a very bad move to me.

It's a terrible decision but it fits.

Could be a few things, but my gut is telling me someone is circulating the idea that by limiting your pool of workers/contractors to only people that will vaccinate really limits the talent acquisition. You want to make sure you get the best talent, don't you?

And we certainly don't want visitors to feel awkward so what the hell, let's just drop all pretense.

Regardless, vaccinations do control spread though not to the 100% degree everyone wanted (believed?). Part of the problem is poor vaccine coverage (too many unvaccinated; too many undervaccinated) combined with an inability to do anything other than believe vaccines are silver bullets. Hey, at least we still have handwashing.

[Smoove_B]

I've yet to see a better summary

So to summarize:
- The immunocompromised will be at high risk this winter, but we don’t plan to do anything about it.
- We hope to battle airborne viruses with vigorous hand washing
- Our primary plan is to hope more people get the booster if we ask nicely and do tv ads

[Max Peck]

TV ads like this one?

[Victoria Raverna]

In recent local news, my company rolled back its vaccine mandates. Employees and visitors no longer need to provide proof of vaccination.

The explanation is that we had a vaccination mandate in place when it was thought that getting vaccinated was an effective measure to slow community spread. Now that the data suggests vaccination is effective to prevent severe illness but not to prevent transmission, that justification for a mandate is no longer in play. So no more mandate.

Thoughts on this? It caught me off guard and was surprising. Seems like a very bad move to me.

Does your company has mask mandate?

[Kurth]

In recent local news, my company rolled back its vaccine mandates. Employees and visitors no longer need to provide proof of vaccination.

The explanation is that we had a vaccination mandate in place when it was thought that getting vaccinated was an effective measure to slow community spread. Now that the data suggests vaccination is effective to prevent severe illness but not to prevent transmission, that justification for a mandate is no longer in play. So no more mandate.

Thoughts on this? It caught me off guard and was surprising. Seems like a very bad move to me.

Does your company has mask mandate?

Nope. We had one, but we did away with that around the same time we leaned into vaccines and mandated vaccination.

[Unagi]

So obviously they aren’t truly interested in curtailing community spread.

[Smoove_B]

Putting this here as it's about the ruling, not the Supreme Court:

On Monday the Supreme Court left in place a ruling that allows the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to issue mask mandates on planes, trains and other forms of transport, as it had for more than a year during the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Supreme Court denied a California attorney’s request to overturn a U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in the D.C. Circuit from December, which found no merit in his claim and affirmed that the TSA does have the authority to maintain security and safety within the transportation system, including imposing the masking requirement.

California attorney Jonathan Corbett had claimed that the TSA did not have the authority to mandate masks on airlines and other types of transportation during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Court of Appeals had disagreed, ruling that the agency “plainly has the authority” to address transportation safety and security.

“Because we find no merit in Corbett’s claim, we deny the petition for review,” the Court wrote. “The Covid-19 global pandemic poses one of the greatest threats to the operational viability of the transportation system and the lives of those on it seen in decades.”

So...those mask mandates on planes, trains, and other forms of transport should be coming any day now. (pauses for laughter)

Of note:

Since the mandate was dropped, some travelers have chosen to keep their masks on. In April, when the mandate was dropped, six out of 10 Americans (60%) supported extending the mask mandate, according to The Harris Poll Covid-19 tracking survey. The next month, a survey by the Pew Research Center found a similar pre-mask majority.

[Max Peck]

Mask mandates not out of the question as Ontario faces 'triple threat' of flu, RSV and COVID-19: Moore

The "triple threat" of a bad flu season, COVID-19 and the resurgence of a childhood viral illness is putting a strain on the health system, Ontario's top doctor said Wednesday, with a decision on masking recommendations possibly coming in a couple of weeks.

Dr. Kieran Moore has said if COVID-19 starts affecting the ability to reduce the surgical backlog he would suggest the government make a recommendation on masking in certain indoor settings, and if there are further effects he would recommend reinstating mask mandates.

Some public health experts, such as former COVID-19 science advisory table head Dr. Fahad Razak, have said Ontario is already at the point of needing mask mandates again.

Many hospitals across the province, both smaller ones in rural areas and large ones in cities, have been overwhelmed with patients, reporting large volumes and long waits.

Emergency departments have closed periodically — a trend that first began in the summer largely due to nursing staff shortages. Children's hospitals in Ottawa, Toronto and Hamilton have reported unprecedented surges of pediatric patients, many coming in with respiratory illnesses.

[Smoove_B]

Every day this gets worse. The director of the CDC was at a Chamber of Commerce meeting on Tuesday and at the ~13 minute mark indicated that the reason so many people are sick right now is because of "immunity debt" - the idea that kids (and people) need to be constantly exposed to diseases to stay healthy. Insanity! If the director of the CDC is repeating this nonsense there really is no hope anymore.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?523963-1/ ... r-covid-19

[Max Peck]

There may be a kernel of sanity buried in there. Since NPI measures kept these kids from being exposed to most pathogens, once the measures stopped and the kids were exposed to a variety of pathogens then the healthcare system is dealing with the resulting infections all at once instead of being spread out over that 2-year period. Even if the risk of severe disease hasn't changed relative to pre-COVID, the surge of concurrent cases would strain the system in the short-ish term. It would be interesting to see how the number of non-COVID cases occurring now measures up to the number of cases that would have been expected in a normal 2-year period.

[Smoove_B]

"Immunity debt" isn't a term that existed until 2021 and it smacks of Great Barrington Declaration nonsense. In no world should it be a policy to openly advocate for exposure to disease as a way to minimize future outbreaks. To further imply that part of our problem is we avoided so much illness with masks the year before that we're all paying for it now is just...I'm speechless. This is the exact opposite of public health in every way and that it's being espoused by the head of the CDC is blowing my mind.

[Zaxxon]

I'm definitely not advocating more exposure for funsies, but it is certainly the case that after 2 years of full-on avoidance, my kids caught every single thing in the school immediately upon their return.