Covid-19 Politics

[broncofan]

I figured since many of us are still living in places where there are Covid-19 outbreaks and it's likely to be a major public health problem and political issue for months to come we might as well have a politics version of the thread.

You can talk about your country's response to covid-19, another country's, or any interesting developments on the scientific front. Or leave it open and talk about whatever you want to with respect to the virus.

Here's an interesting article on animal data for two vaccine candidates: Sinovac and Oxford. My understanding is that the animal testing is really intended to look for safety problems such as antibody dependent enhancement, but you can also get some sense of efficacy in the animal model as well.

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/05/18/criticism-of-the-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine

[fred41]

Just read this today: https://nypost.com/2020/05/18/moderna-reports-positive-results-from-coronavirus-vaccine-trial/
This was also mentioned in the comments section of your article above Bronc.

[broncofan]

Just read this today: https://nypost.com/2020/05/18/moderna-reports-positive-results-from-coronavirus-vaccine-trial/
This was also mentioned in the comments section of your article above Bronc.
Thanks Fred. I hadn't read about that specific study but only knew that Moderna's vaccine is considered one of the most promising candidates. Oxford University had one of the most aggressive timelines in terms of getting through trials. I've read from a few scientists that Oxford's trials are not discouraging in the broader sense, though it makes it unlikely it will be the best candidate or that it will provide sterilizing immunity. But if I could take a vaccine right now that would make a Covid-19 infection basically like the common cold because it would only cause an upper respiratory tract infection I'd be okay with that. The thing is though that its sample size was small and the low antibody titers means it might not provide durable protection either.

From what I've read there will likely be a successful vaccine candidate for Covid-19, but the timeline for it will be a contested issue. The distribution of an unsafe vaccine would be an absolute disaster in so many ways.

[broncofan]

Donald Trump just said that he is taking Hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial drug that has failed to separate itself from placebo in randomized trials and which has a non-trivial side effect profile. So in addition to his other "qualities" the guy is batshit insane. He's taking it as a prophylactic even though there's no evidence supporting it for that purpose and very low quality evidence in the case of disease.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Donald Trump just said that he is taking Hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial drug that has failed to separate itself from placebo in randomized trials and which has a non-trivial side effect profile. So in addition to his other "qualities" the guy is batshit insane. He's taking it as a prophylactic even though there's no evidence supporting it for that purpose and very low quality evidence in the case of disease.Not surprised at all that the Clueless Buffoon Donald Trump said that he's the anti-malaria drug Hydroxychloroquine,even though the drug has dangerous side effects and has no evidence supporting it's purpose in the case of CO-VID 19. and this latest example continues to show that he doesn't believe in science or facts, and continues to downplay the global pandemic,and is just another distraction from the Trump Administration in their mishandling of the pandemic. and completely agree that he is batshit insane.

[fred41]

Hospitals in NYC have been prescribing Plaquenil for patients with Covid-19, but I’m unsure if they still are or if the patients had to be of a certain age. My Dad’s in his eighties with COPD, emphysema, high blood pressure and Diabetes. He’s also had at least one stroke in his lifetime. I had to send him to the hospital in February because a combination of him having Flu, a cold, or Pneumonia and not having taken his medication for a while (I found out later on). He was rehabbing at a nursing facility, on oxygen when in mid April he was sent to a hospital again because his level wouldn’t rise enough. They suspected he had Covid, put him on the plaquenil and after about two days he went back to the nursing home. The nursing home tested him again and he was definitely positive. He tested negative twice after two weeks and was moved to a Covid free floor. He never lost consciousness or felt in dire straits.
There are a lot of mysteries to this virus and, even still, whether or not Planequil does ANYTHING, .....but...?

Questions will remain - Did he have Covid 19 when he originally went in ? The time span makes it Very unlikely though he did have almost every symptom including blood clots (unfortunately, in his condition, he’d probably have all those symptoms anyway with just a powerful cold). He strongly fits the profile of eventually needing a ventilator and/or dying. Yet none of that ever came close to happening. Did the early Plaquenil help? Is he immortal. So many questions.

I hate posting anecdotal stuff like this, because every time I disagree with an anti-vaxxer on any social media, there’s always someone that has to write - I’m positive my child has autism because of a vaccination he/she received...as if that’s evidence of anything. It isn’t. Neither is what I posted...I know that.

[fred41]

P.S. I know I’ve become a cranky old fuck, because when the people on my block bang their pots and pans (everyday at 7PM) for healthcare workers, it annoys the living shit out of me.
I think a solid week of that is probably enough. I’m sure some of them are trying to watch TV also...lol.

[broncofan]

I think my view of unproven drugs is open-minded. If there's no available treatment, I would want to take something that might work instead of nothing, as long as the side effect profile is reasonable. I've taken medicines that have long qt syndrome as a potential side effect and present a low risk of a fatal arrythmia. Of course, there have now been several randomized controlled trials and it seems unlikely hydroxychloroquine works for Covid-19. If it works, which again is unlikely, what would be the mechanism of action? Is it acting to prevent cytokine storm? If it has anti-viral effects, why?

If I got sick with Covid-19 a month or more ago, I might prefer to take Hydroxychloroquine to nothing. At this point, I'd prefer nothing and at the hospital hope I got convalescent plasma and if not, then Remdesivir, whose effectiveness is probably not great.

On the other hand, Trump is taking this prophylactically if he's telling the truth. He's in his seventies, is obese, and is taking a drug that probably doesn't treat the disease and almost certainly doesn't prevent it. And he's taking hydroxy every day for an undefined period of time.... hoping it will keep the virus from infecting him. Seems way out there to me.

BTW, I'm really glad your father is doing well. If I were in your shoes I think I might suspect the Hydroxychloroquine works too. But consider, although 18% of people in their 80s (I know the pre-existing condition worsen those odds) die from Covid, that's still 82% who don't. I've had bad pneumonia and whenever it turns for the better it always seems like a miracle. The other thing is that I read a recent article that said sometimes the course of a viral disease is impacted by the amount of virus one is initially infected with. There have been people in their 90s with emphysema who have had very mild illness.

But I understand you feeling that it may have played a role in his recovery. BTW, I am on the board of a non-profit and they are holding Covid porch parties and I haven't done one of them...so I hear you.

[broncofan]

It isn’t. Neither is what I posted...I know that.
I appreciate that you have both a strong feeling and also insight that it's anecdotal rather than proof. Assuming a drug works may be post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, where you assume the fact that someone got better after they took a drug means the drug caused the improvement. There's another saying people might invoke, which is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That's why I might take an unproven treatment over nothing but I think we're getting some affirmative evidence Hydroxy doesn't work.

[Stavros]

My current interest in this acts at the political level. Tony Blair on the BBC-2 Newsnight programme on Monday night argued correctly that a Pandemic required -and still requires- the one thing it has not created: global co-operation with some form of global leadership -because we are all affected by this, and will be for some to come owing to its economic and particularly its trading implications.

The history of public health at the international level may be mixed, but on more occasions than not States and Empires found a way to co-operate and have been doing so since the mid-19th century at an organized level. Paul Weindling produced some reseearch on this and also published a book, International Heath Organizations and Movements, 1919-1939 (Cambridge, 1995).

Although much has been made of the failure of the US President to lead his own country, let alone the world, he is in good- or bad- company. Boris Johnson may have been in the unique position of being unable to lead anything owing to his own absence in hospital with the disease, but the EU has shown itself incapable of unifying policies, member states going their own way much to the delight of the Leave faction in the UK, while there have been some unfortunate spats over PPE being shared.

At the Global Level, the WHO would be the most obvious co-ordinator of a unified response, but the USA's dismal attitude (in spite of the role America medics and scientists play in the field), the suspicion China has not told the whole of the truth, and the lack of leadership skills on the part of Tedros Ghebreyesus have all conspired to prevent us all 'coming together' to achieve something that in reality medicine and science can achieve, because we have the money, the intellect and the will to prevent Covid 19 remaining in society as a killer, rather than just an annoying illness. That there is no unified campaign to find a vaccine, and the implication I have read somewhere that whoever 'gets there first' won't share it, does not sound good to me.

That may all sound like I am disappointed a universal love-in has not happened, yet here we are, and what do we have to lose by pooling our resources, as the late Roy Porter might have put it, 'for the benefit of mankind'?

Too many countries are being run by selfish, greedy stupid poliicians who wanted to save money rather than spend it on an hypothesis, and have now found themselves having to spend 20 times the amount on reality.

[fred41]

(Deleted post for redundancy...already agree with everything Bronco said above)...lol, also note you liked it right before I deleted it. You’re fast...lol.

[broncofan]

(Deleted post for redundancy...already agree with everything Bronco said above)...lol, also note you liked it right before I deleted it. You’re fast...lol.
Lol You did have new info there. I read it right after I read Stavros' post when it went to the second page. I didn't for instance try to explain the February hospitalization, but thought basically what you wrote. As you said, a cold might have gotten your Dad very sick and yet he was fortunate not to have a severe case of Covid in April.


I've gotten flu a bunch of times, and although I know the strains change so it's a different disease, the results have been wildly different. I've had mild sore throat and sweating in some cases. Yet, it put me in the hospital with pneumonia in both lungs when I was 17.

I agree with Stavros' post that there has been very little international cooperation in response to Covid. PPE, ventilators, and tests have not been shared very broadly and it's likely there will be a lot of protectionism once a vaccine is produced. Although I don't think private philanthropists can replace governments for this sort of thing, the Gates foundation has brought resources to the table and is testing parallel lines of vaccines. That should have been the international strategy.

[fred41]

There are a few studies to test whether it works prophylactically or not. This Detroit one came up first on Google... it makes an interesting read -
https://www.healio.com/cardiology/vascular-medicine/news/online/%7Bc30ff204-961b-4c2a-9bdd-3eb50a50df1b%7D/new-study-to-provide-insight-on-hydroxychloroquine-for-covid-19-prevention-in-health-care-workers

BTW I have a sneaking suspicion Trump’s lying (again) about taking it. He lies so easily...off the cuff.

[fred41]

Okay, forgive the serial posts, but I can’t stop cause I had some good personal news and I’m like an excited kid on too much sugar. So I’m vaping a bit (I use the Firefly 2+) and drinking a bit of Prosecco (relatively cheap, but I’m drinking it in a fairly expensive glass, so...I think that evens it out). Anyway - did you ever go to that John Hopkins Covid map and scroll down as far as you can? Me neither, but I did just now. It leads to a whole potential Netflix series. At the bottom of the list (at the time of this posting) is the small kingdom of Lesotho. It has one case ...and he’s alive ( I think he got it studying in Saudi Arabia) so I’m gonna be rooting for him from now on. But it seems this tiny kingdom surrounded by South Africa (Which I didn’t knew existed) has a whole telenovela going on. Apparently the Prime Minister - 80 year old Thomas Thabane - is finally stepping down, due to the fact that he and his current wife are accused of murdering his former wife three years ago. What does this have to do with this thread? Well, as Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say - “Well, it just goes to show you, it’s always something - if it’s not one thing, it’s another”.

[Stavros]

BTW I have a sneaking suspicion Trump’s lying (again) about taking it. He lies so easily...off the cuff.


Resentment again. He promoted the drug in spite of the experts saying it had no known impact on Covid 19. Fox News then promoted it more than 300 times until they decided it was not going to be a Miracle Cure, and particularly after the query about the positive benefits of disinfectant undermined any belief even Fox had that their guy could be trusted.

But if there is one thing that this President cannot cope with, it is any form of rejection, anything that proves he is not the smartest guy in the room. So he claims to be taking it every day, in order to prove, as he is neither dead nor infected, that he is right. As usual, in the midst of a national crisis, he broadcasts information that is focused only on himself.

As for the threat to withdraw from the WHO, as I have suggested before, in the short term it begs the question why the USA did not seek to improve its influence in the WHO when the new 'Republican' administration took charge in 2017; while in the long term it is part of the view shared by John Bolton and people like him that the UN is no longer relevant, and that this is the administration that, piece by piece, is dismantling the organization that was created, in part by President Roosevelt.

Resentment, again: he simply cannot accept that Roosevelt, or any President, has a better record than him. Just as he has been even more persecuted by the media than Abraham Lincoln, so I guess he believes he has done more for the US than FDR -and if now, they can be compared to their response to economic depression and mass unemployment, now is his chance to prove his critics wrong. Call me, maybe.

Who benefits? Vladimir Putin, who wants the USA weak, divided, ineffective in international politics; Israel, which has repudiated the UN since 1948; Saudi Arabia, which maintains its long term ambition to re-unify the Caliphate under Wahabi control throughout the Middle East (incuding Israel); and China, which like Russia, wants to impose itself on the world without the obstruction of the UN and International Law.

I don't know where this is going, because I still think a war is not going to happen, though the potential for proxy conflicts and 'low intensity warfare' is there. But if you 'follow the money' no President since this one has had such a direct line, in terms of financial and political benefit, to the four states mentioned above, than the one now sitting in the Oval Office.

I feel sorry for Donald Hopkins and other Americans who through the WHO and other agencies have done so much since the 1940s to combat the world's most lethal diseases for the benefit of mankind. Now, for the benefit of one man's inflated ego, their legacy is to be cast aside as if they had, like Obama, never existed.

We can sit here and criticize US Foreign Policy for days on end, but sometimes it is worth taking time out to celebrate the best the US has been part of, and public international health is one of those.

[broncofan]

Having read your post on the first page again Stavros, I realize what an important issue this is. To whatever extent the WHO has not been as effective as they might be, it would only justify redoubling our efforts to support an international organization committed to addressing public health problems around the world. The international response has been hampered by collective action problems and countries facing internal pressure to protect their manufactured products and hoard whatever materials they can purchase in advance of others. Even the opposition, which has in some cases shown slight nods to internationalism and cooperation, have given mixed messages.

Democrats have hammered Donald Trump for sending limited goods to China in January, but on the other hand hammered him when he halted exports of 3m N95 respirators. Everyone is caught between an aspiration to unite and our instinct to mistrust. But just going back to the example of the Gates Foundation testing parallel vaccine strategies...if there is coordination, then every viable strategy can be tested without duplication of efforts. If instead countries believe that the vaccine will be their proprietary right and entitlement, then each country has an incentive to promote only the most likely strategy. Yet with coordination, every reasonable possibility can be tried because countries will know that they are all part of an effort to try the full gamut of possibilities. Collectively this provides the greatest possibility that one strategy will work.

What we've seen during this pandemic should only reinforce the idea that there has to be a better way to coordinate the international public health response.

[Stavros]

Everyone is caught between an aspiration to unite and our instinct to mistrust.


This sums up one of the key problems, and I fear we are living through an era when the trust that is needed most is the trust that few can give. But when you have leaders like Presidents Xi, Bolsonaro and Putin, it is no surprise if trust is weak.

The WHO is a large organization, and as such it has all the problems you find in bureaucracies, with the added fact that the top jobs are part of a horse-trading regime which has nothing to with public health, and everything to do with contemporary politics.

But, again, in the field, the American medics and scientists working on WHO or other agency projects, be it in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia or Latin America, have been examples of the 'soft power' that can do more to enhance a country's reputation with real people than a President, a Sports Star or some other kind of celebrity. And it has been one of the USA's strengths because it has the resources to help, and for comparison's sake, when the British Empire was in its 'sunset' years in the the Middle East in the 1950s, it maintained its atttempt to run the Empire on a shoestring budget when American projects were lavish in comparison -that doesn't mean money always works, but it was a culure of generosity that marked the difference between the two, and a generosity of spirit as well as money.

Now the US is not just mean, but callous too, and I say again this is disrespectful to the generations of Americans -most of them the same age as their President- who went abroad to help people racked with disease, who walked waist deep through an African river to a remote village to inoculate children against Polio, when he was walking into the dressing rooms of Miss America to leer at young women taking their clothes off.

We will overcome some day, but when that great day comes, what will be left? It looks on both sides of the Atlantic, like weakness and division, and a mountain range of debt. At the very least, can we expect an overhaul of public health, at both the domestic and international levels?

[Fitzcarraldo]

Looks like the state has started repressing the numbers in Florida:
https://cbs12.com/news/local/woman-who-designed-floridas-covid-19-dashboard-has-been-removed-from-her-position

[holzz]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/19/coronavirus-brazil-mexico-bolsonaro

pretty poor. And Bolsonaro hardly has good PR as it stands.

[Jericho]

Joy of joys, they've just announced they're starting trials on it over here.

https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/coronavirus-trials-of-hydroxychloroquine-start-uk/

[Jericho]

You miserable old git! :dead:

Wth the government clapping them all with one hand and fucking them over with the other, the hypocracy of it all is starting to wear a bit thin, over here, too.





P.S. I know I’ve become a cranky old fuck, because when the people on my block bang their pots and pans (everyday at 7PM) for healthcare workers, it annoys the living shit out of me.
I think a solid week of that is probably enough. I’m sure some of them are trying to watch TV also...lol.

[fred41]

You miserable old git! :dead:

Wth the government clapping them all with one hand and fucking them over with the other, the hypocracy of it all is starting to wear a bit thin, over here, too.

Get Outta my yard you damn kids!...lol.
Yeah, they’re going to eventually have to cut away some of the work force here in NYC , because the budget’s been mismanaged for so long - so much for ‘essential workers’.

On a note of a different kind - here’s something interesting https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/southern-alberta-researchers-say-medical-cannabis-could-help-fight-covid-19-1.4906249

unfortunately they’re talking only about strains high in CBD , but low in THC......can’t have everything.

[broncofan]

Wouldn't you be happy. They can save your life after a 90 day battle of being higher than Cheech and Chong. Are my movie references dated?

[fred41]

Are my movie references dated?

No my friend, Cheech and Chong are timeless !

(Tried to post a GIF but I’m too stupid..lol)

[fred41]

I give up.
(I also forgot why you can’t delete a post either...maybe that potential Covid cure isn’t for me..so much mental scar tissue...)

[Jericho]

Its got me this, far so you never know! :whistle:




On a note of a different kind - here’s something interesting https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/southern-alberta-researchers-say-medical-cannabis-could-help-fight-covid-19-1.4906249

unfortunately they’re talking only about strains high in CBD , but low in THC......can’t have everything.

[Stavros]

Two critiques-
This one on the managerial failings of the UK Government by Sir Paul Nurse-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-government-science-response-criticism-nurse-nobel-a9527746.html

This from an American who doesn't like Andy-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

[fred41]

This from an American who doesn't like Andy-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

Thanks for posting that Stavros. I had read that article from the Guardian when it was posted on Yahoo. I agree with most of it, but with reservations.

During this pandemic, as the writer suggests, Governor Cuomo ‘seemed’ on top of his game because he gave the image: the calming, on-top-of-things, presence that people often need in a crisis. Basically the alpha male - someone who sounds like they know how to lead. But many times alpha males, as we see before a crisis (and afterwards in hindsight), are quite often just douchebags...and Cuomo is a D-Bag in every sense of the word. He always was, which is why some people in his own party can’t stand him. He’s often as ham fisted and thin skinned as the man in the White House, but he’s slightly smarter and, whether good or bad, somewhat better at being a politician (though just as corrupt) and, at times, better at actually being a leader. He’s going to eventually have to account for the things he and Mayor DeBlasio (a whole different type of D-Bag) did and said at the on set of this pandemic, that caused things to be worse than they should’ve been - quite possibly by a lot! This is where she actually agrees with the nemesis -Fox News.

Funny thing is, I actually believe that some, not all or even most, of the problems were caused because of the hate between himself and the Mayor. Because of that, Cuomo often takes the opposite stance of DeBlasio , just to show who’s boss. But, every now and then, about as often as we have a solar eclipse, Mayor Bill is correct and Governor Andy will have to back track and change his mind. That’s not all there is to it - especially when you read the author’s assertion that Cuomo didn’t seem to read the State’s Pandemic Plan.

Where I disagree with the author is, in the implication that things would have been better, if only he had listened to the progressives that the people of this State put in office. Depending on where you sit in the political spectrum of things, Cuomo is either a moderate or very liberal (as his Father was). My opinion is, based on past practice, Cuomo is more moderate. It’s what helped get him elected as Governor in the first place. But I believe that he always had his sights on the White House, so he had to get his left wing creds...which is why all of a sudden he’s super green, even when the policies aren’t rational and cause even more job and energy losses for the rest of the State. For instance - you can’t close a power plant just because it’s Nuclear Energy, when you don’t allow anything thing else presently feasible to take it’s place. You can’t allow a bail reform package to pass through the legislature, when it wasn’t well thought out, and basically opens the Court House door, releasing some serious predators back to the streets. These are things that happen when he actually does work hand in hand with his elected progressives. Also, regardless of what the author thinks, New York City does need more private schools. Statistically, private schools aren’t always better in the rest of the country...but they are in poor neighborhoods in NYC. Actually fixing the public education system would be preferred, but children have to live and learn in the Present world ...and in that world, right now...private schools are often better for them. Better schools, whether private or public, educate to make better and more productive people, which helps keep the prisons emptier...and isn’t that what most politicians should want?

All these things are issues better debated in their own threads, but again - for the most part, an excellent article. roughly a third of the countries caseload and deaths took place in New York. Another large percentage of those deaths came from nursing homes. Governor Cuomo’s going to have to answer for that.

[holzz]

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196514/the-economic-impact-coronavirus-analysis-from/

All the work Cameron did to bring down the debt - UNDONE.

[holzz]

https://www.euronews.com/2020/05/22/coronavirus-brazil-president-jair-bolsonaro-s-deadly-gamble-with-covid-19-culture-clash

Wasteman.

Probbaly hates trans people coz a TS babe he picked up in Carnival didn't fuck him as good as he wanted.

[holzz]

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/may/21/if-i-dont-have-sex-ill-die-of-hunger-covid-19-crisis-for-rios-trans-sex-workers

pretty sad.

[Stavros]

Thanks for posting that Stavros. I had read that article from the Guardian when it was posted on Yahoo. I agree with most of it, but with reservations.
.

Fred, thanks for a detailed response to the article. Your post raises a number of issues I can only deal with in general terms as I don't live there. On education, for example, if State education has now deteriorated so much you think the private sector would do better, is that because State education cannot be reformed? Is it just a case of money? I would like to say our system is better but it has a wide range of problems, but for me I think curriculum is vital, and I wonder, on both sides of the Atlantic, if our children are being given an education that will help them both improve, and right now, survive over the next 50 years, just 10 of which will probably see more changes than I have seen in the last 60.

I can't really comment on the specifics of Cuomo and DeBlasio, other than to suggest most politicians who reach high office bring baggage with them, it is certainly the case in the UK. It may be the case that it is not even possible to become a Mayor or Governor of party leader without crawling over 'dead' bodies to get there, I guess it comes down to 'reputation management' with the chilling thought that however much we know about the details of this President, before and during his time in office, the 'reputation management' issue that was supposed to make him unelectable clearly didn't have a negative impact even though his conduct in office is probably worse than was imagined.
It is as if being an idiot is now an acceptable aspect of a candidate's reputation. And if not an idiot, extreme positions expressed in extreme language that once would have been unthinkable in Congress, or were the left to known extremists, usually from the 'Deep South'.

It raises the question of competence, and decision making. What Covid 19 has exposed across the world, is the difference between swift and decisive action -often as bold as it has been extreme- and its alternative. We can see the winners are the ones that did the former, and that the losers, in the UK and the US, dithered at the start, were reluctant to make bold decisions that cost a lot of money, and made public statements designed to weaken fears -but have ended up spending ten or twenty times the sums they might have spent even before the crisis, and have probably created more fear than is necessary.

A year or so ago I was talking with a former colleague and we agreed that we (same age) had never before known such a cohort of useless, incompetent politicians, the issues at the time being the catastrophic Conservative election campaign of 2017 and the atrophy of decision-making on Brexit with a paralysed House of Commons. Boris Johnson has not shown himself to be superior to Theresa May, indeed, his actions as party leader as well as Prime Minister beg so many questions about what it means in the UK to be a Conservative as to fall outside this thread on Covid 19.

But, in comparison in the US, the Obama administration was staffed by smart people with years of experience in policy making, and while I am sure it was a disappointment for many because they feel so little changed, those changes Obama sought were often delayed or dismissed by a hostle Congress which it seems to me, often opposed Obama's policies because of him, not because the policies were inherently good or bad. That his successor has staffed his administration with amateurs who seem incapable of grasping what policy making in government is, that they seem more concerned with rolling back the policies of the past because of their loathing of Obama, rather than developing policies for the future, is just one part of what looks in the UK like a country determined to go backwards in time.
But it also means that the inherent incompetence of the Presidency has been matched, in the early stages of this attack, by incompetence at the level of the State in the US, but not everywhere- why does it appear that New York has fared worse than California and Washington State, two States which were most at risk in the early phases of the pandemic? Was it luck, or more competent management?

It may be easy in retrospect to say how things could have been handled differently -but it didn't take two months for the Bush administration to shut down the USA in 2001 -it took less than 24 hours. But if the politicians could not take Covid 19 seriously as a threat to the US, why should the American people take politicians seriously as managers of the country?

I fear the 2020 election may not just be about 'China' or 'Covid 19', but competence and confidence, and if more people do not vote at all, this may further weaken, rather than strengthen American democracy. And it means you could end up with leaders who divide more than they lead.

[Stavros]

Not long after writing the post above, I read the New York Times article inked below, that looks at public faith in Washington DC, or the lack of it. On the one hand it feeds into my view that what this Presidency shares with Rupert Murdoch is a libertarian loathing of Government and the belief that now is the time to undermine publlic belief that Federal Government is good for the country, that it may even be reduced to almost nothing, to 'set the people free' as I am sure they would say. Phase One: destroy the faith in government; Phase Two: cut it to the bone.

On the other hand, the article also suggests a higher degree of faith -presumably based on performace- in local government (evidently not in NYC! -?) -but as I know nothing about local government in the US I cannot comment, and I guess it undermines some of my ideas about the relationship between government and the governed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/23/us/coronavirus-government-trust.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

[fred41]

Fred, thanks for a detailed response to the article. Your post raises a number of issues I can only deal with in general terms as I don't live there. On education, for example, if State education has now deteriorated so much you think the private sector would do better, is that because State education cannot be reformed? Is it just a case of money? I would like to say our system is better but it has a wide range of problems, but for me I think curriculum is vital, and I wonder, on both sides of the Atlantic, if our children are being given an education that will help them both improve, and right now, survive over the next 50 years, just 10 of which will probably see more changes than I have seen in the last 60.

I’m just going to stick with this one topic for now. I really don’t have reason to write much anymore...even for leisure and I suspect you may have done so as part of making a living...not so much as for myself. Also, I gave my Mac Book Pro to someone who found a better use for it and am presently doing everything on an iPad Pro, which is more suited towards my leisurely needs (actually, I could’ve just gotten a simple iPad, but I have a tendency to buy more than I need). It’s really quite intuitive, but I’m still working out the differences and I still can’t always grasp some of the hand commands a younger hand would be able to deal with. For me, typing was easier done on a computer - the trade off being, the ability to do art work (which I thought I would be doing more off) And writing with a stylus. But again, I’m still learning even some it’s most basic functions, so please bear with me.

Even on the topic of education it sometimes makes more sense to deal with locally (at least on the State or City level), because speaking about it federally is a bit too abstract (also, as a comparison, speaking Nationally between the UK and USA, often doesn’t make any sense because of the vast difference in size).

When opining on a topic like this, it helps to know where that opinion comes from, so I will say, up front, that I’ve never worked in the educational field and though I was married at one time, now live alone and have never had any children and that’s by choice - I think that’s important to know because an active parent or teacher can give a different point of view based on their personal attachment to the issue. Private schools have always existed in NYC. Of the types...well wealthy private schools exist everywhere, I assume ...you would think that a school, only for the wealthy would do well compared to a public school, but whether or not it does isn’t really important to any conversation in education (obviously I’m only speaking of grades 12 and down). Leaving out parochial schools for the moment, the big debate here is usually about charter schools.

As I’ve stated before, as well as I can remember , statistically charter schools don’t always do better on a national level in comparison to public schools, but the reasons for that sometimes changes with the locale of the schools in question, and obviously, how they are run. From what I recall, I believe about 50% of them do better than public schools locally, with the rest being about the same and a handful doing worse. At the end of this topic I’ll post a link. Apparently , foundational charters seem to do better than small individual ones. I understand from an ideological point of view public funds should go to public schools, but in the real world, money isn’t always the problem. NYC , from what I understand, spends about $28,000 per student. That’s approximately double the national average and we still have failing schools. I’m going to be honest - from what I know from growing up in this city - often public schools in poor districts are literally hell holes you or I would not set foot in. There’s a reason some of those schools had metal detectors. Before even considering curriculum, don’t you think a safe, healthy environment would be a foundational necessity to be able to even attempt to learn? Aggressive students rarely even get suspended anymore. The child who wants to learn is in an environment that makes it impossible, so why not offer a choice that’s both safer and makes it possible? Sure you’re probably more likely to get positive parental support in a charter (probably the most important thing in a child’s educational performance) but so what? It’s fine to ideologically disagree with giving public funds to private schools...they should fix the problem instead of shoving it off, but every politician promises that and it never, ever gets done. A student in the system now ,can’t wait years ...life doesn’t work that way. Why are adults willing to shrug their shoulder and condemn kids like that for an ideology?

here’s a link from the Manhattan Institute. I believe it’s a conservative think tank, but that doesn’t change anything about my argument. It’s just for statistical info.

This is an easy read from 2018 : https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/new-york-citys-charter-schools-what-research-shows-10975.html

A slightly more comprehensive one from 2019 : https://www.manhattan-institute.org/nyc-charter-school-benefits-over-public-schools

[blackchubby38]

While its fair to question the leadership of politicians before and during the pandemic, I think we have to start paying attention to them as the pandemic starts to wane and the lock downs end. Or if they ever do end. According to Mayor Deblasio, shuttered business can hold on for months.

What fucking world is he living in?

[fred41]

While its fair to question the leadership of politicians before and during the pandemic, I think we have to start paying attention to them as the pandemic starts to wane and the lock downs end. Or if they ever do end. According to Mayor Deblasio, shuttered business can hold on for months.

What fucking world is he living in?

You’re right - here’s where he said that: https://nypost.com/2020/05/22/de-blasio-says-shuttered-businesses-will-be-able-to-hang-on/

I don’t know where he thinks he’s going to get the money to make up for all the tax revenue he’s losing and will continue to lose, especially when he has a history of handing out six figure jobs like candy. He’s not going to get it from the Feds and he doesn’t deserve to. I’m baffled.

One thing Cuomo realizes though, needs to sink in to DeBlasio also - people listen because they realize it’s the right thing to do. When they stop listening , he has very little enforcement power. You can write citations, but if that fails, what then?

[blackchubby38]

You’re right - here’s where he said that: https://nypost.com/2020/05/22/de-blasio-says-shuttered-businesses-will-be-able-to-hang-on/

I don’t know where he thinks he’s going to get the money to make up for all the tax revenue he’s losing and will continue to lose, especially when he has a history of handing out six figure jobs like candy. He’s not going to get it from the Feds and he doesn’t deserve to. I’m baffled.

One thing Cuomo realizes though, needs to sink in to DeBlasio also - people listen because they realize it’s the right thing to do. When they stop listening , he has very little enforcement power. You can write citations, but if that fails, what then?

I think we are getting to a point (if we are not there already) that even the people who were favor of the lock down, are going to start saying enough is enough. Eventually intolerance and money are going to take over.

[Stavros]

I’m just going to stick with this one topic for now. I really don’t have reason to write much anymore...even for leisure and I suspect you may have done so as part of making a living...not so much as for myself. Also, I gave my Mac Book Pro to someone who found a better use for it and am presently doing everything on an iPad Pro, which is more suited towards my leisurely needs (actually, I could’ve just gotten a simple iPad, but I have a tendency to buy more than I need). It’s really quite intuitive, but I’m still working out the differences and I still can’t always grasp some of the hand commands a younger hand would be able to deal with. For me, typing was easier done on a computer - the trade off being, the ability to do art work (which I thought I would be doing more off) And writing with a stylus. But again, I’m still learning even some it’s most basic functions, so please bear with me.

Even on the topic of education it sometimes makes more sense to deal with locally (at least on the State or City level), because speaking about it federally is a bit too abstract (also, as a comparison, speaking Nationally between the UK and USA, often doesn’t make any sense because of the vast difference in size).

When opining on a topic like this, it helps to know where that opinion comes from, so I will say, up front, that I’ve never worked in the educational field and though I was married at one time, now live alone and have never had any children and that’s by choice - I think that’s important to know because an active parent or teacher can give a different point of view based on their personal attachment to the issue. Private schools have always existed in NYC. Of the types...well wealthy private schools exist everywhere, I assume ...you would think that a school, only for the wealthy would do well compared to a public school, but whether or not it does isn’t really important to any conversation in education (obviously I’m only speaking of grades 12 and down). Leaving out parochial schools for the moment, the big debate here is usually about charter schools.

As I’ve stated before, as well as I can remember , statistically charter schools don’t always do better on a national level in comparison to public schools, but the reasons for that sometimes changes with the locale of the schools in question, and obviously, how they are run. From what I recall, I believe about 50% of them do better than public schools locally, with the rest being about the same and a handful doing worse. At the end of this topic I’ll post a link. Apparently , foundational charters seem to do better than small individual ones. I understand from an ideological point of view public funds should go to public schools, but in the real world, money isn’t always the problem. NYC , from what I understand, spends about $28,000 per student. That’s approximately double the national average and we still have failing schools. I’m going to be honest - from what I know from growing up in this city - often public schools in poor districts are literally hell holes you or I would not set foot in. There’s a reason some of those schools had metal detectors. Before even considering curriculum, don’t you think a safe, healthy environment would be a foundational necessity to be able to even attempt to learn? Aggressive students rarely even get suspended anymore. The child who wants to learn is in an environment that makes it impossible, so why not offer a choice that’s both safer and makes it possible? Sure you’re probably more likely to get positive parental support in a charter (probably the most important thing in a child’s educational performance) but so what? It’s fine to ideologically disagree with giving public funds to private schools...they should fix the problem instead of shoving it off, but every politician promises that and it never, ever gets done. A student in the system now ,can’t wait years ...life doesn’t work that way. Why are adults willing to shrug their shoulder and condemn kids like that for an ideology?



Thank you for a well written reply, not least if you don't have a keyboard attached to your iPad Pro (I have also thought of buying one) -I struggle with the flat keyboard on iPads.

Education can be linked to Covid 19 because the fundamental question is about resource management, and what it is that the State spends money on, or what individuals spend their money on. It can range from environmental concerns such as clean water and traffic problems, to health and education, but it seems to me that a major difference between the US and Europe is the different attitude to public service, and the historical origins in Europe of State funded health, education and welfare, where the impact of both the industrial revolution and urbanization in the 19th century forced Governments to reconsider what the State coudld do, indeed, morally ought to do, if only to secure peace in the public realm that threatened to be undermined by social protest, as happened in Germany, where it was Bismarck who initiated their first welfare programmes.

But note that in Germany prior to unification in 1870, and dating from the 18th century, the Prussians had created a universal education system that was compulsory, paid for from taxation, and that included basic subjects in reading, writing and arithmetic, but also had a military/authoritarian component which included the teaching of obedience to authority be it in government or the army. So far, so Conservtive, not leaving education as a matter of choice to individuals -but as the Prussian model became the German model after 1870, and by 1900 Germany had overtaken the UK to become the largest economy in Europe and was the only serious rival in industry to the USA, you might think the Prussian model worked on the level necessary for industrial strength. Then note how the education system became more liberal in the Weimar Republic and, tragicaly, racist in the Third Reich.

But consider that today, two of the most successful economies in the world, and countries with a high standard of living and high levels of achievement in all fields, are Germany and Switzerland, which also have some of the lowest proportion of private schools, something like 5% of the total.

It is also the case that while there was always a religious component to education in Germany, and the Prussian model tended to be Protestant rather than Catholic, religion was an obligatory subject until the new Federation was created after 1945 in the West, where religion was compulsory to the age of 14 but then optional.

A similar commitment to universal education developed in the UK but was distorted owing to religious conflicts, with the Churches playing a leading role as providers of education in essence to defend their 'flock', thus laying the foundation for the 'Faith Schools' that we have today, in spite of the Labour Government of 1945 creating a National Education Service funded from taxation with in general terms all pupils following the same curriculum and exams, there being variations in Scotland which has its own but related system.

Key point- what we have in the UK is an Apartheid education system. Labour did not abolish private schools in 1945 which has meant that the rich can send their children to private schools or colleges which have international renown -Eton, Harrow, Charterhouse, Winchester, Christ's Hospital and so on, the irony being that many of them were founded to teach the poor, as is the case with Eton. The Dragon School in Oxford is one of the best in the country, but even Oxford parents struggle to get their children into it, and the annual fee is £29,580 (approx $35,987).

If the Rich occupy one level, there is the State system, there are 'Faith Schools' which enable Muslims to go to Muslim schools, Jews to Jewish schools, and crucially, Church of England and Roman Catholic schools to maintain an ancient and bloody prejudice, and while some of them are outstanding schools -and legally are obliged to take in children of different faiths-, sectarian education in Northern Ireland has been blamed for a culture of prejudice that fed into the bigotry and violence of 'the Troubles'
Add in the Blair Government's new tier of 'Academy' schools (similar I think t Charter schools) -and you can see that there is a danger of the State system becoming a gutter into which those children fall who don't make it to the other levels, though in none of these cases is there any guarantee the education is actually producing more intelligent and capable pupils, though the assumption is that a child's life chances are improved if he leaves a State school to go to an Academy, and I suspect this is also true in the US if the options are a State school or a Charter school.

But why? Your links explain the differences and look at some of the arguments of State schooling versus Charter Schools, but does not explain why the different options exist. In the UK, Class was the key divider -Eton was founded by King Henry VI in 1440 to educate poor boys; by the 19th century it had been swept up in the economic and social progress of Empire and Industrial Revolution to become the reserve of the rich and the elites ,whose children went from Eton to University and then to Government, Empire, Church, the Military and most obviously Parliamen- as it true today, Cameron and Johnson both travelling the Eton-Oxford-No 10 route.

Is it not also the case that what Charter schools offer is what what private education and Academies offer here? A form of Apartheid where the dividing line in America is Race rather than class? One of your links argues Black children are beneficiaries of Charter Schools, but if so, what about the Black children who are not in Charter Schools? Are these factors in the teaching of poor white Children in the post-industrial towns of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Virginia? What happened to that slogan 'No Child Left Behind'?

Consider the difference: Apartheid education in Britain and America, a Universal system in Germany and Switzerland, and then compare quality of life in all four.

But, and this relates to Covid 19 and health, is the major difference the reluctance of the US to extend the concept of public service to areas outside local government, law enforcement and the military?

You don't have to be a Socialist to believe taxation can be the foundation of a Federal Health Service, because it makes sense on any level, but it does require the citizens of the US to begin to re-think States Rights, not as a form of Independence, but a form of Integration.

Why should each State have its own rules on elections? Why should States have the right to create or organize health and education differently? There is nothing wrong in creating a National system because it would be a means of integrating and unifying the country, rather than separating it, and I can see how at this moment in time when the President not only sneers at public service but denounces men and women with decades of public service as 'Human Scum' it is a febrile issue- but overall, does the present system deliver for people who need health care? Does it deliver the education parents want and what their children, and the country need?

The odd thing, is that the Liberal experiment that began in 1776 was determined to promote individual liberty, and not impose taxes on citizens. Yet to maintain the Continental Army as the armed force of the new United States, still threatened by the British Empire, Washington knew he had to fund the Armed forces from taxation. And while the Liberal idea that the State should not impose rules on individuals capable of making their own decisions, creating a free space between the State and the Citizen, many if not most new Americans lived in close-knit Christian communities which stifled free expression to maintain a common, collective identity and purpose. Thus as the Revolution and America evolved, you might say you had the free and the unfree living in the same country under the same regime: one that produced The Scarlet Letter on the one hand, and Call of the Wild on the other.

But at some point, if you are going to spend trillions of dollars on this and that, why not decide to spend it creating an integrated health service, and has the time not come to abolish Apartheid in education, and take a more imaginitive and egalitarian route to learning for the benefit of all? As soon as children are shut out of education, they are shut out from hope. And given them a second-class education and they may feel like second-class citizens and not care what happens, losing a moral compass that might guide them better in life.

Choices, decisions, and, I think, choices and decisions that must be reviewed as the challenges of the Covid world demand action for real long term change. In the UK we are sleepwalking into a Brexit that has as many bright prospects as it does dark corners, nobody knows if it will work. In the US you face four more years of decline, weakness and division -is it too late to save the Union?

[holzz]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/24/man-broke-brazil-coronavirus-could-bring-tropical-trump/

Tropical Trump?

[fred41]

Education can be linked to Covid 19 because the fundamental question.....

Thanks for the excellent read. I don’t know if you write this strictly from memory, use reference texts or both, but it’s often quite an impressive history lesson. I still remember the long debates you and Prospero (r.i.p.) used to have...I’d learned more about the history of the Middle East from those than I ever did in any school.

I will say that - once again, my answers/opinions, for the most part, tend to pertain mainly to the local than the rest of the country. I think of it as running for Mayor, City Council Rep., or Legislative Rep., as opposed to POTUS. You have to be able to tackle the problems of a smaller group of individuals, before you attempt the gargantuan task of 325 or so million people. While public sector jobs here in the USA probably trail Europe by about 2% , you are obviously correct on taxation. Our highest taxed States don’t even come close to the European average. Also, I believe that the majority of funding for public schools in many of our States is based on property taxes. This of course means - wealthy counties / wealthy schools ...poor counties/poor schools.

New York City’s school budget is more complicated than that however. I believe it gets money from NYS (not really certain of present day formula or how that’s collected other than Federal and property taxes) and local collected taxes, including corporate taxes , which are distributed to the City and then a portion given to the Board of Education, to be allocated to the school districts and their individual public schools. If someone reading this post works in the NYS or City education dept., or is familiar with budgeting, please explain this better, because it can definitely cause headaches.

The allocation of Charter schools is dependent on changing formulas and available spaces given, under the direction of the Governor and Mayor. If a politician wants the support of the Teacher’s and other Public education Unions, then they tend to fight them. This is a problem. Public schools in general, in NYC, haven’t been very good. This helps to explain why more than 50% (perhaps even higher) of the City’s white student population is in private school...and why ever increasing black and Hispanic people leave to find better school districts outside the city or in their own Parochial Schools. I should mention that there are a few other choices in the Public School system...Specialized schools for more gifted students that have to be applied to , where entrance is traditionally based on testing and /or particular skills in the Arts - Music, performance, painting,..etc. Our Mayor and his School’s Chancellor is trying to change the admission process to these schools to balance their racial disparities. The Mayor is being accused of trying to “dummy down” or entirely eliminate the testing requirements of his top Specialized High School’s testing requirements (While it should be noted, that his own son Dante, attended such a school - Brooklyn Tech.). For this he receives , in my opinion, a lot of fair criticism ..such as: Why not ensure a higher percentages of black and Hispanic entrants simply by vastly improving the public schools they come from. He rarely even closes or replaces public schools that continue to grossly fail in all bench marks...over and over again.

I have said public schools in NYC haven’t been very good. Overall this is true, but in as best defense of the Mayor I can muster - I believe test result wise NYC schools have made gains this last year. But some of the worst schools are in poor (and higher crime) areas such as the Bronx..and so if you don’t want to risk your child in one of the ‘bad’ schools, in terms of lack of safety or scholastics, what choice do you have? It is noble to fix both the educational system and it’s disparities between minorities and economic classes. But again, this can often take years, because it takes a balance of the right politicians and informed parents willing to fight for their children regardless of personal ideology. If a charter school can step in and offer your child a better future right now, why not allow it. What if it were your child? What would you want Now?!

Now for some more generalized thoughts on some of what you have mentioned. I suppose in an ideal world, for the whole country’s public educational system to be better, you would need a more socially, ethnically and economically integrated country. Sounds simple, but how to make that happen? In theory Socialism doesn’t actually sound bad at all. But the problem isn’t always the particular political system you either believe in or live under, but the people you entrust to run it and how much power over your life you give them. Also, that means you need a government in place With a system to protect against gross manipulations. You need politicians who follow programs that work and scrap them when they don’t - regardless of ideology. That’s hard to do in a place where at least half of time in office spent is running for re-election and trying to amass voters by any means necessary. If you want to create a better educational system (or any such system) without making it a form of Apartheid, as you mentioned, then you have to improve all of it. Make it better. The problem with rigid political ideologues often comes when they are hit with the realization that they can’t do this, so too often they seem tempted to balance the whole thing out and make it equally worse...because then it would , at least to the uncritical eye, seem fairer.

Gotta end it here for now. Good talk.

[fred41]

Oh yeah, one thing that Covid 19 may have changed about how we receive education - there will probably be more on-line opportunities than before. At least in terms of Higher education anyhow. While some forms of education need to be more hands on, especially in terms of equipment needed, many college courses...and even perhaps some High School, have shown themselves able to be performed with a computer in the home. For reasons too numerous to list, the lower grades will almost always have to be performed in school...but perhaps supplemented online. Besides, schools covering grades K - 12 , do far more nowadays than just teach the basics. Not only are they needed as a form of DayCare, but sometimes they are needed to supply nutrition. Some kids might get their only real meals from public school.

[Stavros]

Oh yeah, one thing that Covid 19 may have changed about how we receive education - there will probably be more on-line opportunities than before. At least in terms of Higher education anyhow. While some forms of education need to be more hands on, especially in terms of equipment needed, many college courses...and even perhaps some High School, have shown themselves able to be performed with a computer in the home. For reasons too numerous to list, the lower grades will almost always have to be performed in school...but perhaps supplemented online. Besides, schools covering grades K - 12 , do far more nowadays than just teach the basics. Not only are they needed as a form of DayCare, but sometimes they are needed to supply nutrition. Some kids might get their only real meals from public school.

Thanks for taking the time for your thoughts and posts on education, but I fear that you have actually described the problem, which is the accumulation of different 'solutions' and 'opportunities' that create multiple layers of schooling, which inevitably means there is a hard core of children at the bottom of the pile and I think we know who those children are.

On one level, I think we can agree that in the past, the quality of education was not so important when working class/blue collar children with no academic aptitude, would leave school and work in heavy industry, in the days when labour-intensive industries were major recruiters of people from all backgrounds. And at the same time, as is evident from the first part of Michelle Obama's memoir 'Becoming', if parents had an ambition shared by their chidren the opportunities were there to break out of, if not the 'ghetto' (Obama was not a 'ghetto kid') the available but dead-end job, and end up in Princeton.

Take away that industrial base, and as in the UK, gographically mostly but not exclusively in the North, what are young men to do if they don't go down the pit, work in a factory or go into the military? This is why I think curriculum development is so important for the next generation, and though I wonder how effective it is, I do agree that one change Covid 19 may bring about is a more digital environment for learning, though the importance of children being in a social/collegiate environment also seems to me to be crucial for the development of social skills.

But in the end it is not about ideology so much as the public culture, where either education is left to 'the market', or the State takes on the responsibility for educating everyone, precisely to prevent the creation of layers of achievement and bias that can take over if parents alone are allowed to organize schooling As I argued, Germany and Switzerland, I assume also Sweden, are successful using a tax-funded education system with limited scope for the private sector- because the parents trust the State system. It would be a major challenge now in the UK, I can't see it happening in the US, but that is also because of the power which Religion seems to exert in the education sector.

The question of religious schools, in the UK at any rate, ought to be one of the most urgent debates we need to have. I cannot understand how the Government allows such insular schoolng that means in parts of London, Orthodox Jewish boys and girls go through the whole of their youth, and probably a lot of their adulthood never interacting with Gentiles, while in Bimingham there have been furious protests by parents -and some who were not parents- in a school with majority Muslim pupils, determined to prevent their children being taught that same sex relations and transgender conditions are normal, even where the details of what was actually being taught was distorted for political purposes. I would abolish religious or 'faith schools' at a stroke if I had the chance.

At the moment this is where some of the cultural issues arise which are exploited by New Wave Fascists who oppose immigration on the grounds that immigrants in large numbers dilute the 'National Character', just as leaving the EU will, one assumes they believe, over time restore to England what its normal Englishness once was, whatever that means. There is little new in this, as the sectarian divide between Catholic and Church of England schools has shown, with in all of these the fear that children are not just being taught how to read and write but also what to think and believe.

Ultimately I fear it is not about the liberal education that intended to develop a child's faculties in academic subjects while enabling them to balance their personal identity with a firm understanding of rights and obligations in society at large, it is about money, and class, and a fear that one's child will not get the best education if the school is x, y or z depending on your prejudice. The unsatisfactry result is that the very mechanism of separation that parents want to privilege their child, reinforces rather than dismantles social divisions derived from class, religion, race and sexuality. There are no easy solutions to this, and I fear that we in the UK will continue with this mosaic of schools, but where opportunity to improve may not be a choice but a matter of luck- and post-codes.

[broncofan]

I have a theory about why our numbers are slowly improving even while we are being slightly less conscientious than we were in late March. I think that in early March we saw an explosion of cases in some regions that climbed at an exponential rate and we implemented a pretty good response once we got a handle on how bad it was (far too late though). It then continued to climb even though people were being very cautious because we didn't have a way to separate mild cases from their households. The plateau maybe consisted of a lot of transmission within households that took weeks and weeks to burn out.

By the time early May came around we loosened up a bit but people were still cognizant of the risk and are voluntarily being more cautious, except in extreme cases we've seen on the news. With not as much transmission occurring within households, and some caution in public, we are seeing a decline in cases. Of course, I have no evidence to back this theory up.

The alternative is that weather is helping, but it still doesn't look like that prominent an effect as some warm, humid regions got hit pretty hard. Anyhow I'm very happy to see our numbers improving even if they are still pretty bad.

I have a few other articles I want to post in the coming days. One or two are about whether severity of illness is correlated with initial infectious dose of virus during transmission. There are articles about this and while it's proven to be a factor in determining disease severity for some other viruses where they can do challenge studies, covid-19 is too dangerous for human challenge. Has anyone seen anything about that or have any thoughts about it?

Edit:https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/opinion/coronavirus-viral-dose.html

Here's one link I might as well include. I read the article at the time it was published but can't now because New York Times wants my email address so they can spam me. You might be luckier though.

[Stavros]

As countries in Europe including the UK, and the US prepare for a phased end to collective isolation, the judgement that is being made of the management of the pandemic is beginning to look even worse than was thought, in both the UK and the US. We seem in the UK and the US, to have experienced what I would call either 'system breakdown' or 'institutional incompetence'. And given that pandemics have been high on the list of threats the State might encounter, complete with reports recommending what to do should one happen, the failures are startling -yet, in the UK seem also to be less unexpected when one looks at the way Brexit has been 'managed' since 2016.

At the moment, the UK Government has found itself under attack -including from its own party- for introducing a 14-day Quarantine requirement for travellers entering the UK -a measure that ought to have been introduced in February if not January- but has no testing regime for those entering the country, and when a Goverment Minister was asked on BBC Radio 4 to name a European country with a worse record than the UK justifying the Quarantine, he failed to answer the question. The claims that the UK now has a testing and tracing regime is being questioned by those who have never encountered it, while the scientists are now being queried for not demanding the most severe restrictions early on. Even the NHS is not immune, not the frontline staf, but the managers who, when the crisis began, relied on supply chains that had broken down and were thus unable to provide ventilators and PPE equipment for staff -and we don't yet know if any of the frontline staff died did not have adequate PPE- while the decision to send elderly patients back to care homes now appears to have been a colossal blunder.

But a long article in the New York Times (worth [free] registering to read) documents how in the US, the CDC has failed to take a lead in this pandemic, regardless of the lack of political leadership but mostly due to a systemic management failure that has left the CDC failing to modernize over the last 20 years or more- it suggests as in the UK, that whatever the degree of expertise the professionals have with regard to the epidemiology and treatment of Covid 19, the CDC lacked an up-to-date management process to 'get a grip'. not helped by the apparently wayward behaviour of Robert Redfield, and the sidelining, indeed punishment, of Nancy Messonier because she told the truth and provoked the President-

“It’s not a question of if this will happen but when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illnesses,” Nancy Messonnier (https://thehill.com/person/nancy-messonnier), the director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said on Feb. 25.

According to the Journal, Trump was angry with Messonnier after her statement resulted in a dip in the stock market. The same day, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said the virus was “contained” in the U.S.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/494187-trump-threatened-to-fire-cdcs-chief-of-respiratory-diseases-in

The New York Times article is here-

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/us/cdc-coronavirus.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

The opportunity, indeed, the necessity for reform is, I think inevitable even before the formal enquiries and reviews begin, and one hopes the money will be there, as well as the political support.

The other breaking news this morning (it is 03.55am here) is the claim that evidence now exists that suggests (proves?) Covid 19 is man-made, but leaked accidentally from the Wuhan lab. The claim is based on the argument in an academic paper following an analysis of the data by two Professors, one in London and the other in Norway, which claims that the earliest known cases were not related to the wet-market in Wuhan, and that in the Genome Sequence the Chinese presented to the WHO dna traces were inserted that are not natural, thus-

In their paper, the scientists claim to have identified "inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface" that explain how the virus binds itself to human cells.
and
A further analysis produced by Prof Dalgleish and his colleagues, due for release in the coming days, claims the Covid-19 virus has "unique fingerprints" that cannot have evolved naturally and are instead "indicative of purposive manipulation".

Entitled "A Reconstructed Historical Aetiology of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike", the new study, seen by The Telegraph, suggests the virus is "remarkably well-adapted virus for human co-existence" and is likely to be the result of a Wuhan lab experiment to produce "chimeric viruses of high potency".

The paper concludes: "Henceforth, those who would maintain that the Covid-19 pandemic arose from zoonotic transfer need to explain precisely why this more parsimonious account is wrong before asserting that their evidence is persuasive, most especially when, as we also show, there are puzzling errors in their use of evidence."

The paper has not yet been accepted for publication in any scientific journal."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/03/exclusive-coronavirus-began-accident-disease-escaped-chinese/

This appears then, to remain a theory, and I wonder if it has been part of the 'evidence' that Michael Pompeo claims 'proves' that Covid-19 is man-made.

[broncofan]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in sharing but I'm just curious if anyone wants to say a few words about what precautions they're taking. We're at the point in the U.S. where we have fewer cases but there's still a risk in social interaction and things are opening up again. As I've said, there really aren't any new therapeutics if one gets sick (other than Remdesivir) but I can tell people are less afraid, or maybe everyone is getting a better sense of what is risky versus what is relatively low risk.

I work in an office and it is completely flexible when I have to come in as most of my work can be done remotely and my employer has no problem with that. I work with three other people in about 1200 square feet so there is plenty of space to distance. I've been going in now a couple of times a week and the people I work with have chosen to do the same. I still order groceries delivery because I figure why not if I can, and I haven't socialized at all... in person.

Also, when I order packages from amazon I let them sit for two days, then open them and wash my hands. Nothing too tough for me. Anyone been taking a few more risks than that? Obviously it depends on where you live how risky a particular behavior is.

[blackchubby38]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in sharing but I'm just curious if anyone wants to say a few words about what precautions they're taking. We're at the point in the U.S. where we have fewer cases but there's still a risk in social interaction and things are opening up again. As I've said, there really aren't any new therapeutics if one gets sick (other than Remdesivir) but I can tell people are less afraid, or maybe everyone is getting a better sense of what is risky versus what is relatively low risk.

I work in an office and it is completely flexible when I have to come in as most of my work can be done remotely and my employer has no problem with that. I work with three other people in about 1200 square feet so there is plenty of space to distance. I've been going in now a couple of times a week and the people I work with have chosen to do the same. I still order groceries delivery because I figure why not if I can, and I haven't socialized at all... in person.

Also, when I order packages from amazon I let them sit for two days, then open them and wash my hands. Nothing too tough for me. Anyone been taking a few more risks than that? Obviously it depends on where you live how risky a particular behavior is.

I will wear a mask when I go into a store, but I don't wear one when I'm walking out in a public. Its a lot easier to maintain physical distance then people make it out to be.

I stop washing my hands as soon as I walk into the house because I accidentally threw out my keys one day because I was in a rush to get to the sink.

I too work in an office, but we are still working from home until June 30th. Then it back to going into the office twice a week. My office consists of 6 rooms that have work stations in them for 2-3 people. Going forward, only one person will be in each room everyday. We were allowed to change our schedules to make this happen.

I think working from home full time is something that sounds good in theory, but it does have its flaws. One of them being a company figuring out that they can save money by outsourcing your job to another country. Something that may happen for industries that lost money during the economic shutdown.

Finally, depending on what it is, most packages that I get usually sit around for two days. But that's more from laziness then worrying about Corona Virus.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in sharing but I'm just curious if anyone wants to say a few words about what precautions they're taking. We're at the point in the U.S. where we have fewer cases but there's still a risk in social interaction and things are opening up again. As I've said, there really aren't any new therapeutics if one gets sick (other than Remdesivir) but I can tell people are less afraid, or maybe everyone is getting a better sense of what is risky versus what is relatively low risk.

I work in an office and it is completely flexible when I have to come in as most of my work can be done remotely and my employer has no problem with that. I work with three other people in about 1200 square feet so there is plenty of space to distance. I've been going in now a couple of times a week and the people I work with have chosen to do the same. I still order groceries delivery because I figure why not if I can, and I haven't socialized at all... in person.

Also, when I order packages from amazon I let them sit for two days, then open them and wash my hands. Nothing too tough for me. Anyone been taking a few more risks than that? Obviously it depends on where you live how risky a particular behavior is.I wear a mask whenever i go to the grocery store and the laundromat, and maintain social distancing,and wash my hands when i return home. and disinfect surfaces around the house as well. and when i order packages from online stores, i let them sit them on the patio for 2-3 days before bringing them in.

[Stavros]

I follow UK guidelines for someone of my age, and wear a mask in shops and other esablishments (for example the Chemist, and the Post Office where I was this morning) where social distancing is not easy to achieve. It is also now mandatory on buses and trains though I have not been on either since mid-March and have no reason to in the near future. However, I wear a standard nursing mark not a high grade medical mask, and not the three-layered covering recommended by the WHO. I am relaxed about 'stuff' such as groceries which I unpack and put away in fridge or cupboard whereas my sister (who lives in North America) cleans and wipes everything, though her husand is in a vulnerable category owing to serious illness in recent years. I do wash my hands when I return from the shops, and that is it basically. I do go out for walks now and then, and even though I believe I am in an area with low rates of infection, this surprises me as there are a lot of care and residential homes close to where I live.

When I am not going into basic shops in town -supermarket, bookshop, and the independent DVD/CD shop (which I fear may not re-open), my time has not changed much, which was spent mosty at home reading and writing and listening to music, or going to concerts, the latter being the one thing that has changed most for me. I went to a piano recital in the next town in February and took the half-hour train journey to Birmingham's Symphony Hall for a Tchaikovsky/Berlioz concert in late Febuary and the German Requiem in early March, all involving close contact with people of my age and younger on trains, in the street, on a tram and in Symphony Hall -and a week after that I was in London and I recall one very crowded supermarket, so I think I must be lucky, or maybe I was infected but showed no symptoms. I am also lucky because I have not lost any income, which these days comes from my pensions, but I do understand how hard it must be for those without savings or a job, and my criticism of the sloppy way this Government has handled the crisis is mostly for them, as I have not been impacted much at all. But who knows, if there is a second wave, I could be dead by Christmas!

[broncofan]

But who knows, if there is a second wave, I could be dead by Christmas!
I hope you're safe. We'd miss you here if you got sick. I think you did get a bit lucky because so many people got sick right around that mid-March period.

My parents are retired and were vacationing in Florida. Around February 28th I flipped out at them. I told them that if this spreads they'll have no time to get back and if they get sick they won't know any doctors to admit them to the hospital. They were very reluctant to come back bc they had a hotel booked for the entire months of March and April but finally agreed, thinking they were making a concession to me. They drove 1200 miles or so to get back to Pittsburgh. They were fortunate not to get sick but it would have been worse if they waited. Their Florida hotel kicked everyone out late March or so anyway.

Blackchubby-I haven't been nearly as productive at home as I am at work. I miss talking to people at work and though I have a printer scanner copier at home I kind of suck with troubleshooting. But work hasn't been the same either as our hours are a bit staggered and we don't sit and talk as much.

As for handwashing, I was a bit crazy for the first week and a half. Then I thought, eh, I just can't control this. I'm at home, my house is probably clean, and I can't be perfect.

I also did not go to any of the BLM protests in Pittsburgh. I am supportive of them but was worried about getting sick and even though they were peaceful I think they still got doused in pepper spray. But I'd say covid kept me away.

[Stavros]

The other breaking news this morning (it is 03.55am here) is the claim that evidence now exists that suggests (proves?) Covid 19 is man-made, but leaked accidentally from the Wuhan lab. The claim is based on the argument in an academic paper following an analysis of the data by two Professors, one in London and the other in Norway, which claims that the earliest known cases were not related to the wet-market in Wuhan, and that in the Genome Sequence the Chinese presented to the WHO dna traces were inserted that are not natural, thus-.

A new article in The Guardian today dismisses the conspiracy claim referred to above, and does so on the basis that research going back several years has discovered that-

"Contrary to the idea that Chinese scientists deliberately released the virus, existing patterns of infection suggest that the wide spread of Covid-19 was a question of when, not if. Only a handful of people work on bat coronaviruses in labs in China, and they wear masks and gloves so as not to contaminate their laboratories. In 2018, we conducted a pilot survey of people living in rural Yunnan province and found nearly 3% had antibodies for bat coronaviruses (https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Virologica-Sinica-SARSr.pdf). Expanding this data to cover the densely populated area in southeast Asia where there are bats known to harbour coronaviruses, we can safely estimate that between one and seven million people are infected with bat coronaviruses each year."
The full article is here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/09/conspiracies-covid-19-lab-false-pandemic

[broncofan]

The WHO put out a statement yesterday that was very unclear and which a lot of virologist and epidemiologists are strongly disagreeing with. They said that asymptomatic spread of Covid is extremely rare. What virologists are saying is that a distinction needs to be made between people who are truly asymptomatic, meaning they get covid and never get symptoms, and those who are pre-symptomatic, meaning they will get symptoms but it is during the incubation period after infection when they are not yet symptomatic.

Most virologists have said they think quite a lot of transmission is occurring from people who are presymptomatic. In fact, there's one study swabbing the backs of people's throats and finding the highest concentration of virus on the first day of symptoms. The WHO did not release data with this statement and it's not even clear what they said is true with respect to true asymptomatics.

Anyhow, many people interpreted what they said to mean that only people with symptoms are spreading the virus. This is extremely unlikely to be true, but believing it's true might make people think they're safer than they really are around others outside their household. Hopefully they issue a clarification.

Edit: For those who are interested this is a good thread from the director of Harvard Global Health Institute https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1270069131652427776

[trish]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in sharing but ...

Between working on physics and mathematics, or playing music, or hiking, biking or just plain sitting on my porch reading it has always been pretty easy for me to find ways to occupy myself without the company of others.

I don’t worry too much about transmission from surfaces. I don’t wash my mail or leave my Amazon purchases sit. I do wash my hands after handling. I don’t wear a mask outdoors (unless protesting) but I always have one with me in case. I do wear it in public indoor spaces. I know people who haven’t been to the grocery store in months. I’m guessing they’re the one’s who initially bought up all the toilet paper. I gotta visit the grocery store every week. A girl can’t live without wine, beer and a good eggplant or two.

I’m not in quarantine but my live interactions with people are largely constrained to a small “bubble” of friends. But that’s not all that different for me from life as usual.

[blackchubby38]

The WHO put out a statement yesterday that was very unclear and which a lot of virologist and epidemiologists are strongly disagreeing with. They said that asymptomatic spread of Covid is extremely rare. What virologists are saying is that a distinction needs to be made between people who are truly asymptomatic, meaning they get covid and never get symptoms, and those who are pre-symptomatic, meaning they will get symptoms but it is during the incubation period after infection when they are not yet symptomatic.

Most virologists have said they think quite a lot of transmission is occurring from people who are presymptomatic. In fact, there's one study swabbing the backs of people's throats and finding the highest concentration of virus on the first day of symptoms. The WHO did not release data with this statement and it's not even clear what they said is true with respect to true asymptomatics.

Anyhow, many people interpreted what they said to mean that only people with symptoms are spreading the virus. This is extremely unlikely to be true, but believing it's true might make people think they're safer than they really are around others outside their household. Hopefully they issue a clarification.

Edit: For those who are interested this is a good thread from the director of Harvard Global Health Institute https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1270069131652427776

I saw that WHO statement on Twitter last night before it was immediately taken down. Then I heard today the representative from WHO clarifying what she meant to say.

Look I don't want to sound like I'm disparaging the World Heath Organization. But they have to make sure they do a better job at making statements about Covid 19. Because even my initial reaction to claim that it was rare for asymptomatic to spread disease was, "WTF". So imagine what someone's reaction who has been dismissive about the whole situation is going to be.

[broncofan]

I saw that WHO statement on Twitter last night before it was immediately taken down. Then I heard today the representative from WHO clarifying what she meant to say.

Look I don't want to sound like I'm disparaging the World Heath Organization. But they have to make sure they do a better job at making statements about Covid 19. Because even my initial reaction to claim that it was rare for asymptomatic to spread disease was, "WTF". So imagine what someone's reaction who has been dismissive about the whole situation is going to be.
I have a family member who sent a mass text to everyone based on the WHO statement that said good news, unless someone's feeling sick they can't give it to you. They didn't come out and say that but that was the gist. My first thought was there's no way we've spent two months having 35000 new infections per day if only people with sore throats and hacking coughs were transmitting it. We're stupid but we're not that stupid.

That's a pretty sizeable fuck up bc people's response to it was predictable. And if presymptomatic transmission is indeed 40-60% like some virologists estimate, even worse.

[broncofan]

I don’t worry too much about transmission from surfaces. I don’t wash my mail or leave my Amazon purchases sit. I do wash my hands after handling.
Very interesting Trish. I think you and Blackchubby and Stavros probably have the more "healthy" view on this whereas Knighthawk and I take the slightly neurotic approach. Don't worry Knighthawk I don't think neurotic is an insult!

There is a difference between a theoretical risk and a practical risk. In hospital settings where there's tons of virus everywhere and on hard, nonporous surfaces, transmission from contaminated objects probably does occur. On softer, porous surfaces, it is possible but probably not likely. The fact that you wash your hands after you handle the objects and mail is more than sufficient. When I leave a package outside, I am calming an anxiety about something remote and very unlikely.

I think your first paragraph sort of gets at the root of who has had more trouble with some of the public health measures and who hasn't. I have a good friend who had a kidney and pancreas transplant who goes to the store (like three times a week), who socializes outside his home, when getting covid-19 would likely kill him since he's on immunosuppressants. Yet for me, I miss banter, and eye contact, and laughing but not that much.

Yet I do kind of yearn for all of this to be over. That's why I obsess about the vaccines and treatments. Dr. Fauci, who is not known for making rash or politically motivated statements, said he does think a January date is possible for a vaccine if everything goes exactly right. Of course, there are obvious risks in moving before there's good enough safety data.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/01/anthony-fauci-on-covid-19-reopenings-vaccines-and-moving-at-warp-speed/ (https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/01/anthony-fauci-on-covid-19-reopenings-vaccines-and-moving-at-warp-speed/)

[trish]

Just want you to know that I do wash each eggplant thoroughIy before use.

I streamed The Navigator: A Medieval Odyssey the other night. The scene (spoiler alert) where Conner is discovered to have brought the black death back to the village - whether intentional or not - seemed like a real betrayal. The last thing I want to do is give the virus to someone vulnerable. It reminded me that our “social bubbles” are sacred trusts. Everyone in them should be cognizant of each other’s risky behaviors.

[fred41]

Always enjoyed being a bit of a loner so the day to day stuff isn’t killing me...I don’t crave large groups of people and never have. I wear a mask, because it’s necessary to do so to get into almost any store and it makes others more secure. For the most part I don’t even mind wearing one - once I switched to the cloth ones. I used to wear nitrile gloves (the black ones tattoo artists use cause they look cooler than the others..lol), but now, because it’s Summer and too hot and humid - only on subways cause they’re icky...and stores that require them. When you think about it - your mask protects others, but your gloves protect you.

When I cook, I use way more dried herbs and alternatives to raw vegetables, not cause it’s safer, but it’s often easier and quicker. But I really miss eating in restaurants, going to concerts and music performances (I’ve had four shows cancelled so far this year, and interestingly enough..haven’t been refunded for any of them yet)..and going to the gym. I have a terrific small gym only two blocks away and spent a lot of time there. to replace it I use power blocks and some basic calisthenics, but I’m getting a bit soft because I do almost no cardio anymore...I hate running outside in the city and I don’t have room for an Exercycle. I cut my own hair which isn’t so hard as long as you keep it short and use a fade in the back instead of a hard line. I’m thinking about doing it myself from now on, but it’s messy and I like my regular barber - his cut isn’t noticeably better, but I knew I liked going to him because normally, in the past, I avoided conversation from other barbers, but with Mike I often initiate it. Also, he keeps a big turtle in the shop and shows new movies on his screen. I appreciate stores that managed to stay open so I spread my consumerism around and use all the local ones. I have at least four liquor stores around so I switch them up regardless of price differences. I even discovered some great local businesses that I wouldn't have if it wasn’t for Covid - such as a local health food store that sells awesome salmon burgers.

Initially I feared the virus, because I needed to interact with my Dad, but now I can’t and he’s already had it anyhow. Other than that, I only fear it like any nuisance such as a cold. Whenever I get a cold, flu, bronchitis it’s never been life threatening - just the coughing part always lasts a long time. I’ve had pneumonia once or twice but that wasn’t that bad either. I do wash my hands when I get home but usually in a perfunctory way.

But I’m tired of this. All the beautiful advantages to NYC - countless restaurants, bars, clubs, shows...all moot because of this. It’s the only reason some folks pay such high taxes to live here, and now....for what? I’ve understandably had an outside stadium concert cancelled...but it’s okay to congregate shoulder to shoulder at a protest. I’ve had one protest right off my block. It was peaceful, but you can definitely tell some people were just there because it’s the only show in town, with the added advantage that many take place in parks...and let’s face it, if some of those stores were open for business and occupied, there wouldn’t have been as much looting. Sad.

On another note, what do you folks think about what’s going on in Seattle? (Obviously no need to answer if it’s over by the time you read this..lol).

[fred41]

So I wake up this morning to a beautiful day - not as humid so I turned the window fan off (I still didn’t get the A/C Home Depot was supposed to deliver two weeks ago - delayed because of Covid they said grrr.), I open the newspaper (well the app anyway) and what do I see: https://nypost.com/2020/06/12/hundreds-pack-st-marks-place-to-drink-despite-coronavirus/
We’re you there Blackchubby38 ? Lol.
12554711255472

[broncofan]

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/06/11/coronavirus-vaccine-update-june-11

Here's an update on vaccines. Moderna has released more data. Insiders at Moderna were accused of using the safety trials to paint a rosy picture to pump the stock price and sell. I don't know whether that's true but the data has been generally good, though one person had an adverse reaction and got sick at the highest dose of their vaccine and they're going with an intermediate strength dose. I had read elsewhere that Moderna plans to begin the Phase 3 in July with 30,000 people.

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/06/09/lots-of-coronavirus-antibody-news

And here's a blog post from a few days ago about monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies can be used prophylactically or as a treatment and most of the companies are testing them for both purposes. Derek Lowe makes the point here that it's not just a matter of what's most effective clinically but what dose is required to be effective because manufacturing ability for them is limiting. Many of these are entering human trials now and a few companies have already set target dates for early fall. I may have posted this before but antibody treatments were very effective in ebola, a much more deadly disease, so there is hope they can be a good bridge to a vaccine. Regeneron's antibody cocktail brought Ebola's survival rate from about 50% to 94% when their antibodies were administered early so there is history of their effective use in infectious diseases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REGN-EB3

[blackchubby38]

What's the point of doing contact tracing if you can't ask the person where they have been and/or who they have seen.

[fred41]

What's the point of doing contact tracing if you can't ask the person where they have been and/or who they have seen.
You’re right it’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m assuming you’re talking about policy such as this:
https://nypost.com/2020/06/15/coronavirus-contact-tracers-wont-ask-if-new-yorkers-attended-protests/

I’m assuming the protests, even though they’re held outside, will have an affect, especially since people are often shoulder to shoulder and often screaming without masks. If this turns out to be true, we deserve to know, because it will play into statistics used by medical authorities.

[broncofan]

The incubation period for the virus is on average five days. There's a lot of variation and it can be much longer. If it averages five days then some people will have an incubation period shorter than that. I'm a bit surprised that in Pittsburgh, which is in Allegheny County, we haven't had an uptick at all and it's been long enough for at least some cases to show up. Random factoid: during the 1918 Flu Pandemic, Pittsburgh had the highest number of deaths per capita of any other city. We're doing much better during covid and the other day had 7 new cases in a county with 1.2 million people.

I agree with Fred and Blackchubby. I understand some people are paranoid about the way statistics and electronic data on their whereabouts can invade their privacy. The privacy invasion of telling health authorities where you've been after you get sick is really minimal. Protesters are not going to be put on lists or subject to surveillance for protesting police brutality and it's very important data.

Health authorities are still trying to figure out what kinds of events are super spreader events, whether being outdoors mitigates some of the danger of being close to other people. It's essential information and with very little risk of misuse. Once again, De Blasio is faced with a pretty easy decision and gets it wrong while trying to prove some point. This is a guy who really shouldn't be in charge of anything...

[broncofan]

And I'm not trying to jump on the anti-De Blasio bandwagon because everyone in NYC thinks he sucks. Every decision he makes is like this. This isn't even a close call is it?

[blackchubby38]

The incubation period for the virus is on average five days. There's a lot of variation and it can be much longer. If it averages five days then some people will have an incubation period shorter than that. I'm a bit surprised that in Pittsburgh, which is in Allegheny County, we haven't had an uptick at all and it's been long enough for at least some cases to show up. Random factoid: during the 1918 Flu Pandemic, Pittsburgh had the highest number of deaths per capita of any other city. We're doing much better during covid and the other day had 7 new cases in a county with 1.2 million people.

I agree with Fred and Blackchubby. I understand some people are paranoid about the way statistics and electronic data on their whereabouts can invade their privacy. The privacy invasion of telling health authorities where you've been after you get sick is really minimal. Protesters are not going to be put on lists or subject to surveillance for protesting police brutality and it's very important data.

Health authorities are still trying to figure out what kinds of events are super spreader events, whether being outdoors mitigates some of the danger of being close to other people. It's essential information and with very little risk of misuse. Once again, De Blasio is faced with a pretty easy decision and gets it wrong while trying to prove some point. This is a guy who really shouldn't be in charge of anything...

And lets be perfectly honest about something:

Once we all agreed that we were going to shut down the country, let governments decide who was an essential worker/business and who/what wasn't, issue stay at home orders, made wearing a mask mandatory in public, instituted curfews, fired tear gas at protesters, etc. all for the greater good, we basically said we were okay with giving up some of our rights and liberties.

Why should telling a contact tracer in order to keep track of the pandemic be any different.

[broncofan]

I'm not discounting the role local politicians can have in preventing Covid outbreaks, but there is some randomness about the timing and severity of outbreaks. Early on, NYC had one of the worst regional outbreaks in the country while much of the South was spared. Now we're seeing Florida, Arizona, and Texas have enormous spikes in cases.

The one common denominator is that we have a federal government that has decided to portray public health as a liberal concern. It's understandable that people would want shutdowns to be lifted along with improvements in case numbers but is there any reason we don't have bipartisan, nearly unanimous support for mask-wearing?

I read from one epidemiologist that significant compliance with mask-wearing in public can bring R0 to close to 1 or below 1 by itself. The President refuses to wear a mask despite the fact that he's not similarly situated to others. Everyone around him gets tested, he forces others to wear a mask around him, but doesn't lead by example.

There are some on the far right, like literal militia nuts and Ron and Rand Paul, who think requiring people to wear masks during a pandemic violates the Constitution, but I don't know of any Constitutional scholar who has argued as much. Maybe we can Alan Dershowitz to say a thing or two about this tyrannical, yet so far mostly voluntary request that is both reasonable and life-saving.

I see a toll in human life that is completely avoidable and involves no trade-off at all and don't understand how others aren't bothered by it. When Florida has 3000 new cases in a day, you know that means given our cfr that about 150 will end up dying?

[blackchubby38]

And I'm not trying to jump on the anti-De Blasio bandwagon because everyone in NYC thinks he sucks. Every decision he makes is like this. This isn't even a close call is it?

The one thing that can make a crisis worse is poor leadership. De Blasio falls into category.

Deblasio has found himself between a rock and hard place. He is a progressive that initially got himself elected because he promised he was going to end "stop and frisk" and reform the NYPD. The relationship between him and the department was fractured from the beginning. There was the infamous incident where cops turned their back on him when he visited two of them in the hospital after they had been shot in the line of duty.

Fast forward to the events that took place in the wake of George Floyd's death. While I don't condone all of the actions of the NYPD during the riots and looting, I understand them. Deblasio apparently felt the same way and even defended some of their actions in his press conferences. Which led people who can be considered his supporters to criticize him and even complain that he hadn't done enough when it came to the reforming the NYPD. In a twisted case of deja vu, at an event honoring Floyd, people turned their back on Deblasio when he started speaking.

I think that's why he issued the mandate about contact tracers not being able to ask people if they were at a protest rally. He is trying to get some credibility back with his base. Even though it flies against everything he championed when he was talking about combating Corona-virus.

[holzz]

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-bolsonaros-brazil-surpasses-1-million-covid-19-cases-2020-6?r=US&IR=T

This man is a wasteman.
His "little flu" is fucking up his country.

I wonder whyhe hate LGBT peopel so much. I reckon at Rio Carnival, he hooked up with some guy and he got turned down since he didn't douche and the guy didn't want shit on his dick. No other reason. A lot of homophobic politicians tend to be down low gay anyhow. Some trans escort should snoop out a story saying he blew her or she topped him.

[Stavros]

Gathering together up to 20,000 people at the Tulsa rally must be an opportunity to test them, and if free of the virus to track them back to the place they came from, and monitor them in case they fall ill with it, and then trace the people they have been in contact with, in order to assess the impact of the rallly. Oklahoma is one of the States where cases are rising on a daily basis, so if they can't stop the trally, they should at least monitor its impact on public health.

[blackchubby38]

Gathering together up to 20,000 people at the Tulsa rally must be an opportunity to test them, and if free of the virus to track them back to the place they came from, and monitor them in case they fall ill with it, and then trace the people they have been in contact with, in order to assess the impact of the rallly. Oklahoma is one of the States where cases are rising on a daily basis, so if they can't stop the trally, they should at least monitor its impact on public health.

Actually it was closer to 6,200 people. So it shouldn't be that hard to test and trace them.

[Stavros]

Millions watched online streaming, Millions. As for Tulsa, attendees would have been close to a million had Patriotic Americans not been intimidated and threatened by a phalanx of Leftists, Ultra-Leftists, Marxists, Marxist-Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Posadists -never forget the Posadists-, Anarchists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Muslims, and of course, the Black Panthers. Or maybe that's fake news.

Meanwhile, Covid-19 cases in Oklahoma continue to rise each day...and that's not a joke.

[broncofan]

Millions watched online streaming, Millions. As for Tulsa, attendees would have been close to a million had Patriotic Americans not been intimidated and threatened by a phalanx of Leftists, Ultra-Leftists, Marxists, Marxist-Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Posadists -never forget the Posadists-, Anarchists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Muslims, and of course, the Black Panthers. Or maybe that's fake news.

Meanwhile, Covid-19 cases in Oklahoma continue to rise each day...and that's not a joke.
:tongue::D

Cases in Oklahoma, California, Arizona, and Florida are very worrisome. The governor of Florida is a guy named Desantis who has been a Trump ass kisser from the beginning of the pandemic. He was late closing beaches and early opening up the state and for a long time Florida's numbers were very good. They are now spiking and starting to get a bit out of control.

There was talk about warm weather slowing transmission a little bit, which is speculative but plausible. It's interesting though, that if you're in a state that's extremely hot and uncomfortably humid like Florida, the weather can bring you inside. The difference in transmission between being inside and outside is probably much greater than differences in temperature and humidity.

But Florida's spiking numbers have also put the lie to some people's claim that countries that were able to control their outbreaks had advantages in climate. If people congregate indoors together, and distancing breaks down, numbers spike.

[filghy2]

Cases in Oklahoma, California, Arizona, and Florida are very worrisome. The governor of Florida is a guy named Desantis who has been a Trump ass kisser from the beginning of the pandemic. He was late closing beaches and early opening up the state and for a long time Florida's numbers were very good. They are now spiking and starting to get a bit out of control.

One of the Australian states has recently reimposed some restrictions in response to a surge in new cases of around 15-20 per day (out of a population of more than 6 million). The US is still getting 20,000-30,000 new cases per day, yet many of your politicians seem to be acting as if this virus is no longer a big concern.

The US is looking like an outlier among developing countries in its inability to control this virus. Apart from Sweden (which has been conducting its own experiment with limited restrictions) I think just about every other developed country has been able to reduce the rate of new cases to a fraction of its peak level back in March-April. It's not just because you are doing so much testing either - I saw somewhere that the percentage of positive tests in the US is relatively quite high.

Colder weather does not appear to have had much effect on transmission rates in Australia and New Zealand either.

It has been about a month since the last Covid-19 death here, so the sense of danger has definitely diminished. I must admit when I read about the recent outbreaks my main concern is what it might mean for my holiday plans. I like to go somewhere warmer during the winter but at the moment I can't even go to the warmer states in Australia because their borders are still closed.

[broncofan]

Back in January I had made big travel plans for this summer and was looking forward to them but by March knew it wasn't going to happen.

When this is under control and we've been vaccinated we really have to do a post-mortem. The mistakes and missed opportunities are too numerous to keep track of.

The most obvious thing is there's just too much pressure on governors not to do their jobs and we have no federal leadership. I've mentioned this but my county has 1.2 million people and had about 10 cases the other day. It contains the city of Pittsburgh, which has reasonable population density so it's not an outlier in that regard.

So that's the basis for my view that if we'd done a good job we'd have about 5000 new cases a day nationwide. It's not as good as many places, but the 30,000 number shows poor national leadership. Once one place is under control there's an explosion elsewhere.

As you say, increased testing doesn't explain everything. It might mean our cfr will be lower for this 30,000 than it was when we had 30,000 two months ago, but percentage positives have started climbing.

I know there are those reading this who understand we've done a poor job but think maybe public health recommendations strike the wrong balance between safety and individual choice. What have we gained by doing a poor job? Is there some benefit I've missed that offsets the loss of life? Is our economy better?

And on the right, all these people worried about the tyranny of being forced to wear a mask inside while applauding the President when he fires inspectors general, cripples the Justice Department, and threatens to use the military against protesters.

[filghy2]

I know there are those reading this who understand we've done a poor job but think maybe public health recommendations strike the wrong balance between safety and individual choice. What have we gained by doing a poor job? Is there some benefit I've missed that offsets the loss of life? Is our economy better?

And on the right, all these people worried about the tyranny of being forced to wear a mask inside while applauding the President when he fires inspectors general, cripples the Justice Department, and threatens to use the military against protesters.

I haven't seen too many reputable economists arguing for early ending of restrictions. Most of them understand that there can't be a sustained economic recovery unless the virus is brought under control, otherwise many people will continue to avoid activities that might expose them.

It's not even clear that this approach has been good politics. Trump's best chance for reelection would be to have things significantly improving by November, but the current approach seems to have made that unlikely. That's the problem with immersing yourself in a delusional bubble - you become incapable of making informed judgements even about your own self-interest.

Surely you are not suggesting that those principled defenders of liberty only care about themselves and don't mind a bit of tyranny if it's directed towards people they don't like?

[broncofan]

It's not even clear that this approach has been good politics. Trump's best chance for reelection would be to have things significantly improving by November, but the current approach seems to have made that unlikely.
Explaining to people that the economy is not saved by opening bowling alleys has somehow not been easy. It is probably more cost-efficient to pay some places to stay closed than to have a dozen or so of their patrons in the icu.

I don't know enough economics to understand this macro issue but isn't the global economy interdependent enough that even if we act like there isn't a deadly virus circulating and get local commerce going there can still be a global recession that impacts us like everyone else?

Watching Republicans accuse Fauci of spooking the markets has been painful. I don't think Trump understands what the stock market is. It is the aggregate of publicly traded companies whose share price is based on expectations people have about their future earnings. Every piece of news can shift people's beliefs about the future profitability of these companies and if you have to sell your shares, the losses are very real. But I can't imagine anything as self-defeating as basing policy decisions on the vain hope that stock market participants are pricing in only the news you want them to. That's a disaster for our long-term well-being and probably not good for the market in the long run either because you're not taking the actions that can enable these businesses to succeed.

[filghy2]

Watching Republicans accuse Fauci of spooking the markets has been painful.

Perhaps they should also withdraw funding from the IMF, who are now predicting that the US economy will contract by 8% this year. The stock market still seems to be overoptimistic about the likelihood of a quick recovery.

[broncofan]

9000 cases in Florida today. It's pretty scary what's going on because unlike NYC at the height of its outbreak they're not actually closing down. I don't know how any American can look at the outcomes we've gotten compared to the rest of the world and not conclude that we screwed this up. And the screw up is measured in tens of thousands of lives. Not sure what else there is to say....people just don't remember what exponential growth looks like...

[broncofan]

I don't know whether to put this in this thread or the next thread down but it made me laugh a bit. Project Lincoln for those who don't know are Republicans against Trump. They've made some very effective ads against him as well.

https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1276596849290461184?s=20 (https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1276596849290461184?s=20)

[broncofan]

I'm a bit surprised that in Pittsburgh, which is in Allegheny County, we haven't had an uptick at all and it's been long enough for at least some cases to show up. Random factoid: during the 1918 Flu Pandemic, Pittsburgh had the highest number of deaths per capita of any other city. We're doing much better during covid and the other day had 7 new cases in a county with 1.2 million people.
Not super important to the general purpose of the thread but I figured since I wrote this about a week ago I should write an update. Today we had 96 new cases and according to our governor's own criteria we probably should be closing things down again. I'm sure he's afraid of that politically, but going from less than a dozen cases a day to close to a hundred in a week is what we call exponential growth. And if you would see the people I encounter taking totally needless risks. The guy who lives next to me talking to everyone who walks by without a mask and from a foot away. Would it hurt to limit your interactions to close contacts? Would it hurt to wear a mask? Would it hurt to stand a few feet away?

[Stavros]

I appreciate your frustration -in the two main supermarkets in town, with arrows on the floor pointing in one direction to minimise human contact it is common to find someone walking towards you in the wrong direction, with even people of my age or older not wearing a mask. Now one supermarket has abandoned the arrow scheme, though they still limit the number of customers allowed in to the shop, and I don't mind queuing to get in.

But, as the rules on isolation are relaxed further -in the UK on July 4th, ha ha- there is a fear that people 'liberated' will go shopping mad, and attempts by cafes and pubs to restrict movements will fail, and so on. Moreover, we now have what might be an emerging trend -the city of Leicester has seen such a large spike in new infections the Goverment is thinking of locking it down -though the shambles that is decision making means that while the Home Secretary has said it is an option, the Conservative MP for Leicester South "told the BBC's The World This Weekend he felt there was "no suggestion" a lockdown was about to happen", while the Labour MP for Leicester East "has called for a lockdown due to a "perfect storm" of poverty, positive tests and higher ethnic diversity". Unity is strength, hence the weakness.
I wonder if this is how Governments will try to manage the relaxation of restrictions with geographically specific spikes -but how can they lock down Leicester, a city of over 300,000?

It makes me wonder if the Republican Convention can take place in Florida; if Texas can be 'shut down', because other than as an act of personal choice, it appears that new infections are rising in the southern States, but direct action by the State Government is not managing what might become a crisis in hospital care. It does appear that new cases in South Korea, China and New Zealand are being handled efficiently -not sure about Germany where there seems to be a link between abattoirs and meat packing plants and new cases. But national and local economies cannot be shut down indefinitely. I suspect we may have to try and manage a permanent presence of Covid 19 at a high level before any vaccine successfully lessens its impact, if it does. And that could be six months to a year.
I cant say I am impressed with Boris Johnson's handling of this problem, just as he seems to be negotiating a Brexit deal with the EU that is superficial and ignores deep problems with trade and services and rights. It is possible that he is even as bored with this major policy issue as the US President, as both are known to have little interest in policy detail, though at least Johnson, often criticised for beng AWOL, does not insult us by playing golf in the middle of a national crisis. I think both men have given up on the politics, and are hoping they can take any credit for any successes that happen, but are now dependent on science to do what politics cannot.

[broncofan]

I think it was clear about 6 weeks into lockdown that people wanted restrictions to be reduced. Local governments kept talking about finding ways to loosen restrictions and open up without causing a spike in cases.

If we had contact tracing, which I understand is a staple of infectious disease control, we would have some sense what sorts of activities were leading to spikes in cases.

It may be that certain businesses, like bars, cannot safely open because the entire purpose of the business is for people to fraternize with people they don't know. Other businesses, on the other hand, can open up if they have safety protocols and people are required to wear masks.

Part of the problem is not just that politicians are not being led by public health experts, but that the public is not being educated about relative risk. There is no such thing as zero risk for most activities but some activities are on average so much more hazardous to the spread of the virus that you can't engage in them without causing outbreaks.

There are also measures people can take without any cost. It costs nothing to a person without breathing difficulty to wear a mask, to talk to someone from a distance, and to be somewhat cautious.

There is also the issue of "end-game" which was brought up here and which I heard brought up elsewhere. The question is, "will we have to live like this forever and if everyone is going to get sick anyway, why prolong it."

Two points:
1. If there is no effective treatment in the Fall, but the vaccine is ready for distribution by early next year, it will be unlikely that more than 20% of the public would be infected by that time. If we had done a better job it would be far lower than that. But the difference between 20% and 60% which is the low end estimate of herd immunity is substantial. Actually, with ifr of 1%, and 40% (the margin) of the population being about 120 million, could be a difference of over a million lives. There was never really an option to do nothing.

2. There is a reasonable chance that there is a somewhat effective antibody treatment approved and if we're lucky ready to be distributed by fall. Don't know how effective it will be, but I'd guess something shows statistically significant efficacy.

[Stavros]

I think it was clear about 6 weeks into lockdown that people wanted restrictions to be reduced. Local governments kept talking about finding ways to loosen restrictions and open up without causing a spike in cases.


This, in two sentences is the perfect summary of the dilemma decision makers have faced, and too often chosen to ignore, or convince themselves they can have freedom and responsibility at the same time. Even at this stage it seems people cannot understand how cruelly effective this virus is in passing from one person to another, and either don't understand or don't care that even if someone infected does not die, their lives may be impacted by health complications for years to come. David Miliband calls this the 'Age of Impunity', but maybe we are moving into an 'Age of Indifferece' in which other people's problems are dismised as irrelevant, even as the relevance of other people standing or sitting next to me on the bus or the train is undeniable -and in the rush hour (on the London Underground, for example) 'in your face', something most people never liked anyway. Is it any wonder people from large cities like London and New York are looking at re-locating to the suburbs and small towns?

[blackchubby38]

Hypothetically speaking, is this idea that I have seen on Twitter even feasibly possible:

Just shut everything down, suspend all mortgage and rent payments, give everybody $2k a month regardless of employment or means and call the rest of the year off. Otherwise we’re doomed.

[broncofan]

I know this thread is a bit all over the place but I came upon this explanation of different immune responses to the virus, from a professor, and it was the clearest explanation I've seen about what types of immune responses vaccine makers want to elicit. He said there seems to be a robust t cell response to covid, as opposed to antibody, which doesn't prevent reinfection but tends to be long-lasting and may prevent serious disease in reinfection. Anyhow, short thread, take a look.

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1277885591376535553 (https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1277885591376535553)


https://twitter.com/ScottGottliebMD/status/1277214331785142273

Here's Scott Gottlieb, former FDA head, saying he thinks vaccines will be available by early next year and with recommendations on virus suppression. For my part, I think the South should close, and places with early outbreaks need to start taking measures to control outbreaks, from mandatory mask wearing to closing certain kinds of businesses.

[Laphroaig]

Hypothetically speaking, is this idea that I have seen on Twitter even feasibly possible:

Just shut everything down, suspend all mortgage and rent payments, give everybody $2k a month regardless of employment or means and call the rest of the year off. Otherwise we’re doomed.

In a word no.

There will always be critical sectors required to work, utilities, health care, food supplies to name but three.

One thing I have seen on Twitter is a few posts resenting the fact that they've worked throughout this pandemic so far whilst others have "sat on their arse" or enjoyed themselves at the beach" while on furlough.

[blackchubby38]

In a word no.

There will always be critical sectors required to work, utilities, health care, food supplies to name but three.

One thing I have seen on Twitter is a few posts resenting the fact that they've worked throughout this pandemic so far whilst others have "sat on their arse" or enjoyed themselves at the beach" while on furlough.

I thought the idea was just wishful thinking. No only for the reasons that you have given, but there is no feasible way to pay for it and for a majority of people, $2,000 a month is not going take care of all of their expenses.

On a side note, you want to see a society quickly crumble, shut off the power. Then we will truly be in the middle of an apocalypse.

[blackchubby38]

I think it was clear about 6 weeks into lockdown that people wanted restrictions to be reduced. Local governments kept talking about finding ways to loosen restrictions and open up without causing a spike in cases.

If we had contact tracing, which I understand is a staple of infectious disease control, we would have some sense what sorts of activities were leading to spikes in cases.

It may be that certain businesses, like bars, cannot safely open because the entire purpose of the business is for people to fraternize with people they don't know. Other businesses, on the other hand, can open up if they have safety protocols and people are required to wear masks.

Part of the problem is not just that politicians are not being led by public health experts, but that the public is not being educated about relative risk. There is no such thing as zero risk for most activities but some activities are on average so much more hazardous to the spread of the virus that you can't engage in them without causing outbreaks.

There are also measures people can take without any cost. It costs nothing to a person without breathing difficulty to wear a mask, to talk to someone from a distance, and to be somewhat cautious.

There is also the issue of "end-game" which was brought up here and which I heard brought up elsewhere. The question is, "will we have to live like this forever and if everyone is going to get sick anyway, why prolong it."

Two points:
1. If there is no effective treatment in the Fall, but the vaccine is ready for distribution by early next year, it will be unlikely that more than 20% of the public would be infected by that time. If we had done a better job it would be far lower than that. But the difference between 20% and 60% which is the low end estimate of herd immunity is substantial. Actually, with ifr of 1%, and 40% (the margin) of the population being about 120 million, could be a difference of over a million lives. There was never really an option to do nothing.

2. There is a reasonable chance that there is a somewhat effective antibody treatment approved and if we're lucky ready to be distributed by fall. Don't know how effective it will be, but I'd guess something shows statistically significant efficacy.

There are certain industries that are going to be in more trouble with another lockdown and/or further restrictions:

Bars
Non-chain restaurants
Movie theaters
Hotels
Amusement Parks
Sporting events
Concerts.

Then when you factor in the symbiotic relationship that the leisure, dining, and travel industries have with other industries and with each other, the economic impact of a lockdown and restrictions gets even worse.

The key is trying to find a balance between saving as many lives of those who are at risk as we can, but at the same time protecting the majority of livelihoods and physical/mental well being of the rest of population.

If we can't do that for the industries that I have mentioned, then Congress may seriously have to consider a bailout for them.

As for what the endgame is. Remember it was about flattening the curve so the healthcare system wouldn't be overrun. It wasn't supposed to be about ceasing to live our lives.

[broncofan]

If we can't do that for the industries that I have mentioned, then Congress may seriously have to consider a bailout for them.

As for what the endgame is. Remember it was about flattening the curve so the healthcare system wouldn't be overrun. It wasn't supposed to be about ceasing to live our lives.
How do you think the U.S. is doing compared to the rest of the world? You can find some countries with more deaths per capita but they also faced earlier outbreaks, have much higher population density, and aren't seeing a second peak.

In my view the object should have been to find a balance between lives saved and quality of life with an emphasis on the former. The fact that there are countries with a fraction the number of deaths per capita who have not suffered any more economic hardship suggests that more aggressive action to save lives would have been better.

The people bringing up the question of endgame often weren't interested in what kinds of public health measures could mitigate the outbreaks, what kinds of treatments could reduce death rates, and what vaccines were in the pipeline that could end the crisis. The question was generally a rhetorical one proposing fatalism or its epidemiological equivalent, herd immunity....this would only make sense if modest public health efforts weren't very effective, if there weren't clinical trials taking place right now, and if we didn't have ongoing the greatest global effort in history to develop vaccines.

I agree that Congress should be acting aggressively to stave off economic hardship and to save industries that need bailouts in the meantime. For me personally, I look at the south and don't think that people bowling and going to bars is going to be viable for some time...I also don't think with reasonable stewardship you'd see outbreaks that large this late, but that's just me.

[blackchubby38]

How do you think the U.S. is doing compared to the rest of the world? You can find some countries with more deaths per capita but they also faced earlier outbreaks, have much higher population density, and aren't seeing a second peak.

In my view the object should have been to find a balance between lives saved and quality of life with an emphasis on the former. The fact that there are countries with a fraction the number of deaths per capita who have not suffered any more economic hardship suggests that more aggressive action to save lives would have been better.

The people bringing up the question of endgame often weren't interested in what kinds of public health measures could mitigate the outbreaks, what kinds of treatments could reduce death rates, and what vaccines were in the pipeline that could end the crisis. The question was generally a rhetorical one proposing fatalism or its epidemiological equivalent, herd immunity....this would only make sense if modest public health efforts weren't very effective, if there weren't clinical trials taking place right now, and if we didn't have ongoing the greatest global effort in history to develop vaccines.

I agree that Congress should be acting aggressively to stave off economic hardship and to save industries that need bailouts in the meantime. For me personally, I look at the south and don't think that people bowling and going to bars is going to be viable for some time...I also don't think with reasonable stewardship you'd see outbreaks that large this late, but that's just me.

I think as a whole, the country has done fine.

Total Cases.- 2,727,853
Deaths.- 130,122
Total Recovered.- 1,143,334
Active Cases.- 1,454,397
Serious Critical.- 15,935

I have read first hand what the Corona Virus has done to people. When the disease is at its worst, I wouldn't want mine or anyone's loved ones to suffer like that and most of time the patient wound up dying in the hospital.

But I have also read cases about people who have survived the worst and were discharged safely home. I have also read cases about people who weren't as bad as those in the ICU and/or required hospitalization and they recovered. Although they're still dealing with some lingering effects.

Then there have been the mild cases where people were treated as outpatients.

Could we have a done better job in preventing the spread of the disease, yes. Maybe states should have started locking down a week earlier than we did. Or maybe we should have locked everything for 2-3 weeks while we had companies manufacture enough masks for everyone and then slowly re-open with states requiring people wear them in public. While the most vulnerable of the population continued to shelter in place.

But overall, I'm okay with the job this country has done as whole.

Just out of curiosity, what aggressive actions would you have liked seen taken.

[broncofan]

Just out of curiosity, what aggressive actions would you have liked seen taken.
Sure I just want to respond to your belief that we're doing well.

The EU has a population of 446 million people. Below is a graph from a week ago of the EU's new cases compared to ours. At the time we had 25000 new cases per day. We now have more than 40000 a day.

https://twitter.com/profwolff/status/1275840862665072640

Remember when Italy was the worst hit country. Italy had 142 new cases today. We not only have more than 40000 new cases per day but are experiencing exponential growth in at least five states. We have 4% of the world's population and 25% of the deaths from covid. Doesn't that tell you something is wrong? Why should we be overrepresented in deaths per capita by 6X? Nearly every country that had an early outbreak like we did has far fewer new cases per capita.

So not only have we not done as well as the countries who have done the best job, we've done far worse than average. What do you think the consensus would be if we conducted a poll of epidemiologists and virologists from the top twenty research institutes in the country about the job we've done? I follow a bunch of them on twitter. I haven't seen one who thinks we've done even a reasonable job.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Here's what I think our response would have been had it been guided by public health experts instead of Trump:


Shut downs the first week of March running for six weeks. Contact tracing in the largest cities once we opened up. Some counties have tried to get those efforts started but the CDC should have marshalled their resources to help. Mandatory mask wearing in businesses. People attended a rally for Trump in Tulsa and most people weren't wearing masks. Mask wearing in public should have been a bipartisan norm and it's something public health experts have recommended for well over two months. As soon as epidemiologists realized there was presymptomatic spread mask wearing should have become mandatory except for people who literally cannot on account of some health condition.

Opening up businesses based on reaching benchmarks set for number of cases per million residents and when those benchmarks break down, closing businesses that have contributed to outbreaks. If you actually set benchmarks based on case numbers relative to population density, there are no surprises.

Mask wearing could save 5% of gdp. People are so concerned about businesses, then why aren't people wearing masks?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/30/mask-mandate-gdp-economy-goldman-sachs/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

Finally, what should signify that we're doing well is that we either have fewer deaths per capita than average or have fared better than other countries in some quality of life metric. Have we?

[blackchubby38]

Sure I just want to respond to your belief that we're doing well.

The EU has a population of 446 million people. Below is a graph from a week ago of the EU's new cases compared to ours. At the time we had 25000 new cases per day. We now have more than 40000 a day.

https://twitter.com/profwolff/status/1275840862665072640

Remember when Italy was the worst hit country. Italy had 142 new cases today. We not only have more than 40000 new cases per day but are experiencing exponential growth in at least five states. We have 4% of the world's population and 25% of the deaths from covid. Doesn't that tell you something is wrong? Why should we be overrepresented in deaths per capita by 6X? Nearly every country that had an early outbreak like we did has far fewer new cases per capita.

So not only have we not done as well as the countries who have done the best job, we've done far worse than average. What do you think the consensus would be if we conducted a poll of epidemiologists and virologists from the top twenty research institutes in the country about the job we've done? I follow a bunch of them on twitter. I haven't seen one who thinks we've done even a reasonable job.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Here's what I think our response would have been had it been guided by public health experts instead of Trump:


Shut downs the first week of March running for six weeks. Contact tracing in the largest cities once we opened up. Some counties have tried to get those efforts started but the CDC should have marshalled their resources to help. Mandatory mask wearing in businesses. People attended a rally for Trump in Tulsa and most people weren't wearing masks. Mask wearing in public should have been a bipartisan norm and it's something public health experts have recommended for well over two months. As soon as epidemiologists realized there was presymptomatic spread mask wearing should have become mandatory except for people who literally cannot on account of some health condition.

Opening up businesses based on reaching benchmarks set for number of cases per million residents and when those benchmarks break down, closing businesses that have contributed to outbreaks. If you actually set benchmarks based on case numbers relative to population density, there are no surprises.

Mask wearing could save 5% of gdp. People are so concerned about businesses, then why aren't people wearing masks?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/30/mask-mandate-gdp-economy-goldman-sachs/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

Finally, what should signify that we're doing well is that we either have fewer deaths per capita than average or have fared better than other countries in some quality of life metric. Have we?

Those are all reasonable actions that could have been taken. But do you think the shutdown should have been federally mandated, as in signed by an executive order by Trump. As for contact tracing, even if the CDC would have marshelled their resources you still would have an issue with people being hesitant to give up that information for a variety of reasons.

When the pandemic first started, public health experts were giving differing views as to whether or not people should wear masks. It took almost month here in New York State before Governor Cuomo made wearing a mask in public mandatory. I think that's why it took so long for masks to become mandatory.

As to why some people are not wearing them now. What I can tell you, some people are just idiots

As for what signifies how we are doing, I believe that measurement should be of how many people have recovered from the disease. Even with a vaccine, you are never going to have a zero infection rate. There are people who test positive that who will never develop symptoms.

But for the people who recover from the worst case scenarios that I talked about early, that is something that should give people hope.

[broncofan]

I'm not sure if the federal government could have mandated a shutdown but I think red states wouldn't have been as resistant to it if Trump wanted to do it. Here's what the American Bar Association says about the Constitutional issues. They seem to indicate Trump could have done it. Given the mood in the country and the fact that Republicans go lockstep with him, I don't think it would have been challenged.

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/

The messaging on the masks was bad at the beginning because presymptomatic spread hadn't been confirmed. Only n-95 respirators (and surgical masks to a lesser extent) are good at protecting the wearer from disease, but the idea was that if someone has it, they should not be out in public. Once the who and cdc realized it was spread by people without symptoms, it became apparent masks could prevent an infected person from spreading it. For that purpose even cloth masks work alright.

Studies have been out for a while about the effectiveness of mask wearing if there's a lot of compliance. Republicans have made it a cultural issue. It causes needless death to have so many people think it's a special freedom to go out in public without a mask.

I don't know about the feasibility of contact tracing but we are a fairly wealthy country and have agencies that had close to three months to get ready for it.

I think our main point of disagreement if we boil it down is on bars, concerts and the like. It does suck for bar owners and other proprietors. These are not normal times though and we've bailed out industries before.

[Laphroaig]

I thought the idea was just wishful thinking. No only for the reasons that you have given, but there is no feasible way to pay for it and for a majority of people, $2,000 a month is not going take care of all of their expenses.

On a side note, you want to see a society quickly crumble, shut off the power. Then we will truly be in the middle of an apocalypse.

As I understand it $1000 payments to people were made in the US but I don't know if that was a one off or how many qualified for the payments.

As it stands, in the UK around 9 million people are on furlough from work and being paid up to £2500 a month by the Government to sit at home. That scheme is due to last till the end of October, though there are changes to the company contributions to this starting from the beginning of August.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1116638/uk-number-of-people-on-furlough/

"As of June 28, 2020, approximately 9.3 million jobs, from 1.1 million different employers were furloughed in the United Kingdom as part of the government's job retention scheme. The scheme, introduced in response to the economic damage caused by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, covers 80 percent of an employees' usual monthly wage, up to 2.5 thousand British pounds a month.
How much does the scheme cost?
The UK government is estimated to have spent 20.8 billion British pounds on the job retention scheme, with that figure expected to rise to 80 billion by the time the program stops in October 2020. To pay for this scheme, among others, it is likely the government will have to resort to levels of borrowing not seen since the Second World War."


If as suggested, the furlough scheme has cost the UK Government £20 billion to date then that's still far less than the estimated £500 billion they spent to bail out the banks.

In addition to the furlough scheme there's similar support for the self-employed, if they have the tax returns to prove it.

Remove major bills like rent/mortgage and the vast majority should be capable of living on that, particularly when "non-essential" shops were closed, so spending was almost all on food and other necessities.


There's already talk of raising taxes to begin clawing back the cost of the scheme.

[Stavros]

I think as a whole, the country has done fine.

Total Cases.- 2,727,853
Deaths.- 130,122
Total Recovered.- 1,143,334
Active Cases.- 1,454,397
Serious Critical.- 15,935

I have read first hand what the Corona Virus has done to people. When the disease is at its worst, I wouldn't want mine or anyone's loved ones to suffer like that and most of time the patient wound up dying in the hospital.

But I have also read cases about people who have survived the worst and were discharged safely home. I have also read cases about people who weren't as bad as those in the ICU and/or required hospitalization and they recovered. Although they're still dealing with some lingering effects.

Then there have been the mild cases where people were treated as outpatients.

Could we have a done better job in preventing the spread of the disease, yes. Maybe states should have started locking down a week earlier than we did. Or maybe we should have locked everything for 2-3 weeks while we had companies manufacture enough masks for everyone and then slowly re-open with states requiring people wear them in public. While the most vulnerable of the population continued to shelter in place.

But overall, I'm okay with the job this country has done as whole.

Just out of curiosity, what aggressive actions would you have liked seen taken.

Blackchubby38, your post offers a rational perspective, and it is important that you present the perspective in the most general terms. This is not an attack on your argument, but when the devil is, as always in the detail, I think the alarming aspects of the Pandemic are the ways in which specific social groups fare worse or better than others, the most obvious being the bias against elderly people, particularly if they have pre-existing health problems, the elderly in care homes, front-line health workers, and the poor.

When these segments are analysed a range of factors emerge:
--front-line health workers have been but always are vulnerable to the infections that exist in a hospital environment
-at the early stage in the UK there was criticism that front-line staff did not have adequate PPE
-care homes became incubators of the disease because vulnerable people were also likely to be less mobile than the average person: people clustered together in a relatively small space offering the virus unhindered opportunities to thrive
-the poor because they tend to have lower thresholds of immunity caused by degraded levels of nutrition, densely packed living spaces, and possibly, ignorance caused by an lack of English and thus an understanding of risks as declared by the local authority.

Just as important is the actual underestimation of cases, owing to the flawed collection of data. In Leicester, for example, which is now on 'Lockdown' -which seems to mean buildings rather than the town- the data gap is worth noting as it led to the Government taking this action-

"According to published data for Leicester, the city recorded just 80 new positive tests between June 13-26. But health secretary Matt Hancock revealed that there were in fact 944 as he announced the decision to tighten the lockdown in Leicester, closing non-essential shops and ordering schools to shut to all non-key worker pupils by Thursday. "
https://www.ft.com/content/301c847c-a317-4950-a75b-8e66933d423a

I suggest that a similar gap in data exists in the US which means, if true, that your statistical profile is inaccurate, and significantly worse than was previously thought, though this does not in general terms undermine your claim that the health professionals have done a good job.

If we can agree on anything it is that the Politicians have failed, that their reluctance to act quickly has caused more suffering and death than might have been. The US shut down on 9/11, nothing entered, nothing left, and it did not take a week or six weeks to do that. New York City shut down though rather obviously Lower Manhattan was in such disarray there were no alternatives, But, and this is the key: it happened, and it was immediate.

A virus can kill more than a terrorist event, and it has. We have been failed by a class of polticians more concerned with their prestigious jobs and the vast amounts of money owned by their sponsors and supporters. At a time when the State rather than the market is the foundation and key driver of national economies, Boris Johnson, announcing an 'ambitious' policy to spend billions of tax payers money to 'Build, Build, Build', likening his economic rejuventation plan to Roosevelt's New Deal felt obliged to make this monumental declaration: "I am not a Communist".

But with Central Planning the basis of policy making, all we need is for someone to call 'Build, Build, Build' (but not Billed) as what it looks like: A Five Year Plan.

https://i.etsystatic.com/6202694/r/il/b3818f/341823063/il_794xN.341823063.jpg

[blackchubby38]

As I understand it $1000 payments to people were made in the US but I don't know if that was a one off or how many qualified for the payments.

As it stands, in the UK around 9 million people are on furlough from work and being paid up to £2500 a month by the Government to sit at home. That scheme is due to last till the end of October, though there are changes to the company contributions to this starting from the beginning of August.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1116638/uk-number-of-people-on-furlough/

"As of June 28, 2020, approximately 9.3 million jobs, from 1.1 million different employers were furloughed in the United Kingdom as part of the government's job retention scheme. The scheme, introduced in response to the economic damage caused by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, covers 80 percent of an employees' usual monthly wage, up to 2.5 thousand British pounds a month.
How much does the scheme cost?
The UK government is estimated to have spent 20.8 billion British pounds on the job retention scheme, with that figure expected to rise to 80 billion by the time the program stops in October 2020. To pay for this scheme, among others, it is likely the government will have to resort to levels of borrowing not seen since the Second World War."


If as suggested, the furlough scheme has cost the UK Government £20 billion to date then that's still far less than the estimated £500 billion they spent to bail out the banks.

In addition to the furlough scheme there's similar support for the self-employed, if they have the tax returns to prove it.

Remove major bills like rent/mortgage and the vast majority should be capable of living on that, particularly when "non-essential" shops were closed, so spending was almost all on food and other necessities.


There's already talk of raising taxes to begin clawing back the cost of the scheme.

A majority of Americans received a stimulus check ranging anywhere from $1,200 (like me) to $4,500. Some people spent the money wisely. Other used it to stimulate the economy by going shopping. There has been talk of doing another round of stimulus.

Unemployment benefits were also raised. I have heard stories about some people making more money being unemployed than from the job that they were working at.

[filghy2]

The EU has a population of 446 million people. Below is a graph from a week ago of the EU's new cases compared to ours. At the time we had 25000 new cases per day. We now have more than 40000 a day.

This article has an up to date chart which shows the difference very starkly. The US is currently getting 6 times the number of new cases per capita as Europe and 12 times as many as Canada.
https://www.vox.com/2020/7/1/21308809/covid-19-coronavirus-2020-trump-election-polls-polarization
I guess it's lucky for you Americans that your government has bought up all that remdesevir.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-02/us-criticised-hoarding-coronavirus-covid19-drug-remdesivir/12414154

As I mentioned in the other thread, Australia had about the same number of cases per capita as the US in mid-March. Hence the initial conditions in terms of exposure to infections from abroad were similar. The advice from medical experts in both countries seems to have been broadly similar. That suggests that differences since then must be due to political decision-making and the willingness of the public to follow advice.

The outbreak in Melbourne I mentioned earlier has increased to over 70 new cases per day. The state authorities have reimposed lock-downs in the effected suburbs. Containing this virus is challenging even in an effective system where the politicians follow expert advice.

[filghy2]

When the pandemic first started, public health experts were giving differing views as to whether or not people should wear masks. It took almost month here in New York State before Governor Cuomo made wearing a mask in public mandatory. I think that's why it took so long for masks to become mandatory.

Interestingly, the medical authorities in Australia have not to date recommended wearing of masks by the general public. I would say no more than 10% of people I see in public have been wearing them. Obviously that's partly explained by the low infection rate, but whatever we did right to keep it low it wasn't mask-wearing.

[broncofan]

Obviously that's partly explained by the low infection rate, but whatever we did right to keep it low it wasn't mask-wearing.
Call it the rule of one. The public has to follow at least one public health recommendation to get any results.:tongue:

It's not right for us to hoard Remdesivir. It's neither here nor there but it doesn't have a proven life-saving benefit and Dexamethasone does. But obviously that shouldn't be the approach to a pandemic, but it may be a portent of things to come with the vaccine and other treatments as well.

[blackchubby38]

I have a correction to make. There have actually been 128,574 deaths in the United States according to John Hopkins University and not 130, 122 that I previously posted.

[broncofan]

I have a correction to make. There have actually been 128,574 deaths in the United States according to John Hopkins University and not 130, 122 that I previously posted.
I appreciate the attention to detail. I wouldn't be overly concerned that you made the U.S. death toll look worse than it actually is since we've likely undercounted by a substantial amount.

(https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200701125506.htm)https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/01/official-us-coronavirus-death-toll-is-a-substantial-undercount-of-actual-tally-new-yale-study-finds.html

[broncofan]

Hospitalizations are rising and case numbers will probably be approaching 60,000 new cases per day this week. Florida, Texas, and Arizona are all going to have their ICU capacity tested before this is over.

Eric Trump recently took to twitter to tout a study on hydroxychloroquine that indicated it might have some benefit. If you look at the randomized controlled trials we've run, an enormous amount of time and energy has been wasted trying to prove this drug might have some marginal benefit.

There are five major companies in the U.S. testing monoclonal antibodies. If they are effective, their benefit should be easier to establish. Although our federal government is subsidizing vaccine manufacture and helping companies produce "at risk", meaning before efficacy and safety are proven, I don't think they've done the same with monoclonal antibodies. By the end of summer there will probably be a lot of data about whether they work but limited capacity to manufacture them.

Finally, I wanted to say that I pointed out that politically we've failed to heed the advice of public health experts but I didn't point out that this also shows up culturally and not just through policies. In a public health crisis, part of the job of those in office is to educate people about what their real risks are and how they can reasonably mitigate those risks. Trump has done nothing but sow confusion, spread misinformation, and undermine the public's trust in experts. We have not done a fine job, or a good job, or an average job, and that should be fairly obvious if we actually hold ourselves to the same standard as other industrialized countries.

[Stavros]

If the key to Covid 19 is that it is an airborne virus, logic suggests that all forms of human congregation pose a risk to someone, be it falling ill, or falling and then dying, just as many can congregate with no risk at all. As there has never been a vaccine for the Coronovirus family of illnesses, suppose we can neither contain Covid 19 nor develop a vaccine? The small cohort of victims of MERS, and the apparent 'disappearance' of SARS acted against the development of a vaccine, and even if one appears, it cannot become a 'magic bullet' in so short a time, here is Costello a few days ago-

The good news is that you’ve got more labs in the world looking for a vaccine for this virus than any other. They’ve got better techniques for designing vaccines and there’s a lot of money going into it. Having said that, they’ve never had a vaccine to a coronavirus. Vaccines usually take several years to develop because you’ve got to test the safety of it. And most worrying, it seems the immune response to the virus is not very good, and fades. That suggests any vaccine you come up with may have only short lasting immunity. For all those reasons I’m cautious. The people I respect say two years would be a possible time. My guess is that we may get a partially effective one a bit quicker.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/05/anthony-costello-world-health-organization-independent-sage-coronavirus

In the US and the UK the risks of relaxing physical distancing are only too evident, in England (not the whole of the UK) since the broader relaxation last Saturday, three pubs in different parts of the country have now shut again because they were responsible for new infections, so the question now is how goverments balance the economic needs of the country and the public health needs.

I fear that a cynical attitude is taking hold, call it 'Drop Dead, America' or 'Keep Calm and Carry on to the Graveyard' here. If the virus cannot be contained, it cannot be contained. If there is no vaccine, we are going to adapt to the continuation of risky behaviour, and higher rates of mortaity than before January 2020. With a President more concerned to manipulate divisions and open old wounds in the US than manage a healing process, and a Prime Minister as bored with Covid 19 as his American friend, and more concerned to 'Get Brexit Done', I see no political solution to Covid 19 as a public health issue other than, 'get used to it'. It is ironic is it not, that sociologists who predicted that with declining rates of regeneration in Europe, North America and parts of Asia the social cohort would become increasingly made up of people over the age of 50, that now they are the most vulnerable to die from Covid 19, but evidently not in Japan.

Maybe I am too negative, but I fear Covid 19 is going to be around for a few more years, and that the immunity that develops will be an immunity to social, rather than individual health.

[broncofan]

As the WHO director, he obviously knows more than I would if I had an additional 8 years of education in science. Yet I have seen some counterpoints to some of Costello's concerns about vaccines. As an alternative perspective consider the following:

Never been a coronavirus vaccine-the failure to develop a coronavirus vaccine was not the result of special challenges with that class of virus. As you point out, Sars was contained and Mers is very deadly but not highly transmissible so there was never a large demand for one. Vaccine testing requires fairly large cohorts but covid is circulating widely in some countries so inferences about whether the vaccines provide sterilizing immunity can be drawn more quickly.

It takes years to develop vaccines-it takes years when one or two approaches are tested at a time. In this case, as he points out, there are 100 different vaccines being tested, from RNA vaccines, to inactivated virus vaccines, to subunit vaccines, to adenoviral vector vaccines. The timeline has been condensed, which means if one is approved by next year, we might not know all of the risks, especially those on the order of one in a million, but with cohorts of 30,000 some of the more common complications like antibody dependent enhancement would likely show up.

The immune response is not very good-99% of people who get infected clear the virus so the immune response must be doing something.

There is a concern about the durability of the neutralizing antibody response. Titers of these antibodies seem to wane after a few months. On the other hand, the fact that neutralizing antibody titers are much lower after several months does not rule out the possibility of a more durable t cell response. Here's one article on this subject, but I'll see if I can find more.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/sars-cov-2-reactive-t-cells-found-in-patients-with-severe-covid-19-67695

If a vaccine is approved by early next year it is unlikely we will know the durability of the immune response to it. If it provides sterilizing immunity and there is widespread vaccination it can help countries eradicate the virus. If on the other hand it only prevents serious illness but not infection or if there is not widespread vaccination because the public lacks confidence in the approval process for the vaccines we might find out that boosters are required.

I don't know anything for certain and don't want to overstate my confidence but many of the scientists I've paid attention to are slightly more optimistic. Of course, it's possible Costello is right and I'm sure there are plenty of scientists who agree with him about the timeline.

[broncofan]

There is a concern about the durability of the neutralizing antibody response. Titers of these antibodies seem to wane after a few months. On the other hand, the fact that neutralizing antibody titers are much lower after several months does not rule out the possibility of a more durable t cell response. Here's one article on this subject, but I'll see if I can find more.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/sars-cov-2-reactive-t-cells-found-in-patients-with-severe-covid-19-67695


Here's what Nobel Laureate Peter Doherty says about immunity to covid. https://twitter.com/ProfPCDoherty/status/1280427719482728449?s=20

[filghy2]

In the US and the UK the risks of relaxing physical distancing are only too evident, in England (not the whole of the UK) since the broader relaxation last Saturday, three pubs in different parts of the country have now shut again because they were responsible for new infections, so the question now is how goverments balance the economic needs of the country and the public health needs.

We are facing these issues now (albeit from a stronger position) with the the recent surge in community transmission in Melbourne. That state is now isolated from the rest of the country and lockdowns have been reimposed in Melbourne. Even the Victoria-New South Wales border is now closed, which wasn't done previously.

Any Government restrictions rely on a substantial degree of voluntary compliance by the public. People have been overwhelmingly willing to comply so far, but I wonder how much that will change if periodic lockdowns continue. I think part of the willingness to comply has come from the fact that people could see that it was working and they could hope that the worst would be over after a few months of sacrifice. I'm not sure what the effect on peoples' psychology will be if they start to feel that there is no end in sight despite their previous sacrifices.

[Stavros]

Your point about patience is the key one- I think people will accept limits to their behaviour for the reasons you describe, but more than once? And if Covid 19 persists because of its ease of transmission, these spikes will occur again and again. It is an illusion to think we are emerging from a crisis that in reality has not ended, only in some countries abated in its intensity. This is why Covid 19 is the most vexing public health challenge we have had in decades, thoigh some would add obesity into that diet.
Hang in there, Oz. Even if we can live without Love Island Australia.

[filghy2]

There is another option, although it may be feasible only for countries that have been able to suppress the virus in the first place. That is the eradication strategy - keep lockdowns in place until you are confident domestic transmission has been eliminated completely and then open up domestically but keep the borders closed. That is what New Zealand has done. Obviously it helps to be isolated geographically.

I'm beginning to think that's what we should have done, rather than easing restrictions once case numbers got relatively low and hoping we could keep it suppressed. Another month or two of lockdowns would have been far preferable to the uncertainty of continued on-and-off restrictions. The problem is that even with a good system and political will suppression relies on too many things being done right, and human nature means that people will become slack and slip-ups will occur.

I am fairly resilient and have maintained a positive attitude. I've organised a domestic holiday for next month, which will help, though I am watching the news a little anxiously and hoping restrictions won't be reimposed on my state.

[broncofan]

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/1282199173857771520?s=20

[broncofan]

There is another option, although it may be feasible only for countries that have been able to suppress the virus in the first place. That is the eradication strategy - keep lockdowns in place until you are confident domestic transmission has been eliminated completely and then open up domestically but keep the borders closed. That is what New Zealand has done. Obviously it helps to be isolated geographically.

I'm beginning to think that's what we should have done, rather than easing restrictions once case numbers got relatively low and hoping we could keep it suppressed. Another month or two of lockdowns would have been far preferable to the uncertainty of continued on-and-off restrictions. The problem is that even with a good system and political will suppression relies on too many things being done right, and human nature means that people will become slack and slip-ups will occur.

I am fairly resilient and have maintained a positive attitude. I've organised a domestic holiday for next month, which will help, though I am watching the news a little anxiously and hoping restrictions won't be reimposed on my state.
These are interesting thoughts and I wish that our country had this kind of strategic discussion. I watch baseball and one of the interesting things about baseball is that players can go into extended slumps even when they're doing everything right. As a result, there are some stats that tell them whether they're doing things right in the short term and just getting unlucky. One of these for instance is hard hit percent but there are others.

Given the delay between our actions and it showing up in case numbers, I think societies really need to focus on the things that are predictive of success. It can take several weeks before case numbers rise and weeks beyond that until we see deaths. Florida, for instance, spent months being lax with public health before they were hit. It was actually used as a prime example by Republicans that there isn't a correlation between public health measures and cases. Over a longer timeline, that always falls apart. The virus spreads easily....comparisons to the flu which has an R0 that is half that of sars-cov-2 should make that obvious.

I agree with you that it would be a decent idea to try to eradicate the virus and close off the borders. Getting the political will behind that would never be easy. But it's a long term strategy that would pay off. Any time a locality opens beyond its contact tracing capability and sees community transmission, it is a setback and a more careful approach would have been better economically and in terms of human life.

One thing I don't understand is that planning hasn't taken into account treatment and vaccine contingencies. A ton of data on vaccines will be available by the end of the year. If the data came back and every kind of vaccine was ineffective, I could understand people insisting we have to find a way to live with the virus as more vaccine efforts and further development took place. But there will be data by the end of the year, providing a reasonable timeline to subsidize and boost up economies that cannot operate at full capacity no matter what until then.

[Stavros]

Given the increasing number of cases in Florida, how can it be right for Disneyworld to open its doors, and can the RNC justify holding their Convention in the State in these circumstances?

And, is it not possible that the Republicans will soon be waking up to the possibility that the Americans least able to get to a polling station in November will be Republican voters in currently Republican states and counties experiencing a surge in casees -and that for this reason they might seek a post-ponement? It may even be part of a 'deep state' conspiracy to rob HIM of a second term, all those infected Democrats travelling around Texas and Florida...

As for the UK, we have got to July and the messages from the Government are contrdictory -go back to work, stay home if you can.
Wear a mask in public -if you want to; wear a mask in trains and buses- compulsory.

This is a Government pretending to negotiate a trade deal with the EU that in fact, years after making the decision, has no idea how to handle goods arriving in the UK from the EU, is building a lorry park in Kent in case there is a long queue of trucks getting into and out of the port at Dover in case their prediction nothing will change turns out to be wrong.

If Brexit poses 'challenges' four years after the Referendum, because we still don't know what it will mean, how can we trust the same crop of Brexit nutters to manage the most devatating public health crisis in 100 years when they can't make a single decision just on masks? And can you believe Michael Gove, who sneered at experts durng the referendum, is now saying Government needs... experts, one of the key recommendations of the Fulton Report, published in...1960...

[Stavros]

As for the expert in the US, well, let's be honest, the way he is being ridiculed and dismissed has been shocking, pathetic, but typical of a man-and his mates- who responds to his superiors with cheap smears rather than gratitude. I at least hope the US public can see this for the grubby campaign that it is, and admit that as a country, it is the White House and its Republican Guards in affected States that have been wrong so often, and are wrong today, and will probably be wrong tomorrow.

"He is the US scientist who became the figurehead of attempts to combat the country’s coronavirus epidemic, described in some quarters as “America’s doctor (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/how-anthony-fauci-became-americas-doctor)”.
Now Anthony Fauci appears sidelined by Donald Trump’s White House after repeatedly contradicting the president’s view about the effectiveness of the government response.
In recent days the 79-year-old director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has come under (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html)increasing fire (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html) from the president and his proxies. Trump told Fox news interviewers that Fauci had “made a lot of mistakes” and said he “disagreed” with Fauci’s claim that the US was in a bad place in its coronavirus response."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/13/fauci-sidelined-as-trumps-white-house-steps-up-briefing-campaign

Thank you indeed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW56CL0pk0g

[broncofan]

Thanks for that Stavros! I saw that at the time but it was funny seeing it again and I'm sure there are people who missed it.

All I have to say is that Fauci has been a dedicated public servant for decades. He served through the Aids panic in the 80s and 90s and is considered one of the most knowledgeable infectious disease experts in the country. He has done his best to be candid and for the most part has, though if anything he has pulled his punches occasionally to avoid antagonizing Trump.

It was only a matter of time until he said the wrong thing or would just be a convenient scapegoat.

The Trump era has not just been a war on the rule of law but a war on experts, expertise, and basic competence. Within every field a consensus will often build around some issue so that 98% of experts believe one thing. Trump has been masterful at cherrypicking those outliers who tell him things he wants to hear. It's really no better than not listening to experts at all.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

As for the expert in the US, well, let's be honest, the way he is being ridiculed and dismissed has been shocking, pathetic, but typical of a man-and his mates- who responds to his superiors with cheap smears rather than gratitude. I at least hope the US public can see this for the grubby campaign that it is, and admit that as a country, it is the White House and its Republican Guards in affected States that have been wrong so often, and are wrong today, and will probably be wrong tomorrow.

"He is the US scientist who became the figurehead of attempts to combat the country’s coronavirus epidemic, described in some quarters as “America’s doctor (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/how-anthony-fauci-became-americas-doctor)”.
Now Anthony Fauci appears sidelined by Donald Trump’s White House after repeatedly contradicting the president’s view about the effectiveness of the government response.
In recent days the 79-year-old director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has come under (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html)increasing fire (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html) from the president and his proxies. Trump told Fox news interviewers that Fauci had “made a lot of mistakes” and said he “disagreed” with Fauci’s claim that the US was in a bad place in its coronavirus response."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/13/fauci-sidelined-as-trumps-white-house-steps-up-briefing-campaign

Thank you indeed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW56CL0pk0gAnother prime example of the Clueless Buffoon In Chief blaming someone else for him and his administration mishandling of the CO-VID 19 Global Pandemic,and taking no responsibility for his failure and negligence of taking the pandemic serious ,and trying to silence an health expert from the truth about what's going on and keeping the public informed about the virus . and shows that the CBIC doesn't know what he is talking about when he makes false claims about having things under control and leading world in testing, and spread misinfomation that CO-VID 19 will go away when the weather gets warm and less testing equals less cases. and this latest example shows he cares about is getting re-elected no matter the cost.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

As for the expert in the US, well, let's be honest, the way he is being ridiculed and dismissed has been shocking, pathetic, but typical of a man-and his mates- who responds to his superiors with cheap smears rather than gratitude. I at least hope the US public can see this for the grubby campaign that it is, and admit that as a country, it is the White House and its Republican Guards in affected States that have been wrong so often, and are wrong today, and will probably be wrong tomorrow.

"He is the US scientist who became the figurehead of attempts to combat the country’s coronavirus epidemic, described in some quarters as “America’s doctor (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/how-anthony-fauci-became-americas-doctor)”.
Now Anthony Fauci appears sidelined by Donald Trump’s White House after repeatedly contradicting the president’s view about the effectiveness of the government response.
In recent days the 79-year-old director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has come under (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html)increasing fire (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus/index.html) from the president and his proxies. Trump told Fox news interviewers that Fauci had “made a lot of mistakes” and said he “disagreed” with Fauci’s claim that the US was in a bad place in its coronavirus response."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/13/fauci-sidelined-as-trumps-white-house-steps-up-briefing-campaign

Thank you indeed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW56CL0pk0gAnd completely agree that it is shocking and pathetic the way Dr. Anthony Fauci has been ridiculed and dismissed,all because he letting the public know about what's going on and how to keep themselves safe during this global pandemic, and i am not surprised at all by the CBIC and his enablers smears and political attacks on a health expert telling what they want don't want to hear. and i think that most of the US Public will see this grubby campaign for what it is. and will admit it. and the White House and Republican Guards in affected states who have been wrong about CO-VID19 from the beginning will continue to be wrong.Because they don't believe in science and facts.

[broncofan]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/jul/16/coronavirus-vaccine-oxford-team-volunteers-lab-controlled-human-challenge-trial

The Oxford vaccine team is considering doing challenge trials to test their vaccine. Typically, the final stage of testing for a vaccine involves giving people the vaccine, having a control group that doesn't get the vaccine, and then waiting to see at what rates each group gets infected with the virus. Theoretically this can be sped up by giving people a vaccine and then intentionally infecting them with the virus. This is dangerous of course because the virus can be deadly and there aren't really any effective treatments for it.

Some issues I've heard people raise with respect to challenge trials, in addition to the obvious ethical ones, are that it is not easy to figure out what dose of virus to challenge people with. Another issue is that to make the challenge trials as safe as possible you choose the lowest risk group, perhaps people in their early 20s. Just because a vaccine raises an effective immune response in those in their early 20s does not mean it will for older groups whose immune systems aren't as strong on average.

[Stavros]

THe Vaccine! The Vaccine! It is almost like that moment in Act 3 of Tristan und Isolde when Tristan, in delirium recalls the moment in Act 1 when Brangane switched a death potion for the love potion -Der trank! Der Trank! Der furchtbare trank! We crave a vaccine to deliver us from this delirium....when in the UK we still do not have an adequate test and trace system, and when the Chief Scientific Officer says people should work from home because spikes, even a second wave is possible, while Boris Johnson wants people to go back to work, but now says employers should make that decision. As for masks, I have given up caring what Boris Johnson says, which is the opposite of what Michael Gove says, and anyway who cares what Priti Patel says on anything? I have a stock of masks, and I use them in shops and confined spaces like Malls -well, the one modest mall we have in town.

Now there is a claim that sputum might be the best and easiest test to roll out across the country....

Is it any wonder the public trust in government in Engand is now so low, when in Sccotland Nicola Sturgeon has handled the crisis better, and Scotland has dealt with Covid 19 with more consistency and effectiveness than in England? Johnson has now set out a timetable for more relaxation of human congregation, but it will be interesting to see how many people take advantage of it, when we can see how vulnerable we still are.

I won't comment on the staggering numbers that account for the tragic mess the US is in, suffice to say that I have seen interviews with Americans on the beach in Florida -they drove there from Oho- stating, simply 'I don't think I will be affected', the news channel then interviewing a woman whose mid-50s husband is fightng for his life after his son came from some snap holiday, passing on the virus. It is now July, and I wonder not, what we have learned, but why so much learning seems to result in ignorant, above alll, selfish behaviour?

But one day she will come on a ship with white sails, the Isolde of the Virus, with a Vaccine, and we shall all be well. Innit?

[blackchubby38]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/jul/16/coronavirus-vaccine-oxford-team-volunteers-lab-controlled-human-challenge-trial

The Oxford vaccine team is considering doing challenge trials to test their vaccine. Typically, the final stage of testing for a vaccine involves giving people the vaccine, having a control group that doesn't get the vaccine, and then waiting to see at what rates each group gets infected with the virus. Theoretically this can be sped up by giving people a vaccine and then intentionally infecting them with the virus. This is dangerous of course because the virus can be deadly and there aren't really any effective treatments for it.

Some issues I've heard people raise with respect to challenge trials, in addition to the obvious ethical ones, are that it is not easy to figure out what dose of virus to challenge people with. Another issue is that to make the challenge trials as safe as possible you choose the lowest risk group, perhaps people in their early 20s. Just because a vaccine raises an effective immune response in those in their early 20s does not mean it will for older groups whose immune systems aren't as strong on average.

If given the opportunity, I would take part in a trial for a vaccine. I'm 46, overweight, I have HTN that is controlled with medication, and a history of pneumonia. I think they're going to need people who are relatively healthy, but have some preexisting conditions to see how effective an immune response is going to be.

[broncofan]

If given the opportunity, I would take part in a trial for a vaccine. I'm 46, overweight, I have HTN that is controlled with medication, and a history of pneumonia. I think they're going to need people who are relatively healthy, but have some preexisting conditions to see how effective an immune response is going to be.
I think you're right. When I first read your post I thought you meant for a challenge study. I don't think you'd be ideal for a challenge study but I do think they need some people about middle age who have one or two pre-existing conditions for phase iii trials. I don't know how they choose people. I would also want be interested in a vaccine trial.

I also wouldn't be good for a challenge study either cause I'm 39 and have had pneumonia a bunch of times. There are probably a couple of vaccines that I'd be willing to take a chance with given some of the safety data that's out now. It doesn't rule out rare effects or even a few relatively more common ones but I still think given how many people are infected and that I now have to go to work, I might be safer. I'd also be interested in contributing....for science!

[broncofan]

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/20/more-pfizer-phase-i-results-antibodies-viral-mutations-and-t-cells

For those who are interested, here's a write up of Pfizer's Phase I trials. The blog discusses the dose-response relationship for developing neutralizing antibodies and the effect of booster shots at all doses. There's also a portion in there where he talks about t-cell immunity and how scientists are hopeful that it will be a significant factor.

Those who had the original Sars from 17 years ago and recovered do not have circulating levels of neutralizing antibodies but do have t-cell immunity still. Another interesting subject he talks about are the different mutations that have occurred in sars-cov-2 so far and the different properties this might give the virus. They are trying to determine whether the neutralizing antibodies raised by this vaccine are effective against these various mutations.

[blackchubby38]

I think you're right. When I first read your post I thought you meant for a challenge study. I don't think you'd be ideal for a challenge study but I do think they need some people about middle age who have one or two pre-existing conditions for phase iii trials. I don't know how they choose people. I would also want be interested in a vaccine trial.

I also wouldn't be good for a challenge study either cause I'm 39 and have had pneumonia a bunch of times. There are probably a couple of vaccines that I'd be willing to take a chance with given some of the safety data that's out now. It doesn't rule out rare effects or even a few relatively more common ones but I still think given how many people are infected and that I now have to go to work, I might be safer. I'd also be interested in contributing....for science!

I just submitted all my information for vaccine trials. I'll report back once I hear something.

[broncofan]

I just submitted all my information for vaccine trials. I'll report back once I hear something.
Thanks. That would be cool if you are chosen and get one of the better vaccines. Then (I think) we hope you end up in the active group rather than the control group. Keep us updated.

[Stavros]

We now know how to defeat Covid 19. Just put your lips together, and blow...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kenneth-copeland-blow-coronavirus-pray-sermon-trump-televangelist-a9448561.html

[blackchubby38]

While I know wearing masks in the public is important, am I the only person who thinks it wrong to either fine or arrest people for not doing so. The same goes for informing on businesses that aren't enforcing social distancing guidelines.

[broncofan]

I wouldn't be surprised if there are people who agree with you though I disagree.

To start, it doesn't violate a constitutionally recognized liberty interest to require someone to wear a mask during a pandemic and to enforce it with a civil fine. The same goes for businesses that aren't following public health orders. I think part of the social contract is that (within reasonable limits) people can be required to take precautions because of the collective benefit they provide. And if wearing a mask doesn't jeopardize the wearer's health (and may provide some protection) then a mandate isn't unreasonable. How else would we enforce a public health measure that people insist is their prerogative not to follow except with a sanction of some sort?

I think it would be wrong to fine someone for not wearing a mask if they have a respiratory condition that makes it difficult for them to do so and so I would strongly support medically proven exemptions to a mandate. I think people can be required to sacrifice their comfort for a legitimate safety benefit but not necessarily their own personal well-being.

I don't know if it's productive to fine people for not wearing masks given the culture we have and the shocking level of ignorance that's been sown among our public. If we fine people, I think there are enough people with a skewed idea of what our constitution says that we'd just have more people flout the regulation.

[broncofan]

For Stavros: a week or so ago you posted an informative article that included a prediction that it might take longer than people expected for a vaccine to be available. I responded that I had read some of the rebuttals and provided what I thought was the other side of the argument. Of course, I've consistently sought out the most optimistic voices about vaccines and treatments because frankly it makes me feel better. Anyhow, I thought of our exchange when I saw this article, which has comments from a range of experts about what can still go wrong and why it might be a bad idea to convince people there won't be any complications with the phase iii vaccine trials. They do a good job of including some experts who are bullish as well. We'll see!

https://www.vox.com/21311768/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccine-available-moderna-fauci (https://www.vox.com/21311768/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccine-available-moderna-fauci)

[broncofan]

Former Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cain died of Covid today. He attended the Trump Tulsa rally and urged people not to wear masks because according to him everyone was "fed up." It's unclear whether he contracted covid at the rally or was there spreading it to hundreds of other people.

Covid has both defined who we are as a society and is changing it for the worse. For my part, I started out wishing everyone well regardless of their choices. I'm at the point where I don't feel much regret that someone who has endangered other people has lost a battle with a disease he showed no concern about. Will Herman Cain's death be a wake up call to people peddling misinformation about the virus? Why didn't Herman take hydroxychloroquine? Couldn't demon sex doctor have gotten him some hydroxychloroquine? We really shouldn't joke about the dead. It's ghoulish and wrong.....but what if the dead were systematically poisoning people with misinformation while they were alive and succumbed to that same poison?

Victims of misinformation and victimizers as well. It's almost like Herman Cain's body decided to issue the correction to his public statements.

[Stavros]

For Stavros: a week or so ago you posted an informative article that included a prediction that it might take longer than people expected for a vaccine to be available. I responded that I had read some of the rebuttals and provided what I thought was the other side of the argument. Of course, I've consistently sought out the most optimistic voices about vaccines and treatments because frankly it makes me feel better. Anyhow, I thought of our exchange when I saw this article, which has comments from a range of experts about what can still go wrong and why it might be a bad idea to convince people there won't be any complications with the phase iii vaccine trials. They do a good job of including some experts who are bullish as well. We'll see!

Thanks for this Broncofan, for some reason I seem to have missed it until today. On the one hand, if I have been guarded in my views on a vaccine, it is because a vaccine against Corona type viruses has not been found. On the other hand, the temporary nature of the SARS pandemic in the early 2000s meant the pool of infected subjected from which to derive enough information for a vaccine was not stable enough, whereas the extensive occurrence of Covid 19 and the large number of scientists across the world working on a vaccine suggests it might be found sooner rather than later.

At this stage I think Government should be looking at intermediate strategies, of which the most crucial now is test and tracing. British tourists arriving back in the UK are not tested at the airport, yet have been told to self-isolate. It is obvious that testing at the airport is the best way to find out if returning tourists are infected not least because most have been in the least affected areas of Spain -its islands- rather than those parts of Spain where there have been new cases.

It is also important that results be rapid, ideally, as with a breathalyser test, immediate, or at least some test to indicate a possible infection -but also for returning tourists to have follow-up tests a fortnight after returning home. With an effective test and trace system, we will know if returning tourists (or travellers for other reasons) are at risk, and save on the inconvience of re-instating lockdowns as a blanket measure (as has happened overnight in the North, the grim North) because the Government, six months into this pandemic, has yet to create an effective reporting system, in spite of the insistence of the WHO from the start on the importance of testing and tracing.

There has been an overload of regulation, but a deficit of prophylactic tactics designed to aquire information on the basis of which to quarantine, or not as the case may be -saving anxiety, time, and lots of money. I wish I could express my confidence in the manner in which this pandemic is being handled in the UK -I can't. I don't think Boris Johnson is as absorbed in this crisis as he is in a crisis of his own making, namely Brexit.

[filghy2]

Will Herman Cain's death be a wake up call to people peddling misinformation about the virus?

Not much chance of that. These people seem to have almost unlimited capacity for spinning anything that happens to fit their existing narrative. For example, I just saw this story about a Republican Congressman who claims he may have got the virus because he started wearing a mask after resisting previously. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-30/louie-gohmert-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-donald-trump/12506114

Meanwhile, the situation in Australia is a little worrying. The outbreak in Melbourne is not under control after 3 weeks of lockdown, and cases are now starting to rise again in Sydney. Social-distancing fatigue seems to have set in, as people are being less cautious than they were in the first wave. A recent survey found that 90% of people were not self-isolating after first experiencing symptoms, and only half were doing so between being tested and receiving their results.

One issue the current surge has highlighted is problems in the running of private aged care homes, where most of the deaths have occurred. There have been fewer problems in state-run homes, which have more stringent staffing standards. Inadequate care of the aged has been a long-running issue, but the virus has really brought it home. It seems that as a society we have chosen to prioritise keeping taxes low over the welfare of the elderly.

[broncofan]

It is also important that results be rapid, ideally, as with a breathalyser test, immediate, or at least some test to indicate a possible infection

Testing efficiency is improving and is one very important way to control outbreaks. One reason it was fairly obvious that people without symptoms were spreading the disease is that it would presumably be pretty easy to control a disease that only people with significant symptoms could spread. Even without contact tracing, you could tell covid wasn't controlled just by isolating people once they develop a sore throat or something.

In the U.S., major league baseball has started a season. They are testing their players regularly, limiting staff, and hosting games without fans. They're still experiencing outbreaks because they have not properly isolated the players and the season will probably end up being canceled. Within two weeks there have already been two major team outbreaks and it looks like some futuristic contest of attrition. Lots of testing and common sense can go a long way.

Filghy-I'm sorry to hear there are outbreaks in Australia. I had been following for the first several months but haven't paid attention lately. I can only imagine you have responsible officials who are at least trying to control what's going on. Even countries that have been vigilant and guided by science such as Germany (and now Australia) have had some outbreaks simply because this disease is so tough to contain. In the long run intelligent efforts are rewarded though. But quarantine fatigue is real.

As for assisted living or private aged care centers, it's a tough problem. Residents have lots of medical needs, frequently go to hospitals, and are exposed to nurses, doctors, and other staff. Wherever there are outbreaks here there seem to be problems within these facilities and they need a bit of luck not to be hit. My uncle is in one of these facilities and we just got a letter saying they had their first two cases of covid.

[broncofan]

Thanks for this Broncofan, for some reason I seem to have missed it until today. On the one hand, if I have been guarded in my views on a vaccine, it is because a vaccine against Corona type viruses has not been found. On the other hand, the temporary nature of the SARS pandemic in the early 2000s meant the pool of infected subjected from which to derive enough information for a vaccine was not stable enough, whereas the extensive occurrence of Covid 19 and the large number of scientists across the world working on a vaccine suggests it might be found sooner rather than later.
.
One reason I'm cautious in my expectations is that I've read about therapies and been optimistic before only to learn that the drug and vaccine development process is slow and can seem even slower with 1000+ people a day dying in this country. I also haven't found there is a consensus with respect to a timeline for a vaccine, as some scientists believe it will be successful and others anticipate some pitfalls.

One thing I can say is that I'm more likely to be optimistic because I haven't watched this slow process unfold before and therefore am not aware of all of the pitfalls that can hinder vaccine efforts. I will read one study about rhesus monkeys developing immunity to viral challenge and won't even consider that humans might not have the same response, both to the vaccine and to the disease. Scientists are still trying to figure out what the "correlates of immunity" are but it's guesswork until people are vaccinated and go out in the world.

I do think our epidemiological controls should be based on the premise that there will be a vaccine by February or so of next year, even if it ends up not being the case. If there are lots of failures and other pitfalls then public health strategies can be revamped then. But if you tell people that there is a possible light at the end of the tunnel, they then can tell themselves they're not committing to being cautious their entire lives.

Finally, I also had been interested in monoclonal antibodies simply because it seemed exciting and short of re-purposing drugs designed for other diseases it is the only way to develop a tailored treatment in a short period of time. As I said before, they were very effective in Ebola, though they don't have a long track record of use in infectious diseases (pitfalls here involve "viral escape" and the development of viral resistance to the monoclonal antibody; interestingly people can even develop antibodies to the synthetic antibody which is not ideal either). I think data from some of the human trials for these antibodies are expected to be released by the end of the summer, so whether it's false optimism or a real treatment, at least we'll have some idea.

[filghy2]

In the U.S., major league baseball has started a season. They are testing their players regularly, limiting staff, and hosting games without fans. They're still experiencing outbreaks because they have not properly isolated the players and the season will probably end up being canceled. Within two weeks there have already been two major team outbreaks and it looks like some futuristic contest of attrition. Lots of testing and common sense can go a long way.

In Australia, the major sports teams have been relocated to hubs in relatively safe areas, where the players and support staff are kept isolated from the general public. They can bring their families, but they have to be isolated as well. At present there is no Australian rules football games being played in Melbourne, which is the home of the sport. I think that is the first time ever, as they kept playing during WWII.

[filghy2]

Filghy-I'm sorry to hear there are outbreaks in Australia. I had been following for the first several months but haven't paid attention lately. I can only imagine you have responsible officials who are at least trying to control what's going on. Even countries that have been vigilant and guided by science such as Germany (and now Australia) have had some outbreaks simply because this disease is so tough to contain. In the long run intelligent efforts are rewarded though. But quarantine fatigue is real..

The appalling thing is that most of this second wave appears to have originated from lapses in the control of hotel quarantine in Melbourne, which was outsourced to private security companies. I assume that was done to save on police resources, which definitely proved to be a false economy.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-20/victoria-coronavirus-hotel-quarantine-inquiry-day-1-in-melbourne/12471916
Fortunately our politicians are still mostly acting like mature adults. Even the finger-pointing and blame-shifting between politicians of different parties when things have gone wrong has been fairly constrained.

[Stavros]

So, it looks like the US did in fact have a 'National Plan' to tackle Covid 19 -but it was scuppered by Under-President Kushner -is this man ever going to make himself accountable for his decisions?

"Inside the White House, over much of March and early April, Kushner’s handpicked group of young business associates, which included a former college roommate, teamed up with several top experts from the diagnostic-testing industry. Together, they hammered out the outline of a national testing strategy. The group—working night and day, using the encrypted platform WhatsApp—emerged with a detailed plan obtained by Vanity Fair.
Rather than have states fight each other for scarce diagnostic tests and limited lab capacity, the plan would have set up a system of national oversight and coordination to surge supplies, allocate test kits, lift regulatory and contractual roadblocks, and establish a widespread virus surveillance system by the fall, to help pinpoint subsequent outbreaks.
The solutions it proposed weren’t rocket science—or even comparable to the dauntingly complex undertaking of developing a new vaccine. Any national plan to address testing deficits would likely be more on the level of “replicating UPS for an industry,” said Dr. Mike Pellini, the managing partner of Section 32, a technology and health care venture capital fund. “Imagine if UPS or FedEx didn’t have infrastructure to connect all the dots. It would be complete chaos.”
The plan crafted at the White House, then, set out to connect the dots. Some of those who worked on the plan were told that it would be presented to President Trump and likely announced in the Rose Garden in early April. “I was beyond optimistic,” said one participant. “My understanding was that the final document would make its way to the president over that weekend” and would result in a “significant announcement.”
But no nationally coordinated testing strategy was ever announced. The plan, according to the participant, “just went poof into thin air.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/07/how-jared-kushners-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into-thin-air

[broncofan]

In Australia, the major sports teams have been relocated to hubs in relatively safe areas, where the players and support staff are kept isolated from the general public. They can bring their families, but they have to be isolated as well. At present there is no Australian rules football games being played in Melbourne, which is the home of the sport. I think that is the first time ever, as they kept playing during WWII.
I went to a Manly Eagles Aussie Rules football game a while ago. I had a lot of fun but it was kind of like explaining American football to someone who's never watched it. You can explain the premise but then any time something happens you're explaining an exception or some quirk. I know I'm saying this apropos of nothing but it's a vivid memory for me. Hopefully they're back when this nightmare is over.

Anyway, that seems like the obvious way to do things. Imagine Major League Baseball's planning process though. They honestly thought they could test players and staff, allow both to go out in public where a super transmissible virus is raging, and that people would always test positive before spreading it. This illusion has already been shattered. When I heard they were having the season, I figured they could probably have the players make some commitment to quarantine or opt out if they were uncomfortable with that, and even hold all of the games in the same location without a lot of travel.

As for the hotel quarantine breakdowns, all I can say is that your administrative mistakes regard precautions we haven't even contemplated. We have people go back home when they test positive and don't even have options to provide them. I hope you get things under control. I did look at the numbers in Australia, not by region though, and they've popped, but you can definitely get things back to where they were. If I looked at the right time of day, it was 600 new cases in a country of 25 million. This would be the per capita equivalent of 8000 new cases in the U.S. For reference, when we had started to suppress the virus and get things under control before the south exploded, we had 20,000 cases and declining. So I think now is the time to act...

[broncofan]

One interesting study would be how the U.S.' response to Covid compares to our response to Influenza in 1918. The 1918 pandemic killed 675,000 Americans while Covid has killed 154,000 so far.

Take into account that in 1918 there were a lot of differences in icu care. Ventilators had not been invented yet. So while we may lament the fact that only 40-50% of those put on ventilators survive (the reporting for survival rate for people ventilated has varied a lot), everyone who would need one would be dead. Oxygen therapy had already been used therapeutically but I'm having trouble locating whether hospitals in 1918 were all equipped with it and using it. But an enormous number of people have needed oxygen to survive.

Testing was not nearly as good back then. As Trump likes to boast, we have tested tens of millions of people. The ability to work remotely was not possible then. And it's tough to know exact infection fatality rates but I haven't seen a lot of evidence that covid is more deadly than 1918 flu. Is it possible that we responded to a deadly pandemic better in 1918 than 2020?

[broncofan]

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-covid-19-ventilator-patients-survival-rates-increase-20200703.html

[blackchubby38]

One interesting study would be how the U.S.' response to Covid compares to our response to Influenza in 1918. The 1918 pandemic killed 675,000 Americans while Covid has killed 154,000 so far.

Take into account that in 1918 there were a lot of differences in icu care. Ventilators had not been invented yet. So while we may lament the fact that only 40-50% of those put on ventilators survive (the reporting for survival rate for people ventilated has varied a lot), everyone who would need one would be dead. Oxygen therapy had already been used therapeutically but I'm having trouble locating whether hospitals in 1918 were all equipped with it and using it. But an enormous number of people have needed oxygen to survive.

Testing was not nearly as good back then. As Trump likes to boast, we have tested tens of millions of people. The ability to work remotely was not possible then. And it's tough to know exact infection fatality rates but I haven't seen a lot of evidence that covid is more deadly than 1918 flu. Is it possible that we responded to a deadly pandemic better in 1918 than 2020?

From what I have read about the The Flu Epidemic of 1918, was that it worse than the Corona Virus. Especially when you take into consideration how much living conditions and medical care has improved since then. WWI was coming to an end, so you had U.S. troops returning from Europe. Not on a plane mind you. But on a boat on a voyage that if I recall took about 6 days to complete.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

So, it looks like the US did in fact have a 'National Plan' to tackle Covid 19 -but it was scuppered by Under-President Kushner -is this man ever going to make himself accountable for his decisions?

"Inside the White House, over much of March and early April, Kushner’s handpicked group of young business associates, which included a former college roommate, teamed up with several top experts from the diagnostic-testing industry. Together, they hammered out the outline of a national testing strategy. The group—working night and day, using the encrypted platform WhatsApp—emerged with a detailed plan obtained by Vanity Fair.
Rather than have states fight each other for scarce diagnostic tests and limited lab capacity, the plan would have set up a system of national oversight and coordination to surge supplies, allocate test kits, lift regulatory and contractual roadblocks, and establish a widespread virus surveillance system by the fall, to help pinpoint subsequent outbreaks.
The solutions it proposed weren’t rocket science—or even comparable to the dauntingly complex undertaking of developing a new vaccine. Any national plan to address testing deficits would likely be more on the level of “replicating UPS for an industry,” said Dr. Mike Pellini, the managing partner of Section 32, a technology and health care venture capital fund. “Imagine if UPS or FedEx didn’t have infrastructure to connect all the dots. It would be complete chaos.”
The plan crafted at the White House, then, set out to connect the dots. Some of those who worked on the plan were told that it would be presented to President Trump and likely announced in the Rose Garden in early April. “I was beyond optimistic,” said one participant. “My understanding was that the final document would make its way to the president over that weekend” and would result in a “significant announcement.”
But no nationally coordinated testing strategy was ever announced. The plan, according to the participant, “just went poof into thin air.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/07/how-jared-kushners-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into-thin-airNot surprised that the National Plan on how to handle the CO-VID 19 Global Pandemic was scrapped by the Silverspoon Spoiled Brat Jared Kushner,nope he's never going to make himself accountable for his decisions,because he just as delusional and toned deaf like his father in law the Clueless Buffoon In Chief is.

[broncofan]

Positive results for Regeneron's antibody cocktail in non-human primates when used therapeutically and prophylactically. This is a good sign but obviously not as good as positive results in clinical trials in humans which we're waiting on.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.02.233320v1 (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.02.233320v1)

https://twitter.com/AndyBiotech/status/1290428132848214016

https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN24Z2S3

[broncofan]

A short clip of Trump being dismantled by Jonathan Swan. Apparently Trump thinks the relevant metric is CFR and not deaths per capita. He should be removed from office for being this dumb.

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1290497186489348096 (https://twitter.com/axios/status/1290497186489348096)

[Stavros]

Is it the case that his staff are terrified of telling him the truth, telling him how to add up, because they don't want to be fired, because they fear his volcanic temper? Or is it the case that they do tell him, but he is so utterly convinced of his own -superior- intelligence that he just ignores them, as he ignores -and then insults Drs Fauci and Birx? Kushner might be intellectually ill-equipped for his ghostling of the Presidency -I believe he is now co-ordinating and directing the re-election campaign- but then when you read the tweets of Junior and Skittles, you reach the conclusion there is a circle of dimwits in the White House who can't actually see what the rest of the world is seeing.

The key point is this: he doesn't care. And more worryingly, the men who can do someting -McConnell, Barr -don't care either. They seem to me have boxed themselves into an ideological vice in which you are either with the President and the USA, or against them. All those years in Congress and the Department of Justice, and they can't see the incompetence in front of them? You have to wonder if the Republicans looking defeat in the face have decided to go down with the ship rather than save it.

Covid 19 has become too difficult for the most egocentric leaders to handle, because they are are not used to delegating, or to collegiate decision making based on non-political, in this case medical, advice. They have been revealed to be too timid, or indifferent to the stark reality of the virus, to make the very tough decisions that are supposed to be emblems of the tough-guy persona they project: your President, Boris Johnson, Jair Bolosonaro, Benjamin Netanyahu.

The myth of the strong leader, exposed by the kind of public health crisis that ought to show them at their finest -and a fascinatng study by Archie Brown. Note that for Brown

"...Truman is something of a hero. In contrast to self-styled "strong" leaders, seeking to achieve their aims through dominance and diktat, Truman was an instinctively collegiate president, delegating significant authority to his colleagues – especially his two secretaries of state, George Marshall and Dean Acheson. As Brown writes: "It was characteristic of Truman's style that the most outstanding foreign policy achievement of his presidency is known as the Marshall Plan, not the Truman Plan."
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jul/03/myth-strong-leader-political-leadership-modern-age-archie-brown-review

[blackchubby38]

This probably should go into the thread about NYC, but since we are talking about ineffective leaders.

Apparently the New York city Health commissioner has resigned over Mayor Deblasio's handling of the Corona Virus. While there are no details yet as to what the problem was, I wish he was one the resigning and not her.

[broncofan]

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/08/04/regenerons-monoclonal-antibody-cocktail-in-primates

I highly recommend this article for those who are interested in treatments. It interprets Regeneron's animal studies, talks about how effective each animal model is at predicting human response, and discusses the pros and cons of prophylactic v therapeutic use of antibodies.

The federal government has given Regeneron a paltry 450 million dollars and I don't think has had much involvement in the funding of other antibody candidates.

The big problem with antibody treatments is that in the first round only 100,000 doses might be produced as capacity is limited. This limits its usefulness for prophylactic use except in high risk groups. It also will limit its usefulness if it is only effective if administered early. We have millions of cases in this country. We really need to see this show effects when administered to people who are already in serious condition in order for current capacity to meet demand and make a big difference. That's tougher. Regeneron's ebola cocktail was much more effective when administered early but still showed modest improvement in survival when administered a bit later. Of course, covid is not as deadly per case as ebola and there is a chance this still improve survival rate in already hospitalized patients.

[blackchubby38]

Is it the case that his staff are terrified of telling him the truth, telling him how to add up, because they don't want to be fired, because they fear his volcanic temper? Or is it the case that they do tell him, but he is so utterly convinced of his own -superior- intelligence that he just ignores them, as he ignores -and then insults Drs Fauci and Birx? Kushner might be intellectually ill-equipped for his ghostling of the Presidency -I believe he is now co-ordinating and directing the re-election campaign- but then when you read the tweets of Junior and Skittles, you reach the conclusion there is a circle of dimwits in the White House who can't actually see what the rest of the world is seeing.

The key point is this: he doesn't care. And more worryingly, the men who can do someting -McConnell, Barr -don't care either. They seem to me have boxed themselves into an ideological vice in which you are either with the President and the USA, or against them. All those years in Congress and the Department of Justice, and they can't see the incompetence in front of them? You have to wonder if the Republicans looking defeat in the face have decided to go down with the ship rather than save it.

Covid 19 has become too difficult for the most egocentric leaders to handle, because they are are not used to delegating, or to collegiate decision making based on non-political, in this case medical, advice. They have been revealed to be too timid, or indifferent to the stark reality of the virus, to make the very tough decisions that are supposed to be emblems of the tough-guy persona they project: your President, Boris Johnson, Jair Bolosonaro, Benjamin Netanyahu.

The myth of the strong leader, exposed by the kind of public health crisis that ought to show them at their finest -and a fascinatng study by Archie Brown. Note that for Brown

"...Truman is something of a hero. In contrast to self-styled "strong" leaders, seeking to achieve their aims through dominance and diktat, Truman was an instinctively collegiate president, delegating significant authority to his colleagues – especially his two secretaries of state, George Marshall and Dean Acheson. As Brown writes: "It was characteristic of Truman's style that the most outstanding foreign policy achievement of his presidency is known as the Marshall Plan, not the Truman Plan."
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jul/03/myth-strong-leader-political-leadership-modern-age-archie-brown-review

The issue with authoritarian figures or in the case of President Trump figures with those traits, is that they don't like to hear bad news. So Dr. Birx, Dr. Fauci and the rest of the Corona Virus task force have had to walk the fine line of doing what's the best for the county, all the while keeping the person they work for happy. I think both Birx and Fauci realize/ed the worst thing that could have happened/still happen is if one or the both of them got/gets fired.

So I think they make sure to tell him things that he wants to hear, all the while making sure the public knows what's going on. That's why Fauci is always giving interviews with various media outlets. While this hasn't saved them from getting insulted by Trump, it has kept the task force intact for the whole time the pandemic has been going on.

Its not an easy position to be in because it looks like they're signing off on whatever the President is saying. Over the weekend it was reported that Nancy Pelosi doesn't think too highly of Dr. Birx because she didn't push back forcibly when Trump made the comment about injecting disinfectants. But like Dr. Facui said earlier this year, "What are we supposed to do, grab the microphone out of his hands as he is speaking".

That's an interesting point you make about Truman delegating significant authority to his colleagues. While that maybe true, he also said "The buck stops here". Meaning that final decision will always be made by the person in charge and that a leader will always take the responsibility for when things go wrong.

[Stavros]

All good points, but not good for governance in a democracy.

I was surprised at Nancy Pelosi's comments on Dr Birx, it seemed like a cheap shot from someone in her position, I don't know enough about her to know if this is how she is, or if it was a lapse of judgment.

Truman is a difficult one to assess- the use of the Atom Bomb in Japan -about which the pro-and-contra arguments continue to batter each other (see the link below); the alleged manipulation of the UN to embark on war in Korea...perhaps it was his style that appeals to Archie Brown.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/04/harry-truman-grandson-hiroshima-nuclear-atom-bomb

[Stavros]

A brief (14 pages) but interesting view of the political and economic challenges of Covid 19, including proposals for a one-off wealth tax, has been produced by the London School of Econoics, and is here-

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cepcovid-19-004.pdf

[Stavros]

Those of you interested in the vaccine against Covif 19 may know of this website tracking more than 40 experiments currently taking place. Not sure how often it is updated, the link is from 4 days ago-

https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2020/3/covid-19-vaccine-tracker

[jaminfan]

africa says no to the vaccine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWWgTwFKoUs

[filghy2]

A puzzling question at present is why Republicans are uninterested in reaching agreement on a further stimulus package - or indeed any strategy for dealing with the effects of the virus - when they are the ones likely to suffer if things are not improving by November. In other words, why are they behaving like an opposition party when they are the incumbent?

This article suggests four possible explanations: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/8/17/21368234/trump-republicans-covid-19-2020-democrats-senate-relief-stimulus-polls
- they are afraid to do anything independently of Trump's say-so
- anti-government ideology cannot deal with any crisis requiring government intervention
- they are afraid of a Tea Party 2.0 internal backlash
- they have given up on November and just want to make things as hard as possible for a Biden administration

This fits in with the point made in Robert Reich's article posted in the other thread: because Republican's have succeeded politically through negative strategies these seem now to be the only skills they have and that are valued within the party.

How can such a party deal with any problem requiring carefully-considered government responses? Presumably by trying to deny the seriousness of the problem or by finding scapegoats to divert attention from the real issues. And how long can this approach succeed - particularly if (as seems plausible) we are entering a period where we are more exposed to crises that require some kind of government action?

[Stavros]

How can such a party deal with any problem requiring carefully-considered government responses? Presumably by trying to deny the seriousness of the problem or by finding scapegoats to divert attention from the real issues. And how long can this approach succeed - particularly if (as seems plausible) we are entering a period where we are more exposed to crises that require some kind of government action?

We have reached a stage, not just in the US, when failure and a refusal to accept responsibility for failure has become 'normal', because those within the parties concerned -Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives and Labour (ie, in the US and UK)- are terrified of the reality that change must mean if we are to move on from Covid 19, colossal government debt, and the long term but nevertheless urgent problems that have been set aside -climate change, the meaning and practice of work, to which we now add its challenged location, and the dismal prospect that our youth, under the age of 20, are being condemned to a decade of idleness and despair.

Perhaps nothing encapsulates the indifference to facts, than the President's attempt to ridicule New Zealand because it has recorded nine new cases of Covid 19-

"“The places they were using to hold up now they’re having a big surge … they were holding up names of countries and now they’re saying ‘whoops!.
“Do you see what’s happening in New Zealand (https://www.theguardian.com/world/newzealand)? They beat it, they beat it, it was like front-page news because they wanted to show me something,” the US president said at a campaign rally in Mankato, Minnesota.
...On Monday Auckland recorded nine new cases of the virus, and 13 on Tuesday, while the US’s Monday figure was just under 42,000."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/18/trump-calls-out-new-zealands-big-surge-on-day-it-records-nine-covid-cases

The fact is everyone who can read or turn on their tv or radio, can see this nonsense fo themselves, just as few people can believe the grandiose rubbish that the President talks about when everything is 'the worst in history', 'the greatest in history' and when he can claim Obama is guilty of Treason without a shred of evidence -indeed, this is media madness at its 'best' of the kind Murdoch has been pumping out since he was so slimy an operator in Australia they called him 'the dirty digger'. Truth is irrelevant, using all means possible to repeatedly sneer and jeer at others using 'street smart' lingo to 'connect' with Blokes and Mums -the whole point is that every day Obama must be cast as a villain, any achievements of his administration claimed by the succeeding one. There is no this and that, only either/or.

Covid 19 is not important because the people dying from it are not important, and because Dr Fauci talks too much about medicine and society, he is replaced by a jobsworth whose primary aim will be to praise the President.

But the self-harm filghy2 refers to is now evident in the atttack on the UPS, a contraction of whosse services damages the lives of rural voters most likely to vote Republican, just as Republican governors indifferent to Covid 19 are seeing their voters hit by the very same virus they dismiss, as if it were just something they must bear. It remains to be seen, that if votes are not counted, they will include enough Republican voters to deny him a second term in office.

He cannot perpetually condemn the Democrats for stealing an election, when he has alienated, and may deny the vote from his own base. But the US is set for five-to-six months of chaos, whereas in the UK, where the fiasco of school exam results has crystallized so much of what has gone wrong with the overall campaign against Covid 19, we are four months away from the reality of Brexit, with the sense that nobody is in charge, or that those in office don't want to take charge, thus Secretary of State for Education Gavin Williamson, widely regarded as the least competent minister in a Cabinet of misfits, takes no responsibility for the failure of his department, because at fault is an algorithm.

If it were not for the strength and diversity of our civil society, our inherited freedoms, the vitality of social media and multi-party democracies, we would resemble Belarus. And to think that Lukashenko is the kind of politician the President aspires to be, that Boris Johnson most resembles....well, with rumours of a split in the Communist Party of China over Xi's not-so-briliant thought, and even more inept action, which major power is going to be the first to be clobbered by Covid?

[broncofan]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/health/covid-19-antibody-treatments.html

The reason many virologists are interested in the results of human trials in monoclonal antibodies is that it takes two to five years to develop an antiviral that is tailored to a particular virus. It is also unlikely that repurposed drugs, be they antivirals or immunosuppressants, are going to have a major impact on the course of the epidemic. On the other hand, monoclonal antibodies, if production can match demand, actually have the potential to come online and make a big difference prior to the approval of vaccines. Furthermore, testing of antibody cocktails in two different animal models have shown robust effects on disease course.

Is it any surprise then that the Trump administration has spent very little money helping to develop them? Is it any surprise that clinical trials are difficult to conduct because of testing deficiencies, including slow turn around times on tests which has slowed enrollment? Regeneron's data is going to be delayed by at least a month and Eli Lilly has now said they may not be done with phase iii trials until the end of the year. Government money may help Regeneron produce at risk but there are a bunch of other companies trying to develop them, from Lilly to Sorrento. Another missed opportunity to actually help people.

[Stavros]

A brutal analysis of the Conservative Governmen inept management of Covid-19-

"The government has offered no support to ensure people are able to self-isolate. Nor has it collected statistics on whether people actually are self-isolating – an extraordinary oversight, given that the whole exercise is practically pointless without this information. If isolating means people – particularly those in the gig economy – will lose their incomes and possibly even their jobs, they are far less likely to come forward to be tested. Likewise, they’re less likely to name their mates, who may also lose out. How can we expect people to look after their community if their community won’t look after them?
Despite clear international evidence (https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00382) indicating the importance of support measures, and domestic stories about people spreading (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/16/covid-19-ms-sandwich-makers-sick-pay-self-isolated-union?CMP=share_btn_tw)infection (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/16/covid-19-ms-sandwich-makers-sick-pay-self-isolated-union?CMP=share_btn_tw) because they continued to work even when unwell, the government has done nothing to support people isolating. They have made no moves to ensure those people have access to sick pay or to prevent bad employers from reprimanding workers who have to isolate. The government has designed a system whose aim is to get people to self-isolate – without making it possible for people to do so."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/19/public-health-england-government-failings-coronavirus

[Stavros]

The Telegraph in the UK argues that the fundamental flaw in China in the information chain in December 2019 -possibly even before that- lay in the fear among low-level party and Wuhan city functionaies that they would be punished for admitting they had not been able to control the first cases of what became Covid 19. Though it appears to shift direct blame from the Chinese Government, the culture of fear and silence in the Communist Party which must be immune from criticism, undoubtedly helped the virus spread. How other Governments then reacted is a separate argument, but this one seems reasonable to believe-

"Unfortunately for the world, the universal fear of passing bad news up the chain was all the more acute in this case under an authoritarian system that encourages officials to withhold information for fear of reprisal.
Tragically, this enduring lack of transparency and accountability under President Xi Jinping’s Communist regime means we may never know the cause of this deadly coronavirus in order to prevent the next. "
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/us-adjusts-intelligence-assessment-chinas-role-covid-19-outbreak/

[broncofan]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1297138862108663808

Donald Trump is pretending like the hold-up with vaccines and therapeutics is red tape from "deep state" saboteurs at the FDA. First, there has not been a hold up with vaccines as they have moved at extremely rapid speed through phase i and ii trials and are enrolling patients for phase iii very quickly. We are not Russia (yet). We are not going to be administering untested vaccines to people when we don't know whether they're safe or effective. What Russia is doing doesn't just endanger its own citizens but also risks making the pandemic worse. Vaccine-induced resistance to viruses is more of a theoretical risk but it is possible for an ineffective vaccine to create a selection pressure for the virus that would increase its virulence. They could do this in the same way a therapeutic can create pathogen resistance. If the induced immune response doesn't completely clear the virus, it can result in mutations that are more difficult for the immune system to deal with.

Finally, the therapeutics he is talking about are delayed because of insufficient testing which is at least partly on him. He has spent the last several months hawking hydroxychloroquine when it's ineffective and has taken no interest in the therapeutics with the most potential, including interferon (Sukumvit posted a link on the other thread) and monoclonal antibodies. The government has invested a sum total of 450 million dollars into monoclonal antibodies, when it should have invested more than ten times that amount. If they are shown to be effective either at prevention in key workers or as therapeutics and they are not ready by election time, it is his negligence and the poorly coordinated response of our government that is to blame. Monoclonal antibodies should have been much easier to expedite through clinical trials than a vaccine because it is easier to screen for the dangers associated with administering one or two cloned antibodies than the varied immune responses of millions of people to a vaccine. If used as therapeutics, it also takes much less time to identify efficacy. But alas, with tests taking five days to come back it is difficult to enroll patients in trials meant to test the product in early disease.

What a clusterfuck. What an incompetent, stupid piece of shit Trump is and how unbelievably stupid anyone is who doesn't know it.

[Stavros]

And if the Republican Party is now in alliance with QAnon, should the President combat the 'Deep State' head-on, and fire all the Jews in his Administration, as presumably they are covert operatives of the 'Deep State' that is holding up development of the vaccine, and had Bannon arrested?

[KnightHawk 2.0]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1297138862108663808

Donald Trump is pretending like the hold-up with vaccines and therapeutics is red tape from "deep state" saboteurs at the FDA. First, there has not been a hold up with vaccines as they have moved at extremely rapid speed through phase i and ii trials and are enrolling patients for phase iii very quickly. We are not Russia (yet). We are not going to be administering untested vaccines to people when we don't know whether they're safe or effective. What Russia is doing doesn't just endanger its own citizens but also risks making the pandemic worse. Vaccine-induced resistance to viruses is more of a theoretical risk but it is possible for an ineffective vaccine to create a selection pressure for the virus that would increase its virulence. They could do this in the same way a therapeutic can create pathogen resistance. If the induced immune response doesn't completely clear the virus, it can result in mutations that are more difficult for the immune system to deal with.

Finally, the therapeutics he is talking about are delayed because of insufficient testing which is at least partly on him. He has spent the last several months hawking hydroxychloroquine when it's ineffective and has taken no interest in the therapeutics with the most potential, including interferon (Sukumvit posted a link on the other thread) and monoclonal antibodies. The government has invested a sum total of 450 million dollars into monoclonal antibodies, when it should have invested more than ten times that amount. If they are shown to be effective either at prevention in key workers or as therapeutics and they are not ready by election time, it is his negligence and the poorly coordinated response of our government that is to blame. Monoclonal antibodies should have been much easier to expedite through clinical trials than a vaccine because it is easier to screen for the dangers associated with administering one or two cloned antibodies than the varied immune responses of millions of people to a vaccine. If used as therapeutics, it also takes much less time to identify efficacy. But alas, with tests taking five days to come back it is difficult to enroll patients in trials meant to test the product in early disease.

What a clusterfuck. What an incompetent, stupid piece of shit Trump is and how unbelievably stupid anyone is who doesn't know it.Completely agree 1000%.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1297138862108663808

Donald Trump is pretending like the hold-up with vaccines and therapeutics is red tape from "deep state" saboteurs at the FDA. First, there has not been a hold up with vaccines as they have moved at extremely rapid speed through phase i and ii trials and are enrolling patients for phase iii very quickly. We are not Russia (yet). We are not going to be administering untested vaccines to people when we don't know whether they're safe or effective. What Russia is doing doesn't just endanger its own citizens but also risks making the pandemic worse. Vaccine-induced resistance to viruses is more of a theoretical risk but it is possible for an ineffective vaccine to create a selection pressure for the virus that would increase its virulence. They could do this in the same way a therapeutic can create pathogen resistance. If the induced immune response doesn't completely clear the virus, it can result in mutations that are more difficult for the immune system to deal with.

Finally, the therapeutics he is talking about are delayed because of insufficient testing which is at least partly on him. He has spent the last several months hawking hydroxychloroquine when it's ineffective and has taken no interest in the therapeutics with the most potential, including interferon (Sukumvit posted a link on the other thread) and monoclonal antibodies. The government has invested a sum total of 450 million dollars into monoclonal antibodies, when it should have invested more than ten times that amount. If they are shown to be effective either at prevention in key workers or as therapeutics and they are not ready by election time, it is his negligence and the poorly coordinated response of our government that is to blame. Monoclonal antibodies should have been much easier to expedite through clinical trials than a vaccine because it is easier to screen for the dangers associated with administering one or two cloned antibodies than the varied immune responses of millions of people to a vaccine. If used as therapeutics, it also takes much less time to identify efficacy. But alas, with tests taking five days to come back it is difficult to enroll patients in trials meant to test the product in early disease.

What a clusterfuck. What an incompetent, stupid piece of shit Trump is and how unbelievably stupid anyone is who doesn't know it.RE:And these are 2 more examples from a Clueless Buffoon spreading conspiracy theories,and doesn't know what the hell he is doing or what he's talking about. and agree that Donald Trump is an incompetent and stupid pile of shit. and
how unbelievably stupid anyone who doesn't know it.

[broncofan]

The FDA recently, under pressure from the Trump administration, supported an Emergency Use Authorization for convalescent plasma. Convalescent plasma was initially considered a promising therapy but more recent evidence suggests it's not very effective. First, most hospitalized patients have reasonably high titers of antibodies and the supposition is that a transfusion, even from someone who cleared the virus, may not do too much. In ebola, convalescent plasma was not effective even though monoclonal antibodies were, and my understanding is that it can be hit or miss in infectious diseases.

The most important point I suppose is that there aren't any randomized controlled trials demonstrating its effectiveness. We've spent time and effort with such trials of hydroxychloroquine, but 6 months into the U.S. pandemic we do not have results from a single rct for convalescent plasma. It may work, it is unlikely to cause harm, but its approval is politically motivated.

Finally, the idea of therapeutics is attractive to anyone who looks at public health efforts and says, "that's not the way it should be." It's a hope for a silver bullet or something that can make this pandemic go away. Likely that won't happen until we get a vaccine. As I've said before, I found monoclonal antibodies exciting and think they have a lot of potential in general despite their limitations, but we will probably be dealing with this until there's an effective vaccine.

[Stavros]

The situation here in the UK can best be described as confusion close to chaos. On the one hand, the overall rate of infection has declined as have daily deaths, but in specific parts of the country, including Scotland, there have been spikes in the rate of infection. Some of it has been caused by holiday-makers returning from supposedly 'safe' destinations in Greece and Portugal, others due to more schools opening. 20-30 year olds are accused of beig the carriers of the virus, largely because of the relaxation on physical distancing in public places.

Yesterday we had the farcical situation of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland having different regulations for holidaymakers-

"Differences in UK quarantine rules are "confusing" for travellers, Grant Shapps has admitted, as the four nations take varying approaches to international travel.
The transport secretary acknowledged people's frustrations, as Scotland and Wales asked arrivals from Portugal and parts of Greece to isolate, but England and Northern Ireland held off.
Wales' rules (https://gov.wales/exemptions-self-isolation-coronavirus-covid-19-html), including only six Greek islands, began at 04:00 BST on Friday.
Travel firms called for urgent clarity.
Some holidaymakers from England who anticipated a change in quarantine rules said they spent hundreds of pounds to get home early.
While Wales' advice has already changed, arrivals to Scotland (https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-public-health-checks-at-borders/pages/exemptions/) from Portugal and French Polynesia will also have to self-isolate from 04:00 on Saturday. Scotland has already reintroduced quarantine for arrivals from Greece.
The measures will affect those who reside in Wales and Scotland but return to the UK via England.
Portugal, Greece and French Polynesia are still on England (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-travel-corridors) and Northern Ireland's (https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/coronavirus-covid-19-countries-and-territories-exemptions) lists of travel corridors."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54022411

Meanwhile Boris Johnsn's poll ratings have sunk from an approval rate of 92% in March to 48%. There is a sense here that the Government wants to move on from Covid, and certanly there is also anxiety that the trade negotiations with the EU are not going well, even if Johnson, Cummings and others want the UK to leave the EU in December without a deal. As the idea of income tax increases was floated earlier this week, alarm bells rang and the Prime Minister yesterday had to address a hastily arranged meeting of Tory MPs to calm their nerves, though he did so to a room packed with over 50 MPs, not wearing masks, in a room where 20 was supposed to be the maximum. It remans to be seen if anyone falls ill, as has happened with meetings addressed by the President in the USA.

It means that without a vaccine that is touted as some sort of magic bullet that will bring an end to the way we live, and with spikes in new cases forcing instant lockdowns of towns and cities or areas within them, we have moved from the gradual descent from the peak of the pandemic, to a jagged fall and rise which suggest that quarantine, self-isolation and other strategies may be with us for at least another six months, with a severe impact on the economy. How much longer can the Government subsidize business?

Add to that is the prospect of the UK failing to agree a trade deal with the EU, or an agreement of principles which leaves detais to be decided at a later date. But another report claims that with the formal end of UK-EU relations starting at the end of the year no firm plans have been put in place to control border traffic-

"Boris Johnson (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/boris-johnson-0)’s government has been warned of “border chaos” at the end of the Brexit (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brexit) transition period, as a leaked government document revealed that attempts to get the UK’s ready for trade for 1 January 2021 are “unmanageable”.
Eight major groups from the logistics industry are now demanding an urgent meeting with Michael Gove (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/MichaelGove) and other senior cabinet ministers – warning that the UK’s supply chain faces “severe disruption” if infrastructure and IT systems are not fixed."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-live-brexit-keir-starmer-uk-politics-today-tony-abbott-latest-a9704536.html

Martin Kettle points out that when she was forced to resign as leader of her party, Margaret Thatcher had a majority of 101, larger than Johnson's. When he was running for the leadership there were plenty of warnings about Boris Johnson's cavalier attitude to policy, and he has demonstrated in recent months a frustration shared by most people that Covid continues to shape our lives. But while some of us accept that and the limitations it imposes on us, he wants to be rushing around doing other things, obsessed as he is with proving he has always been right about Brexit.

Johnson will survive his first year as Prime Minister- I don't expect a challenge to his leadership this December-, but will he survive 2021? The signs are not good, and even those of us who want to see him gone, cannot see much to hope for if Brexit + Covid makes a bad situation worse. Some people leaving the city for the countryside might wonder if they shoud leave the country altogether. If I was under the age of 40, I think I would leave.

Martin Kettle has a perceptive article on Johnson here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/03/boris-johnson-conservative-mps

[Stavros]

We had a right to think that by September we would be moving out of this crisis, not deeper into it. What a pathetic shower of idiots and losers this Government is!

"The UK has recorded a massive rise in the number of people testing positive for coronavirus, amid concerns the government has lost control of the epidemic just as people are returning to work and universities prepare to reopen.
Labour has demanded the health secretary, Matt Hancock (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/matt-hancock), give an urgent statement to the House of Commons to explain the increase and why some people are still being told to drive hundreds of miles to have a test."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/06/coronavirus-fears-uk-government-lost-control-cases-soar

[blackchubby38]

Here in NYC, despite New York recording record-low COVID-19 infection rates, there is still a ban on indoor dining and movie theaters are still not allowed to reopen. I understand the frustration of restaurant owners because they can never get a straight answer from either Gov. Cuomo or Mayor De Blasio on when indoor dining will be allowed. Its always "we will see" or "we don't have a plan for indoor dining to return at this time".

There is also the inconsistency when it comes to other businesses. Casinos have been allowed to reopen at reduced capacity. But there is also the inconsistency when it comes to location.

For those of you who are may not be familiar with NYC, the county of Nassau, Long Island borders the borough of Queens. Indoor dining has been allowed to return to Nassau County. It is a possible for a person to cross the border from Queens into Long Island to have a meal indoors, but not a vice a versa. That really doesn't make any sense.

Now the President has decided to way in with this tweet: “New York City must stop the Shutdown now,” “The Governor & Mayor are destroying the place!” “The Democrats will open up their states on November 4th, the day after the Election,” he wrote. “These shutdowns are ridiculous, and only being done to hurt the economy prior to the most important election, perhaps, in our history! #MAGA.”


I have never really paid attention to President Trump's tweets or buy into his conspiracy theories. But I think both Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio have to make a decision soon about when both indoor dining and movie theaters are going to be allowed to reopen. Especially the former because in a month or so, it will start getting physically uncomfortable to dine outdoors at night here in NYC.

[broncofan]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/08/world/covid-19-coronavirus.html

The Oxford/Astrazeneca trial has been paused because one person who received the vaccine has developed transverse myelitis. It is considered a severe adverse reaction though I think people have gotten it from flu vaccines as well. Still, it's not good news. We'll have to see how rare it ends up being and how this person's case develops.

[Stavros]

Here in NYC, despite New York recording record-low COVID-19 infection rates, there is still a ban on indoor dining and movie theaters are still not allowed to reopen. I understand the frustration of restaurant owners because they can never get a straight answer from either Gov. Cuomo or Mayor De Blasio on when indoor dining will be allowed. Its always "we will see" or "we don't have a plan for indoor dining to return at this time".

There is also the inconsistency when it comes to other businesses. Casinos have been allowed to reopen at reduced capacity. But there is also the inconsistency when it comes to location.


Thanks for this insight, as there is in the UK a similar contradiction, or there was as yet again public health policy has changed with an announcement last night that gatherings of more than six will be banned-

"Amid concerns that the current rules are both widely misunderstood and too difficult for police to implement, Boris Johnson (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/boris-johnson) will hold a hastily-arranged Downing Street press conference on Wednesday to outline the new restrictions.
The dramatic change of approach by No 10 follows a sudden spike in the number of people being infected with the virus, with almost 8,500 positive tests being recorded in England in the last three days."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/08/coronavirus-gatherings-of-more-than-six-to-be-banned-in-england

But how has it come to this? Because the relaxation of physical distancing and allowing people to go abroad for holidays has happened too soon. The relaxation was made because the economy needed a boost, but it may be that the assumption that declining rates of infection would not be reversed, has become more a wild guess, though new infections do not appear yet to result in a new wave of fatalities. And just as it made no sense to have rules in Queen's which are not imposed on Long Island, so it was daft to have rules that allowed people to go the pub but not to see their grandparents, and when there is a pitiful lack of an effective test and tracing system in this country, the opportunity for Covid 19 to resurge has emerged. Moreover, it is not just the UK but the European continent too, and I assume tourism is a primary factor in this new wave.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/sep/08/coronavirus-live-news-spain-cases-top-500000-in-european-first-as-global-deaths-pass-890000

What I think is also emerging that may become a serious problem, is the extent to which people may decide that Covid is going to kill a few people, make others sick, but that this is just tough -a Telegraph journalist, know for her toxic opinions, puts it thus:

"The powers of the wretched Coronabeast are waning fast. “It has burnt through the dry grass, mainly those who would have died anyway in the next few months, and now it is infecting younger age groups but not harming them,” says a scientist friend. Admissions are only a fraction of the level compared to peak of the pandemic despite warnings of a second wave rolling across Europe. “Covid has gone from our wards, has been for weeks” reports the head nurse at one of the UK’s largest hospitals..."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/britains-grip-coronafear-and-dangerous-virus/ (whole article behind paywall).

Because prominent people in Government -in the UK, in Ireland- have broken their own rules, people may become cynical and decide to ignore them. But I wonder if this is feeding into a more lawless atmosphere where illegal raves, and other street parties take place and if the police arrive they are abused and a fight breaks out. It is different in the USA because there has not been a nationwide, and effective lockdown as there was here, because of politically-motivated defiance and an apparent indifference to illness- some of the things I have seen on the news here have been staggering in this regard, though large gatherings have also been complicated by the BLM protests and the counter-protests of armed militias, one shown last night on ITV news from Louisville, Kentucky was mind-boggling -White Militias, Black Militias, and no police! And if people wore masks, it was to hide their identity not for health reasons!

So I went to see Tenet in the cinema last week, but the cinemas must close again as they did earlier in the year- I don't see how two screens limited to six people in each is viable. As for the coffee shops in town, I assume takeaways may be available, but no more sitting. New York in this regard has been stricter in its maintenance of the rules, but I wonder if we are reaching a breaking point when more and more people will just do their own thing? The behaviour and language ofthe President is appalling in this regard, but he is feeding a cynical beast that thinks Covid 19 is over-rated as a threat, and the attempt to impose the wearing of masks some sort of Marxist-Leninist plot to coerce the population into behaving the same way.

What I am not sure about is the extent to which people have, or are losing respect in their elected politicians, and how this might affect the way they vote. There was a lot of goodwill earlier in this pandemic, and people did what we had to do, and I think probably the majority may still be willing to limit their behaviour -but it can't last indefinitely, and I don't know what the next three months holds for us.

[blackchubby38]

An updated to the post that I made yesterday. NYC restaurants will be able to resume indoor dining on September 30th under the following criteria:

Restaurants will be limited to 25 percent capacity, all customers will have to submit to temperature checks, one member of each party will have to give contact tracing information, there will be no bar service -- and the public will be asked to anonymously report violations by phone or text.

Masks must be worn at all times when not seated at table and tables must be 6 feet apart.

Restaurants close at midnight.

[Stavros]

An updated to the post that I made yesterday. NYC restaurants will be able to resume indoor dining on September 30th under the following criteria:

Restaurants will be limited to 25 percent capacity, all customers will have to submit to temperature checks, one member of each party will have to give contact tracing information, there will be no bar service -- and the public will be asked to anonymously report violations by phone or text.

Masks must be worn at all times when not seated at table and tables must be 6 feet apart.

Restaurants close at midnight.

Best of luck with that one! In the UK the re-opening of cafes and restaurants was shaped by the Chancellor subsidizing the cost with his Eat Out to Help Out Scheme-(the result in my town was queues of up to 50 people outside Wagamama at lunchtimes)-

"To support restaurants and the people who work in them we’re saying ‘Eat Out to Help Out’.So for the month of August we will give you a 50% reduction, up to £10 per head, on sit-down meals and non-alcoholic drinks Monday-Wednesday. #PlanForJobs (https://twitter.com/hashtag/PlanForJobs?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) pic.twitter.com/D6eznIDjqC (https://t.co/D6eznIDjqC)
— Rishi Sunak (@RishiSunak) July 8, 2020" (https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1280834206210408449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)


Now we have two more slogan based strategies, The Rule of Six, and, get this- Operation Moonshot, est. cost £100 billion...
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3520

Cost of a real Moonshot?

"NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine offered his first concrete budget estimate for the agency's current lunar aspirations, a plan that has been dubbed the Artemis program. That plan includes recruiting commercial companies and international partners, building a lunar space station, landing humans at the moon's south pole by 2024 and framing the whole project as practicing for Mars (https://www.space.com/nasa-moon-rush-accelerating-human-mars-mission.html)."For the whole program, to get a sustainable presence on the moon, we're looking at between $20 and $30 billion..."
https://www.space.com/nasa-moon-2024-return-cost-revealed.html

Health-warning: Careful with those fags...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-KGiwGn1d8







(https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1280834206210408449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

[broncofan]

When people point out that the Flu has a mortality rate of .1% and the IFR of Covid is probably around .7% they actually understate the difference in danger between the two diseases. The Flu mortality rate is a case fatality rate which means it's based on number of deaths divided by number of positive flu tests. Although flu tests are readily available, people with mild flu symptoms don't get tested most of the time and there are asymptomatic flu cases. On the other hand, people with mild symptoms of Covid are getting tested currently and even some asymptomatic people are getting tested when their contacts test positive. As a result, it seems like a reasonable comparison to compare current CFR of Covid against the CFR of Flu. If you do that the mortality difference looks closer to about 20X rather than 7X. The only group that seems to not have an elevated risk of death with covid relative to flu are children, who are not at all immune to the effects of covid but develop serious disease infrequently.

[broncofan]

When people point out that the Flu has a mortality rate of .1% and the IFR of Covid is probably around .7% they actually understate the difference in danger between the two diseases. The Flu mortality rate is a case fatality rate which means it's based on number of deaths divided by number of positive flu tests. Although flu tests are readily available, people with mild flu symptoms don't get tested most of the time and there are asymptomatic flu cases. On the other hand, people with mild symptoms of Covid are getting tested currently and even some asymptomatic people are getting tested when their contacts test positive. As a result, it seems like a reasonable comparison to compare current CFR of Covid against the CFR of Flu. If you do that the mortality difference looks closer to about 20X rather than 7X. The only group that seems to not have an elevated risk of death with covid relative to flu are children, who are not at all immune to the effects of covid but develop serious disease infrequently.
Anyhow my point is that cfr depends upon how many mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic people get tested. If we knew the ifr of both diseases it would make for a better comparison. The IFR for seasonal flu is estimated at .025-.04%. So even if we compared ifr to ifr, a .7% ifr for Covid would still make it between 17 and 28 times as deadly.

The link below provides both cfr and ifr for seasonal flu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_disease_case_fatality_rates

[broncofan]

To add to this, there is a group of very stupid Republicans who make one or both of the following two arguments. They argue that people are dying "with covid" rather than of covid and that's it's a coincidence that people happen to die 4 weeks after they've been infected with sars-cov2 of known covid-related sequelae. I don't know what to tell you but it's strange we also have excess death numbers that are greater than recorded deaths given that people are dying by coincidence of pneumonia and blood clots shortly after being diagnosed with covid.

They also reduce the death toll to include only those who don't have any pre-existing conditions. Of course, this would reduce the death toll of Flu to practically nothing if they did that. These people know nothing about causation, about the human condition, and are low grade eugenicists. If a 50 year old with hypertension dies of covid they still died of covid, notwithstanding their hypertension. Even those who are 20 and have no pre-existing conditions but die might have some difference in the way their immune system functions to explain the fact they clear the virus less efficiently than other 20 year olds. Would someone say they died because of that difference?

The whole argument is not just stupid but dehumanizingly stupid and appalling.

[Stavros]

So, from Eat Out to Help Out, The Rule of Six and Operation Moonshot, we expect the Prime Minister, probably on Tuesday to announce a Circuit Break strategy that will localize lockdowns where there has been a surge of Covid 19. A circuit break was first introduced in Singapore, and is the latest attempt by this useless Government to Take Back Control of a pandemic that appears to be, after six months, reverting to what it was when it began. Rather like the EU Withdrawal Agreement that tossed the conduct of Parliamentary business into chaos before ousting Theresa May and replacing her with a man, Boris Johnson, who hailed his version of the Withdrawal Agreement 'a triumph' when it was 95% the same as the one which led him to resign as Foreign Secretary, and which is now before the House as so flawed a document the men who wrote it now stand up in the Commons to say they will defy its provisions as related to Northern Ireland and knowingly break the law.

So serious has this become that Johnson's own party, the Stalinist party of Brexit shorn of its 'Remain' traitors (once known as 'Conservatives'), is now saying, in effect, that he has six months to Take Back Control of the agenda or lose his position. It is a somewhat bitter irony that the man who adopted Brexit without once thinking through the details of it, now faces oblivion because his effulgent and positive view of the process has circled back on him because nobody in 2016 thought much about how Northern Ireland could be taken out of the EU without violating the Good Friday Agreement, just as since Covid 19 Johnson has failed to implement a nationwide and severe reign of austerity to strangle the virus- panicking in July to allow the very relaxation of the lockdown rules that has both led to a resurgence of the virus, while threatening the economy a second time, yet with a record of amateurish bungling -a 'world beating' test and trace system that flopped on the Isle of Wight, so the world can be relieved it wasn't tried on them.

Then we hear this from the new head of the Test and Trace system, Dido Harding-

"The head of the NHS test-and-trace programme, Dido Harding, told MPs on Thursday demand for tests was outstripping supply by three to four times – and conceded the sharp increase as children returned to schools had not been anticipated."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/18/circuit-break-plans-for-england-to-prevent-new-covid-lockdown

Had not been anticipated? Hello? Is anyone there? Year Six? Year One?

Other reports claim that Boris has put on a lot of weight since returning from hospital, that he is complaining that his apartment in No 10 is too small, they only have one cleaner, and he has had to take such a large pay cut from his previous income as a journalist that he can't afford a nanny, plus those other costs, given that of the six chidren he has fathered by, I think, four different women, he must provide for four of them. Life is tough at the top, eh, Boris?

He is not alone, as I have rarely seen such a miserable bunch of useless incompetents calling themselves the British Government. The same party that gave us Grenfell Tower -a scandal the details of which have but trickled out in the last 18 months- is now in an inferno of its own making, with Brexit simmering away, waiting to blow its top.

Somebody, send help! We are struggling, and are in need. America, if you can't spare Batman, Robin will do.

[broncofan]

https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/29/regenerons-covid-19-antibody-may-help-non-hospitalized-patients-recover-faster-early-data-show/

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-treatment-regeneron/regeneron-says-its-covid-19-treatment-reduces-viral-levels-improves-symptoms-idINKBN26L08A

Regeneron, which is a biotech company that specializes in the production of monoclonal antibodies, has just released a limited amount of data for its antibody cocktail. The data shows that when the antibodies were given to people in early disease, viral load was reduced, and time to recovery was significantly reduced. I've read that the most impressive result was in a subgroup, specifically those who were labeled "seronegative", meaning at the time of treatment didn't produce much in the way of their own antibodies (Igg I believe but I don't know).

We don't have survival rate data yet because this was administered in mild to moderate disease. There would be a major logistical challenge if this is only effective in early disease, as it's administered intravenously. Furthermore, the effective dose was 8 grams, which is considered a high dose of a monoclonal antibody which is already expensive to produce. One can do the math of 8 grams times 40,000 daily cases to get the per day production that would be needed for early disease.

Anyhow, the take away is that the results were promising. Viral load over time is correlated with case severity and reduction in the symptomatic period is an important marker. It will take some time to see whether this is effective in preventing death in serious disease. I'm a bit less interested in the prophylactic arm simply because I think a vaccine will be available in limited supply by the time it could be approved but it's still useful to have a treatment bc the vaccine might not provide sterilizing immunity and some people might not get vaccinated.

[broncofan]

Just one last thing about this. According to Eric Topol, a doctor at Scripps who I follow on twitter, monoclonal antibodies will likely be approved by December or January. The reason clinical trials were delayed is because the pool of people available for trials was sucked up by hydroxychloroquine trials and because testing turnaround was so bad people couldn't be enrolled.

I am not sure whether Trump will get an infusion of monoclonal antibodies early in disease but it's unlikely. I've read that he has a fever and cough.

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1312055397985910784

[broncofan]

Update: he did get an infusion of the Regeneron antibody and was started on Remdesivir.

What's puzzling is that his doctor acknowledged that he has also been started on dexamethasone. This is not just an aggressive treatment but there are known risks associated with giving steroids to someone too early in disease. Steroids work because they have mild immunosuppressing effects. Of course you hope that their suppression of deadly inflammation is greater than their suppression of your ability to fight a virus, but that's why the calculus makes more sense in severe disease. I'll include a link to a medical professional saying it, but I don't think a doctor would give a covid patient dexamethasone unless he thought he had more than mild symptoms.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1312788769058283522

[broncofan]

https://twitter.com/sciencecohen/status/1312852480632541184?s=20

Here is a three tweet thread from Jon Cohen of Science Magazine about the dangers of giving dexamethasone too early. It has an article attached that I haven't read yet, but I've found their articles to be very thorough while still being digestible for non-scientists.

[Stavros]

"The speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/nancy-pelosi), has taken aim at the British vaccine testing safety regime, warning that UK approval of a vaccine would not automatically mean it was safe according to the US’s own procedures.
Amid a race to produce an effective vaccine against Covid-19 that meets broad international acceptance for safety, Pelosi’s comments appear partly motivated by concern that any quick and unilateral British approval of a vaccine might be embraced by Donald Trump for political gain, perhaps even before the 3 November election."

What a silly, petulant comment by Speaker Pelosi, and frankly an insult to scientists in the UK. And for what, to get one over on the President? She would be better off looking at where the money is going in the US and ask how it is that the President is treated with a drug that was developed (in part from the tissue of an aborted fetus) by one his golfing buddies and the company he used to own shares in. Vaccines must be about public safety as well as medical effectiveness, but right now there isn't one, but there is a corrupt link between politics and pharmaceuticals, and it into that mix where Pelosi ought to be raking her greasy stick.

[broncofan]

The President of the United States has spent the last seven months touting hydroxychloroquine, which was shown not to work by May. As early as April, most scientists thought the best chance of a new, effective therapeutic would be the development of monoclonal antibodies. Phase II data are suggestive of efficacy but we still don't have proof they can save lives.

Trump has spoken the words monoclonal antibodies zero times in the last seven months. Even after getting an infusion of them produced by Regeneron he thinks the drug name is "Regeneron" and also doesn't appear to be aware of the fact that Eli Lilly, Sorrento and several other companies are testing their own cloned antibodies. As I've said before, the clinical trials have been delayed because of Trump's politically motivated obsession with hydroxychloroquine.

He also didn't invest enough federal money to produce monoclonals "at risk" so that if they're proven safe and effective they'd be widely available. Now he's touting Regeneron's treatment as a cure, which it surely isn't and his soft-headed son Eric has referred to the treatment his dad received as a vaccine, which it also isn't. Hopefully Trump's loss is clear cut because this is getting to be too much.

[blackchubby38]

"The speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/nancy-pelosi), has taken aim at the British vaccine testing safety regime, warning that UK approval of a vaccine would not automatically mean it was safe according to the US’s own procedures.
Amid a race to produce an effective vaccine against Covid-19 that meets broad international acceptance for safety, Pelosi’s comments appear partly motivated by concern that any quick and unilateral British approval of a vaccine might be embraced by Donald Trump for political gain, perhaps even before the 3 November election."

What a silly, petulant comment by Speaker Pelosi, and frankly an insult to scientists in the UK. And for what, to get one over on the President? She would be better off looking at where the money is going in the US and ask how it is that the President is treated with a drug that was developed (in part from the tissue of an aborted fetus) by one his golfing buddies and the company he used to own shares in. Vaccines must be about public safety as well as medical effectiveness, but right now there isn't one, but there is a corrupt link between politics and pharmaceuticals, and it into that mix where Pelosi ought to be raking her greasy stick.

Of all the countries and their scientists that I would trust to come up with a safe vaccine it would be Great Britain, regardless of who your guys PM is.

Its October 11th. Even if one of the pharmaceutical companies on either side of the Atlantic would to come up with a vaccine by the end of the month, I don't think its going to have an impact on the U.S. Presidential Elections. It also probably wouldn't be available for widespread distribution either. So I don't know why Pelosi had to make that statement.

[broncofan]

Throughout covid it has always been pretty easy to identify a medical consensus.

When a vaccine is made available, whether it's from Britain or from the U.S., there will be a lot of information available and a lot commentary on what the data tell us from experts.

I haven't really understood those Democrats who say they won't take a vaccine made available under Trump. If the data were strong enough and the FDA approves it, Trump's view shouldn't matter.

Finally, I have no idea whether the regulatory guidelines in Britain for vaccines are more or less stringent than they are in the U.S. Pelosi's comment is technically correct that one country's regulatory approval shouldn't be binding on our FDA, but given how compromised our FDA has become, maybe she should wait and see what data is made available.

[broncofan]

I haven't really understood those Democrats who say they won't take a vaccine made available under Trump. If the data were strong enough and the FDA approves it, Trump's view shouldn't matter.
What i mean is that if we're worried about a vaccine that is rushed through the regulatory process you don't have to judge its safety by Trump's comments. People will demand that the data be publicly available and will see what the foremost experts have to say about the strength of the evidence.

[blackchubby38]

Throughout covid it has always been pretty easy to identify a medical consensus.

When a vaccine is made available, whether it's from Britain or from the U.S., there will be a lot of information available and a lot commentary on what the data tell us from experts.

I haven't really understood those Democrats who say they won't take a vaccine made available under Trump. If the data were strong enough and the FDA approves it, Trump's view shouldn't matter.

Finally, I have no idea whether the regulatory guidelines in Britain for vaccines are more or less stringent than they are in the U.S. Pelosi's comment is technically correct that one country's regulatory approval shouldn't be binding on our FDA, but given how compromised our FDA has become, maybe she should wait and see what data is made available.

A while back, all the CEOs of the major pharmaceutical companies said that no matter what pressure is exert on them, they will not release a vaccine until it has gone through the necessary trials and gets approved by the FDA. Even if you take into consideration the bad reputation that pharmaceutical companies have (some of which is earned), I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. The ramifications of releasing a rushed vaccine to market can have a significant impact on people's health, not the mention the bottom line of the company whose name is on it.

I think there are some Democrats who are just so blinded by their hatred for Trump that will automatically dismiss anything that is associated with him. Even if it is something as positive as a vaccine.

[broncofan]

I think there are some Democrats who are just so blinded by their hatred for Trump that will automatically dismiss anything that is associated with him. Even if it is something as positive as a vaccine.
I understand the skepticism about anything associated with him, as we have 5 times more deaths per capita than the average country. Than average! This man talks about great, average beat him by 500%.

He also promoted a drug that failed in numerous clinical trials and fired Rick Bright, a man with decades of experience making vaccines because he wouldn't promote his fascist sugar pill. He compounded that by gumming up the clinical trials of treatments that could succeed, then getting a compassionate use exemption for himself for a drug whose trials his actions got delayed and is now bragging it's a cure.

If the only evidence of a vaccine's effectiveness were Trump's word, I'd have nothing to do with it. But the vaccines really have very little to do with him and the regulatory process will as well. Under any administration we'd have at least as robust a program and a different President would have required Slaoui to divest his stock portfolio as well. But by the time you or I get a vaccine I expect we'll be told what percentage of people it's expected to prevent disease in and how that is inferred and how many people had serious side effects. If a company is not transparent about the data, I will have concerns, but Trump will be irrelevant as long as he doesn't inadvertently get in the way.

[blackchubby38]

I just submitted all my information for vaccine trials. I'll report back once I hear something.

An update. This is an email that I received this morning:

Thank you for completing a survey and joining the COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN) Volunteer Screening Registry. We are so thankful for your willingness to consider research to help fight the COVID-19 pandemic.

Can You Help Us?

As you may know, older adults have the most hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 of any group in the United States. So far, not many persons older than age 70 have signed up in this registry.

If you know of someone in your life who is older than age 70 and interested in participating in coronavirus prevention research, would you consider passing along our website to them (https://www.PreventCOVID.org/ )? For persons without internet access, or who do not feel comfortable with online forms, they can also call our toll-free registry at 866-CVT-1919 (866-288-1919).

Again, thank you for joining the CoVPN Volunteer Screening Registry. You are making a difference! You may still be contacted by researchers who can tell you more about upcoming studies. If we do not contact you, that means there is no study that we can match you with right now. New studies continue to be planned over the next few months.

Thank you!! We appreciate your help and support.

[blackchubby38]

Speaking of Nancy Pelosi and her petulance.

//www.yahoo.com/news/pelosi-calls-cn-ns-blitzer-an-apologist-for-the-gop-in-heated-exchange-over-stimulus-bill-230555851.html

This is the second time that she has accused a news anchor of being an Republican apologist because someone asked her what the Republicans offered in negotiations. The first time was with Judy Wooddruff from PBS if I'm not mistaken.

I don't see what the problem is with making deal now where you might not getting everything you want and then if Biden wins the election, doing another stimulus deal once he is sworn into office.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Speaking of Nancy Pelosi and her petulance.

//www.yahoo.com/news/pelosi-calls-cn-ns-blitzer-an-apologist-for-the-gop-in-heated-exchange-over-stimulus-bill-230555851.html

This is the second time that she has accused a news anchor of being an Republican apologist because someone asked her what the Republicans offered in negotiations. The first time was with Judy Wooddruff from PBS if I'm not mistaken.

I don't see what the problem is with making deal now where you might not getting everything you want and then if Biden wins the election, doing another stimulus deal once he is sworn into office.I watched that interview and Nancy Pelosi very disrespectful and combative towards CNN's Wolf Blitzer,by talking over and accusing him of being a Republican Apologist when all he was trying to do was ask her questions about what the Republicans offered in negotiations for a new stimulus deal, and her petulance was on full display in the interview,and i also don't see what the problem is with making a deal where the Democrats might not be getting everything they want.

[Stavros]

An excellent, if depressing overview of the management or mis-management of COVID-19 in the US, some of which can be applied to the UK.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/opinion/coronavirus-united-states.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

[broncofan]

There are some people who think it's unfair to blame Trump for our bad covid outcomes. Yet this country didn't have any inherent disadvantages in dealing with it when it comes to our resources, our geography, and the number of great scientists we have.

It is not just that culturally Americans are resistant to taking measures that protect other people. That message has been boosted by Trump and its impacts magnified by segments of the public who think any sacrifice they are asked to make is an infringement on their liberty. Off the top of my head, here are things I've heard Trump say:
1. Covid is like the flu
2. Covid only kills old people
3. A vaccine will be available in three months (he said this in early March)
4. A vaccine will be available in October (he said this during his debate with Biden in October; there's one day left in the month)
5. Hydroxychloroquine treats covid and randomized controlled trials showing it doesn't are run by Trump-haters
6. Monoclonal antibodies are a cure (the most recent data shows efficacy in early disease and none in hospitalized patients)
7. Masks aren't effective (said as late as October)
8. We're going to open the economy by Easter
9. Disinfectant and uv light inside the body can treat covid
10. Fauci has been wrong about everything (most of the things he's accused of being wrong about are taken out of context)
11. We're rounding the corner and the virus will go away (said recently as daily cases explode to 90,000 a day)
12. When the weather warms up it will disappear on its own.
13. Liberate Michigan (a call for insurrection against very reasonable public health measures at the beginning of the first shutdown)
14. Making fun of his opponent wearing a mask during a debate in which he was probably already sick with covid

The people who don't think he can be blamed for 150,000 deaths must think it's a coincidence that he's saying things that misinform people about the virus, about the trajectory of infections, and about their risk and that we've done a terrible job in containing it. Seems to me that kind of cavalier attitude towards the truth is what endangers people during a pandemic.

[Stavros]

The way in which the President and his son are claiming deaths are now so low as to be unremarkable is so stark in its repudiation of the facts, one wonders if they have given up, and are torching the shed before they leave? As for 'rounding the corner', the evidence suggests the USA is going round in circles, or that Covid-19 is running rings around America. Unless, and until those ignorant fools mask up and shut down their space, then Covid-19 will be free to roam. Not the kind of freedom America, or anywhere else wants.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

There are some people who think it's unfair to blame Trump for our bad covid outcomes. Yet this country didn't have any inherent disadvantages in dealing with it when it comes to our resources, our geography, and the number of great scientists we have.

It is not just that culturally Americans are resistant to taking measures that protect other people. That message has been boosted by Trump and its impacts magnified by segments of the public who think any sacrifice they are asked to make is an infringement on their liberty. Off the top of my head, here are things I've heard Trump say:
1. Covid is like the flu
2. Covid only kills old people
3. A vaccine will be available in three months (he said this in early March)
4. A vaccine will be available in October (he said this during his debate with Biden in October; there's one day left in the month)
5. Hydroxychloroquine treats covid and randomized controlled trials showing it doesn't are run by Trump-haters
6. Monoclonal antibodies are a cure (the most recent data shows efficacy in early disease and none in hospitalized patients)
7. Masks aren't effective (said as late as October)
8. We're going to open the economy by Easter
9. Disinfectant and uv light inside the body can treat covid
10. Fauci has been wrong about everything (most of the things he's accused of being wrong about are taken out of context)
11. We're rounding the corner and the virus will go away (said recently as daily cases explode to 90,000 a day)
12. When the weather warms up it will disappear on its own.
13. Liberate Michigan (a call for insurrection against very reasonable public health measures at the beginning of the first shutdown)
14. Making fun of his opponent wearing a mask during a debate in which he was probably already sick with covid

The people who don't think he can be blamed for 150,000 deaths must think it's a coincidence that he's saying things that misinform people about the virus, about the trajectory of infections, and about their risk and that we've done a terrible job in containing it. Seems to me that kind of cavalier attitude towards the truth is what endangers people during a pandemic.Donald-D.A.M.N-Trump has been completely wrong on all of those misguided claims he has made over the last 9 months ,and his comments shows that he doesn't believe in science or facts,and doesn't know what the hell he is talking about and is living in an alternative reality. and also shows how uneducated and unhinged he is. and the people who think that he shouldn't be blamed for the 150,000 deaths due his mishandling of the CO-VID 19 Pandemic are delusional and tonedeafed. and agree that kind of cavalier attitude towards the truth is what endangers people during a pandemic.

[filghy2]

Meanwhile, in another universe far, far away (perhaps we could call it Sanity World).

The COVID-19 second wave in Melbourne has been brought under control, with no new cases for 10 days now.

Two recent state elections have seen incumbent governments comfortably returned, as also occurred in New Zealand - indicating that voters are prepared to reward politicians would do a competent job of managing the virus, despite the hit to the economy. The Trump-style populists saw a big fall in their vote.

The conservative Prime Minister of Australia has congratulated Joe Biden on his win and invited him to visit next year.

[Stavros]

There may be a clash in the US as Mike Pence 'renews' his leadership of the Covid-19 Taskforce later today (Monday) while the Transition Team announce the membership of ther own. In normal times, the Transition Team would be given the money and the office space to organize their own transition, plus any help the outgoing Presidency provides, which at this time of writing is nothing. I am about to link some claims re this in the election thread.

The President complained about 'Covid, Covid, Covid' dominating the news, and said after the 3rd you would not hear about it. Perhaps that is the measure of the man, and that the first reactions of his party to his defeat was led by Rudolph Giuliani in the car park of a garden centre cited next to a sex shop and a cremation centre...

[broncofan]

Pfizer, which was not part of Operation Warp Speed, has released early data showing it prevented infection in 90% of people. It will eventually qualify for an emergency use authorization in the U.S. and also be distributed in several other countries. Some say the positive results bode well for other vaccines currently in trials, including Moderna which uses similar technology and is expected to have enough data to release results by the end of this month.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/covid-19-vaccine-from-pfizer-and-biontech-is-strongly-effective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/ (https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/covid-19-vaccine-from-pfizer-and-biontech-is-strongly-effective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/)

[Stavros]

I think the time has come for the Administration to do something unprecedented and invite President-Elect Biden's Covid-19 team to begin working with Mike Pence with immediate effect, or this is the kind of senseless drivel that will guarantee another million infections, and God hows how many more deaths.

We may need to start linking the policies of this Government with Crimes Against Humanity, and all that implies with regard to indictments.

"Dr. Scott Atlas (https://www.huffpost.com/topic/scott-atlas), the White House’s controversial coronavirus adviser, encouraged an insurrection on Sunday against Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) over Michigan’s new COVID-19 safety protocols meant to curb the state’s skyrocketing infection rates.
The remarks by Atlas, who is a neuroradiologist with no formal training in treating infectious diseases, came in response to the Democratic governor announcing an epidemic order (https://www.freep.com/story/news/health/2020/11/15/covid-19-restrictions-3-week-lockdown-shutdown-high-schools-colleges/6305432002/) starting Wednesday for at least three weeks. The new Michigan Department of Health and Human Services regulations (https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98178_98455-545136--,00.html) halt in-person learning for high schools and colleges, indoor dining, theaters, stadiums, organized sports, casinos and group exercise classes.
“The only way this stops is if people rise up,” the Trump adviser tweeted (https://twitter.com/SWAtlasHoover/status/1328120887128842240) in response to the new regulations. “You get what you accept. #FreedomMatters #StepUp” "
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-covid19-adviser-tells-michigan-rise-up-whitmer-restrictions-043820011.html

[broncofan]

Pfizer, which was not part of Operation Warp Speed, has released early data showing it prevented infection in 90% of people. It will eventually qualify for an emergency use authorization in the U.S. and also be distributed in several other countries. Some say the positive results bode well for other vaccines currently in trials, including Moderna which uses similar technology and is expected to have enough data to release results by the end of this month.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/covid-19-vaccine-from-pfizer-and-biontech-is-strongly-effective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/ (https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/covid-19-vaccine-from-pfizer-and-biontech-is-strongly-effective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/)
As expected, Moderna's mrna vaccine was successful just like Pfizer's (94.5% efficacy v 90% efficacy) and will probably get emergency use authorization before the end of the year. One benefit of Moderna's vaccine is that it doesn't require storage at extremely cold temperatures and when it reaches point of delivery it can be kept at refrigerator temperatures for 30 days before it denatures. This makes it logistically much easier to get to remote places than the Pfizer vaccine, which will need special packing at every step of transit and sensors to make sure there aren't even transient temperature increases.

The only thing Donald Trump deserves credit for is having a pandemic so out of control that data collection occurred quickly during Phase III. All things equal, it would have been preferable to have fewer cases and deaths and to collect data a bit more slowly even if it meant we have to wait a couple extra months.

The data showed only 5 infections so far in the vaccine group. The fact that none of them was severe is notable though not statistically significant yet. The hope is that when people are infected the disease is also less severe. But just the fact that it's 94.5% effective at preventing disease is a great sign so far.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27W1E6

[broncofan]

We may need to start linking the policies of this Government with Crimes Against Humanity, and all that implies with regard to indictments.

Thank you for this, including the portion about the disgraceful Dr. Atlas. It is difficult to find a doctor who is less respected among his peers. At a time when the virus is out of control and hospitalizations are at an all-time high he is stoking division and undermining public health. There have been epidemiological studies that have evaluated the effectiveness of our public health response. For the most part, we have had almost no national response and the response of our states has been undermined by the public messaging of the President. Most of these studies say that a modest degree of top down leadership would have prevented more than 100,000 deaths and a study from Columbia University estimated 130,000-210,000 deaths could have been prevented.

What is striking about Trump's public statements is that he's made no attempt to learn about the disease spreading all over this country. There is a difference between those who questioned the efficacy of mask use in early March when we weren't certain there was pre-symptomatic spread and those who have done so 6 months into the pandemic. There is a difference between saying one is hopeful about hydroxychloroquine in March and saying it after an unprecedented number of RCTs show it isn't. For many people, there is a learning curve but for the President there are a series of impulses directed by his ego, without regard for the effect of his statements on people's compliance with public health recommendations.

Scott Atlas is the latest example of how easy it is for a leader to cherry-pick experts to support his policy preferences. He can do it in climate science, he can do it in law, and he has done it in the response to this pandemic (though as you note Atlas is not an infectious disease doc). It is possible for the consensus view of any field to be wrong but when you consistently seek out marginal voices to say things that are convenient for you, it undermines public welfare.

Edit: might as well include this since I've mentioned it a couple times:

https://ncdp.columbia.edu/custom-content/uploads/2020/10/Avoidable-COVID-19-Deaths-US-NCDP.pdf

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I think the time has come for the Administration to do something unprecedented and invite President-Elect Biden's Covid-19 team to begin working with Mike Pence with immediate effect, or this is the kind of senseless drivel that will guarantee another million infections, and God hows how many more deaths.

We may need to start linking the policies of this Government with Crimes Against Humanity, and all that implies with regard to indictments.

"Dr. Scott Atlas (https://www.huffpost.com/topic/scott-atlas), the White House’s controversial coronavirus adviser, encouraged an insurrection on Sunday against Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) over Michigan’s new COVID-19 safety protocols meant to curb the state’s skyrocketing infection rates.
The remarks by Atlas, who is a neuroradiologist with no formal training in treating infectious diseases, came in response to the Democratic governor announcing an epidemic order (https://www.freep.com/story/news/health/2020/11/15/covid-19-restrictions-3-week-lockdown-shutdown-high-schools-colleges/6305432002/) starting Wednesday for at least three weeks. The new Michigan Department of Health and Human Services regulations (https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98178_98455-545136--,00.html) halt in-person learning for high schools and colleges, indoor dining, theaters, stadiums, organized sports, casinos and group exercise classes.
“The only way this stops is if people rise up,” the Trump adviser tweeted (https://twitter.com/SWAtlasHoover/status/1328120887128842240) in response to the new regulations. “You get what you accept. #FreedomMatters #StepUp” "
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-covid19-adviser-tells-michigan-rise-up-whitmer-restrictions-043820011.htmlAgree and also think it is time for the Trump Administration to do something unprecedented and invite President-Elect Biden's CO-VID 19 to the White House to begin working with Mike Pence with immediate effect,And the remarks made by Dr. Scott Atlas's againist Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer were despicable and dangerous,and shouldn't speak on things he knows nothing about and should keep his remarks to himself,and let people who are qualified speak to the public.

[broncofan]

Of all the countries and their scientists that I would trust to come up with a safe vaccine it would be Great Britain, regardless of who your guys PM is.

The main vaccine being produced in the UK is an adenovirus vector vaccine by Oxford and Astrazeneca in partnership. It is a different class of vaccine to the ones produced by Pfizer and Moderna shots, which are mrna vaccines.

These vaccines are engineered to deliver the genetic instructions to make the sarscov2 spike protein inside an adenovirus, which is one of the types of viruses that causes the cold. My understanding is that the viral vector is the vehicle for getting those genes into our own DNA since that's how viruses reproduce themselves. One of the challenges with this kind of vaccine is that our immune systems can identify and attack the adenovirus before it gets to our cells which would make it ineffective. To avoid this problem Oxford is using Chimpanzee adenovirus because our immune systems will not have encountered it. There is still the possibility that if immunity to covid wanes over time and we need boosters our immune systems might recognize and attack the adenovirus more robustly the second time.

Anyhow, the results of the Oxford/Astrazeneca vaccine are expected soon. Johnson and Johnson also has an adenovirus vector vaccine that a lot of people are excited about but there were delays in the clinical trials and they are not expected to complete them for at least another month. Johnson and Johnson's vaccine is being tested in single dose trials which is important given manufacturing constraints. It can also be refrigerated for 3 months, which provides much less logistical challenge than the vaccine by Pfizer.

Although Pfizer's vaccine was the first one approved it remains to be seen whether it will be the most utilized. It already looks like Moderna's vaccine will be easier to supply and others are on the way.

[broncofan]

Johnson and Johnson's vaccine is being tested in single dose trials which is important given manufacturing constraints.
Turns out Johnson & Johnson also just started trials with two doses. One might speculate it shows a lack of confidence in their single dose program but it's probably the responsible thing to do in case two doses is much more effective.
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/j-j-erring-caution-tests-new-two-dose-regimen-for-covid-vaccine

[Stavros]

If there is going to be a coup in the US, maybe someone should remove Kristi Noem from her office before South Dakota returns to the stone age, assuming it is not her aspiration.

"Coronavirus in South Dakota is running at an intensity (https://globalepidemics.org/key-metrics-for-covid-suppression/) only surpassed in the US by its neighbor North Dakota. The state has an alarming positivity rate of almost 60% – nearly six out of 10 people who take a Covid test are infected – second only to another neighbor, Wyoming.
...
Amid this devastating contagion, Noem is rigidly sticking to the strategy she has adopted since the pandemic began. It consists of a refusal to accept mask mandates (https://rapidcityjournal.com/opinion/gov-noem-update-on-south-dakota-s-covid-19-response/article_586e2456-23c0-5ba0-bb06-5fc78d084593.html) and repeated denial (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-sd-state-wire-health-south-dakota-kristi-noem-6f2bfed4eb2e3311217ca4470eb58517) of the science around the efficacy of wearing masks; resistance to imposing any restrictions on bars and restaurants; no limits on gatherings in churches or other places of worship; and no orders to stay at home.
While the statistics are clear – the virus is running wild in South Dakota – Noem has turned a public health emergency into an issue of “freedom” and “liberty”, consistently lying about the trajectory of the disease under her watch. “We’re doing really good in South Dakota. We’re managing Covid-19,” she has said. (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-health-south-dakota-f967a1a56b798f43ae0d2be971b27b39)"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/19/kristi-noem-trump-strategy-denial-covid-ravages-south-dakota

[broncofan]

The results for the Oxford Astrazeneca vaccine trial have come in and there is now a third effective vaccine. The efficacy was 70%, which was not as good as Pfizer or Moderna but it is still very good since 50% is typically considered good enough for approval. Those who led the trial say that when they gave volunteers a small initial dose with the full second dose the efficacy was 90%. We'll see if that holds over time but it's still fairly good news. The vaccine is easier to store and transport than Pfizer's vaccine and the results here bode well for Johnson and Johnson's vaccine using similar technology.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html)

[broncofan]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html)
This article by BBC is much better imo. It addresses the question of whether the result is "disappointing". It is not disappointing really. If the 70% result had come in before Moderna and Pfizer's data it would be heralded as a great success and it has logistical advantages over those vaccines. It also explains a possible reason why a subgroup that got an initial small dose may have had a better result. All of these studies are looking at serious disease in secondary analysis. The endpoint is number of symptomatic cases, but so far the vaccines do look like when they don't prevent symptomatic cases they may prevent serious disease though it probably takes a lot more data to establish that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55040635

[KnightHawk 2.0]

If there is going to be a coup in the US, maybe someone should remove Kristi Noem from her office before South Dakota returns to the stone age, assuming it is not her aspiration.

"Coronavirus in South Dakota is running at an intensity (https://globalepidemics.org/key-metrics-for-covid-suppression/) only surpassed in the US by its neighbor North Dakota. The state has an alarming positivity rate of almost 60% – nearly six out of 10 people who take a Covid test are infected – second only to another neighbor, Wyoming.
...
Amid this devastating contagion, Noem is rigidly sticking to the strategy she has adopted since the pandemic began. It consists of a refusal to accept mask mandates (https://rapidcityjournal.com/opinion/gov-noem-update-on-south-dakota-s-covid-19-response/article_586e2456-23c0-5ba0-bb06-5fc78d084593.html) and repeated denial (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-sd-state-wire-health-south-dakota-kristi-noem-6f2bfed4eb2e3311217ca4470eb58517) of the science around the efficacy of wearing masks; resistance to imposing any restrictions on bars and restaurants; no limits on gatherings in churches or other places of worship; and no orders to stay at home.
While the statistics are clear – the virus is running wild in South Dakota – Noem has turned a public health emergency into an issue of “freedom” and “liberty”, consistently lying about the trajectory of the disease under her watch. “We’re doing really good in South Dakota. We’re managing Covid-19,” she has said. (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-health-south-dakota-f967a1a56b798f43ae0d2be971b27b39)"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/19/kristi-noem-trump-strategy-denial-covid-ravages-south-dakotaSouth Dakota Governor Kristi Noem is just as delusional and tonedeafed about the CO-VID 19 Pandemic as Donald Trump is,and her comments shows that she doesn't believe in science or facts.

[Stavros]

A report from South Dakota on Channel 4 News in the UK last night suggests little is going to change in the State and that as a result more people will fall ill, and too many die. In the same segment one citizen believes his indiviidual liberty cannot, and should not be interfered with by a politician, moments later, a nurse pointing out every hospital bed in the State is full and that they cannot cope with the impact of the virus. She conceded that however angry she is with the irresponsible people who take no action to limit their interactions with others, she is powerless to change the way they behave.

Individual liberty is indeed a precious right, but 'no man is an island, entire unto himself', and until people -in whatever country they live- recognize that their social behaviour has consequences for others that mght threaten their liberty, this virus will have a happy home, and home have unhappy families.

[broncofan]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/27/oxford-who-scientists-more-data-needed-on-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine-trials-.html

Over the past few days there have been some concerns about the quality of the data provided from the Oxford/Astrazeneca trials. The larger trial showed efficacy of 62% for two doses of the vaccine. A second protocol, carried out in a smaller cohort that only included people between the ages of 18 and 55, and which used a half dose followed by a full dose, had an efficacy of 90%. The reported efficacy of 70% was the average of these groups.

It turns out that the half shot was administered by mistake. They discovered it was a half dose after the fact and were surprised that this resulted in higher efficacy though there are questions about the fact that the group did not include elderly people. There are also questions about whether it should have been averaged with the data from the two full shot protocol since they were different study designs. Will there be further studies of the half dose/full dose regimen to establish its efficacy?

It will probably get approved in most places and its price and logistical advantages are important. More in the times article below.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/business/coronavirus-vaccine-astrazeneca-oxford.html

[broncofan]

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/absolutely-remarkable-no-one-who-got-modernas-vaccine-trial-developed-severe-covid-19

This is a good write up on the most recent results from the Moderna vaccine trials. The vaccine had 94% efficacy in preventing symptomatic disease and none of the people in the vaccine arm developed severe disease. That is going to be an important measure to watch as 6% of millions of people is still a substantial number of people with covid once everyone is vaccinated.

So far it looks like Moderna's vaccine is the most promising. It doesn't need to be stored at super cold temperatures like Pfizer's and is much more effective than the Oxford/Astrazeneca vaccine.

The FDA makes the decision on EUA approval on December 17th and Moderna hopes to provide 20 million doses by the end of the year.

[Stavros]

On the one hand it seems to me that it is the lack of a robust system of barrier measures in the US that is resulting in record numbers of people falling ill, and dying from Covid 19. The White House holds parties where people without masks congregate, apparently Secretary of State Pompeo will have Christmas parties where people can congregate without masks, and when the White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany spoke to reporters yesterday her husband stood at the back of the room not wearing a mask. As for those Governors who refuse to impose severe limits to human congregation, perhaps iike the President they don't much care how many people die or fall ill when there is Golf to play.

On the other hand, I ought to be pleased to report the first vaccines against Covid 19 have arrived in the UK from Belgium, even that there are signs that the R rate is declining, but even as the UK continues to struggle with this viral infection and its management. Does it mean the US should adopt the social distancing measures the UK has imposed -even though they appear inadequate when compared to countries with a better record?

Designating parts of the country as being in three Tiers of severity means, for example, that in Tier 2 "pubs and bars can also open until 23:00, but only if they operate as a restaurant. Alcohol can only be served with a substantial meal"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52977388

But if you thought that was clear, try defining what a 'subsantial meal' actually is, because Michael Gove, who along with Chancellor Rishi Sunak is one of the most favoured replacements for Boris Johnson should he be ousted in the year ahead, has, shall we say, 'egg on his face' by failing to convince anyone, let alone himself, what a 'substantial meal' is.

When it turns on a Scotch Egg, you have to wonder if three tiers make sense -in the space of an hour, Gove on the Radio confirmed that a Scotch Egg is a 'starter' not a substantial meal. An hour later he said ""A scotch egg is a substantial meal. I myself would definitely scoff a couple of scotch eggs if I had the chance".
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/overegging-it-michael-gove-scrambled-by-substantial-meal-farce/01/12/

Hmmm...one Scotch Egg is a Starter, two is a meal? Could that be where the distinction lies?

And for the record, the Scots had nothing to do with this egg, boiled and encased in sand. But the true origins are disputed -it originated as a snack -yes, a snack- for the rich to take with them on long carriage journeys, or to be taken on the long train journey from London to Ediburgh; or it originated in India, and like Kedgeree was brought back to the dining tables of old Colonials...or, whatever. If you must, buy one in a pub with your ale, and get tucked in. And don't worry what the Americans will use as a substitute if they have Tier 2 restrictions and bars can only open if they serve a 'substantial meal'.

I wonder what Tucker Carlson would make of it?

The wondrous contentions of the Scotch Egg are debated here-
https://theculturetrip.com/europe/united-kingdom/england/articles/the-contentious-history-of-the-scotch-egg/

[sukumvit boy]

China's Covid-19 gambit

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6522/1263

[Stavros]

China's Covid-19 gambit

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6522/1263

Thank you for linking this fascinating article. On the one hand, China is good at a lot of things -science, selling itself abroad, and they now need to use the positives to repair a damaging virus that has possibly slowed foreign investment in China for a decade. On the other hand, China is aso good at lying, deceiving and using 'stuff' -infrastructure development in Africa, these vaccines - to 'make friends and influence people'. So, in the article, it is stated in one paragraph that "With the pandemic vanquished at home, China is vaccinating its people as insurance—often, against a dangerously infected world." A few paragraphs later, "Yip says the government was even considering vaccinating all of Beijing after a COVID-19 outbreak there in June." ---vanquished? Under control? I don't want to demean the Chinese achievement, but I think a) it is too soon to judge the efficacy of its vaccines over the long term, and with a diverse population receiving it in terms of age, medical condition, etc; and b) China does not give open access to its data, so we don't actually know what the health profile of the country is with regard to Covid-19.

But much food for thought.

[sukumvit boy]

Yes,great article well worth the read.
I find it interesting that China's gamble in deciding to produce a 'whole killed virus vaccine' seems to have paid off. Whereas 'Operation Warp Speed' rejected the idea from the beginning due to the history horrific side effects and problems with killed vaccines in the past ,which are well documented and explained in the article .
However it gives one pause to consider the cost in lives and commerce we have incurred in waiting for the more sophisticated and expensive 'messenger RNA ' vaccines now being released in the West. After all ,China was vaccinating thousands as early as February and hundreds of thousands beginning with a wide release of vaccines in June(outside of clinical trials).

[filghy2]

I find it interesting that China's gamble in deciding to produce a 'whole killed virus vaccine' seems to have paid off. Whereas 'Operation Warp Speed' rejected the idea from the beginning due to the history horrific side effects and problems with killed vaccines in the past ,which are well documented and explained in the article .

That's the difference between dictatorship and democracy - an authoritarian regime has more scope to take risks with the lives of its citizens. This doesn't necessarily mean that the Chinese approach is the right one for the future. Sometimes risky gambles pay off through luck. The outcomes might be different if the same approach was repeated many times over.

[broncofan]

Yes,great article well worth the read.
I find it interesting that China's gamble in deciding to produce a 'whole killed virus vaccine' seems to have paid off. Whereas 'Operation Warp Speed' rejected the idea from the beginning due to the history horrific side effects and problems with killed vaccines in the past ,which are well documented and explained in the article .
However it gives one pause to consider the cost in lives and commerce we have incurred in waiting for the more sophisticated and expensive 'messenger RNA ' vaccines now being released in the West. After all ,China was vaccinating thousands as early as February and hundreds of thousands beginning with a wide release of vaccines in June(outside of clinical trials).
Moderna's mRNA-1273 vaccine was produced in January. Within weeks of the virus being sequenced they had already designed a vaccine. As far as I know almost the entire time was taken up by phase 1-3 clinical trials. I don't believe the time difference was the product of using mrna instead of an inactivated vaccine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA-1273

I wonder what kind of safety data they could have had by February or even June. Just having read about antibody dependent enhancement makes me think China was risking an ugly outcome for their people. ADE basically means that a person raises an antibody response from the vaccine but the antibodies not only don't block entry of the virus into cells but facilitate it. So people not only don't have protection against the virus but actually get sicker. There are a whole series of other ugly risks that are difficult to rule out without clinical trials.

I stopped reading about vaccines once Moderna's data came out though I am still interested in what happens with Johnson and Johnson's one shot vaccine.

Giving people untested vaccines is a good way to cause widespread harm and reduce confidence in them. Right now for Pfizer and Moderna we've seen data for effectiveness in preventing symptomatic disease. We don't yet know how effective they are at preventing people who are vaccinated from having asymptomatic infections that they can spread to others.

[sukumvit boy]

Yes, a large factor in Operation Warp Speeds' decision to forgo a whole killed virus vaccine was the fear that the possible side effects would undermine the public's confidence in vaccines in general in a world already full of 'anti vaccers'.

[broncofan]

Yes, a large factor in Operation Warp Speeds' decision to forgo a whole killed virus vaccine was the fear that the possible side effects would undermine the public's confidence in vaccines in general in a world already full of 'anti vaccers'.
Before watching all of this unfold I had never followed the clinical trial process and what wasn't intuitive to me I slowly adjusted to because I heard enough scientists explain the process. What wasn't intuitive is that we would have an effective and safe vaccine at the very beginning of a disease that ended up killing more than 300,000 people here in ten months, but that it would take exactly that long to figure out whether it was safe and effective.

Even if we don't take into account the possibility that the public would use a very bad outcome from a poorly tested vaccine to refuse vaccination ever again, I wonder what the expected average outcome would be of vaccinating people after a couple of months with only the quickest of studies to assess tolerability and some optimization of doses while measuring antibody titers, t cell response, trying to guess correlates of immunity, and picking the best option. Then we vaccinate the highest risk people gradually, while telling them not to change their behavior based on the expectation they have immunity and in parallel run the full sequence of clinical trials because some control is needed to actually assess the data although there would be safety and efficacy monitoring of people who are vaccinated. If the vaccine was unsafe, how many people would be impacted by the time they figure it out?

I suppose from the standpoint of the Chinese, they are probably able to force people to get vaccinated and so public confidence in vaccines matters a bit less (I am not trying to take a gratuitous shot at their government but I don't think they would have an issue with forcing people to get vaccinated). Maybe they thought they could run parallel trials while vaccinating at risk individuals that they think would produce a better average outcome.

[Stavros]

The vaccine has become a Seventh Cavalry in the siege. I read today that with regard to the 'Flu, there are currently 'four flavours' and that immunologists who specalize in 'flu have learned how to identify them and modify the vaccine, so the 'flu jab I get every year (I had my last one in early November, free of charge, of course) is not precisely the same vaccine as the one I had in 2019.

On one level we should not underestimate the science, which may not be in control of Covid-19 + variants, but has not lost control either. What we have seen in the UK is a loss of control by Government. The new strain of Covid-19 that has led to this panic and the end of free movement outside the UK was first identified in September, and we don't know if relaxations on social mixing encouraged it to spread -but it has already reached Australia from the UK and I think just from two people entering the country.

This re-emphasizes how wickedly clever this virus is in attaching itself to our organs, and the need to either maintain, increase, or in the case of some countries (hint: the US) introduce social restrictions with an inevitable economic effect. Indeed, the ban on travel into Europe from the UK ought to have been part of the UK Government's stategy in March, but there was no strategy, no national co-ordination, just a few wings and some prayers. Prayers may soothe the soul, they don't end pandemics.

2021, from the UK's perspective, looks as bleak as 2020. I doubt we will see an end to the persistence of this virus for most the year, maybe late Summer if you want a positive view. Brexit complicates everything, which is why a sense of gloom is descending on the country even Boris Johnson won't be able to raise, assuming he stays in office long enough to try it.

Science can only do so much, the rest is up to us.

[sukumvit boy]

Flu viruses:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/viruses/types.htm#:~:text=There%20are%20four%20types%20of, global%20epidemics%20of%20flu%20disease (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/viruses/types.htm#:~:text=There%20are%20four%20types%20of, global%20epidemics%20of%20flu%20disease).
Corona viruses:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/types.html

[broncofan]

Nine months into a pandemic in which 330,000+ people have died in the U.S. we still have people complaining about the tyranny of public health guidelines. What is the end game they asked one month into the pandemic when we were already a month into the greatest collective effort to develop a life-saving vaccine the world has ever seen.

The end game was to develop herd immunity by vaccine instead of through mass sickness and death. What we did was operate in limbo where the economy could not thrive but people would still get sick and die. By ignoring what has happened in the rest of the world some people continue to insist that the burdens imposed by mask wearing and distancing have been too great. What is their model of excellence? Sweden? Belgium? What country has decided to take the "stoic" approach and not hesitated when it became obvious they were condemning their citizens to the worst of both worlds?

There can only be so much delusional wish fulfillment until all of the lies are laid bare. It is the most vulnerable who suffer the consequences. Keep the elderly safe while everyone else goes about life as normal? Has that worked anywhere? Don't elderly people depend on younger people for healthcare and assisted living? Isn't their risk tied to how much the virus is spreading?

Now we have all of the vaccines that can help us deal with this virus and the federal government has already done a poor job with logistics. Could it be more obvious that what we heard from the beginning was laziness and incompetence hiding behind a wall of ignorance?

[Stavros]

The sad fact of the matter is that science is bullshit as far as a substantial number of Americans are concerned, the ones who really don't care if you live or die. The majority of Americans do care, and the majority probably do behave responsibly, but enough do not, and tragically for you they are in positions of authority. In a country where so so much power is devolved to the States, maybe Kristi Noem and Ron DeSantis should be charged with being accessories to murder, though they won't be. As for the President, the slogan that sums up his Presidency should probably be Drop Dead, America, My Golf is More Important Than You Lives.

Trump has now made more money playing golf in less than four years than Tiger Woods has in 23. If I were Prime Minister I would ban all travel to and from the US for an indefinite period. I feel sorry for decent Americans, but there are too many of you on the wrong side of science who bring shame and disrespect to the country. And for the record, we have plenty of morons in the UK, and not just those choosing to ski in Switzerland, or have maskless beach parties in Sydney. It is simple really, they don't care. Thanks to these people, the impact of the vaccine will take much longer to sideline a viral infection which may now become endemic for years, even if the volume of cases declines so that it no longer becomes a public health emergency. We have a long way to go. And miles and mles and miles to go before we can sleep.

[broncofan]

The majority of Americans do care, and the majority probably do behave responsibly, but enough do not, and tragically for you they are in positions of authority.
I think this is the key point. I'm sure our scientific literacy is not great but one can say that about many places that have been more responsible than we have. The average person will not know very much about disease dynamics or viral spread and won't even be motivated to learn about it during a pandemic. People in positions of authority have a responsibility to learn as the public depends on them to provide responsible advice.

There was always going to be some bullshit circulating among the fringes, and there is in most countries, but Republicans have made it much more mainstream than it would have been. Just as viral spread is exponential, lies told about the virus have effects that are magnified. And the lying and obfuscation has been very pervasive so one can't really deny our incredibly poor outcome is tied to it.

[broncofan]

Thanks to these people, the impact of the vaccine will take much longer to sideline a viral infection which may now become endemic for years.
Without saying too much I think there are good reasons to think it will be endemic for a while. One is that we don't know how durable protection is from the vaccines. The second point is that it's a highly transmissible virus and we don't know what the compliance with vaccination will be in many countries. The good news is that the vaccines are much more effective than a lot of people thought they would be.

The flu vaccine, for instance, is only about 50% effective at preventing disease in many years. As you say above, one of the reasons is that the flu mutates very quickly and scientists are presented with a constantly moving target as they reformulate the vaccine each season. The most recent mutation of sars-cov-2 is not the first documented mutation of it but I think the first one that changed transmissibility (though not virulence) a lot. Still most of the scientists think the approved vaccines will be effective against it and the amount of tweaking of the vaccines to accommodate further mutation will not be as challenging as with the flu. We'll see. Clearly leaders in every country should realize that time is of the essence and the faster they mobilize their vaccine efforts the greater service they provide to their citizens.

[Stavros]

Without saying too much I think there are good reasons to think it will be endemic for a while. One is that we don't know how durable protection is from the vaccines. The second point is that it's a highly transmissible virus and we don't know what the compliance with vaccination will be in many countries. The good news is that the vaccines are much more effective than a lot of people thought they would be.


I agree with you, and I think we can agree that it has been a colossal failure of politics, rather than science, and that the opportunity to show how effective politics can be was missed, because the man in charge was only interested in himself, not the country.

The New York Times article linked below (not behind a paywall) documents the in-fighting and deluded decision-making in the White House, where it appears Mark Meadows was as destructive as Trump, but I like this comment from one of the readers, from Portlan, Oregon:

"Michael Kennedy
Portland, Oregon9h ago (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage#commentsContainer)

Times Pick
He never figured it out. His lack of historical knowledge was his end. Americans rally behind their president in a crisis. If he'd come on national television, called all Americans to work together against this common enemy, he would have won the election in a landslide. Americans want a strong leader during a crisis. Americans are willing to set aside their differences to work together and overcome problems that are common to everyone. Instead, he took a cowards stance. He dug in, and presumed - erroneously - that it was something to do with only him. Trump manufactured his own demise, and in the midst of his hubris, millions became ill, and tens of thousands of Americans died. Donald Trump couldn't see beyond his own quest for superficial popularity. History will not be kind."


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage#commentsContainer

[broncofan]

I think that person's post is right. Trump had a better chance to do it than a Democratic leader would have because the latter would have had Republicans in opposition. Republican congressmen could have done nearly as much damage speaking over a Democratic President as Trump did as President.

But with Trump as President, if he had decided to pull the country together and had taken the lead of the vast majority of epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists, it would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives and probably gotten him a second term.

[broncofan]

The purpose of operation warp speed was not only to subsidize the development of vaccines but to manufacture doses at risk so that they were available by the time clinical trial results came in. They should have also worked out any and all logistical issues about their delivery in advance.

Trump had more than 9 months to work through these logistical hurdles. His supporters can pretend that anyone would make the mistakes he made but they simply wouldn't have. Most competent leaders would have had a plan in place in the event the vaccine trials were successful. The purpose of operation warp speed was to anticipate success at every stage so that each successive stage would proceed without delay.

I can't wait for him to be gone. We'll see what Biden is able to do even without the cooperation of about 45% of the country.

[sukumvit boy]

Excellent 40 page article in the current issue of the "New Yorker" magazine "The Plague Year" about how and why the US failed so badly in controlling the pandemic.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/01/04/the-plague-year?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top

[Stavros]

Excellent 40 page article in the current issue of the "New Yorker" magazine "The Plague Year" about how and why the US failed so badly in controlling the pandemic.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/01/04/the-plague-year?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top

Lawrence Wright is an impeccable source, so this is compelling reading. I think we can all agree that where many of our governments have failed -and where others have succeeded- it is in the failure to establish a test and trace system early on, and to mandate mask wearing by the public -two of the three major failures Wright identifies. I would also add the national co-ordination thay Wright refers to, and its absence, notably in the US and in the UK. That the UK was promised a 'world-beating' test and trace system that flopped at its first trial is sadly typical of the grandiose drivel Boris Johnson excels at, to the extent that I no longer bother taking anything he says seriously, as far as I am concerned, he can talk to the wall.

The area of difficulty is in the first phase, when the first cases were identified in China, and how the Chinese handled information exchange, but also how demanding or not extermal actors were. I think we can say that in the three years prior to January 2020, the US made not the slightest effort to improve its influence at the highest levels of the WHO, and that this indifference, exaggerrated by Trump's disdain for anything and everything associated with the UN and in particular its agencies, helped the US to take a more distant stand than it probably should have. The clinical issues to me must relate to the previous SARS epidemic that was successfully contained, so begs the question why the Chinese do not appear to have been more willing to share all of their information, and in particular the evidence which I think was there in December that human-to-human infection was already taking place. The seriousness of the first SARS epidemic ought surely to have created an emergency mind-set, and I wonder if the difference is that President Xi, as a more activist premier, and one developing his own cult, has induced a fear mentality among those Chinese officials who factor in a fear of 'bad news = failure' where their failure becomes Xi's failure and his failure becomes China's, the sad irony being that if this is what they wanted to prevent, they ended up making it worse than it needed to be.

It is frustrating, because the 'West' has co-operated with China in the study of zoonotic disease and had we a more collegiate attitude to the internatonal relations of public health, who knows how soon we could all have taken common action to limit its effect?

That said, the usual suspects -false predictions of the course of the viral infection, a hope rather than the fact that it could be/woud be limited to China/Asia, and the greater fear of its economic consequences, clouded decision making. It ends up as a cluster-fuck of global proportions, from which we ought to learn the value of international cooperation and knowledge transfers and sharing.

But also the warning that the human race is fast expanding into wilderness areas where unknown pathogens lie in wait to feast on the human body, and yield exotic animals whose flesh no human need ever eat.

[sukumvit boy]

I was also saddened to read about how the CDC ,which since its inception in 1946 has been a beacon and model of public health , was undermined and its' reputation sullied by politics and budget cuts by the Trump administration.

[blackchubby38]

I'mposting this here because it ties directly into Covid. Apparently Governor Cuomo has finally seen the light and has to decided to legalize marijuana because of the economic impact the pandemic has had on the state. You know there was something wrong when South Dakota decided to make weed legal before NY.

Now Cuomo just has to go all in and legalize sports betting.

[broncofan]

In Pennsylvania we have medical marijuana cards but the list of conditions one can get a card for is so extensive it seems like the road to legalization of recreational use. Some states have that too. I went to one of the dispensaries pre-pandemic and the place was packed. The salespeople take you back and tell you about thc cbd ratios and ask whether you want to be mellow or less mellow. It hasn't caused any major problems here.

[Stavros]

I was also saddened to read about how the CDC ,which since its inception in 1946 has been a beacon and model of public health , was undermined and its' reputation sullied by politics and budget cuts by the Trump administration.


Some among the new generation of 'Conservative' politicians and activitist who in reality have never read Gramsci, nevertheless cite the concept of cultural hegemony this famous/notorious Italian Marxist described as the means whereby Capitalism sustains bourgeois power based on the 'means of production'. The argument thus developed that socialists could develop their own narrative and resistance culturally, as well as politically, and that this would become part of a more general 'mind set' or mentaliy to make socialism appear to be a logical as well as a desirable alternative.

To the Conservatives, this explains their allegation that Schools and Universities are now 'woke' factories in which 'Cultural Marxism' has established its hegemony, indoctrinating generations of students who are well-disposed to socialist ideas, and hostile to liberal views of the market, individualism, the family, binary sexuality, religion and so forth -and this in spite of the billions spend by the Koch Brothers, Moral Majorty and Christian organizations in Universities to do the opposite, and the rather obvious fact that in spite of schools and universities in Europe and North America being 'woke' from head to toe, when they become tax-paying workers, all those students and young people vote Republican and Tory as well as Democrat and Labour.

The extension of this view thus sees Government bureaucracy as captive to either 'left-wing' or 'Liberal' ideas, and thus cannot be trusted to implement a radical conservative agenda, be it 'Austerity', Brexit, or whatever consensus-busting acts one associates with Trump. The long term impact has been a civil service in which able people have been filleted out, to be trimmed down for financial purposes, and where, politically, Weber's claim that a neutral civil service is vital for the creation of a stable State, it is replaced with its opposite, a partisan civil service where people are appointed for their political loyalty rather than their expertise.

In the US one saw this when Anthony Fauci was effectively replaced by Scott Atlas, and as you address, the manner in which the CDC has been marginalized. Consider the case of Nancy Messonier, recognized as one of the most brilliant Americans with a lifetime of research and practice in Immunization and Respiratory Disease. Shortly after her statement on February 26th 2020, a furious Trump effectively banned her from speaking in public, indeed, she went from being the first major voice on Covid-19 to silence in the space of 24 hours. Thus:

"It's not so much a question of if this will happen anymore, but rather more a question of exactly when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illness,” she said during a briefing on 26 February. (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0225-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html)
The speech marked a tipping point in the agency’s messaging and sent the stock market plummeting."
"Upon the president’s discovery of the briefing, he was reportedly furious and threatened to fire Dr Messonnier according to The Wall Street Journal. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/health-chiefs-early-missteps-set-back-coronavirus-response-11587570514?mod=hp_lead_pos5)
"By the time Trump (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/trump) lands, the whole thing had spun out of control, and he was livid. He calls Alex Azar, wakes him up screaming, 'What had happened ... did you know Nancy Messonnier had scared the s*** out of people?'" Mr Shear said.
Dr Messonnier was not fired but was sidelined in favour of the newly set up coronavirus taskforce led by Mike Pence, the documentary reports."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/cdc-trump-coronavirus-documentary-nancy-messonnier-b1205877.html

From that day to this, Nancy Messonier has been silenced. But who was right? Nancy or Donald? And who has paid the highest price for this institutional failure -that perhaps with the right leadership from day one might have prevented the worst that has happened?

I hope Biden will give this extraordinary woman a voice, if she still has something to say. I would like to hear it.

[broncofan]

I read today that Johnson and Johnson will be seeking FDA EUA for its one shot vaccine in February. If they get it that will help supply enormously since the doses go twice as far. I'll post an article when I see one.

[Stavros]

So far, two countries have been lauded for their vaccination programmes: Israel and the UK. There is some speculation on the speed with which Israel has acquired so many doses, and at what cost, but as most of the adult population are military reservists who can be called up and with a popuation less than 10 million, one can appreciate the country has an existing infrastructure that makes such national programmes easier than in most others. That the Israelis don't appear to have any intention of vaccinating Palestinians is fairly typical of their attitude, and it is not likely to change, while the rate of infection continues to cause concern.

The other country is the UK. Here, we have an in-built, national structure called the NHS which not only has large general hospitals serving the commnity (and often more than one), I get my annual 'flu jab at my GP surgery, where most of the vaccinations can and will be done that are not being transported to care homes, hospitals, or pop-up clinics in town. But what this also does is beg the question, why at the beginning of the pandemic, did the Govt fail to anchor a test and trace system on the existing network of GP surgeries, Hospitals and Clinics all of which could do it, or do it with extra help? The 'world beating' test and trace system Boris Johnson promised has not materiaized, though millions has been spent on it. It is all very well people applauding the UK but we still have high rates of infection in some areas, and there is a long way to go before we can relax the restrictions that are in place.

Intially I stated I did not think this Pandemic would kill a lot of people, and I was wrong. I thought last year that as a SARS-variant virus, the same measures that controlled the first outbreak would be sufficient to control this one, and I was wrong. In part it is because this strain of the virus is more efficient than the first, and because, as discussed with Sukumvit Boy above, there has been a catastrophic institutional failure, in the US, in the UK and to some extent across the EU. Any success in China as filghy2 has said must be the result of China's merciless party dictatorshp, plus our not knowing what the cost has been in terms of lives lost and lives ruined. Where the success has also been recorded, such as Taiwan -population 23.78 million, 855 cases, 7 deaths- the success may be due to the ease with which an Island can isolate, but also institutional success, and public support for measures it has dealt with before in the fist SARS episodes ten or so years ago.

Where it has failed, the consequences have been grim. Had I been told last year the US would record 24 million cases, I would have disbelieved it as even being possible, but it is a fact.

I think the incoming Administration not only has a major vaccination programme to co-ordinate nationally, it is still essential to create a test and trace system and I would hope this is given as much urgency as the vaccination drive. It makes no sense to me to live in a country where the authorities don't know who is infected, or where and how they were infected, and who they were in contact with. There needs to be national co-ordination of data management, as well as clinical treatment.

And I would add, that for at least a month, the US needs to shut down, including minimal entry and exit from the Lower 48 and Alaska. I hate the phrase because it was made up by a UK Chancellor in the 1990s as an excuse for Govt cuts to expenditure, but is appropriate in this case:
If it's not hurting, it's not working. And the US has a whole lot of pain yet to live.

[broncofan]

Intially I stated I did not think this Pandemic would kill a lot of people, and I was wrong. I thought last year that as a SARS-variant virus, the same measures that controlled the first outbreak would be sufficient to control this one, and I was wrong. In part it is because this strain of the virus is more efficient than the first,

Where it has failed, the consequences have been grim. Had I been told last year the US would record 24 million cases, I would have disbelieved it as even being possible, but it is a fact.


Sars-cov-2 isn't more efficient, it just results in a contagious pre-symptomatic period that makes it more difficult to contain. This was already suspected in February 2020 and the virus looked like it was going to be a major problem as soon as it was in South Korea and Italy.

The UK is one of a handful of countries that has done as poorly as the US in deaths per capita. Perhaps the mistakes weren't as obvious in the UK as the US (I haven't been paying attention) but there are many countries that have done a better job.

[broncofan]

Sars-cov-2 isn't more efficient, it just results in a contagious pre-symptomatic period that makes it more difficult to contain.
Anyhow, if by efficient you mean transmissible, the r0 of sarscov1 and sarscov2 are about the same. The biggest difference is interval between symptom onset and maximum infectivity which makes it harder to contain. It's why by April 3 most health agencies were on the same page about mask wearing, though Trump didn't quite understand the guidance.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30484-9/fulltext

[filghy2]

Intially I stated I did not think this Pandemic would kill a lot of people, and I was wrong. I thought last year that as a SARS-variant virus, the same measures that controlled the first outbreak would be sufficient to control this one, and I was wrong.

Many people made mistakes early on. In my first post on this last January I said that we should keep it in perspective because loads of people die every year from regular flu. There's a world of difference between making mistakes in an unprecedented situation and refusing to learn from mistakes as more information becomes available. That's why it's so annoying when Covid minimisers argue that we should not listen to the experts because some early predictions were wrong or their initial advice was changed later (while ignoring their own poor record).

The vaccination program in Australia isn't expected to commence until March. As the virus is well under control there is not the same imperative to bypass the normal drug approval processes. That means we have the luxury of being able to assess what happens in other countries. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-19/norway-deaths-australia-tga-pfizer-covid-vaccine-evaluation/13066948

We have had some restrictions being re-imposed in response to recent outbreaks in some cities (albeit minor by US or European standards). There's clearly a bit of fatigue, but public acceptance seems to be holding up and there's still generally bipartisan support apart from some quibbling at the margins. The key to success seems to be creating a virtuous circle, in which administrative competence, demonstrated success, political support and public support become mutually reinforcing.

[broncofan]

One doesn't have to be able to predict how many people will die to know something will be an issue governments have to prepare themselves for. I still am surprised by the complacency of most governments up until March because it did seem clear China was not able to contain the virus and nobody else was willing to take more extreme measures that they took. It turns out many of the measures they took probably weren't that effective but the effort was obvious.

Two personal anecdotes: In 2020 I had a lease in a crowded apartment complex with lots of common areas and the lease did not expire until May 1. On February 25th I signed a one year lease for a house because I thought if we ended up taking some lockdown measures I didn't want to get stuff delivered in the apartment I was in. I paid double rent in March and April and had a number of people I know tell me I was being unreasonable. I know many people wouldn't be able to afford to do what I did but plenty of people who could thought it was odd. It still is and my chances of being infected in the package room or the hallways of an apartment complex was not high.

On March 2nd I told the psychiatrist I had been going to that I was beginning to panic about "coronavirus" and that I was afraid it was going to spread and I would get sick. I also made the mistake of telling him I rented a house. He told me it was an exacerbation of my ocd and that my chances of getting sick with "coronavirus" were less than my chances of being shot. I'm sure this sounds cliche or made up but this was how the conversation went. And it probably was an exacerbation of my ocd but I still cancelled my next appointment with him and found someone else.

My point is that one doesn't have to know most things about a public health menace to be concerned. I don't understand the lack of strategy from officials either or the resignation from many that herd immunity by infection was inevitable and either happens now or five years from now. If we knew there were 15 plus vaccines being tested and that the first round of results could be obtained by the end of the year, why wouldn't the strategy be to limit deaths until the results give you a clue about whether there's light at the end of the tunnel or a potentially protracted problem? The only reason not to do this was because morbidity and lower quality of life from adhering to public health guidelines outweighed the benefit in mortality. There was comparative data very early on to say this wasn't the case.

I also got many things wrong and learned a lot this year. I'm disappointed the learning curve for Republicans and leaders in other countries was not the same.

[Stavros]

I think OCD is only a problem if it interferes with the way you live to the extent that you become a prisoner of process rather than outcome. In either an epidemic or a pandemic, the geography is shaped by space and time, so anywhere crowded becomes a threat to be avoided, that would include lifts/elevators and hallways. Obvious other factors would be chronically ill neighbours, feral children, low-income workers who cannot afford to self-isolate and so on. My brother-in-law has significant health issues so my sister has become OCD in her management of their immediate environment, but she had those tendencies to fuss over small things anyway, and I was told of a Great Aunt on my mother's side, whom I was too young to remember, who when she visited, brought a duster and cleaning fluids to wipe down chairs and tables where she was, something of an insult to my mother, but those Victorian women were often a bit strange anyway (my maternal grandmother whom I remember well was born in 1882).

So taking precautions in this pandemic is the right thing to do, and I regret to say in your case even more so in the USA. That said, John Harris in The Guardian has argued something like 90% of the British public have been obeying lockdown rules, and while we hear a lot from the 'Rejection Front' in the US, I wonder if the majority of Americans too are more sensible that we sometimes think. And anyway, costs aside, being in your own house must be safer than an apartment block.

My guess is that if something has changed that is going to be permanent, more and more people in European and North American cities are going to continue wearing masks for years to come, particularly on public transport, and maybe in Malls and shops too. It is common in Asian cities, and it makes sense, and you don't need to be OCD to wear one, now or in the future. From a practical point of view, I find in cold weather the mask protects my face from cold winds, and on my last trip to London, I found it easier to fall asleep on the train. Awareness of the risks of daily life is not OCD anymore, as there are good grounds for believing that we may be entering an age when viral outbreaks are more common than once they were, though we can only hope they do not break out of a locality to become global in their impact.

[filghy2]

One doesn't have to be able to predict how many people will die to know something will be an issue governments have to prepare themselves for. I still am surprised by the complacency of most governments up until March because it did seem clear China was not able to contain the virus and nobody else was willing to take more extreme measures that they took.

I think a big part of the problem is that most politicians didn't understand how exponential growth works, which meant that it was hard to convince them to act while case numbers were still relatively low. In terms of public messaging we went almost overnight from being assured that things were under control and we could go about our normal lives with a few precautions, to having significant restrictions on our activities.

The other element is a failure to understand risk management principles. There is a common, but fallacious, argument that we should avoid costly actions to avoid a future problem if there is considerable uncertainty about the extent of the problem (climate change is another issue where this argument is often put). But if there is a lag before those actions have an impact, and a risk of very bad outcomes, then it is worth incurring some cost to avoid that possibility. If you wait for more information it will already be too late to avoid the bad case scenario. I'm sure the people making this argument don't actually apply it to their own lives - for instance, the whole point of insurance is that you pay a certain cost to avoid any risk of very bad outcomes, even though the probability of those outcomes make be low.

[broncofan]

Vaccine distribution is picking up in the U.S. I can link an article later but probably better you just do a google search if you're interested. Moderna says it has tested whether its vaccine is responsive to the virus variants that have been found in UK and South Africa. It says people develop the same antibody response to the UK variant as to the most common one and that people have a reduced antibody response to the South African variant but they believe it will still be protective (I think they inferred this from comparing it to antibody levels of people with natural infection). In the meantime they want to develop booster shots more tailored to these variants to prevent waning immunity. Immunologists are treated it as mostly good news.

I want to say that although we're not out of this crisis yet and it will probably be a while before circulating levels of virus are low, there is a light at the end of this tunnel. Israel has some data on the people they've vaccinated and hospitalization rates are way down among people over 60. More vaccines are coming in the year ahead and although it's concerning any time there is a new strain of this deadly virus, there is reason to think innovation can outpace it now that we know people can be inoculated. Still, it's a challenge and we will likely know a lot more about 100 days from now when a larger proportion of the U.S. population is vaccinated.

[broncofan]

I know this is a press release from Eli Lilly but that is how most of these companies are releasing their data. The latest studies apparently show that monoclonal antibodies from Lilly reduce risk of hospitalization or death by 70%. As I suspected if they are only effective in early disease, which is what the data has shown, there would be logistical problems. But almost no effort has been made to make these drugs available to people in early disease. Unless the only people who qualified for monoclonal antibody treatment were Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Donald Trump, and Rudy Giuliani, all of whom either received Lilly or Regeneron's cocktail.

From what I've read the supplies of these drugs are not being used.

https://investor.lilly.com/news-releases/news-release-details/new-data-show-treatment-lillys-neutralizing-antibodies (https://investor.lilly.com/news-releases/news-release-details/new-data-show-treatment-lillys-neutralizing-antibodies)

[broncofan]

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/biden-covid-variants-462425

Here's an article about the available vaccines and their effectiveness for the UK and South African variants. Moderna is testing booster shots for the South African variant even though antibody levels from the Moderna shot are thought to be protective against it (as I said above a lower antibody response might mean it's not effective against this variant for as long). Good to try to stay ahead of this although the scary thing is that if surveillance has not been good there might be other variants out there already.

[Stavros]

I had a sms from my GP on Tuesday afternoon asking me to go online and book my Covid-19 Vaccination, which I did. I had the jab on Wednesday evening before 7pm. The vaccine was administered high up on my left arm close to the shoulder, was painless, with no bleeding. I was told the after effects might be -a sore arm, which I have not noticed; a head-ache, which I have not had; and feverish or 'flu like symptoms, and though I have not had that either, I have spent most of Thursday asleep in bed. So no complaints.

The AstraZenica vaccine I have had is at the core of a row between the UK and the EU. The UK both validated the AstraZenica vaccine and ordered it before the EU, which has yet to authorize its use though is expected to this week. The EU is claiming that as the funding was shared between the EU and the UK the factories in Belgium and the Netherlands ought to be distributing it within the EU -AstraZenica is making most of its UK vaccine in the UK. If you want to read more about this row there are two links below.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55822602

https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/27/astrazeneca-row-could-spark-an-eu-uk-vaccine-trade-war-warns-mep

What it proves, to me, is that the lack of a co-ordinated response for what is, after all, a Pandemic, has caused more problems than it needed to, and that goes for the EU as well as the UK where there has been no attempt to co-ordinate a National Response across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

A broader analysis by Lee Jones in the Telegraph, for once not hidden behind a paywall, argues that the structural changes made to the State since Thatcher, have effectively removed from Central Government the control over both policy-making and delivery that it used to have, largely because Margaret Thatcher was instrumental in arguing, as Ronald Reagan did, that 'Government is the problem, not the solution' -his article may be challeged on his concept of the 'regulatory state' but it is worth reading, and begins thus:

"Why has Britain fared so poorly with Covid-19? Although blaming this or that minister or official offers an easy answer, the deeper causes lie in the transformation of the British state.
Britain inherited from World War II a “command and control” state; a state that could govern. Whitehall was well-practised in strategic planning, good at the rapid and efficient mobilisation of resources and people, and it regularly took authoritative, direct action to meet society’s needs.
Back then, the state could deliver what democratically elected politicians asked of it – to build the NHS, for instance – because it retained the powers, people and resources to do so.
Today, after 40 years of reform, the “command and control” state has been replaced by a “regulatory state”. Decision-making has shifted from parliament to an archipelago of some 400 “arms-length” quangos, employing more than 278,000 people and costing £205 billion per year. Moreover, the state’s assets – its capacity to execute policy on its own accord – have been outsourced or rationalised.

As the regulatory state has grown, its ambition has shrunk. Politicians no longer offer grand visions of the future, just technocratic tweaks. Having dismantled or sold off the levers of power, they downplay public expectations, insisting there is no alternative.
The outsourcing of responsibility and decision-making is clear with respect to the NHS. After successive reforms under governments of all stripes, the Department for Health and Social Care no longer has operational control. Responsibility has been outsourced to dozens of quangos and local commissioners, operating within a fragmented internal market, with scant strategic oversight."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/rolls-royce-skoda-pandemic-has-exposed-britains-failed-regulatory/

[broncofan]

That's interesting Stavros. I'm glad you got your first shot and had no major complications. When do you go back for your second shot?

My Dad got the Moderna vaccine about a week ago. My Mom got her shot two days prior and it was the Pfizer shot. Both of them had sore arms but no other side effects. They were advised that people sometimes get more side effects after their second shot as the immune system recognizes the antigen and mounts a more serious response. Interestingly, people who have been infected earlier in the pandemic are reporting the side effects on their first shot, which would be the second time their immune system sees the spike protein.

Anyhow, I've told my parents that for their vaccines studies don't show any immunity until two weeks after the first shot so not to be complacent. I'm glad to hear you got the shot!

[blackchubby38]

Because of my job, I was able to get my first dose of the Pfizer vaccine today. If everything goes according to plan, I should be getting my second dose on February 22nd.

[Stavros]

Because of my job, I was able to get my first dose of the Pfizer vaccine today. If everything goes according to plan, I should be getting my second dose on February 22nd.


Good news, pleased to hear it - I haven't been given a date for my second vaccination yet.

The news I am frustrated with has been on tv broadcasts and in the online press, and concerns those people who think the vaccination will make them infertile, or insert a micro-chip into their brain, or 'God knows what'! The NHS is recruiting prominent people from the Black and Asian community on the grounds that vaccination sceptics are more commonly found in these social groups, usng what data I do not know. It seems to me that there are plenty of 'Whte British' people who are just as sceptical as others, for whatever reason, and none of it based on science.

Either the number of people across the world who reject science is growing, or they are not as great as we think but have captured the media's attention, a few seats in Congress (we have the dapper dimwittery of Sir Desmond Swayne in the House of Commons), and are thus attempting to shift extreme views from the fringe into the centre ground. With the Taliban resurgent in Afghanistan, and some indivduals appearing to share their outlook on life even if they live in the UK or the US, I feel we are not just involved in a campaign against Covid-19 but a strugge for the preservation of the Truth.

[broncofan]

Because of my job, I was able to get my first dose of the Pfizer vaccine today. If everything goes according to plan, I should be getting my second dose on February 22nd.
Really good news. How's the shoulder? Almost everyone I've talked to has a sore shoulder first evening from Pfizer and Moderna. Not a good or bad sign either way I don't think but it lasts three to four days for some.

[broncofan]

This just came up on my twitter feed. I will look into it later and post an article or two but former fda head says that Johnson and Johnson data just came in and is very good. This would change supply very quickly if it gets approved. It's a one shot vaccine also which makes the doses go twice as far.

https://twitter.com/ScottGottliebMD/status/1355139722646081537 (https://twitter.com/ScottGottliebMD/status/1355139722646081537)

[broncofan]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine-single-dose-researcher/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-29/j-j-single-dose-vaccine-provides-strong-shield-against-covid-19

The Johnson and Johnson vaccine uses the same technology as the Oxford/Astrazeneca vaccine but it delivered in one shot with no booster. It is probably effective enough to get an emergency use authorization from the fda.

If I recall correctly, both Moderna and Pfizer were over 90% effective in preventing symptomatic disease. That includes mild, moderate, and severe. Johnson and Johnson is 66% effective in preventing moderate to severe disease, prevented 85% of severe cases, and 100% of hospitalizations and deaths.

If given the choice I think most people would much rather have the two shot vaccines from Pfizer or Moderna. Those shots also show pretty good efficacy 14 days after the first shot (though with limited data). It's unclear how long any of the vaccines will provide immunity for but the benefit of the second shot is to prime the immune system and raise antibody response far higher than in those who have recovered from covid. So as a layperson I would have some concern about how long immunity lasts after the J&J shot but perhaps I will read something positive about antibody responses etc. Edit: in the Scott Gottlieb tweet I posted above he says "people showed sustained and increasing immune protection over time". So I'm sure we'll hear more about what data shows that.

Johnson and Johnson says it can produce ten million doses in February and that's ten million more people vaccinated. I imagine they can ramp up much further after that. Since the government is paying for vaccines, I'm not sure who would choose a vaccine that is 66% effective rather than 95% effective at preventing covid cases but maybe it has a better side effect profile or maybe some people in a lower priority group would prefer to get some protection earlier.

[Laphroaig]

Johnson and Johnson says it can produce ten million doses in February and that's ten million more people vaccinated. I imagine they can ramp up much further after that. Since the government is paying for vaccines, I'm not sure who would choose a vaccine that is 66% effective rather than 95% effective at preventing covid cases but maybe it has a better side effect profile or maybe some people in a lower priority group would prefer to get some protection earlier.

If the Government is paying, we won't get a choice. When called for an appointment, turn up and take whichever is on offer, or not at all.

[filghy2]

If the Government is paying, we won't get a choice. When called for an appointment, turn up and take whichever is on offer, or not at all.

If vaccination is not compulsory I assume you could choose to pass and then opt in later. The government wants to get as many people vaccinated as possible, so it would not make sense to not let people change their minds.

[filghy2]

Johnson and Johnson says it can produce ten million doses in February and that's ten million more people vaccinated. I imagine they can ramp up much further after that. Since the government is paying for vaccines, I'm not sure who would choose a vaccine that is 66% effective rather than 95% effective at preventing covid cases but maybe it has a better side effect profile or maybe some people in a lower priority group would prefer to get some protection earlier.

I guess it's a trade-off. When the virus is spreading rapidly now, is it better to wait for more supplies of the more effective vaccine or to vaccinate as many as you can with what you have now? Does getting the less effective vaccine now preclude getting the other one later?

[broncofan]

I guess it's a trade-off. When the virus is spreading rapidly now, is it better to wait for more supplies of the more effective vaccine or to vaccinate as many as you can with what you have now? Does getting the less effective vaccine now preclude getting the other one later?
Good point. We have enough pfizer and moderna ordered for nearly the entire population but it probably would save a lot of lives to vaccinate people with J&J while production of the other two are ramping up.

[blackchubby38]

Really good news. How's the shoulder? Almost everyone I've talked to has a sore shoulder first evening from Pfizer and Moderna. Not a good or bad sign either way I don't think but it lasts three to four days for some.

Not bad. In fact, it feels very similar to when I got a tetanus shot on January 4th.

[broncofan]

For the last several months we knew that Johnson & Johnson's one shot vaccine was in the pipeline and a promising candidate. They received 1 billion dollars for research from Operation Warp Speed. It's kind of tough for me to believe that they shouldn't have been given a lot of money to produce their vaccine at risk. That's the entire post. It was fairly obvious that it would be a worthwhile risk/gamble. Their supply is starting at 2 million doses. I haven't read any critiques yet but was that the smartest approach when they could have been given money to produce tens of millions of doses at risk?