I meant to post this one time, but I never got around to it. Its from 12/15/2021.
Covid’s deadly trade-offs, by the numbers: How each state has fared in the pandemic
http://www.politico.com/interactives...mic-scorecard/
Printable View
I meant to post this one time, but I never got around to it. Its from 12/15/2021.
Covid’s deadly trade-offs, by the numbers: How each state has fared in the pandemic
http://www.politico.com/interactives...mic-scorecard/
It looks like a reasonable attempt at an objective analysis, but there are some inherent limitations.
1. States are not equal in their vulnerability to a pandemic. More densely-populated states are likely be worse affected than lightly-populated states, which also means their economies would be more affected, regardless of the policy response. We have no way of knowing what would have happened in world with no policy responses. It looks like lightly-populated states generally did better overall, but is that because they made better policy choices or just because they were less vulnerable?
2. December 2021 is really too early to make a proper assessment because the pandemic was still in full swing and the economic recovery was just beginning. Some of the economic impacts may have been temporary and could be reversed later, but deaths are obviously permanent. I don't know if anyone has done a later analysis - it looks like Politico hasn't.
The aim of the Telegraph revelations, in advance or as a substitute for the conclusions of the UK's offiicial enquiry, is to sway individual opinion -not so much against Johnson and Hancock -two lost causes anyway- but the key policy areas of Lockdown and Mask Mandates.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackchubby38
So I was rather hoping for your personal opinion on Masks and Lockdown strategies, not least because the experience of New York was different from, say, Florida. That said, you are under no obligation to tell anyone what your views are.
From my perspective, I supported both the Lockdowns/Social Distancing, and the Mask Mandates. That I was in a vulnerable position early on in the pandemic but have only tested positive once, post-vaccination, underlines my belief in the regulations.
Here is another article I meant to post when I initially saw it. Its from June 3, 2021.
California mandated masks. Florida opened its restaurants. Did any of it matter?
Which Covid-19 restrictions really worked — and which ones really didn’t?
http://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid...ebate-evidence
An interesting article, for which thanks are in order, though I also note you don't have a personal opinion you want to share.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackchubby38
The links below point to the arguments not covered in the link you offered, specifically the impact of lockdowns on the economy, and the view that was current at the time that the health of the economy was more important than the health of the people. Esther McVay, who was in Boris Johnson's Govt at the time, led a debate on these issues, and pointed out that-
"GDP declined by 11% in 2020, the steepest drop since consistent records began in 1948 and, based on less precise estimates of GDP going back further, the contraction in 2020 was the largest since 1709. During the first lockdown, UK GDP was 26% lower in April than only two months earlier in February. More than 8 million workers were furloughed during April and May 2020, peaking at 8.9 million—roughly a third of all employees—in May 2020. Overall, 11.7 million jobs were furloughed."
Covid-19: Economic Impact of Lockdowns - Hansard - UK Parliament
But she also goes on to argue that 'Project Fear' meant that the public complied with Govt restrictions out of fear as much as a logical connection between a vital outbreak and the best measures to combat it -ie Masks and Lockdowns. Having cited at the start Niall Ferguson's view that the 'West' would never impose the draconian social measures used in China, he then points out that in fact they did.
And this is part of the current campaign by the Libertarian/Anarchist/Hate Govt in the Telegraph to persuade people Govt got it wrong, and at a catastrophic price in terms of lost revenue, lost jobs, and in Treasury policy massive Govt borrowing, over-generous furlough schemes and fraud on a scale rarely seen in Govt.
A more measured view based on Stats from a Treasury official puts it more neatly, notwithstanding the 'bounce back' that followed the vaccination programmes and the decline of Covid as a crisis- thus the three takeaways are-
"
- the greatest fall in annual GDP in over 100 years;
- the greatest increase in government borrowing in over 50 years; and
- the risk of exceptionally high unemployment but a risk that, fortunately never crystalised."
Covid and the UK Economy - Speech by Clare Lombardelli, Chief Economic Advisor, HM Treasury - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Note also that because of Brexit, Covid has impacted the UK in different ways -we have a labour shortage rather than higher unemployment, nor is it clear how the decline of the over-50s in the labour market will impact the economy in 10 years time while the costs of supporting Ukraine will also have some impact. I guess this makes a definitive assessment of 'Covid Economics' hard to come by, but the key for me is that Masks and Lockdowns generally were essential, my view on schools is not secure.
But also the Tone of Govt/State announcements was important, with my view that the indifference to public health on the part of Trump and De Santis was though shocking, no surprise, as in effect, they really don't care about people on any level at any time. After all, in Florida and Texas they more or less give away battlefield weapons to any lunatic who wants them to murder Americans -men, women and children.
Full disclosure, I missed it the first time that you asked for my opinion. When I finally saw it, I wanted to give it some thought on how I was going to answer the question because I have an idea how some people are going respond to what I have to say. So, I will just say this once and be done with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
I understand why the plans were being implemented and, in the beginning, I supported them. That said, I think the lockdown strategy has done considerable damage to society in general. Here in NYC, because of inept leadership on both the city and state level, things were made worse than they needed to be.
In addition, NYC was on lockdown a lot longer than it needed to be and there are times that I think this city will never truly recover from them.
Remote learning also went on far longer than it should have. We have only recently come to terms with the negative impact that the lockdowns had not only, on a student's education. But their mental and physical well-being, as well as in certain cases their social development.
When it comes to the mask mandates. I begrudgingly supported them and always wore a mask when I went into a store or when I was on public transportation. Although I know probably caught Covid last March when I forgot to put one on when I was in the subway. But I never wore one when I was out in public.
Also, to give you a perspective on where we are at when it comes to masks in this city. This how much things have changed since 2020.
Mayor Adams to New York City Shoppers: Drop That Mask
http://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/06/ny...masks-nyc.html
There is actually a jewelry store in my neighborhood with a “No masks allowed” sign in the window.
The difficulty in assessing the economic impacts is that it's hard to distinguish two different questions:
(i) What was the economic impact of lockdowns?
(ii) What was the economic impact of the pandemic?
Lockdown sceptics often imply that all the economic impacts were caused by lockdowns, but this assumes the economy would otherwise have continued as normal. If there had been no restrictions, and death rates were higher as a result, would people have continued to behave as normal?
We should also be wary of 20:20 hindsight. It's too easy to say that we must have overreacted because the more pessimistic scenarios did not eventuate. The problem is that we did not know this at the time because we knew little about the virus. We had no idea how long it would take to develop vaccines, or even whether this would be possible. if we had waited for more data before acting, and the pessimistic scenarios proved to be correct, it would have been to late to prevent them.
We don't know what the future will bring, but it's likely there will be more pandemics and some of them will be more deadly than this one. If the lesson we draw from this episode is that we should not act preemptively to limit the spread of infection that will likely turn out to be a mistake.
I appreciate your candid views, and with the post from filghy2 I think the intriguing questions revolve around the differences between the impact of the lockdowns and the impact of the pandemic -one is specific, and has been damaging, in the UK at any rate, but where the economic profile has been complicated by the impact of Brexit making it hard to disentangle one from the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackchubby38
The longer term impact it seems to me relates to global supply chains, and a determination to re-locate production away from China in order to secure supply, a form of economic nationalism that might suit the 'America First' brigade and those still yearning for Brexit success in the UK, but which seems to me to have limited potential. That a lot of this is also hostility to China is also not hard to see, and it may be that China comes off worst out of all this, a) because the domestic health profile remains unstable, and b) because over the long term it may cease to be the 'workshop of the world'.
The key issue for me is the relationship between public health and public culture. Your post indicates the gap that exists between people who are used to acting on their own and do not need, or want prompting let alone rules from Govt, be it City, State or Federal; and those who are used to being obedient, or compliant, because they trust Govt. On this basis, the stark difference between Sweden and South Korea is an object lesson, though to be fair South Korea had experience with an epidemic and was this in a better place to respond, though the responses were so different, and both countries have a high level of spending on health.
This article offers an interesting comparison-
A world of no lockdowns: The case of South Korea and Sweden (ideasforindia.in)
Also, because I understand you work in the health sector, I am going to assume you were/are more sensitive to the immediate environment you work in, and can join the dots when it comes to the epidemiology of Covid and the most effective ways to stop it. Masks are crucial, and in the first phase, social distancing was crucial, it is just a 'no brainer' -an airborne virus that attacks the lungs thrives in urban settings and places where humans congregate. How to respond? Don't give it access.
Thus in essence I think we are dealing with the science vs politics questions, with the Telegraph and others now asking if in fact the science was so secure that it justified lockdowns and social distancing as rules imposed by the Govt, or if compliance was better secured through individual choice -on the basis people are not going to be reckless- and had the lockdowns not been imposed, would the rate of infection and death have increased?
On this last point, the Telegraph is in the happy position of not having to prove the argument, because it cannot, but it can hammer home the 'Govt is bad' argument on the basis of the staggering costs to the UK.
On this basis, I think it is a problem if you have what you call 'inept' govt, and it is aggravated if people either don't trust the legislators, or disagree with the severity of the rules they imposes. The problem is we cannot know if the lockdowns were as damaging as is being claimed, because the assumption is that the level of infection and death would not have been higher, that in fact cases tended to cluster, for example among the elderly in care homes, rather than among schoolchildren. But the epidemiological argument concerned carriers who could be the young, so on the basis of what was known in 2020 I don't see that there was much of an alternative. But I tend to support collectivist responses, and I think they were effective.
Science is not bullshit, the politics was. When I was in Germany over Christmas/New Year 2021-2022, you could not enter any public building without a Covid Pass (ie proof of vaccination)- and in some venues, a test was required before entry, but testing stations available nearby to do this. Again, in Germany last summer and last Christmas/New Year, when I was also in Vienna, masks are still mandatory on public transport, but because of the effectiveness of vaccines, all other restrictions lifted. And the point is that the people comply, they obey, and they do so because they can see that it works. But it seems to me that these sorts of barrier methods would drive a Texan to pull out a gun or some equivalent verbal response, but that is politics in command, not science, and obviously the US suffered from having an idiot in the White House who neither understood the science, nor supported it.
You might say I am being obstinate in refusing to believe that it wouldn't have been so bad without masks and lockdowns, but I don't see that at all. The economy was always going to suffer, this was the most serious public health crisis in 100 years, you can't deal with something of that magnitude without a contraction of economic activity. But did the regulations go on too long? Again, I don't think so, because I think the key was getting the vaccine, and then ensuring the population got it. Again, this is science in command: understanding what the virus is, how it works, and stopping it. Once you have that, the cascade of vaccinations liberated the people.
The science of Covid has been a triumph -delineating its DNA, understanding how the virus works, creating a vaccine to control it, to prevent it killing people: this is what has mattered most. The politics has been dismal, whether it is the ineptitude of legislators, or the shocking disinformation in the media none of which was anchored in science. The consequences have been harsh, but that is what happens in a pandemic. It changes things. Whether New York has changed because of Covid, or Covid exposed other changes taking place is not something I can judge.
I do sympathise with your frustration at the management of it, but it was always going to be a rough ride -but we came through, we beat it, and it was a collective effort. And it was the kiss of death for Trump, and that was the icing on the otherwise inedible cake.
I hope people have learned to trust the science, and if handled properly, trust the politicians too when they are properly informed and make the right decisions, though this appears to be the weak link as failures in delivery across a range of social and economic issues erodes trust in Govt, but that is a different debate.
More arguments in favour of the wet market in Wuhan as the source of the Covid virus, via 'racoon dogs'--to read the full article you may have to sign in, so here are some extracts-
"One of the most compelling clues to the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic was uploaded without announcement to a scientific database, going unnoticed for weeks.And then, just as suddenly, it vanished from public view.
The genetic data, from swabs taken at the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, China, in the weeks after Covid-19 first emerged, were available online just long enough for a Parisian scientist to stumble upon them while working from her couch on a Saturday afternoon earlier this month.
“I have a bad work-life balance,” says Florence Débarre, an evolutionary biologist whose accidental discovery of the files led to confirmation for the first time that animals susceptible to the coronavirus were present at the Wuhan market.
They were thousands of raw genetic sequences from swabs that Chinese scientists had taken in early 2020, from the floors, cages, walls and surfaces of the Wuhan market where the first cases of the virus were detected.
A pre-print analysis of the same swabs, released by the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC) in February 2022 claimed they had included human DNA and coronavirus traces, but showed no evidence of the kinds of animals most likely to have been vectors for the virus.
Their findings supported arguments made by some Chinese officials that the Wuhan market was merely a site where the virus spread among humans, rather than the cradle where it made its first fateful leap from animals to people. But when Débarre and her colleagues analysed the same data, they received another result. “It was the Latin name for raccoon dog, multiple times,” she says. “It was one of the greatest emotions of my life.”
Raccoon dogs, omnivorous east Asian cousins of the fox, are highly susceptible to coronavirus infections and shed the virus in sufficient quantities to infect animals and humans around them. In other words: a suspect was confirmed to have been present at the scene.
Débarre stresses that other animal DNA was also found in the swabs, and that there is still no conclusive proof that raccoon dogs in the market were carrying the virus, or were the vehicle for its first spillover into humankind. “But now it cannot be denied that they were there,” she says."
‘Being truthful is essential’: scientist who stumbled upon Wuhan Covid data speaks out | Coronavirus | The Guardian
The official Enquiry into the Covid Pandemic and now it was managed in the UK has opened in London. The hearings are expected to last until 2026 with a report published either in that year or in 2027. A basic outline of the Enquiry is here-
UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk)
So far, former Prime Minister David Cameron, and former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, have been giving evidence, in effect to argue their case that the evident lack of preparedness for a Corona Virus outbreak was explained by a bias toward a different form of epidemic, namely of Influenza, the subject of a Public Health England trial called Exercise Cygnus, in October 2016. Both men deny that their policies of 'Economic Austerity' contributed to the UK's lack of preparedness in 2020 because of budget cuts to the NHS and the failure to fund the Contingency Planning that had been recommended by Exercise Cygnus.
What was not better known before this week, was that while Exercise Cygnus was held in October 2016, in February of that year, another trial by Public Health England, Exercise Alice, was mounted to assess the preparedness of the UK for a MERS-Corona Virus outbreak -in other words, a Corona-type viral outbreak not so far from the Covid outbreak that actually happened.
You can read about Exercise Alice here-
Exercise Alice: the UK government tested the response to a coronavirus, but why are we only discovering this now? - The BMJ
All of the ingredients for the mismanagement of the Covid virus were in place in January 2020 -the budget cuts to the NHS, the absence of the contingency planning that meant, for example, a lack of PPE when the need was urgent; and intellectually, a disbelief that the UK would be subject to the kind of viral attacks that were associated with either the Middle East, or Asia.
Or: It can't happen here. Until it does.
This reminds me of Donald Rumsfeld's famous statement about known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
A contingency plan that deals only with known knowns is of limited usefulness. Unfortunately, politicians never learn this lesson. The irony of Rumsfeld's insight is that he ignored it in relation to Iraq.
It is more about the practicalities -if there are contingency plans, they need to be funded, there needs to be a shadow organization in place ready to step into the light when there is an emergency. The simple facts are that a) the Cameron/Osborne economic strategy did not commit to giving money to 'hypotheticals'; and b) even when the first Covid cases were reported in China, the assumption was that this was merely another Asian problem we would not have to deal with. As soon as those first cases emerged in Northern Italy and the State of Washington in the US, alarm bells should have been ringing.
Austerity and Arrogance: two knowns.
Trump is at it again: re-writing history.
He claims that 'smart people' -he needs them to buttress his own credentials- but hasn't told us who they are- have praised his decision-making on Covid that saved "100 Million lives worldwide"....and then claims that the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 began in 1917 and was the reason the First World War ended...!
Evidently his 'smart people' are that ignorant, as the first recorded case was in, wait for it, Kansas in March 1918, by which time the Russian Empire had given way to the Bolsheviks who withdrew from the War and signed a peace with the German Empire at Brest-Litovsk, the same month as that case in Kansas. Did that and the failure of Germany's spring campaign in 1918 -the Kaiserschlacht - bring an and to the War, and was it the involvement of the US in that phase of the war that proved decisive? If you want an answer, best not to ask Donald, or his 'Smart Friends'.
Trump's wise decision making on Covid followed his combined determination that there was nothing to worry about, with his full frontal attacks on the first states to be affected -Washington, New York and Michigan -when he should have been supporting them as his duty as President required. Praise? Not really.
Senile? I don't think so. Permanently stupid? Sure.
As for Ms Kelly, was she advised to show some leg to make sure Trump did not get upset and Storm out of the interview?
Trump and DeSantis Trade Blows Over COVID-19 Response (yahoo.com)
De Santis seems to be going all out for the anti-vaxxer vote, warning against Covid boosters for people under 65.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...tions-00117284
This has implications beyond Covid. We are probably going to get a resurgence of preventable diseases because an increasing portion of the population is believing scare stories about vaccines.
https://www.politico.com/tag/the-ris...ccine-movement
Make America great again; bring back polio!
On the one hand, the most serious, and challenging public health crisis in 100 years, on the other hand an ignorant, dangerous fool who presided over thousands of deaths (see YouTube link below).
"MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan played Fauci footage of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) telling supporters last year that “someone needs to grab that little elf and chuck him across the Potomac.”"
Anthony Fauci Exposes Ugly Reality Behind Ron DeSantis' Dangerous Attacks (yahoo.com)
The truth about DeSantis’ awful record on covid - YouTube
I got the original pfizer series back in 2021 and kept my boosters up to date. Last September I got the Moderna updated bivalent booster that had additional protection against omicron but still contained mrna for the original spike.
Today I'm getting Moderna's 2023 monovalent booster that is supposed to provide protection against the most recent variants. I did not choose pfizer over moderna or vice versa in any case and the decision was often made based on availability.
The vaccines have continued to provide very good protection against severe disease and mortality (markedly if you compare to someone with no exposure to sars-cov-2, which must be exceedingly rare). I have not had any major side effects and am just saddened there has been so much misinformation about the vaccines and about the original death toll. I remember in 2020 when we had 3,000 deaths a day in the US and now we have right-wing commentators who say it was like the common cold. Their followers say they always knew it was a hoax.
Anyhow, I'll let everyone know whether the side effects are mild, moderate, or bad. Usually I get a sore arm, a little dizziness about 12 hours after, and an intermittent headache for a day or two.
I haven't looked at the latest infection fatality rates or rates of long covid but obviously while the pandemic part may be over, covid continues to cause significant illness as an infectious disease. The last I read it is still more deadly than flu, though not markedly so, and much depends on a person's vaccination and infection history. Long covid is very debilitating for a lot of people, causes a host of fairly major life consequences for those who have it, and the treatments are by individual symptom, and not especially effective.
As of today I have been vaccinated against RSV.
Two-weeks ago I got the updated Covid-19 vaccine. Two weeks before that, I was vaccinated against pneumonia and two weeks before that, the flu.
I am getting flu shot in November. I had what was probably the flu (but not covid since I tested) in the week before my covid shot. I didn't feel like getting flu shot at the same time even though I did last time. I think I will be getting flu shot pretty soon though. Good luck to you!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir Putin
Edit: I forgot that I said I'd say what my side effects were. Minimal. Sore arm, but that was it this time.
Had my Covid booster this lunchtime, Flu jab next week. Have also been offered a Shingles jab which I shall accept as I had an attack a few years ago. I hope people reading this will get their shots.
The public enquiry into the Govt's management of the Covid Pandemic is not revealing many surprises, though it is probably torture for the officials having to admit they bungled it. It will be interesting, when it can be done, to compare the views of the medical professionals with the politicians. Meanwhile, leaked WhatsApp messages and those shown at the Enquiry expose the shambles at the heart of Government, this one from the Cabinet Secretary a concise condemnation of the idiot we had as Prime Minister (first seen in the Live reports in The Guardian). You may need to open the image in a new tab to read it.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F9sW-eLX...jpg&name=large
Rachel Wearmouth on X: "A WhatsApps between Cabinet Secretary Simon Case & Boris Johnson's ex-adviser Dominic Cummings, & other messages between Case and former comms chief Lee Cain Suggests govt was in chaos during Covid https://t.co/mpJhEvICy5" / X (twitter.com)
The Live reports from the Covid Enquiry are compelling to read. This morning we learn that Downing St was told a lockdown was essential but did not announce it for 10 days. We learn Boris Johnson was useless at making decisions and went on holiday for 2 weeks in mid-February, and some of this is important because those who write for the Telegraph and The Spectator and other 'Conservative' type outlets, are focusing on the argument there was no need for lockdowns, given that their attempts to prove vaccinations either don't work or cause more harm has no scope or truthfulness.
Reports are here-
(1) No 10 staff realised full lockdown was necessary 10 days before it was announced, inquiry hears – UK politics live (theguardian.com)
I find it gobsmacking that the main news channels are covering it live without a bleeper for the explicit language spoken from transcripts of the WhatsApp messages.
Channel 4 News bleeped out the offending words, and not only were they offensive, it is worth noting that having referred to a woman working in the Downing St operation as a C***, Cummings then shrugged his shoulders to say he said worse things about the men. And for good reason too I think. But when I worked for a well known multi-national there was an ethical code, and the kind of language used in No 10 would have got people sacked where I worked, and anyway, I would not use that kind of language at any time, and there were times of tension.Quote:
Originally Posted by rodinuk
The saddest thing, is that I don't think many people are surprised at the crudity, the dysfunctional department, the petty vindictiveness, the ego wars, just how out of touch with real people these exalted nobodies were. And where are they now?
A useful summary of yesterday's trip through the 'orgy of narcissism' that was Boris Johnson's Downing St...
Eight shocking revelations from Cummings and Cain at the Covid inquiry | Covid inquiry | The Guardian
I wonder what we would learn if we had the same documentation from the Trump White House re Covid -?
Another grim day in the Covid Enquiry, where we learn not that the Prime Minister and his Cabinet have, in Michael Gove's words 'had enough of experts', but that they didn't understand what they were saying anyway. Boris Johnson cannot understand elementary graphs, Rishi Sunak claims the experts did not warn him his 'Eat Out to Help Out' would spread Covid rather than restrict it, and allegedly on the victims 'let them die'. Even when you factor in the inexperience with a major public health incident like Covid, the inability or unwillingness of Politicians to make tough decisions is fundamental to what went wrong, their press conferences at times just a pack of lies, just as they banned people from gathering together while they partied hard.
How Patrick Vallance’s explosive diaries exposed Covid chaos inside No 10 | Patrick Vallance | The Guardian
I had my two shingles shots in 2020 right before and after the start of the Covid-19 pandemic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
Let us hope this ignorance is not contagious...
"The World Health Organization has accused Nigel Farage of spreading misinformation after he launched a campaign to block an international treaty designed to improve global pandemic preparedness.WHO member states are negotiating a deal to shore up cooperation against new pathogens. If adopted, the legally binding treaty would commit countries to helping each other in the event of a pandemic, increase research and sharing of data, and promote fair access to vaccines.
But populist figures including Farage and a number of Tory MPs are lobbying the UK government to block the deal, claiming that it will give the WHO power to enforce lockdowns on countries, dictate policy on mask wearing and control vaccine stocks."
WHO accuses Nigel Farage of spreading misinformation about pandemic treaty | Nigel Farage | The Guardian