Live data from Hacker News

Delta Variant

unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com

151–160 of 442 posts

Re: Delta Variant

#151

I honestly don't know how to feel about Tomas Pueyo. He's very opinionated about what he writes, and has gained good readership and influencer status on this topic. It's clear in his writings that he fancies himself as an "amateur of expert insight". He may be 100% correct. He may also be 100% wrong. It's hard to tell (let alone without invoking the conditional fallacy). However, the most lasting impression I have of…

ive never heard of this author and i thought it was a good blog post. your post is for better or worse the definition of ad-hominem and also black-and-white thinking (100% right or 100% wrong). In the US, we are in a dangerous place where social distancing and masking have basically stopped, and with a much more contagious variant like Delta we're defintiely going to have a much bigger problem again in the coming months. I didn't see anything in this article that struck me as counterproductive towards preparing for the continuation of the virus.

Re: Delta Variant

#152
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a vaccinated person - the risk of dying is quite low. That isn't the only criteria i use to decide if something should concern me.

As a vaccinated person, I've never really paid much thought to other diseases that could make me, at worst, mildly ill. One may have to enlighten me as to why this one should be different from, say, influenza in my day to day activities at this point.

Many possible responses, but I'll stick to one.

Because it isn't just about you. This is a public health matter that is a different situation. We have a rapidly decreasing chance of making this NOT be the next influenza, killing many people every year. This thing, in theory, could have been basically stopped by now, regionally at the very least, but folks want to party and go to restaurants and can't be bothered to get a vaccine.

I'm very glad you got the vaccine. If everyone who could get it did get it, then (at least in the U.S. where it's free and available everywhere) we'd probably be at herd immunity by this point and this would be in the rearview mirror. Then do that for the rest of the globe before variants get too out of hand, wasting all of the previous effort.

Re: Delta Variant

#153

The article purposefully conflates numbers to tell a narrative. I am talking only about EU, and at that southern EU which is where I've been following the numbers closely. Delta variant has been acting for up to 1 month in some regions, and as described in the article yes cases are up very quickly. However, the article says: > COVID deaths [...] And if you think Europe or the US will be spared This is not reflected a…

> mixing deaths in one country with infections in another

so basically like the last 15 months

there is a clear separation of critical thinkers on this planet such that we are almost two different species if it wasnt for the viable offspring

Re: Delta Variant

#154

The article purposefully conflates numbers to tell a narrative. I am talking only about EU, and at that southern EU which is where I've been following the numbers closely. Delta variant has been acting for up to 1 month in some regions, and as described in the article yes cases are up very quickly. However, the article says: > COVID deaths [...] And if you think Europe or the US will be spared This is not reflected a…

[flagged]

Re: Delta Variant

#155

The article purposefully conflates numbers to tell a narrative. I am talking only about EU, and at that southern EU which is where I've been following the numbers closely. Delta variant has been acting for up to 1 month in some regions, and as described in the article yes cases are up very quickly. However, the article says: > COVID deaths [...] And if you think Europe or the US will be spared This is not reflected a…

I hate having to be skeptical of this stuff, because the consequences of skeptics being accurate are even more horrifying than the pandemic. This is so challenging because when you look at each number he uses, and then compare it to its base rate, you can see why hesitancy levels are 30-50% in regions of developed countries. If you are among that cohort of people in your region who are not vaccinated, should you get it? Yes, and especially if you have co-morbidities or work with people who do. We need to seriously consider what the consequences of a controversial vaccination plan that requires 90% compliance for it to succeed are going to be if/when it fails. (I would even posit that number is closer to 70%)

If you talk to hesitant people, and there are a lot of them, the reason is a mistrust of the people leading the effort and managing the pandemic. Why mistrust? Many reasons, but the most challenging one is because of numbers that don't pass a smell test coupled with apopleptic ad-hominim aggression directed against anyone who questions them. This all but guarantees a 20%+ rejection rate from people who just dig in because they do not make health or other decisions based on fear and shame. There will be a defiant group of about 5-10% who you just can't reach at all, so if your plan needs them, you will need a new plan.

Calling people hesitant is patronizing and was probably the stupidest PR move of all time and the committee responsible for it will have to live with those consequences.

But instead of arming people with a litany of whataboutisms, I would say this to an unvaxed person: given your objections, how does getting the shot prevent you from resisting or even fighting a battle you percieve you need to fight against these authorities you do not trust? Polite euphemisms aside, let's call it what it is, because that's the crux of it.

If it does, you need to just act now and literally overthrow your governments in the next few weeks, but if you aren't going to act today and do that, then get a shot, and use the time to figure out how to depose these people that you do not trust in good time. If, as many hesitant people believe, there might be long term harm to them, your long term still involves a conflict to replace these people, but risk from hypothetical side effects still nets out of that equation.

My rationale to the so-called hesitant would be this: get the shot, and then use the time to organize and support your revolts against untrustworthy leaders and institutions, because once you are vaccinated, you can draw from the ranks of others who were also forced into it. Use this to unite people to your causes against untrustworthy authorities, because your skepticism comes directly from people using this to divide you. Take that from them, and then commit to organizing and scaling the change that has to come. Having the shot gives you skin in the game with the people you are going to need on your side.

This issue isn't the main battle, but I will absolutely support efforts to ensure trustworthy people get into positions of authority after this.

Re: Delta Variant

#156
post #4

I have to admit, I'm a little perplexed about all the discussion around the Delta variant. It almost feels like people are discussing this like it's a plot point in a novel, a new looming threat that comes after Act II, rather than a cold scientific fact. As someone who lives in New York and has been vaccinated for months, should I worry about this? It seems like the answer to that question is no, I shouldn't. Also n…

I'm a fully vaccinated Canadian, and it matters to me because the vaccines are effective against Delta, but seemingly only barely so— and the longer it continues to circulate the better a chance it has of evolving further and then us all having to go into lockdown and wait for another booster shot that specifically targets whatever the new vector is: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/07/3-princip...

> the vaccines are effective against Delta, but seemingly only barely so

What data are you looking at? Even the waist pessimistic data - Israel - shows the vaccine working at great effectiveness.

Re: Delta Variant

#157
Not sure why science/math minded people are buying into any COVID Fears. The death rates are 1 percent, and it particularly targets old and obese people.

I have no problem getting vaccinated and paying for n95 masks for old and obese people.

But COVID reminds me of post 9-11 terrorist fears. Statistically insignificant and gets people glued to TVs. Instead of the military industrial complex winning tax dollars, big pharma wins tax dollars.

I just want a science based approach to these pandemics, instead we got hysteria.

Re: Delta Variant

#158

I honestly don't know how to feel about Tomas Pueyo. He's very opinionated about what he writes, and has gained good readership and influencer status on this topic. It's clear in his writings that he fancies himself as an "amateur of expert insight". He may be 100% correct. He may also be 100% wrong. It's hard to tell (let alone without invoking the conditional fallacy). However, the most lasting impression I have of…

I got the same opinion just from the article. So sure of himself, giving advice to everybody and blasting alarming attitude, while real epidemiologists and doctors that I know are much less sure about predictions and almost never beat the drum of alarm. He's probably a case of Dunning-Kruger effect.

Re: Delta Variant

#159
post #41

These new variants were to be expected as the vaccines seem to be accelerating these mutations. My understanding is that the COVID vaccines train the body to recognize the outer protein layer of the virus. In consequence when that changes (because of mutations and natural selection) the body becomes less effective at recognizing the virus. Geert Vanden Bossche[1] has been warning about this for months now. He says it…

As far as I understand (I don't have any background in biology), mutations will happen regardless of whether people are vaccinated or not. There might be mutations that make the virus circumvent some vaccine protections, but those mutations would take place even if we weren't vaccinating people. Nothing about the vaccines "guides" the virus towards specific mutations. Mutations are random. If this is correct, why wou…

It depends if the vaccine is sterilizing (destroys the virus) or leaky (symptoms are prevented but virus is not destroyed).

Leaky vaccines do change evolutionary pressure and increase the likelihood of escape variants.

For a case study in the worst case outcomes of leaky vaccines, see Marek's disease [1].

It seems like the mRNA vaccines are at least partially leaky, so there have been concerns raised and alarms sounded by researchers.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease

Re: Delta Variant

#160
Content like this that fails to incorporate demographics as natural immunity goes in the “alarmist” bucket for me at this stage. We know the vaccines work against delta. If you are in a developed country and wanted a vaccine you have gotten one. The delta so far does not harm the young in any meaningful enough way to change our calculus around children.

The thing we ought to be worried about is what happens if a new variant pops up that hurts kids. I’d like to see analysis from a virologist on the odds of this happening given selective pressures.

Post reply on HN