Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

context-cdn.washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 135 posts

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#111

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

koheripbal wrote: post #97
X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #70

page 18 seems to be indicating that Delta is ~2x more likely to have all of the bad outcomes relative to ancestral strain. That combined with how much more infectious this is makes it truly worrying. One interpretation of the fact that Israel has such different numbers on vaccine effectiveness is that effectiveness starts dropping ~6 months in. We'll need to start doing 3rd shots for lots of people ~now.

2x the extremely low rate for vaccinated people is still very low - hence the extra efforts needed to vaccinate people.

Yes, it's important, in the US we are largely demand constrained, however globally we are supply constrained.

IMO the world just got a lot darker.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#112

Post by notabee »

lamontcg wrote: post #110
arc-in-space wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, I think its recent growth in use is a smooth addition to the language, even if we do already have plenty of synonyms for 'bad'. Speaking of those, your very classy 'stupid' hasn't exactly clarified much either.

It isn't just "bad", it denies knowledge of any cause and shrugs it off. If you're looking at broken tech and you shrug it off as "oh well its just cursed" then you're never going to solve the problem. The frequent posts on this site where someone drilled down through multiple levels and determined root causes of issues and mitigations were not written by someone who though the problem was "cursed". The use of that w…

If this is the case, then that's not how I was using that word at all. More like, I feel cursed to know this potential outcome, and feel like blissful ignorance might be preferable. Quite the opposite of what you're inferring, I'm going to be reading much further on this issue because it's important.

Obviously this is a really specific pet peeve of yours, in a specific context, that doesn't have much to do with what I said. Maybe you just saw the word, had an emotional response based on the behavioral of some individuals you know, and your brain turned off to reading the context of what I actually said.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#113

Post by SkyMarshal »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #107
SkyMarshal wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not aware of any expert or health official who believes that eradicating the pandemic is possible. There are plenty of experts and health officials who believe that eradicating the pandemic is possible. Including some with experience eradicating other pandemics like Ebola and Zika [1], along with the editor-in-chief of the Lancet [2], among others. Eradicating a pandemic is not unprecedented, it can and has bee…

First off, I think this is an instructive case of reputation laundering. These seem like two independent sources at first, but if you dig deeper, both of these sites are mouthpieces for one Yaneer Bar-Yam. I have to concede that he's not a crank, and appears to have meaningful pandemic expertise. I'm now aware of one expert who's confident eliminating Covid is possible. But this has to be evaluated in the context of…

I’m not sure “reputation laundering” is the right term, since these folks don’t have any reputational problems. One site is their institute’s home page with news on all their research. The other is a website focused on COVID19 only, aggregating relevant info, with a more semantic URL and probably some SEO, and including team members outside of NECSI. They don’t hide their connection to NECSI, but the organization is more than just NECSI.

As for the disagreement, it probably stems from the fact that with other outbreaks like Ebola, with known ~50% mortality rates, there’s unanimous consensus that they must be shut down early, and so they are.

That common cause and singled-minded focus and coordination is a major factor in successfully eradicating the pandemic. And doing it early before it can become widespread is obviously more viable than shutting it down after it’s gone global.

These folks are asserting that the methodologies used for shutting down other pandemics early can still be effectively scaled up to shut down a widespread pandemic like COVID19 that we failed to shut down early. And that’s where the disagreement is with the consensus you linked.

The thing is, global pandemics aren’t over, they’re just beginning, and we could be hit by something worse later. It behooves all of society to use COVID19 as a not-too-deadly trial run for learning how to quickly shut down something worse in the future, rather than fatalistically accepting it.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#114

Post by AndrewBissell »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #84
sbierwagen wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is a secret hidden footnote to "NO ADJUSTMENTS FOR OTHER INTERVENTIONS" and "no distancing, no isolation, no gathering restrictions" that reads "just kidding about that, all restaurants and bars need to be closed immediately" then this slide deck is doing a very bad job of clearly recommending what public heath interventions should be done. Again, why would they recommend universal masking if they know for a…

Why hasn't the FDA approved the vaccines, when health experts universally agree they're safe and effective and everyone should get one? I always hate when conversations come to this, because it comes across as a wild hot take, but there's a point where you've just gotta blame organizational dysfunction. It wouldn't be appropriate for the CDC to say "everyone ought to close indoor dining again" or "masks are pointless…

> when health experts universally agree they're safe and effective and everyone should get one

This is not true.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#115

Post by rayiner »

trainsplanes wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in Asia is everyone walking around masked unless they’re actively sick? In Tokyo you can always see a few masked people, but that’s totally different than everyone being masked.

Everyone in Japan is currently walking around masked. People here also walk around with masks during allergy season, or doing flu season even when they’re not sick. In Taiwan and Vietnam I saw (and wore) masks on days when the air was particularly dirty.

We’re talking about everyone wearing masks indefinitely going forward. Japan was definitely not like that pre-pandemic.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#116

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #113
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, I think this is an instructive case of reputation laundering. These seem like two independent sources at first, but if you dig deeper, both of these sites are mouthpieces for one Yaneer Bar-Yam. I have to concede that he's not a crank, and appears to have meaningful pandemic expertise. I'm now aware of one expert who's confident eliminating Covid is possible. But this has to be evaluated in the context of…

I’m not sure “reputation laundering” is the right term, since these folks don’t have any reputational problems. One site is their institute’s home page with news on all their research. The other is a website focused on COVID19 only, aggregating relevant info, with a more semantic URL and probably some SEO, and including team members outside of NECSI. They don’t hide their connection to NECSI, but the organization is…

> As for the disagreement, it probably stems from the fact that with other outbreaks like Ebola, with known ~50% mortality rates, there’s unanimous consensus that they must be shut down early, and so they are.

I think this is the core thing that I've never understood about the zero covid idea. If you look at, say, France or Spain, there was a unanimous consensus that the coronavirus must be stopped early, with strong and severe lockdowns for 5-6 weeks as these sites outline. The consensus didn't break because of laziness or complacency; it broke because it didn't work, because the lockdowns reduced but never eliminated community transmission. If you have a disease that's not that bad in the scheme of things, and you try the best known suppression strategies but they don't get rid of it, what other option is there than to find a way to live with it?

I also think it's important to acknowledge that our efforts to fight Ebola have not generally been this strong, despite Bar-Yam's arguments that they should be. In 2014, some American states imposed mandatory quarantines on doctors and nurses who'd been treating Ebola patients in western Africa, and there was strong pushback - from medical experts, who said that the quarantines were stigmatizing and counterproductive and there's no medical reason to impose such an over-the-top policy. "The Ebola quarantines and other movement restrictions put in place throughout the nation beginning in late 2014 were motivated by fear and by politics, not by medical science", said Doctors Without Borders.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#117

Post by jpster »

If vaxxed people are still getting infected and transmitting Delta at similar rates as unvaxxed, then the reasons for getting vaxxed are:

- lower your own chances of symptomatic disease, severe illness, hospitalization and death

- and therefore, help keep the healthcare system from collapsing

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#118

Post by jpster »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #84
sbierwagen wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is a secret hidden footnote to "NO ADJUSTMENTS FOR OTHER INTERVENTIONS" and "no distancing, no isolation, no gathering restrictions" that reads "just kidding about that, all restaurants and bars need to be closed immediately" then this slide deck is doing a very bad job of clearly recommending what public heath interventions should be done. Again, why would they recommend universal masking if they know for a…

Why hasn't the FDA approved the vaccines, when health experts universally agree they're safe and effective and everyone should get one? I always hate when conversations come to this, because it comes across as a wild hot take, but there's a point where you've just gotta blame organizational dysfunction. It wouldn't be appropriate for the CDC to say "everyone ought to close indoor dining again" or "masks are pointless…

Based on a podcast I heard this week FDA approval also looks at quality assurance of mass manufacturing, storage, supply chains, etc. It’s not just about efficacy and safety of the formulation, itself, but whether they can be assured at scale. It takes time to check all those boxes.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#119

Post by SkyMarshal »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #116
SkyMarshal wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure “reputation laundering” is the right term, since these folks don’t have any reputational problems. One site is their institute’s home page with news on all their research. The other is a website focused on COVID19 only, aggregating relevant info, with a more semantic URL and probably some SEO, and including team members outside of NECSI. They don’t hide their connection to NECSI, but the organization is…

> As for the disagreement, it probably stems from the fact that with other outbreaks like Ebola, with known ~50% mortality rates, there’s unanimous consensus that they must be shut down early, and so they are. I think this is the core thing that I've never understood about the zero covid idea. If you look at, say, France or Spain, there was a unanimous consensus that the coronavirus must be stopped early, with strong…

>The consensus didn't break because of laziness or complacency; it broke because it didn't work, because the lockdowns reduced but never eliminated community transmission.

Their critique of most of those cases is the measures were lifted prematurely, before getting all the way to zero infection rate, allowing it to re-spread again. And also the fact that all adjoining countries need the same zero-covid policy, or even ones that get to zero covid can be reinfected by neighbors. It's all (the way to zero), or nothing.

Re: CDC Internal Delta Variant Presentation

#120

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #119
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As for the disagreement, it probably stems from the fact that with other outbreaks like Ebola, with known ~50% mortality rates, there’s unanimous consensus that they must be shut down early, and so they are. I think this is the core thing that I've never understood about the zero covid idea. If you look at, say, France or Spain, there was a unanimous consensus that the coronavirus must be stopped early, with strong…

>The consensus didn't break because of laziness or complacency; it broke because it didn't work, because the lockdowns reduced but never eliminated community transmission. Their critique of most of those cases is the measures were lifted prematurely, before getting all the way to zero infection rate, allowing it to re-spread again. And also the fact that all adjoining countries need the same zero-covid policy, or eve…

How can we be confident that zero infection rate would ever have been achieved? They gave it a good shot, in most places over twice as long as had been originally planned. At some point, if you're not seeing transmission rates getting at least close to zero, it seems like you have to conclude the plan's not working.
Post reply on HN