Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths • Hacker News Board

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#631

Post by nzealand » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:52 AM UTC

rajin444 wrote: post #306

valeness wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(speaking generally here at those I've seen share the same rage, not accusing you directly) I just cannot wrap my head around being so upset that a public official lied you're willing to sever friendships, familial ties, and sacrifice your career because you refuse to follow sane and frankly manageable guidelines to prevent the spread of COVID-19. It's not even that the messaging is currently or has been conflicting…

You're probably overestimating covid risk (there are other polls similar to this one - this is the most recent): https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimat... The media's addiction to "scare articles" as well as the government's willingness to promote noble lies puts a lot of weight towards covid risk being heavily propagandized. On top of that, complying with government orders simply because you're…

Ironically that comes up with wildly inaccurate estimates itself.

> we take the average population totals over the relevant periods for each population (March 1, 2020-Aug. 9, 2021 for the unvaccinated population and Dec. 15, 2020,-Aug. 9, 2021, for the vaccinated population). The adjusted population of vaccinated people comes to 83 million and 295 million for the [un]vaccinated population

330 million Americans, less 83 million vaccinated Americans equals 247 million unvaccinated people, not 295 million.

They are also deliberately ignoring CDC estimates.

> CDC epidemiologists estimate that the actual number of hospitalizations may be 1.8 times higher than the reported number.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#632

Post by titzer » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:55 AM UTC

at_a_remove wrote: post #102

colordrops wrote: post #10

The article is discussing the media and government being intentionally vague or even misinformative because they don't trust the public, but it backfires and causes more distrust. The flip side that wasn't discussed is the belittling and censoring of voices that were skeptical of the narratives, which engendered even more distrust. Their strategy of information control backfired, and they doubled down. Now we've got…

And there has been this background ambient energy of "Big Pharma is evil, the Sacklers ..." (which I find rather scapegoaty for the Sacklers in particular) which just immediately ran afoul of "You should definitely trust in these vaccines produced by Big Pharma, the ones we have been telling you are so greedy/evil/incompetent." Then you have some discussion of what "gain of function" means and ... Well, the distrust…

> Well, the distrust the American public has in Science! has been earned over decades.

If we split apart what the power structures say is "Science" and what Science actually is, we find the same dynamic as been since time immemorial. A priestly class with their guarded knowledge, meted out to us poor rubes in oversimplified commandments. A monk class whose esoteric studies are hidden from view, filed away in the annals of religious letters, Scientific journals, dissertations in libraries...the like.

What a time to live in though! The internet and YouTube and open access journals--Science has never been more accessible and understandable, animated, and illustrated, like it is now!

But we are in a wash of disinformation and misinformation and lying and rage, too.

Yes, the power structures are coming unglued. But Science is about truth. If only we could get our pants on and coax the crazies off the ledge.

> it has been sold with a pat and a don't worry your pretty head about it.

It's because we are treating grown adults like unruly children, dumbing everything down to the least common denominator, at times striking them with an iron rod, at times bending over backwards because Biology class was boring in highschool and the last thing we can afford in the age of distraction is to be boring!

No! We should make Science fun! If we are going to treat people like kids because they don't know Science then at least make it fun for them to catch back up! We should get people excited about discovering and learning new things again, the way a Carl Sagan could. Instead of threatening, we should be seducing and luring people into the terrifying prospect of finally figuring out how shit works.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#633

Post by jimkleiber » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:59 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #604

Natsu wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I agree that there are valid reasons to make different risk calculations, however, part of that calculation has to be the chance of catching and spreading Covid to people who have higher risk. I personally have almost no risk from Covid. But if I don't take precautions I could easily kill grandma, who can't vaccinate, and others at the nursing home. I agree that there's no one true risk calculation for everyone…

> "...I could easily kill grandma..." see, there's the hyperbole that makes you lose credibility. ~95% of those 65 and older in the US are vaccinated. visiting with grandma (or any family, for that matter) is an instance where wearing a mask (and certainly a number of other potential mitigations) could make a difference, so use your brain to make that assessment, not some brainless heuristic infringed upon you by an…

I lived with my parents for all of last year and my mom was going thru chemo, so at the time, the threat to her life from covid was very present in my mind. That has gone away since she got vaccinated and I'm grateful. At the same time, my best friend's parents are not vaccinated and I worry that they will get very sick and/or die. My great uncle died from covid. I agree that maybe the phrase "easily kill grandma" was hyperbole from the other poster, and yet i don't know their grandma's situation and the way I read it, their grandma cannot be vaccinated.

Regarding the vaccination rates, I don't think they are as high as you had said/estimated. What I found[0] said 65-74 was around 80% fully vaccinated in the US and 75 and up was around 77% fully vaccinated. If I did the math correctly on my phone, the difference between 80.83% fully vaccinated 65-74 year olds and 95% fully vaccinated is 4,474,231 people. The diff between 77.1% of 75 and up and 95% of them is 4,027,214. While estimating 95% when the percentages were 80.83% and 77.1% may seem insignificant, combined, operating on a large set of people, the difference between your estimate and what I see reported by the CDC adds up to 8,501,445 people...which is just the difference, not the total number of people not fully vaccinated in those age groups. I also think that those percentages are not evenly distributed across geography, as some places have higher vaccination rates and other lower ones, which could make it lower than 80% or 77% in certain pockets.

I'll be the first to admit I don't know if I did the math right above and that I know very little about how statistics work. I think it is very hard for many of us to avoid exaggerating and bending data to align with our fears. Just as I think you were doing your best to estimate the percentage of people fully vaccinated, I assume the original poster was doing their best to estimate the risk to the life of their grandma.

[0]: https://usafacts.org/visualizations/covid-vaccine-tracker-st...

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#634

Post by nuerow » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:02 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #604

Natsu wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I agree that there are valid reasons to make different risk calculations, however, part of that calculation has to be the chance of catching and spreading Covid to people who have higher risk. I personally have almost no risk from Covid. But if I don't take precautions I could easily kill grandma, who can't vaccinate, and others at the nursing home. I agree that there's no one true risk calculation for everyone…

> "...I could easily kill grandma..." see, there's the hyperbole that makes you lose credibility. ~95% of those 65 and older in the US are vaccinated. visiting with grandma (or any family, for that matter) is an instance where wearing a mask (and certainly a number of other potential mitigations) could make a difference, so use your brain to make that assessment, not some brainless heuristic infringed upon you by an…

> see, there's the hyperbole that makes you lose credibility.

It is not a hyperbole, and it saddens me to hear this level of ignorance in this forum.

The COVID-19 mortality rate for the age >65 is over 20%. That's over 1 death per 5 infections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics_of_the_COVID-19_pan...

> ~95% of those 65 and older in the US are vaccinated.

No, not quite. It is estimated that 95% of the total US population of >65 received at least one shot, but the percentage of fully vaccinated people in that age group is around 84%.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine...

However, these numbers are averages. Willingness to get the shot varies widely across the US. There are regions within the US where barely half the population took a single shot. For instance, in Idaho, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Mississippi less than half the population took even a single shot, so the majority is still totally unvaccinated.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/these-state...

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#635

Post by iammisc » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:05 AM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #417

iammisc wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also completely ignores the fact that ivermectin, whatever its merits for covid are, is an actual human medication. It is not a veterinary drug, although it has utility in animals too.

Isn't it as a prescription-only drug for humans (as a dewormer)? In that case, everybody who considers self-medicating with Ivermectin would be using the veterinary supplies (because they can more easily buy the intended-for-horses version), which the associated risks of overdosing.

It's an antiparasitic. Prescription only yes I believe.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#636

Post by Barrows » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:05 AM UTC

I have to admit that you have shown a great insperation in this wonderful site. I understood that we should teach a tactical approach in every learning opportunity that we received even in our own ways of learning before teaching technical skills and showing the result to others to come up for successful and contented result and through this i was able to modify each poject that i have specialy this one for u >> Thanks !!

https://www.prepaidcardstatus.biz/

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#637

Post by 75dvtwin » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:06 AM UTC

colordrops wrote: post #10

The article is discussing the media and government being intentionally vague or even misinformative because they don't trust the public, but it backfires and causes more distrust. The flip side that wasn't discussed is the belittling and censoring of voices that were skeptical of the narratives, which engendered even more distrust. Their strategy of information control backfired, and they doubled down. Now we've got…

> Now we've got a huge swath of US citizens that will never take the vaccine

Not only 'the vaccine' (meaning Covid-19) vaccine. Trust to CDC is lost, trust to FDA is lost, trust to Executive orders on health policies is lost.

Trust to major news networks, trust to health pundits -- is lost.

On top of that, of course, trust for non-health related 'institutions' (eg FBI, CIA, NSA, FISA courts) -- is lost.

Everything from here on coming from the above institutions -- will be viewed with skepticism and distrust.

Hell, probably trust in legitimacy of election process is lost too. Will see, I guess.

My point about the article -- is that fails to consider the whole system in a country like US...

No longer will western politicians be able to point out to authoritarian dictatorships -- from the point of moral authority.

The "Whatabout-ism" is now 'normalized', and will continue be normal discourse of international politics for a very long time.

Historians 200 years from now 2016-2022 will have to be calling this as a 'Period of Pundits & Institutions loosing people's trust' for many of English-speaking countries.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#638

Post by nuerow » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:08 AM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #393

clairity wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'just follow the rules'... that's exactly how we get the blind unreasonableness we're seeing everywhere. you need to examine your assumption that masks are doing anything at all in most common situations, and then consider what's actually reasonable vs. what you've rationalized yourself into. humility is missing in your thrust to convince others of your correctness.

I think you meant to reply to someone else, because you're quoting words that I didn't write. If I was running things, I would tell people that they have no power to punish anyone whatsoever and design the Covid rules with that in mind, making them focused entirely on helping people instead of controlling them.

> I would tell people that they have no power to punish anyone whatsoever and design the Covid rules with that in mind, making them focused entirely on helping people instead of controlling them.

How effective do you believe your approach would be? An unenforceable rule is merely a suggestion, and one which relies on responsible and informed decision-making to be followed.

If anything, the current state of affairs shows that ignorance and irresponsible behavior runs rampant, and we're seeing reckless idiots putting everyone around them at risk.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#639

Post by swader999 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:10 AM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #417

iammisc wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also completely ignores the fact that ivermectin, whatever its merits for covid are, is an actual human medication. It is not a veterinary drug, although it has utility in animals too.

Isn't it as a prescription-only drug for humans (as a dewormer)? In that case, everybody who considers self-medicating with Ivermectin would be using the veterinary supplies (because they can more easily buy the intended-for-horses version), which the associated risks of overdosing.

It's a protease inhibitor as well as anti parasitic. Much easier to get the animal brands. Overdosing is difficult unless your doing it on purpose. People ingesting the pour on cattle version or consuming products that mix ivermectin with other related but unsafe active ingredients likely caused the very small number of legitimate issues.

For me, taking ivermectin and having it clear up my long covid almost instantly was great. Then weeks later witnessing this coordinated take down was a real turning point for me. Hard to trust anything now.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#640

Post by nuerow » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 5:16 AM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #532

jjgreen wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, "helping people comply with rules" and "just follow the rules" are pretty much synonymous.

Properly understood, they're on opposite sides of the equation and as mentioned, I'd prefer not to do any punishment at all, because I feel like that cuts off most of the nonsense. So that means giving people masks if they don't have one or making reasonable accommodations where possible and making interventions about safety. But I know it's not quite so easy and especially now a lot of people are hardened and less w…

> But I know it's not quite so easy and especially now a lot of people are hardened and less willing to work together to smooth things over.

The whole point of enforcing public health and safety rules is that a significant percentage of the population is uninformed/misinformed and shows poor decision-making skills based on their personal risk perception and how they value the impact of their own actions on everyone else's risk.

If it only takes one ignorant fool to spread a deadly disease to dozens around him, how do you expect to mitigate or contain a pandemic?