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

New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 432 posts

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#321

Post by GekkePrutser »

spookthesunset wrote: post #108
oliv__ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard for something "working" is very much up for debate though, even if it is carefully avoided. "Slowing the spread" is not a good enough argument in my opinion. Everyone wants to slow the spread, the only question worth asking is: at what cost? At what point do you deem something effective and worthy of sacrificing your freedoms for? 1% efficacy "slows the spread". Is that worth it? Where do you draw the li…

The cost is something absolutely nobody wants to discuss but it is vital to do so. Yeah “slowing the spread” is important in a vacuum where we live with no friction and spherical cows but here in the real worth that one goal competes with literally everything else. Asking society to myopically focus on nothing but “slowing the spread” of one very specific illness for years on end is, quite frankly, madness. There is…

Well said. Any of the measures we have only delay the inevitable. They may have worked at the start to eradicate it but they didn't. Now it's pretty much guaranteed we will all get covid, and probably multiple times. Any of the tools we have now will not prevent that, just delay it.

I'm not recommending dropping them altogether but we'll need to find a balance. To go from crisis mode into discussing long-term strategy.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#322

Post by spookthesunset »

tldrthelaw wrote: post #255
spookthesunset wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We did. We have multiple vaccines and treatments. That was the end game. If those didn’t work, we have no choice but either live in some dystopian hellscape to save people from exactly one illness at the cost of literally all other issues… or we accept the risks and move on with our lives. 2 years of this is a non trivial amount of time.

We do have another choice, continuing to buy time to add to the arsenal of weapons we have against the virus. Things are only simple when you frame the issue simply; reality is complicated. You need only imagine yourself flickering out to see the value in doing what you can to keep someone from the same fate. We are all alive in our heads just like you are in yours.

You are free to live that existence all you want but that is your own personal risk assessment. Vaccines were the end of the game for governments being able to dictate our own risk assessments. There is literally nothing else we can do besides vaccines and treatments.

To suggest it is totally cool to play this game 2 years into this requires an awful lot of privilege.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#323

Post by gusgus01 »

ipaddr wrote: post #118
aledalgrande wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strikes me how such a heartless comment comes from someone running a "community" business. Really sad.

Let's not get personal and connect his business and your expected social norms into some shaming activity. I disagree with him but I wouldn't want to silence him. He needs to feel free to express his viewpoint and we should feel free to attack those views with other views and maybe throw in some facts to strength our case.

OP might have meant it as a personal attack and shaming, but it does point out a bias. The first benefit on the business's homepage is "Unlock the value of your community" and it's centered around jobs. Lockdowns (at least in the US) was tied with quite the wave of unemployment and continues to have lasting impact on that segment.

Of course, someone can also say everyone has bias what with it being a global pandemic, but it's still useful to be cognizant of said biases.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#324

Post by spookthesunset »

cthalupa wrote: post #280
spookthesunset wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts don’t dictate policy. Even if masks were incredibly effective so some point we’d have to stop wearing them. Now that we have countless effective medical interventions, I’d say that time is now. Vaccinated individuals have zero business being required to wear masks. They’ve done their part and should be able to return to a fully normal life. COVID is never going away. There is so much more to live for than being…

> Vaccinated individuals have zero business being required to wear masks. They’ve done their part and should be able to return to a fully normal life. Masks help prevent you from spreading the virus to other. As a vaccinated individual, you are highly unlikely to have serious illness from CV19, but you can still get it and spread it to others, even if you are only mildly symptomatic. And this is based on data from th…

> masks should also be the new normaL

For those who wish to wear them, sure. But for those who don’t? That is fine too. Masks should be a personal choice at this point. Not something forced by the state.

We have vaccines. Getting one ends your obligation to participate in this Covid stuff. Forcing these NPI’s on vaccinated individuals is completely immoral in my opinion.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#325

Post by legolas2412 »

righttoolforjob wrote: post #222
sbierwagen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: >A travel ban is not an evidence-based solution unless you stop all travel from every country. Okay, why not do that? China's done it. Vietnam, Australia and New Zealand require a week+ quarantine for international travelers. It obviously works: it stopped two Omicron carriers at the border in Hong Kong. Why not do that? If COVID-19 is such a serious threat that it requires shutting down all schools…

1) It's too late (for this variant). So you can't act reactively. 2) When would you ever open then (since you need a proactive approach)? 3) How would trade look? I can't think of a single way of halting a contagious virus between countries that wouldn't completely shut us down as a race. The cost to humanity would be beyond imagination. Perhaps on the order of 100x-1000x that of corona.

Maybe you imagination is limited. China has done this precisely. They have kept the virus in check while limiting international travel and while being the world's factory. You open up when enough of your population is vaccinated.

I wonder why you feel that it is fine to say "too late" for this measure that obviously works. Do you also say too late to lockdowns, vaccine mandates, restaurant and schools closures, and mask requirements. If you don't, then maybe spend a moment thinking if your epidemic response is guided by your political allegiances

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#326

Post by tempestn »

refurb wrote: post #269
johnchristopher wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it elicited the same immune response it wouldn't be much of a use though, right ? Anyway, how do they know the usual but new seasonal flu vaccine is safe ? Can't the same framework apply ?

They run clinical trials on them to make sure they are safe and effective. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectivenessqa.htm Manufacturers guess which flu strain will predominate and start working 9-12 months early to capture the data for approval. There is no way a new Covid mRNA vaccine will be approved with safety and efficacy data from a clinical trial. That will be take months to complete.

> There is no way a new Covid mRNA vaccine will be approved with safety and efficacy data from a clinical trial.

You meant 'without', right?

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#327

Post by blindmute »

Niksko wrote: post #308
blindmute wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't end until you make it end. When I close my laptop, I am unaware there is even anything going on; I don't wear a mask, I am unvaccinated, and I am fortunate enough to live in a place where people largely behave in this same way. My life is 100% the same as it was 3 years ago. If you're restricting your own behavior, stop. If you're being restricted by third parties, seriously consider moving or outright dis…

Unless you live in a 100% isolated, self sufficient community, your number will be called eventually. If that's the tradeoff you want to make then enjoy your life. But bragging about your life being the same as it was 3 years ago isn't the brag you think it is. Meanwhile, everyone else is living 90% of the life they were 3 years ago, but they'll continue that for a long and healthy life.

I don't think my number will be called. In the US, the hysteria is already fading even in the most liberal areas. In certain states like SC and FL, the people have pretty much decided that the pandemic is over. I really don't foresee this flipping back to lockdown in those areas. Self sufficiency is a virtue, one that I have been cultivating long before any of this happened; owning land and knowing how to use it makes a lot of the bullshit happening in the cities rather trivial. Working remotely takes care of the rest.

There's no reason for me to brag here. You can pretend I am an unhealthy, fat hick if it makes you feel better. For anyone else who is thinking of becoming a bit more self sufficient and is chafing under the yoke, I would recommend leaving the large cities foremost, and buying a house on some arable land. Read "The New Complete Book of Self-Sufficiency" for a primer on what is possible.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#328

Post by GekkePrutser »

bavell wrote: post #233
kaba0 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“If we could not extinguish even the small fire, stop pouring buckets of water on it, let the whole thing burn down” It is still an exponential curve that will overflow all the hospitals the moment you stop paying attention, causing hundred thousands of additional deaths indirectly due to overworked med staff. Object permanence is a thing.

What I can't understand is the risk/benefit of firing thousands of unvaccinated medical staff across the US while we're in the middle of a pandemic and already experiencing hospital staff shortages. Isn't that just exacerbating the problem? Were those unvaccinated medical workers really killing more people than they saved? I honestly don't know but it doesn't feel like we really did the calculus and are instead just…

Especially because it takes a minimum of 4 years to train new ones...

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#329

Post by blindmute »

gouda-gouda wrote: post #319
blindmute wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't end until you make it end. When I close my laptop, I am unaware there is even anything going on; I don't wear a mask, I am unvaccinated, and I am fortunate enough to live in a place where people largely behave in this same way. My life is 100% the same as it was 3 years ago. If you're restricting your own behavior, stop. If you're being restricted by third parties, seriously consider moving or outright dis…

I believe this has been more eloquently described as: “ignorance is bliss.”

Or more verbosely, "Mental health improves when you stop consuming propaganda"

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#330

Post by Wowfunhappy »

Terretta wrote: post #293
timr wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nice, but filtration efficiency =/= real-world efficiency. Unless you plan on super-glueing mask fabric to everyone's face holes, of course. Also, last time I checked, most people aren't wearing N95 masks. Probably because they're annoying and difficult to wear. > Which isn't minor. It's been over a year. If you're not using an N95, you're doing yourself and those around you a disservice. I am vaccinated. Whic…

Feels like you’re slinging a lot of assertions without substantive evidence, seemingly asking people to “Google that for you”. Among other things, vaccinated persons can and do contract, carry, and spread, during which a decent* mask does do its thing. And who doesn’t wear an N95 class mask? I see about 2/3rds N95, KN95, or KF94s, 1/3 useless masks, appearing to be mostly correlated along economic lines ($2/masks vs.…

> And who doesn’t wear an N95 class mask? I see about 2/3rds N95, KN95, or KF94s, 1/3 useless masks, appearing to be mostly correlated along economic lines ($2/masks vs. $0.50/masks).

I can't comment on the rest of the science, but fwiw, I live in NYC and I'd estimate that maybe 1 / 20 people I see on the street are wearing N95/KN95/KF94 masks. Everyone else just wears cloth masks, or paper surgical masks.

Post reply on HN