We could have universal Covid vaccines soon • Hacker News Board

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#301

Post by wizofaus » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 6:55 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #279

wizofaus wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really believe that’s what drives people? I've seen plenty examples of entrenched prejudice in people against others that can't possibly have any negative effect on their own existence. And in many cases it's very hard not to see it as irrational "hatred" where, as per GP's point, even just pretending the objects of their hatred simply don't exist would surely be a better response. Presumably hatred for enti…

> I've seen plenty examples of entrenched prejudice in people against others that can't possibly have any negative effect on their own existence. Sure. But OP referred to "50% of the United States ... hating minorities." As a card-carrying minority who lives in a Trump-voting precinct, that's bollocks. > BTW, I'm pretty sure most people (on HN at least) can distinguish between those that object to immigration on raci…

Racism (or at least a strong sense of cultural superiority) is almost certainly a key component behind Japanese immigration policies. My Japanese partner would be one of the first to agree.

And no, there's no "obligation" to welcome increased immigration - plenty of environmentally focused political groups demand lower immigration too. Indeed I have some serious concerns over the effect it has on poorer countries when there are so many options for their brightest and most motivated citizens to seek a new life elsewhere. But that's a world away from the dog whistling that goes on when politicians deliberately stir up racist sentiment by singling out entire cultural groups of migrants as being the source of recent crime waves or undeserved recipients of welfare etc.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#302

Post by sn9 » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:22 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #283

randomhodler84 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, stop staying this foolishness. In dense cities like NY, I would say at least 20% of the city is infected right now. Workers. People on the street. The subway is disgusting, there is at least one infected person per carriage coughing over everyone and refusing to wear a mask. You walk around and hear that infected lung with light mucus cough. It’s everywhere. Unless we get proper proper sterilizing vaccines, the w…

Well maybe try moving out of such a densely packed disease trap? Out here in the exurbs I don’t know a single person for whom covid has been any more inconvenient than a cold (since vaccines became widely available). I’m no anti-vaxxer. I had it, got vaxxed anyway just in case, wore my masks, etc. Like most people, I’m done now. If you want to go live in a bubble be my guest.

That implies we should simply empty the world's cities which I hope you recognize is not a serious or pragmatic alternative to simply vaccinating more.

We could just vaccinate our way until Covid transmission rates fall enough that we don't have to worry about it. Congrats on living in the middle of nowhere, but that's a bubble of a different sort.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#303

Post by puffoflogic » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:22 PM UTC

internet_user wrote: post #207

puffoflogic wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this have to do with anything? The CDC said we need to take the vaccine. That's all you need to know. If you need to take it then obviously kids need to take it too.

Why did UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) refuse to recommend universal vaccination to 12-15s on risk benefit basis? How did these internationally renowned vaccinologists and immunologists suddenly become antivaxxers overnight? Professor Andrew Pollard, Chair (University of Oxford) Professor Lim Wei Shen, Chair COVID-19 immunisation (Nottingham University Hospitals) Professor Anthony Harnden…

No post body was provided.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#304

Post by sn9 » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:25 PM UTC

t-3 wrote: post #258

randomhodler84 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wanna go out in public and not get sick. It’s happened too many times now.

If the vaccine isn't stopping you from getting sick now, why would it stop you from getting sick if more people took it? Does not compute.

Because the vaccines still slow transmission and more people getting vaccinated would slow transmission even more, lowering one's risk of getting infected as well as the severity of the infection.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#305

Post by sn9 » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:26 PM UTC

landemva wrote: post #217

Auracle wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the original strain and then delta 9 months later. I was 33-ish, decent BMI and I get more exercise than 99% of people. Both times I had two full weeks of extremely high fevers and I was the most fatigued I’ve ever been in my life, to the point where it was an incredible challenge to feed myself or go to the bathroom. The first time my around my lungs hurt enough where I could barely take a full breath and I de…

Am curious what blood test showed for antibodies after your first infection. I had it 1.5 years ago. I just got another blood test and the IgG antibodies are still strong.

You might have had a more recent non-symptomatic infection.

All kinds of possible explanations.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#306

Post by apostacy » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:28 PM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #274

apostacy wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much of the handling of this pandemic has completely shattered my trust in our medical and scientific institutions. The debate about the actual medical benefits of the vaccine are almost irrelevant at this point.

Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust?

> Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust?

Doubling down on failed lockdown policy long after it was known to be ineffective and hurt more people than it helped. Profiteering off of the pandemic crisis. Rampant censorship of people who turned out be correct and were trying to warn us.

If they knew that there was something wrong with the vaccine, I expect them to lie about it, and censor and coerce whistle blowers into silence. They have demonstrated their eagerness to do so over the last two years.

So what good is the word of "the science" about how effective vaccines are? These are the same people that told us that we should trust the Chinese government.

> What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust?

Absolute transparency. Admitting that they made mistakes and committing to avoiding those mistakes in the future with meaningful policy changes. Reparations paid to those who were needlessly harmed by their mistakes.

At the very least, something like the settlements from toxic waste dumping coverups would be a good start.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#307

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:47 PM UTC

robhunter wrote: post #276

jameshart wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust?

Differentiating between a hypotheses and facts Having transparent, open, equity-based discussions about costs & benefits Frequent, honest, humble admitting of mistakes

[deleted]

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#308

Post by rayiner » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 7:50 PM UTC

wizofaus wrote: post #301

rayiner wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen plenty examples of entrenched prejudice in people against others that can't possibly have any negative effect on their own existence. Sure. But OP referred to "50% of the United States ... hating minorities." As a card-carrying minority who lives in a Trump-voting precinct, that's bollocks. > BTW, I'm pretty sure most people (on HN at least) can distinguish between those that object to immigration on raci…

Racism (or at least a strong sense of cultural superiority) is almost certainly a key component behind Japanese immigration policies. My Japanese partner would be one of the first to agree. And no, there's no "obligation" to welcome increased immigration - plenty of environmentally focused political groups demand lower immigration too. Indeed I have some serious concerns over the effect it has on poorer countries whe…

> Racism (or at least a strong sense of cultural superiority) is almost certainly a key component behind Japanese immigration policies.

That proves my point--you're conflating "racism" with cultural conflict. "Race" is a construct in post-slavery societies, where animosity exists between people who otherwise share history and culture. White southerners and Black southerners are culturally very similar to each other. The animosity of the white southerners toward Black southerners is based on skin color, and that's why it's deemed illegitimate.

The Japanese preference for their own culture is completely different. Unlike skin color, culture makes a huge difference in people's daily lives and there are good reasons for people to prefer their own culture. When I fly back from visits to Tokyo, I land in JFK and am immediately hit in the face with cultural differences. If I were Japanese, and liked Japan the way it is, why would I want New Yorkers coming and changing it?

> But that's a world away from the dog whistling that goes on when politicians deliberately stir up racist sentiment by singling out entire cultural groups of migrants as being the source of recent crime waves or undeserved recipients of welfare etc.

The concept of "dog whistling" is just circular thinking. A study shows that, when you take Trumpian rhetoric about crime and immigration, and omit the reference to Trump himself, the majority of Hispanics and Black people agree with the statements: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/opinion/biden-latino-vote...

"We began by asking eligible voters how 'convincing' they found a dog-whistle message lifted from Republican talking points. Among other elements, the message condemned 'illegal immigration from places overrun with drugs and criminal gangs' and called for 'fully funding the police, so our communities are not threatened by people who refuse to follow our laws.' Almost three out of five white respondents judged the message convincing. More surprising, exactly the same percentage of African-Americans agreed, as did an even higher percentage of Latinos."

Why is Trump's rhetoric "racist" even though the majority of Black and Hispanic people agree with what he says? Because "Trump is a racist." It's circular.

Illegal immigration creates real burdens on communities. One of my wife's cousin's kids goes to a school in the Portland exurbs where 30% of the kids are children of immigrants who not only don't speak English, but mostly don't even speak Spanish (but rather myriad indigenous languages). That creates real problems and burdens for the school. Why are folks in that community morally obligated to be happy about these changes? They're not.

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#309

Post by akkawwakka » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 8:06 PM UTC

chii wrote: post #277

akkawwakka wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are preventing development of serious disease with the vaccine. At the end of the day, that’s what should count.

> At the end of the day, that’s what should count. no, that's just the most that could be achieved. The ideal, which is long lasting immunity, is not quite achievable atm (it seems). I'd definitely accept reduction in severity, but would hope for a life long immunity.

The conversation around this could benefit from more precise language.

Long lived immunity against severe disease, driven by the T cell response against epitopes that are generally well preserved (>80% for spike protein, ~98% for non spike protein) [1]

≠

Immunity against infection, conferred by circulating neutralizing antibody, which last for a couple of months

Most vaccines blunt or prevent disease but not infection.

[1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-022-00838-5

Re: We could have universal Covid vaccines soon

#310

Post by nathanaldensr » Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 8:10 PM UTC

yucky wrote: post #139

sovnade wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now it's more accurate - there's plenty of vaccines out there previously that weren't 100% effective, so there's no reason to have the absolute language out there. The measles vaccine is only 97% effective after 2 doses - so that wouldn't have met the old definition either. edit: sorry i'm rereading your post and I'm not even sure what your issue is with the current definition

>sorry i'm rereading your post and I'm not even sure what your issue is with the current definition Really? So the definition the CDC used for years to describe vaccines had to be changed, since by their own definition the COVID vaccine wasn't actually a vaccine. And the best part is they didn't even announce & explain the change, they just stealthily modified it on their website. And you don't understand why so many…

Remember, the gaslighters want you to feel crazy for noticing these things, when in fact it's a very rational reaction to have. Remember, they imply that you are the crazy one for mistrusting government, and all past incidents that show government (and the pharmaceutical industry) are not to be trusted are to be merely handwaved away.

It was, quite frankly, a psyop of the highest order. And they're still pushing it, even in this thread.