Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April • Hacker News Board

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#201

Post by rotexo » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:00 PM UTC

reissbaker wrote: post #39

ganafagol wrote: post #12

Note that we still don't have much data on whether and by how much vaccinations do reduce transmission. The objective of the vaccines was to minimize serious cases. But transmissions are a different story. It could easily be that the vaccine prevents serious cases in 95% of people but transmission is not impacted significantly. We just don't know yet. Why is this relevant? Because the whole concept of "herd immunity"…

This is no longer true. We do have data that the vaccines reduce transmission, thanks to Israel's mass vaccination program: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-va... The margin of reduced transmission is very close to the margin of reduced symptoms: 90% reduction in asymptomatic transmission, and 93% reduction for symptomatic transmission. The study is only on Pfizer's vaccines, but I would expe…

Careful there—those conclusions may be overstated because of bias in the people getting tested in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated groups (https://mobile.twitter.com/ZoeMcLaren/status/136358205077574...)

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#202

Post by user-the-name » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:00 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #154

swivelmaster wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing out that someone is not an expert at something is not an ad hominem.

Arguing against someone's position by simply stating (truthfully or not) that they are not an expert is textbook ad hominem .

This is a good example of why "ad hominem" is one of the worst arguments you can try to use against something.

In actual human discussion, pointing out that someone is making claims about something they don't know anything about is the very basis of common sense. Trying to make this out to be a logical fallacy only shows how useless that label is.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#203

Post by mcguire » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

"Amid the dire Covid warnings, one crucial fact has been largely ignored: Cases are down 77% over the past six weeks."

Yes, we are down to the level we were...last fall.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#204

Post by jessaustin » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

Zimahl wrote: post #124

chasd00 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, "Covid will be mostly gone by April" would mean the beginning April. However, if it's not gone, you can assume the response will be "oh i meant by the end of April".

You have to love those moving goalposts.

The goalposts were installed on a speeding train early last year.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#205

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

anoonmoose wrote: post #186

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about teams, it's about attempting to evaluate the counterfactual. If the difference between the US and Australia is primarily due to lockdowns, you would expect to see areas with more lockdown do better than areas with less. Much better, to a degree that drowns out any noise, since the overall difference is so vast. And that really doesn't seem to be what we observe.

You're acting like there were parts of the US in 100% lockdown vs 0% lockdown, when the difference is a lot more like 20% (max) vs 10%, and it's a lot harder to suss out any difference in result when the difference in practice is that small.

If lockdown explains most of the variance between Australia's 1k deaths and America's 500k deaths, then the difference between 10% and 20% lockdown should still be very visible.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#206

Post by pavlov » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

burlesona wrote: post #100

ttul wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be noted that WSJ’s opinion section is extremely politicized. Their regular news desk is separately edited and maintains decently high journalistic standards.

It's pretty weird actually. The news desk for the WSJ is among the best out there. Their news stories tend to be really dry in a good way - full of facts and figures, with very little in the way of click bait hyperbole. Their subscriber model is all about business people who want the details and not opinion... Which then makes the opinion desk at the WSJ a real oddball. It's consistently right-leaning, sometimes to t…

IMO, the Financial Times is a good alternative to WSJ.

Global perspective but still does deep dives into American issues; not owned by Murdoch; opinion desk not insane; soothing peach background color in both paper and online editions.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#207

Post by lisper » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:08 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #154

swivelmaster wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing out that someone is not an expert at something is not an ad hominem.

Arguing against someone's position by simply stating (truthfully or not) that they are not an expert is textbook ad hominem .

From the Wikipedia article on ad hominem arguments:

"Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments, some but not all of which are fallacious." [Emphasis added]

In particular, pointing out that someone is speaking outside of their area of expertise is a logically valid ad hominem argument.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#208

Post by jessaustin » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:09 PM UTC

VMG wrote: post #17

rawfan wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The British variant spreads faster than you can possibly vaccinate people. In Germany the case numbers are still going down, but if you look at the wildtype and B.1.1.7 separately, the wildtype is going down while the British variant is in full exponential growth. And that is in spite of a full nationwide hard lockdown.

*than Germany can possibly vaccinate people

I would expect Germany to rank near the top of any world ranking of "capacity for effective public action". Brazil and its twin USA are not at the top of those rankings.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#209

Post by cgriswald » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:09 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #154

swivelmaster wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing out that someone is not an expert at something is not an ad hominem.

Arguing against someone's position by simply stating (truthfully or not) that they are not an expert is textbook ad hominem .

"He wants you to believe that green is the best color of M & M, but his business went bankrupt," is an ad hominem argument.

"He trains parakeets, so I don't find him a credible source of dog behavior" is not.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#210

Post by devNoise » Mon, Feb 22, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

aww_dang wrote: post #185

jessaustin wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

News firms in USA optimize for audience size. Most Americans would rather listen to Pollyanna bullshit than uncomfortable truth. So, the news firms mostly publish wishful thinking. According to some of these shallow beings, we were supposed to have "herd immunity" by last April. Here in the real world, it's still not clear that this concept is even possible with the covid virus.

What about the old adage of "fear sells"? Do doomsday predictions no longer generate clicks?

I agree that "fear sells". Usually there is a "them" to be afraid of. Not sure the media has figured out who we're supposed to be afraid of in this pandemic.