The new COVID thread

[nullnor]

you know, the whole adaptive immune system out-competing the innate one works after natural infection too. and if the virus changes enough it will escape natural immunity also. there will be a few differences but ppl previously infected will get re-infected. it might depend on the severity of their previous infection. in theory the more they were infected the better their immune system will perform upon reinfection.

[nullnor]

I've had rabies shots. not many ppl can say that.

there's multiple covid nasal vaccines in development. that might be the best thing scientifically to come from this. because it will stop transmission, as long as everyone takes it.

[nullnor]

I remember back in the 70's and my mom took me to the doctor. I had to get vaccinated, which was painful. If only she could have found some lunatics on the internet back then, might have saved me from getting shots, lol.

no-one had time to be crazy on the internet in the 70's. by the time everyone's computer booted up and finished downloading a pornographic image it was time to get up and go to school. and after 6 hours and half a download, someone picks up the phone and you have to start over.

[johnnya24]

I fancy myself more of a smartass troll than a dumbass one. But YMMV.

You just keep being you...running with the herd.

BTW, Thanks for being courteous in answering me--oh wait you said not to expect courtesy, well done then.

Here you go smartass. CDC report from last week. Hospitalization rates for vaccinated / unvaccinated, with and without prior infection:

- Hospitalization rates for the unvaccinated-with-a-previous-infection are marginally lower than the vaccinated-without-a-previous-infection.

- And vaccinated-with-a-previous-infection and unvaccinated-with-a-previous-infection are joint lowest and practically identical.

Turns out nature does a pretty good job, as common sense, and evidence from hundreds of years of medical research suggested.

Now, please be totally predictable and don't let any of this inconvenient data effect your extremism. You've been a good source of amusement. Also please stop using the word "science" to defend your position, you're nothing more than an anti-anti-science-reactionary ... I fully expect you to fudge the science when that becomes an inconvenient obstacle, so don't let me down.

--------------------

Confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among immunologic cohorts defined by vaccination and previous diagnosis histories — California, May 30–November 13, 2021

[Teenwolf]

So I guess everybody here supports Joe Biden ending US hospitals' duty to report Covid hospitalizations, available hospital beds, equipment shortages, ICU admissions, the whole 9 yards? Getting close to 1 million US deaths... time to move on.

[Bene Futuis]

Virus spread was 62% higher in schools without mask mandates.

https://www.abc12.com/coronavirus/university-of-michigan-study-shows-mask-mandates-at-schools-show-lower-covid-transmission-rates/article_9dfcd525-94d5-50cb-9b00-ac1c2171d7fe.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share

[Sour Masher]

So I guess everybody here supports Joe Biden ending US hospitals' duty to report Covid hospitalizations, available hospital beds, equipment shortages, ICU admissions, the whole 9 yards? Getting close to 1 million US deaths... time to move on.

I don't. But I think Biden is getting passes on a lot of things from a lot of folks, because we are just so relieved that he isn't the former guy. I did not have very high expectations for the Biden presidency, but he has managed to perform even lower than those expectations on some things. It is disappointing, but not hugely surprising. I think 2024 is poised to be a very good opportunity for a young, progressive candidate to make a legit push for the WH, assuming, as I hope, Biden does not try to run again in 2024. I don't think AOC would be able to win the general anytime soon--she has been used as the progressive scarecrow stand-in on the right, so her name recognition might actually hurt her there. But I could see a lesser known dark horse progressive going all the way. A fresh face, fresh approach candidate on the left would be very attractive to a lot of people.

If one does not emerge, and I know you are going to hate reading this, TW, but if no other significant progressive emerges in the 2024 primaries, I could see Warren being the nominee. With Bernie very likely not running, she would, I assume, pick up a lot of progressive support, except for the Bernie supporters that just hate her to an irrational degree. I am not suggesting there are not legitimate reasons to not like her, or that she does not have real flaws, but if it ends up being a field of Harris and Mayer Pete and a bunch of moderates, it would make little sense to me if Warren didn't garner a significant amount of progressive support--enough to win her the primaries.

[Bene Futuis]

So I guess everybody here supports Joe Biden ending US hospitals' duty to report Covid hospitalizations, available hospital beds, equipment shortages, ICU admissions, the whole 9 yards? Getting close to 1 million US deaths... time to move on.

I am pretty sure this is very misleading, but couldn't stomach listening to that guy for more than about three seconds to confirm.

Nonetheless, here's a Harvard epidemiologist:

[Bene Futuis]

I don't. But I think Biden is getting passes on a lot of things from a lot of folks, because we are just so relieved that he isn't the former guy. I did not have very high expectations for the Biden presidency, but he has managed to perform even lower than those expectations on some things. It is disappointing, but not hugely surprising. I think 2024 is poised to be a very good opportunity for a young, progressive candidate to make a legit push for the WH, assuming, as I hope, Biden does not try to run again in 2024. I don't think AOC would be able to win the general anytime soon--she has been used as the progressive scarecrow stand-in on the right, so her name recognition might actually hurt her there. But I could see a lesser known dark horse progressive going all the way. A fresh face, fresh approach candidate on the left would be very attractive to a lot of people.

If one does not emerge, and I know you are going to hate reading this, TW, but if no other significant progressive emerges in the 2024 primaries, I could see Warren being the nominee. With Bernie very likely not running, she would, I assume, pick up a lot of progressive support, except for the Bernie supporters that just hate her to an irrational degree. I am not suggesting there are not legitimate reasons to not like her, or that she does not have real flaws, but if it ends up being a field of Harris and Mayer Pete and a bunch of moderates, it would make little sense to me if Warren didn't garner a significant amount of progressive support--enough to win her the primaries.

Out of curiosity:

- What are the "some things" where Biden has managed to perform lower than your expectations?
- What are the legitimate reasons not to like Elizabeth Warren? Relatedly, what do you think are her real flaws?

I remember you made an offhand comment some time back where you agreed with someone (can't remember who) who asserted that Elizabeth Warren doesn't have a firm grasp of domestic economic policy or some such assertion. I view Elizabeth Warren as perhaps the preeminent voice on domestic economics in our entire country.

I don't view you as particularly biased, so I'm honestly interested in knowing what you think.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Here you go smartass. CDC report from last week. Hospitalization rates for vaccinated / unvaccinated, with and without prior infection:

- Hospitalization rates for the unvaccinated-with-a-previous-infection are marginally lower than the vaccinated-without-a-previous-infection.

- And vaccinated-with-a-previous-infection and unvaccinated-with-a-previous-infection are joint lowest and practically identical.

Turns out nature does a pretty good job, as common sense, and evidence from hundreds of years of medical research suggested.

Now, please be totally predictable and don't let any of this inconvenient data effect your extremism. You've been a good source of amusement. Also please stop using the word "science" to defend your position, you're nothing more than an anti-anti-science-reactionary ... I fully expect you to fudge the science when that becomes an inconvenient obstacle, so don't let me down.

--------------------

Confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among immunologic cohorts defined by vaccination and previous diagnosis histories — California, May 30–November 13, 2021

I never said one was significantly effective over the other.

I said--Your position that it's no big deal if you GET covid after you're vaxxed because of the super immunity it provides, BUT were AGAINST vax Mandates for those who have already had Covid. Fuck that super immunity of if means being TOLD what to do, is contradictory.

I also said if you're not doing EVERYTHING you can to mitigate the virus, you're part of the problem.

That includes advocating whatever it takes it get everyone Vaxxed, even Mandates.

I thought you were done with this conversation?

Must be that I'm so amusing you just can't resist.

You just can't quit me...

[Sour Masher]

Out of curiosity:

- What are the "some things" where Biden has managed to perform lower than your expectations?
- What are the legitimate reasons not to like Elizabeth Warren? Relatedly, what do you think are her real flaws?

I remember you made an offhand comment some time back where you agreed with someone (can't remember who) who asserted that Elizabeth Warren doesn't have a firm grasp of domestic economic policy or some such assertion. I view Elizabeth Warren as perhaps the preeminent voice on domestic economics in our entire country.

I don't view you as particularly biased, so I'm honestly interested in knowing what you think.

On Biden: I should begin by saying that I like him as a person and find his overall integrity (hair sniffing aside, which is creepy, but I don't not think sexual) a rare thing in politics. I think it is possible that some of the mistakes he has made would not have been made by a younger Biden. But I think he has not adapted to the ever-changing nature of the pandemic nimbly. I hoped that the minimum wage battle would have been fought and won by now--if not to the full 15 an hour, at least somewhere between 12 and 15. I understand it was/is a really tough battle, but I think others--Warren, for instance--would have made more traction on it. I feel the same way about issues related to healthcare, college tuition subsidies and student loan remedies, tax reforms for the rich, and most adaptation of green initiatives. I understand how difficult getting anything done has been and will continue to be for Biden, given how obstructionist Manchin is, but I think a a truly exceptional leader--a creative and critical thinker obsessing over clever avenues toward movement on these issues surrounded by a team of like-minded individuals--could have and would have made more movement on at least some of these things. I just don't even see the desire from Biden to really fight for these things like I hoped.

Regarding Warren, I am primarily talking about her as a candidate--she was my candidate for most of the primaries and despite me souring on her a little from a character/personality standpoint, I continued to believe she was the the smartest and most creative candidate in 2020 from a policy standpoint. But from a campaigning standpoint, she made several strategic errors that surprised me. For someone so smart in terms of policy, she really made some dumb mistakes as a candidate, which frustrated me. Much was made, of course, of her claiming Native American ancestry and benefiting from that before getting called out for it. I do not think that makes her a bad person--she seems to have sincerely believed she had more NA ancestry than she did, but it wasn't a good look, and she handled it poorly. How she navigated establishing a lane in the primaries was just poor politics--especially in how she dealt with Bernie and his supporters. Whether you believe her claims had merit or not, it was at the very least bad strategy to deal with Bernie as she did. It was also bad strategy to initially be all-in for M4All only to backtrack on that. That issue was merely a talking point, because it wasn't going to happen, no matter who got elected, and I guess you could claim she took a hit for being honest, but it was still a bad move to "evolve" so quickly on that issue.

That said, if I ever criticized Warren for having a poor grasp of domestic economic policy, I must have been very drunk, as I agree, she is one of the smartest people in politics on domestic economic issues. I think I may have made that claim about Bernie Sanders, who I admire as a person, but believe his blow up the system total anti-capitalism would just never work in the good ol USA. Warren, to me, represented an actual path to real progress in America. She understands that the system has flaws, but that the system is powerful and can be harnessed through clever and creative ways to achieve progressive goals by regulating, restricting, and guiding the amoral beast that is capitalism, rather than try to blow up a system that has been the engine, for better and worse, of most progress in most of the Western world. I thought her ideas represented the best path forward to real change in 2020, and maybe in my lifetime. Maybe not as much change and Bernie and his supporters wanted, but a much more pragmatic path. Eventually, when it became clear Warren was blowing her shot, I came around to the idea that while I did not agree with Bernie on how to move forward in America, that he was never going to be able to do the most dangerous things he might want to, and that he was the most sincere and most trustworthy advocate for positive change that would at least pull the country toward positive goals.

I still think Warren is incredibly smart and a stand out on creative policies that would be good for our country, but I grew ever more disappointed in her as a candidate in 2020. Some relatively minor character/personality flaws diminished my admiration of her as a person/candidate, even while I still admired her ideas. More importantly, her strategic blunders made me fear how she would handle Trump in the general, and Manchin and all the other roadblocks as President. These are the things that gave me pause and would again in 2024. But she is smart and perhaps she will learn from the mistakes I think she made in 2020. Despite these flaws, if she had ended up the nominee and did beat Trump (that would have been no lock), I do think she would have made more progress than Biden on most of the issues I care about. But it is hard for me to be too critical of Biden, because after the former guy, I'm just so relieved to have him in office, I just can't get too furious at him. He is pretty much who we expected him to be.

While I respect Warren and think she would once again be the sharpest policy mind in the race if she ran again in 2024, I hope for a fresh face to emerge that doesn't have baggage in 2024. I guess I am hoping for another Obama in terms of a charismatic candidate that can win over people, as I fear we will need that to win in 2024. And from what I saw from Warren in the last primaries, she is not that candidate. She carries a lot of baggage and a lot of hate from a lot of Bernie supporters. She also has to deal with sexism, ageism, and attacks from the right for being too progressive. She would have a tough road, again, and she did not show herself capable of overcoming those obstacles last time. But, if no other major progressive emerges in 2024, she might have a shot. If she did go all the way, it would excite and scare me. I'd be excited by what I think she would do as president, but very afraid she would not get there.

[Teenwolf]

Out of curiosity:

- What are the "some things" where Biden has managed to perform lower than your expectations?
- What are the legitimate reasons not to like Elizabeth Warren? Relatedly, what do you think are her real flaws?

I remember you made an offhand comment some time back where you agreed with someone (can't remember who) who asserted that Elizabeth Warren doesn't have a firm grasp of domestic economic policy or some such assertion. I view Elizabeth Warren as perhaps the preeminent voice on domestic economics in our entire country.

I don't view you as particularly biased, so I'm honestly interested in knowing what you think.

I think it's incredibly insulting to Bernie's voters to say that they wouldn't vote for Warren because of her BS stunt in the primaries. I wouldn't support Warren because she would lose, and the media would blame her progressiveness for the loss. Bernie would have won. Important difference there.

Her entire base is wealthy, educated, white.

Party will not support any progressive, no matter what. Abrams, Porter, Warren, doesn't matter. They will all act to shut out the progressives, tell them to step in line, wait their turn, etc. They keep progressives around to give voice to the issues the main party would NEVER address. Their role is to acknowledge injustice while doing nothing to fix it. Believing otherwise is foolish.

Bene, you're honestly happy with what Biden's done (nothing)?! That's the implication of your questions to SM. That we should have expected 4 years of failures leading to another Republican (likely Trump) WH. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Sour Masher]

Here is a shorter answer, in case the above is too long to read--I have a significant bias against those that took their shot and fell short, especially in a situation I think was ripe for success. She couldn't beat out a diminished Joe Biden or even finish top two last time. She took her shot, made several campaign errors, and came up short. Sure, folks can learn, grow, and win after having lost, but I think there is way too much recycling in politics. I never thought we needed a second Bush in the WH, or a second Clinton. Screw dynasties and bloodlines in politics. We have 330 million people in this country. We have more talent out there that deserves a shot at being heard. And in politics, being relatively new has many benefits. The longer you are n the game, the more you are attacked, demonized, and picked apart.

[Sour Masher]

I think it's incredibly insulting to Bernie's voters to say that they wouldn't vote for Warren because of her BS stunt in the primaries. I wouldn't support Warren because she would lose, and the media would blame her progressiveness for the loss. Bernie would have won. Important difference there.

Her entire base is wealthy, educated, white.

Party will not support any progressive, no matter what. Abrams, Porter, Warren, doesn't matter. They will all act to shut out the progressives, tell them to step in line, wait their turn, etc. They keep progressives around to give voice to the issues the main party would NEVER address. Their role is to acknowledge injustice while doing nothing to fix it. Believing otherwise is foolish.

I don't know how to quote and respond line by line, but on your first point, insulting or not, I do think many Bernie supporters would not support Warren because of how she dealt with Bernie. I'm not saying that about you, but I think that would be a big factor for at least some voters. In fact, I think that is the case for someone else on this board that you do not get along with.

Your second point is a very good one. Warren's base was not diverse and she didn't seem to know how to fix that.

I disagree with your third point, but I do think it would take a very special, really charismatic progressive candidate, and sadly, none of the ones you named fit that bill, so I guess we do agree, since my disagreement is based on a hypothetical progressive dark horse with the charisma to charm voters at an elite level (Kennedy, Clinton, Obama level charmer).

[Bene Futuis]

On Biden: I should begin by saying that I like him as a person and find his overall integrity (hair sniffing aside, which is creepy, but I don't not think sexual) a rare thing in politics. I think it is possible that some of the mistakes he has made would not have been made by a younger Biden. But I think he has not adapted to the ever-changing nature of the pandemic nimbly. I hoped that the minimum wage battle would have been fought and won by now--if not to the full 15 an hour, at least somewhere between 12 and 15. I understand it was/is a really tough battle, but I think others--Warren, for instance--would have made more traction on it. I feel the same way about issues related to healthcare, college tuition subsidies and student loan remedies, tax reforms for the rich, and most adaptation of green initiatives. I understand how difficult getting anything done has been and will continue to be for Biden, given how obstructionist Manchin is, but I think a a truly exceptional leader--a creative and critical thinker obsessing over clever avenues toward movement on these issues surrounded by a team of like-minded individuals--could have and would have made more movement on at least some of these things. I just don't even see the desire from Biden to really fight for these things like I hoped.

Regarding Warren, I am primarily talking about her as a candidate--she was my candidate for most of the primaries and despite me souring on her a little from a character/personality standpoint, I continued to believe she was the the smartest and most creative candidate in 2020 from a policy standpoint. But from a campaigning standpoint, she made several strategic errors that surprised me. For someone so smart in terms of policy, she really made some dumb mistakes as a candidate, which frustrated me. Much was made, of course, of her claiming Native American ancestry and benefiting from that before getting called out for it. I do not think that makes her a bad person--she seems to have sincerely believed she had more NA ancestry than she did, but it wasn't a good look, and she handled it poorly. How she navigated establishing a lane in the primaries was just poor politics--especially in how she dealt with Bernie and his supporters. Whether you believe her claims had merit or not, it was at the very least bad strategy to deal with Bernie as she did. It was also bad strategy to initially be all-in for M4All only to backtrack on that. That issue was merely a talking point, because it wasn't going to happen, no matter who got elected, and I guess you could claim she took a hit for being honest, but it was still a bad move to "evolve" so quickly on that issue.

That said, if I ever criticized Warren for having a poor grasp of domestic economic policy, I must have been very drunk, as I agree, she is one of the smartest people in politics on domestic economic issues. I think I may have made that claim about Bernie Sanders, who I admire as a person, but believe his blow up the system total anti-capitalism would just never work in the good ol USA. Warren, to me, represented an actual path to real progress in America. She understands that the system has flaws, but that the system is powerful and can be harnessed through clever and creative ways to achieve progressive goals by regulating, restricting, and guiding the amoral beast that is capitalism, rather than try to blow up a system that has been the engine, for better and worse, of most progress in most of the Western world. I thought her ideas represented the best path forward to real change in 2020, and maybe in my lifetime. Maybe not as much change and Bernie and his supporters wanted, but a much more pragmatic path. Eventually, when it became clear Warren was blowing her shot, I came around to the idea that while I did not agree with Bernie on how to move forward in America, that he was never going to be able to do the most dangerous things he might want to, and that he was the most sincere and most trustworthy advocate for positive change that would at least pull the country toward positive goals.

I still think Warren is incredibly smart and a stand out on creative policies that would be good for our country, but I grew ever more disappointed in her as a candidate in 2020. Some relatively minor character/personality flaws diminished my admiration of her as a person/candidate, even while I still admired her ideas. More importantly, her strategic blunders made me fear how she would handle Trump in the general, and Manchin and all the other roadblocks as President. These are the things that gave me pause and would again in 2024. But she is smart and perhaps she will learn from the mistakes I think she made in 2020. Despite these flaws, if she had ended up the nominee and did beat Trump (that would have been no lock), I do think she would have made more progress than Biden on most of the issues I care about. But it is hard for me to be too critical of Biden, because after the former guy, I'm just so relieved to have him in office, I just can't get too furious at him. He is pretty much who we expected him to be.

While I respect Warren and think she would once again be the sharpest policy mind in the race if she ran again in 2024, I hope for a fresh face to emerge that doesn't have baggage in 2024. I guess I am hoping for another Obama in terms of a charismatic candidate that can win over people, as I fear we will need that to win in 2024. And from what I saw from Warren in the last primaries, she is not that candidate. She carries a lot of baggage and a lot of hate from a lot of Bernie supporters. She also has to deal with sexism, ageism, and attacks from the right for being too progressive. She would have a tough road, again, and she did not show herself capable of overcoming those obstacles last time. But, if no other major progressive emerges in 2024, she might have a shot. If she did go all the way, it would excite and scare me. I'd be excited by what I think she would do as president, but very afraid she would not get there.

Thanks a bunch for the great answer - good stuff and much appreciated.