|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On August 24 2021 03:29 Sermokala wrote:
Them making the kabul airport a new alamo would be the dumbest thing possible for them to do. They may want US troops out but they have no real options, they get their supplies from the airport that they're sitting on. Its like besieging a port town and telling everyone inside that they have to leave or starve.
All they have to do is keep people from getting to the airport and the whole purpose off the operation is ruined.
A more aggressive option could be to harass the effort without doing an all out assault.
Sporadic sniper fire on aircraft/troops is hard to deal with but not impossible. Stray mortar rounds is impossible to deal with. This would quickly make the situation on the airport extremely difficult.
One would suspect that the Taliban would start with keeping Afghans out from the airport from outside checkpoints (but still allow westerns out) if the time limit is exceeded. Then shutter it for everyone. Then slowly ramp up the aggression from there.
|
On August 25 2021 03:58 Mohdoo wrote:I think this is going to come up when vax requirements for work end up making their way up to the supreme court: “Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances….” https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/493/reynolds-v-united-statesAlso would like to hear Farvacola's view.
Reynolds is the first case that enunciated that principle, and there's an even more on-point case that will certainly come up as legal challenges make their way through the courts. Both are old, well-settled law that should be given the highest level of stare decisis possible. The wiki is a good summary.
|
On August 25 2021 04:41 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 03:58 Mohdoo wrote:I think this is going to come up when vax requirements for work end up making their way up to the supreme court: “Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances….” https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/493/reynolds-v-united-statesAlso would like to hear Farvacola's view. Reynolds is the first case that enunciated that principle, and there's an even more on-point case that will certainly come up as legal challenges make their way through the courts. Both are old, well-settled law that should be given the highest level of stare decisis possible. The wiki is a good summary.
What's your prediction how all this shakes out? It looks like tons of companies are making it mandatory suddenly. I bet way more to follow. No one will want to be the anti-vax place to work lol
|
|
|
On August 25 2021 04:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 04:41 farvacola wrote:On August 25 2021 03:58 Mohdoo wrote:I think this is going to come up when vax requirements for work end up making their way up to the supreme court: “Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances….” https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/493/reynolds-v-united-statesAlso would like to hear Farvacola's view. Reynolds is the first case that enunciated that principle, and there's an even more on-point case that will certainly come up as legal challenges make their way through the courts. Both are old, well-settled law that should be given the highest level of stare decisis possible. The wiki is a good summary. What's your prediction how all this shakes out? It looks like tons of companies are making it mandatory suddenly. I bet way more to follow. No one will want to be the anti-vax place to work lol
Employer-side vaccine mandates will pass muster (and already have in many trial courts), employers have tons of leeway (and strong legal obligations) when it comes to prioritizing the health and safety of the workplace. Not even the religious angle gets around the obvious issues with forcing employers to employ people who pose a contagious threat to others. Government vaccine mandates like the one upheld in Jacobsen are a much closer call, though even then, the public health threat that unvaxxed people pose will only become more and more certain as a justification for restrictions.
|
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses.
|
|
|
On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses.
Vaccines appear to be less effective just due to viral load, which by the way, is exactly what I predicted way before we had the data. Mohdoo was right for the millionth time in this pandemic. Swish.
3rd booster creating orders of magnitude difference in antibody levels (3-4 depending on where you look) is probably sufficient for the delta variant. Its just a differential equation. Changing your initial conditions makes a big difference.
|
On August 25 2021 09:21 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Not if you look at severity of the infections. The vaccines are still proving to be great at that. And with how this all works the more people you have the lower % of stopping the infection all together. All the numbers, data , facts all SCREAM vaccinatuon works and js working. Anyone telling you diffent is being led by a combo of faulty assumtions and confirmarion bias.
You are looking at it differently than I am. I have the Pfizer based on my theories back in April. Seems correct now, for the data we had then and have now. But, reducing severity is not a good public health justification for mandated vaccines, protecting 3rd parties is. We need data that vaccines significantly protect 3rd parties from most covid *right now* to justify a government mandate. I think we probably could get that study done in time, but it would probably be too late by the time it returned results.
I do think you are critically mistaken on one point though: I am of the opinion that we are past the point of stopping covid altogether. If we magically transformed 100% of people into Pfizer vaccinated (aka same status as me), covid-delta would continue to spread enough that Covid Zero (as some people call it) is an unrealistic goal. Based on the wiki Delta emerged early enough (2020) that vaccine-eradication in the world was actually physically impossible. We never had a chance to do it.
On August 25 2021 09:24 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Vaccines appear to be less effective just due to viral load, which by the way, is exactly what I predicted way before we had the data. Mohdoo was right for the millionth time in this pandemic. Swish. 3rd booster creating orders of magnitude difference in antibody levels (3-4 depending on where you look) is probably sufficient for the delta variant. Its just a differential equation. Changing your initial conditions makes a big difference.
IMO a booster might be slightly helpful, but I think chasing the variant dragon with MRNA updates (which can turn on a dime if the FDA and others will accept these formula modifications quickly under their emergency use provisions) would be much more effective.
|
Northern Ireland26270 Posts
I thought pretty much everyone was on the side that the ship to Covid elimination has long since sailed?
|
On August 25 2021 13:01 WombaT wrote:
I thought pretty much everyone was on the side that the ship to Covid elimination has long since sailed?
Hell no. All my left of center friends think of only we can inject some MAGAs covid will disappear. Its a facebook clutter of "bold ideas".
|
On August 25 2021 13:01 WombaT wrote:
I thought pretty much everyone was on the side that the ship to Covid elimination has long since sailed?
Pretty sure this was agreed on - the only thing we can do is mitigate it to the level of a flu.
http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Info-Site/Documents/COVID_sitrep/2021-08-19_Data_Summary.pdf
From my provincial summary:
Most of the recent cases, hospitalizations and deaths continue to be among unvaccinated individuals.
Case rate per 100,000 people is ~10x higher among unvaccinated individuals compared with fully
vaccinated individuals, and hospitalization rate is ~17x higher among unvaccinated individuals.
• Vaccination with 2 doses provides better protection than 1 dose.
It's spreading amongst the vaccinated population, but at a far lower rate, and at a much lower severity level. Give the vulnerable a third shot, and everyone else a booster down the line, and if that gets close to sterilizing immunity against Delta, there's still a chance it can be eradicated at the community level once kids can be immunized too.
There's going to be pockets of unvaccinated being infected constantly though, and there's not much you can do about it other than letting them deal with it.
|
|
|
On August 25 2021 12:58 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 09:21 JimmiC wrote:On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Not if you look at severity of the infections. The vaccines are still proving to be great at that. And with how this all works the more people you have the lower % of stopping the infection all together. All the numbers, data , facts all SCREAM vaccinatuon works and js working. Anyone telling you diffent is being led by a combo of faulty assumtions and confirmarion bias. You are looking at it differently than I am. I have the Pfizer based on my theories back in April. Seems correct now, for the data we had then and have now. But, reducing severity is not a good public health justification for mandated vaccines, protecting 3rd parties is. We need data that vaccines significantly protect 3rd parties from most covid *right now* to justify a government mandate. I think we probably could get that study done in time, but it would probably be too late by the time it returned results. I do think you are critically mistaken on one point though: I am of the opinion that we are past the point of stopping covid altogether. If we magically transformed 100% of people into Pfizer vaccinated (aka same status as me), covid-delta would continue to spread enough that Covid Zero (as some people call it) is an unrealistic goal. Based on the wiki Delta emerged early enough (2020) that vaccine-eradication in the world was actually physically impossible. We never had a chance to do it. Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 09:24 Mohdoo wrote:On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Vaccines appear to be less effective just due to viral load, which by the way, is exactly what I predicted way before we had the data. Mohdoo was right for the millionth time in this pandemic. Swish. 3rd booster creating orders of magnitude difference in antibody levels (3-4 depending on where you look) is probably sufficient for the delta variant. Its just a differential equation. Changing your initial conditions makes a big difference. IMO a booster might be slightly helpful, but I think chasing the variant dragon with MRNA updates (which can turn on a dime if the FDA and others will accept these formula modifications quickly under their emergency use provisions) would be much more effective.
There is also already tons of data showing booster is very good vs delta. When the issue is viral load rather than significant structural mutation, amping up the antibodies does the trick. One of the main issues is that the US keeps trying to suck WHO dick. Israel is correctly recommending 5 months til booster while idiot Fauci is saying 8.
|
Part of the problem with recommending boosters in the US when much of the world lacks 1st doses is that it is problematic from an ethical and long term/global epidemiological perspective.
If a company has 100 million vaccines the science is abundantly clear that they'd be better used as 1st/2nd doses for healthcare workers around the world rather than boosters for already vaccinated people in the US. Capitalism is equally clear that it'd be more profitable and therefore desirable to sell them to countries like the US with more money than sense (or ethics) even if millions of them ultimately expire unused.
People in the US are indoctrinated to believe that this is not horrifically violent behavior they are engaging in. WHO scientists and doctors are mostly just pointing out how excessively selfish, shortsighted, and cruel it is. I see Fauci as trying to split the difference.
|
On August 25 2021 14:27 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 12:58 cLutZ wrote:On August 25 2021 09:21 JimmiC wrote:On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Not if you look at severity of the infections. The vaccines are still proving to be great at that. And with how this all works the more people you have the lower % of stopping the infection all together. All the numbers, data , facts all SCREAM vaccinatuon works and js working. Anyone telling you diffent is being led by a combo of faulty assumtions and confirmarion bias. You are looking at it differently than I am. I have the Pfizer based on my theories back in April. Seems correct now, for the data we had then and have now. But, reducing severity is not a good public health justification for mandated vaccines, protecting 3rd parties is. We need data that vaccines significantly protect 3rd parties from most covid *right now* to justify a government mandate. I think we probably could get that study done in time, but it would probably be too late by the time it returned results. I do think you are critically mistaken on one point though: I am of the opinion that we are past the point of stopping covid altogether. If we magically transformed 100% of people into Pfizer vaccinated (aka same status as me), covid-delta would continue to spread enough that Covid Zero (as some people call it) is an unrealistic goal. Based on the wiki Delta emerged early enough (2020) that vaccine-eradication in the world was actually physically impossible. We never had a chance to do it. On August 25 2021 09:24 Mohdoo wrote:On August 25 2021 07:51 cLutZ wrote:
Jacobsen is kinda weak precedent. Its basically like letting people pay a $50 fee to avoid the vaccine.
The real trouble is the vaccines, at least Pfizer, which is the approved one, are proving less effective than hoped, and even moreso against Delta. International reports have been trending towards most people with it being vaccinated, and a report out of Nevada seems the same trend is coming here. When that is true, the case for mandatory vaccines pretty much collapses. Vaccines appear to be less effective just due to viral load, which by the way, is exactly what I predicted way before we had the data. Mohdoo was right for the millionth time in this pandemic. Swish. 3rd booster creating orders of magnitude difference in antibody levels (3-4 depending on where you look) is probably sufficient for the delta variant. Its just a differential equation. Changing your initial conditions makes a big difference. IMO a booster might be slightly helpful, but I think chasing the variant dragon with MRNA updates (which can turn on a dime if the FDA and others will accept these formula modifications quickly under their emergency use provisions) would be much more effective. There is also already tons of data showing booster is very good vs delta. When the issue is viral load rather than significant structural mutation, amping up the antibodies does the trick. One of the main issues is that the US keeps trying to suck WHO dick. Israel is correctly recommending 5 months til booster while idiot Fauci is saying 8.
There's a difficult balance in the developed world, where we can afford to throw down money and buy everyone a 3rd (and 4th, 5th, ....) shot. However to actually bring Covid to manageable levels in the shortest amount of time, boosting people vs delta in the US right now doesn't really matter. It's way more important in the long term to get first and second doses to Africa, Asia and South/Central America than it is for the mohdoos of the world to get a third dose. Obviously, in the short term, the effects of getting a booster are great, and in mohdoo's case, the vaccine had already been stored too long to do anything else with it (well, either that or force some antivaxxer to get dosed, but I understand the region where Mohdoo is has enough vaccines hoarded to do both and still have to throw doses away).
The problem is that that brings delta under control in the developed world, while in the developing world (where the vast majority of people on this planet actually live), Covid in *all* its variants continues to run rampant, spawning off new variants every couple of weeks. What if the next variant is a mutation of delta that lets it reinfect people who already had it (again) and is just a little bit more vaccine resistent (again). Do we give Mohdoo a 4th dose? It's just really shortsighted (and we had this conversation a few pages back).
The focus, also for the developed world, should be to get vaccines to the developing nations who are screaming out for them. The logistics of vaccination there are also just that much harder (especially after our press and politicians torpedoed AstraZeneca, which was the big one that doesn't need really tricky refrigeration). That is where our focus needs to be in order to get Covid under control... and not have to deal with variants kappa through omega.
|
On August 25 2021 15:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Part of the problem with recommending boosters in the US when much of the world lacks 1st doses is that it is problematic from an ethical and long term/global epidemiological perspective.
This would be true if we weren't throwing away thousands every week. The doses aren't getting shipped to poor countries when we don't use them. They expire. There is no infrastructure to transport them. It is either the trash can or arms. There is no option to ship them.
|
On August 25 2021 15:41 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 15:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Part of the problem with recommending boosters in the US when much of the world lacks 1st doses is that it is problematic from an ethical and long term/global epidemiological perspective.
This would be true if we weren't throwing away thousands every week. The doses aren't getting shipped to poor countries when we don't use them. They expire. There is no infrastructure to transport them. It is either the trash can or arms. There is no option to ship them.
In a sense you're correct, however, it's not like the poor countries aren't getting them. Part of my job so I can definitely say parts of Africa and the middle east etc are definitely getting them. You're correct in the sense that the ones that aren't being used are just going in the bin, instead of getting them into distribution on top of what countries are ordering which is a shame but I guess that's just part of how society works, can't use em? Bin. Got stuff you don't WANNA use? Bin. While there's definitely demand for more in other places.
|
|
|
On August 25 2021 16:53 [GS]PLACiD wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2021 15:41 Mohdoo wrote:On August 25 2021 15:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Part of the problem with recommending boosters in the US when much of the world lacks 1st doses is that it is problematic from an ethical and long term/global epidemiological perspective.
This would be true if we weren't throwing away thousands every week. The doses aren't getting shipped to poor countries when we don't use them. They expire. There is no infrastructure to transport them. It is either the trash can or arms. There is no option to ship them. In a sense you're correct, however, it's not like the poor countries aren't getting them. Part of my job so I can definitely say parts of Africa and the middle east etc are definitely getting them. You're correct in the sense that the ones that aren't being used are just going in the bin, instead of getting them into distribution on top of what countries are ordering which is a shame but I guess that's just part of how society works, can't use em? Bin. Got stuff you don't WANNA use? Bin. While there's definitely demand for more in other places.
Poor countries are getting vaccines, yes, but none of the vaccines poor countries get comes from US pharmacies. Once they are shipped once, that's it, GG, they aren't going somewhere else. We don't even have sufficient vaccine tracking infrastructure in the US. First of all, it would be incredibly expensive to do this kinda min/maxing with nearly expired vaccines. Second, we have no information infrastructure for it. The whole thing is impossible with the incompetent CDC.
The CDC is failing to such an extreme degree that I am thinking of this in a purely independent sense. I will care for me and my family and basically ignore every single other consideration because I feel like I've been entirely hung out to dry.
The Biden administration's covid response feels like Bush saying "Mission Accomplished". They decided ahead of time that vaccines being distributed would be the light at the end of the tunnel. Once that turned out not to be true, they were like "Oh well! lol!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
