|
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 September 10 2021 06:18 farvacola wrote:Keep an eye on the September 18 yallqaeda rally in DC, it might pop off after this news. The wife and I plan to be downtown for her birthday meal, so maybe I’ll live report a bit lol
National vax mandate is quite literally their doomsday. This is a really major development in their shitty little heads. I think a huge number of these folks see this as either the end or the beginning. National MRNA vax mandate by Biden using OSHA. This is like their biggest nightmare. Juicy!
|
if there’s any chance that doesn’t get struck down by the supreme court that alone would make a biden presidency worth it for me.
we could of course stand to do better and gain more, but, at the minimum, that will be worth it.
On September 10 2021 06:18 farvacola wrote:Keep an eye on the September 18 yallqaeda rally in DC, it might pop off after this news. The wife and I plan to be downtown for her birthday meal, so maybe I’ll live report a bit lol
please go to old town alexandria instead. these fuck heads are armed and stupid.
|
On September 10 2021 06:48 brian wrote:if there’s any chance that doesn’t get struck down by the supreme court that alone would make a biden presidency worth it for me. we could of course stand to do better and gain more, but, at the minimum, that will be worth it. Show nested quote +On September 10 2021 06:18 farvacola wrote:Keep an eye on the September 18 yallqaeda rally in DC, it might pop off after this news. The wife and I plan to be downtown for her birthday meal, so maybe I’ll live report a bit lol please go to old town alexandria instead. these fuck heads are armed and stupid.
The precedent for government mandated vaccines is fairly good, I’d bet at least a 5-4 upholds what has just been implemented were a challenge to make its way there.
And yeah, we will probably go to Clarendon or Alexandria (or just stay home that day) instead, but we were really looking forward to Rasika, the wife loves Indian food.
|
On September 10 2021 06:52 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2021 06:48 brian wrote:if there’s any chance that doesn’t get struck down by the supreme court that alone would make a biden presidency worth it for me. we could of course stand to do better and gain more, but, at the minimum, that will be worth it. On September 10 2021 06:18 farvacola wrote:Keep an eye on the September 18 yallqaeda rally in DC, it might pop off after this news. The wife and I plan to be downtown for her birthday meal, so maybe I’ll live report a bit lol please go to old town alexandria instead. these fuck heads are armed and stupid. The precedent for government mandated vaccines is fairly good, I’d bet at least a 5-4 upholds what has just been implemented were a challenge to make its way there. And yeah, we will probably go to Clarendon or Alexandria (or just stay home that day) instead, but we were really looking forward to Rasika, the wife loves Indian food.
With this supreme court i very much doubt precedent matters anymore.
|
Mandating vaccines seems sensible to me, but considering the U.S. is seeing about 300% more new COVID-19 infections a day, about two-and-a-half times more hospitalizations, and nearly twice the number of deaths compared to the same time last year. it seems clear the reopening was rushed/done carelessly given what we knew/know about vaccination rates then and now.
|
|
|
With the vaccine having fill approval there is no reason to not get it. We need to have more insurances be like delta airlines and make you pay 200$ more per check if you dont want to get it. That along with a mandate will motivate most of the holdouts.
|
On September 10 2021 08:27 Shingi11 wrote:
With the vaccine having fill approval there is no reason to not get it. We need to have more insurances be like delta airlines and make you pay 200$ more per check if you dont want to get it. That along with a mandate will motivate most of the holdouts.
My extremely antivax cousin was gonna get it just to go on some shitty Florida cruise until she realized her kids would need it too. Tons of these people are willing to be only mildly inconvenienced before their supposed deeply held views fly out the window.
|
On September 10 2021 08:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Mandating vaccines seems sensible to me, but considering Show nested quote + the U.S. is seeing about 300% more new COVID-19 infections a day, about two-and-a-half times more hospitalizations, and nearly twice the number of deaths compared to the same time last year. it seems clear the reopening was rushed/done carelessly given what we knew/know about vaccination rates then and now.
I don't think "same time last year" is a relevant comparison at this point. At this time last year, the first versions of the virus were essentially beaten, and neither Alpha nor Delta had emerged yet.
If reopening was rushed in the US we don't know. Long term, opening up now could be a good decision as being infected probably gives better immunity than any vaccine. If people don't want their shots, at least they will be immune that way, and without herd immunity we can't ever open up completely.
|
Are you saying getting COVID is a good way to get immunity from COVID? Being infected with COVID without the vaccine is basically the worst case you would really hope for, in no way, shape, or form should we look at reopening as a good decision because COVID will spread to more people.
|
On September 10 2021 20:51 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2021 08:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Mandating vaccines seems sensible to me, but considering the U.S. is seeing about 300% more new COVID-19 infections a day, about two-and-a-half times more hospitalizations, and nearly twice the number of deaths compared to the same time last year. it seems clear the reopening was rushed/done carelessly given what we knew/know about vaccination rates then and now. I don't think "same time last year" is a relevant comparison at this point. At this time last year, the first versions of the virus were essentially beaten, and neither Alpha nor Delta had emerged yet. If reopening was rushed in the US we don't know. Long term, opening up now could be a good decision as being infected probably gives better immunity than any vaccine. If people don't want their shots, at least they will be immune that way, and without herd immunity we can't ever open up completely.
COVID isn't the chicken pox. You can't just take a bunch of kids and throw them together so they don't get shingles later in life. If chickenpox had the same short term and long term effects then pox parties wouldn't have happened.
The best way to acquire immunity is to take the vaccine, catch it and suffer none of the terrible effects because of the vaccine, and then go on with your life. Herd immunity will be impossible without extensive suffering and loss of life, even setting aside what's already lost.
|
Herd immunity only works when near 100% of the population is immune. Every nation that tried to entertain herd immunity before the vaccine had massive losses. We should not be looking to Sweden and US on how to proceed, unless you're ok with 2% of the remaining unvaccinated population dying
|
|
|
Ya hospitals just get overwhelmed, we have a lot of people dying from non covid things cause you have a anti vaxxers taking up all the ICU beds.
|
On September 10 2021 22:01 Excludos wrote:
Herd immunity only works when near 100% of the population is immune. Every nation that tried to entertain herd immunity before the vaccine had massive losses. We should not be looking to Sweden and US on how to proceed, unless you're ok with 2% of the remaining unvaccinated population dying
No, that is not how herd immunity works. It was hoped to be reached at 70%, but the Delta variant +that vaccines is not distributed evenly across age groups it has to go higher, probably somewhere 75-95%. The definition of herd immunity is that outbreaks stop by themselves, and if they do depends on how infectious the disease is.
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/herd-immunity-lockdowns-and-covid-19?gclid=CjwKCAjwhOyJBhA4EiwAEcJdcah4o2WzRi66W_kh043Qjiuxxi1SvSzaeRx_1BnW8V7nMwt8pbvdIBoCrOQQAvD_BwE#
Yes, getting the virus is the best immunisation, which is often overlooked. If people don't want to be vaccinated, it is really the only option, keeping restrictions, quarantines and mass testing forever is not viable IMO.
Vaccines will not carry a population to herd immunity by themselves, but the cases will be milder and fewer, effectively turning covid into a manageable flu.
I believe most countries are shooting for a vaccine % in the 80s before opening up completely, but what the right strategy is remains to be seen, and in the US that seems almost impossible to achieve.
|
On September 10 2021 23:04 Slydie wrote:
No, that is not how herd immunity works. It was hoped to be reached at 70%, but the Delta variant +that vaccines is not distributed evenly across age groups it has to go higher, probably somewhere 75-95%.
So what you're saying is that that is exactly how it works? 95% is near 100%
"Hoping to be reached by 70%"? By who? Not scientists, that's for sure. There was never a world where 70% immunity would eradicate Covid-19, that is, if it can be eradicated at all. If it keeps mutating, like the flu, then eradication is not on the table. The goal then is for every able bodied person to get vaccinated, so the few who can't due to age or allergies, are protected
On September 10 2021 23:04 Slydie wrote:
Yes, getting the virus is the best immunisation, which is often overlooked.
It's just that it's also the best way to kill people. Again, to repeat myself, this only works if you are fine with 2% of the remaining unvaccinated population dying (+whatever consequences filling up hospitals will have). It's not overlooked, it's murder
|
If you want people to build up resistance by infection, why not have a shot first and then fend it off with a much hgher chance of not having to go to the hospital?
|
On September 10 2021 23:07 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2021 23:04 Slydie wrote:
No, that is not how herd immunity works. It was hoped to be reached at 70%, but the Delta variant +that vaccines is not distributed evenly across age groups it has to go higher, probably somewhere 75-95%. So what you're saying is that that is exactly how it works? 95% is near 100% "Hoping to be reached by 70%"? By who? Not scientists, that's for sure. There was never a world where 70% immunity would eradicate Covid-19, that is, if it can be eradicated at all. If it keeps mutating, like the flu, then eradication is not on the table. The goal then is for every able bodied person to get vaccinated, so the few who can't due to age or allergies, are protected Show nested quote +On September 10 2021 23:04 Slydie wrote:
Yes, getting the virus is the best immunisation, which is often overlooked. It's just that it's also the best way to kill people. Again, to repeat myself, this only works if you are fine with 2% of the remaining unvaccinated population dying (+whatever consequences filling up hospitals will have). It's not overlooked, it's murder
You're wrong. Epidemiologists did expect herd immunity to be reached around 70-75%. The threshold depends on how infectious the disease is (R0) and how effective the vaccines are. Here two articles explaining it. The first one's shorter, giving you the gist of it. The Wiki one is more detailed. The table in the linked section shows the threshold values for COVID-19.
https://www.path.org/articles/understanding-journey-herd-immunity/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Theoretical_basis
The formula is 1–1/R0, but it has to be calibrated for vaccine efficacy, from what I understand.
So, yes, the herd immunity threshold can be lower than 95-100%.
|
|
|
On September 10 2021 23:30 Artisreal wrote:
If you want people to build up resistance by infection, why not have a shot first and then fend it off with a much hgher chance of not having to go to the hospital?
As I understand anti-vaxers, that is not what they want. Instead, they are underestimating the dangers of COVID-19 while overestimating treatments and the vaccine side effects. 1 shot it's much better than 2.
In other instances, the risk/reward is more debatable. Even for COVID-19, it is not certain that it is worth it to vaccinate children under 12. They are already well protected, and it is very complicated to work out if the vaccines are effective enough. In one study, Pfizer is partly avoiding the whole problem like this:
The Pfizer study won't test to see whether the vaccine actually prevents children from getting sick. Instead, it will look at their blood to see if they are making the kinds of antibodies that have been shown to prevent disease.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/08/18/1027035486/covid-vaccine-children-under-12-your-questions-answered
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
