|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On May 24 2021 01:43 BlackJack wrote:
Not only do I disagree with the idea that vaccine passports will "need" to be created, I also really doubt that they will be created. At least in my country. I've been predicting August 2021 as the time that COVID becomes irrelevant. I seriously think nobody is going to care about COVID in a couple months, especially not enough to demand to see your papers.
That depends on whether the US can actually reach herd immunity (and maintain it over the years). Perhaps immunization below the herd immunity threshold is enough to prevent the healthcare system getting derailed like it did in NY, but it remains to be seen.
|
On May 24 2021 01:43 BlackJack wrote:
Not only do I disagree with the idea that vaccine passports will "need" to be created, I also really doubt that they will be created. At least in my country. I've been predicting August 2021 as the time that COVID becomes irrelevant. I seriously think nobody is going to care about COVID in a couple months, especially not enough to demand to see your papers.
Depends in my opinion.
I personally don't see a need for in-Province vaccine passports in Canada, mostly because we're on pace to hit 80%+ vaccinated which is well above thresholds for herd immunity that have been found so far. Restrictions on capacity in events is enough until those thresholds are hit.
For international travel though, that's a different story.
Between countries with known high vaccination rates (for example between Canada/UK), I expect that travel will be vaccine passport free in a few months.
Between a country with a high vaccination rate, and a country with a low/no/unreliable vaccination rate though, it's quite a different story. From Canada to Australia, for instance, I'd expect a vaccine passport to be required until Australia reaches a point where the vaccination rate is high enough to handle any imported cases which might take well into next year.
|
Hawaii is on track to be fully vaccinated by Summer (couple months), and it really feels like it.
I’m actually glad masks are still mandated since a lot of tourists come in from all over the world (regardless if they quarantine or not). But I feel like it’ll be really soon that things will be normal again.
|
On May 23 2021 21:35 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2021 21:03 Slydie wrote:
As much as I think vaccine passports make some sense currently to open up quicker, it is a very dangerous path, especially for other things than crossing borders.
Which other "passports" for your health condition could it open up for? Sexually transmittable diseases? Diabetes? Smoking? Heart attacks? What do you mean? Outside of the STI none of those are transmittal and if someone wanted you to show there STI results before they had sex with you what's the issue? To the others all life insurance, health insurance, disability and so on reject, rate or exclude based on the above. There is no danger to a flight crew or a stadium if you have diabetes, I think you're slippery sloping this past possible actual uses.
That is another reason I don't think insurance companies should hold the keys to our healthcare. I also never do the yearly health checks my employer offers, I don't see why I should give them that information for no reason.
Anyway on topic: A family member just got quarenteened as their teacher tested positive. The teacher was vaccinated, but probably only had one dosis. She had mild symptoms. I doubt anyone got infected, but we will know for sure soon.
It sucks, but maybe it is interesting to see how this behaved in real life rather than in lab studies and reports.
|
Is this some bizarre US thing I am too European to understand? Why would Your employer want Your health records?
|
|
|
From BC, the government released data that showed one dose was 70% effective against transmission after 21 days. Their viral load, even if they do have symptoms is significantly lower than unvaccinated, so it helps drop transmission numbers. Between 80% lower chance of symptomatic covid from one dose, and 70% chance of transmission, your chances of getting covid from someone with one dose is ~6% that of a random unvaccinated person. Transmission between vaccinated people as a result is essentially zero.
My employer gives me health insurance for stuff that isn't covered by normal free healthcare:
1. Free vision checkup once/year
2. Reimbursement for dental procedures (mostly dental checkups/cleaning every 6 months)
3. Prescription drug discounts
It's considered to be part of my benefits package. My employer doesn't really know any of my health stuff, the insurance provider does. They do provide a service that my employer pays for and I get some benefits out of it (I'm young/healthy, so I make use of the preventative services mostly.)
|
On May 25 2021 03:14 Lmui wrote:
From BC, the government released data that showed one dose was 70% effective against transmission after 21 days. Their viral load, even if they do have symptoms is significantly lower than unvaccinated, so it helps drop transmission numbers. Between 80% lower chance of symptomatic covid from one dose, and 70% chance of transmission, your chances of getting covid from someone with one dose is ~6% that of a random unvaccinated person. Transmission between vaccinated people as a result is essentially zero.
My employer gives me health insurance for stuff that isn't covered by normal free healthcare:
1. Free vision checkup once/year
2. Reimbursement for dental procedures (mostly dental checkups/cleaning every 6 months)
3. Prescription drug discounts
It's considered to be part of my benefits package. My employer doesn't really know any of my health stuff, the insurance provider does. They do provide a service that my employer pays for and I get some benefits out of it (I'm young/healthy, so I make use of the preventative services mostly.)
I used to have generous health package with a former multinational employer. I rarely utilise all my benefits, but my other colleagues with dependents always gush about maxing up and visiting the panel clinic for (what I feel) the slightest of illness. Knowing how corporate and HR works, they can dig up your medical records if they really wish to. Not to check on your condition, of course, but to check the number of sick days, amount of benefits claimed, etc. Yes, there may be good 'ol policies against discrimination and what not, but it's really naive thinking that the powers-that-be and spreadsheet spreaders won't pull out the relevant data on cost (especially during retrenchment crunch-time).
BTW, what is going on with Toronto? No dine-in for over a year? Are people actually okay with this?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57079577
|
On May 25 2021 10:23 RKC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2021 03:14 Lmui wrote:
From BC, the government released data that showed one dose was 70% effective against transmission after 21 days. Their viral load, even if they do have symptoms is significantly lower than unvaccinated, so it helps drop transmission numbers. Between 80% lower chance of symptomatic covid from one dose, and 70% chance of transmission, your chances of getting covid from someone with one dose is ~6% that of a random unvaccinated person. Transmission between vaccinated people as a result is essentially zero.
My employer gives me health insurance for stuff that isn't covered by normal free healthcare:
1. Free vision checkup once/year
2. Reimbursement for dental procedures (mostly dental checkups/cleaning every 6 months)
3. Prescription drug discounts
It's considered to be part of my benefits package. My employer doesn't really know any of my health stuff, the insurance provider does. They do provide a service that my employer pays for and I get some benefits out of it (I'm young/healthy, so I make use of the preventative services mostly.) I used to have generous health package with a former multinational employer. I rarely utilise all my benefits, but my other colleagues with dependents always gush about maxing up and visiting the panel clinic for (what I feel) the slightest of illness. Knowing how corporate and HR works, they can dig up your medical records if they really wish to. Not to check on your condition, of course, but to check the number of sick days, amount of benefits claimed, etc. Yes, there may be good 'ol policies against discrimination and what not, but it's really naive thinking that the powers-that-be and spreadsheet spreaders won't pull out the relevant data on cost (especially during retrenchment crunch-time). BTW, what is going on with Toronto? No dine-in for over a year? Are people actually okay with this? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57079577
They've had one of the world's most ineffective lockdowns. Closed off outdoor areas, parks etc, declared tons of items "non-essential" and banned the purchase of said items, all led by a leader who didn't graduate high school. He's literally Canada's Trump.
Of course people don't listen if you do that.
Contrast that with BC. We've had far softer lockdowns than Toronto, and seen far better results because we aren't under particularly stringent conditions most of the time, outdoor gatherings are permitted, and people are generally trusted to be adults about things. When restrictions are put in, people listen for a few weeks, because in general, we have a much higher level of trust in the government to do the right thing.
|
On May 25 2021 00:56 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2021 23:53 Slydie wrote:On May 23 2021 21:35 JimmiC wrote:On May 23 2021 21:03 Slydie wrote:
As much as I think vaccine passports make some sense currently to open up quicker, it is a very dangerous path, especially for other things than crossing borders.
Which other "passports" for your health condition could it open up for? Sexually transmittable diseases? Diabetes? Smoking? Heart attacks? What do you mean? Outside of the STI none of those are transmittal and if someone wanted you to show there STI results before they had sex with you what's the issue? To the others all life insurance, health insurance, disability and so on reject, rate or exclude based on the above. There is no danger to a flight crew or a stadium if you have diabetes, I think you're slippery sloping this past possible actual uses. That is another reason I don't think insurance companies should hold the keys to our healthcare. I also never do the yearly health checks my employer offers, I don't see why I should give them that information for no reason. Anyway on topic: A family member just got quarenteened as their teacher tested positive. The teacher was vaccinated, but probably only had one dosis. She had mild symptoms. I doubt anyone got infected, but we will know for sure soon. It sucks, but maybe it is interesting to see how this behaved in real life rather than in lab studies and reports. I'm not 100% sure on the Math but before vaccination my wife was quarantined 3x for kids in her class getting it, only once was there a transfer between classmates and it could have happened away from the school as the kids were friends. My daughter in daycare has been quarentined 4x and twice there was transfer but one was between teachers. My wife did catch it at school from her educational assistant. So my completely unscientific anecdotal experience says that there would be 50% no spread even before vaccine. I'm sure this does not help with your experience but I figured maybe it would give you a bit of a baseline. Not that we can get any real info from such a small sample. Also I completely agree on the insurance end, but now a days a bunch of people trust government even less! (I'm very pro universal public healthcare).
Thanks! In my case, this was very likely a no-spread scenario, which was the most probable, given that the teacher had one dosis of vaccine, and she did not go to work with sympthoms. After that, nobody knows what mattered most, her mutation, that kids rarely get them in the first place, distancing and work groups, that she wore a mask during classes... Take your pick, but it turned out well.
The thing I am most proud of with how Spain is dealing with this pandemic is that they have kept all schools open this academic year, and all teachers have been vaccinated early considering how many dosis have been available.
Speaking of kids and vaccines, the Moderna gives a 100% protection among 12-18 year olds in a 3700 tests study, which means stage 2 I believe. I am not sure if they need to run a full stage 3 study to get theri vaccine approved for use in this age group. The main concern I would guess is rare autoimmune reactions.
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Wellness/covid-19-vaccines-kids/story?id=77505555&cid=clicksource_4380645_1_heads_hero_live_headlines_hed
|
My province is going to slowly open up.
The dose 1 percentage in the chart doesn't actually matter. We're going to blow past all the requirements by weeks at the current vaccination rates (Even if you're using entire population % vaccinated), and we'll be comfortably doing a lot of second doses by the time the milestones come around.
![[image loading]](https://i.cbc.ca/1.6039773.1621969680!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_1180/b-c-restart-plan-may-25-2021.jpg)
|
|
|
People that don't see this as a major problem have their heads in the sand. Hell there are people that want facebook to go even further in deciding what is true and what isn't and censoring/silencing everything that isn't part of the correct narrative.
|
On May 27 2021 14:27 BlackJack wrote:People that don't see this as a major problem have their heads in the sand. Hell there are people that want facebook to go even further in deciding what is true and what isn't and censoring/silencing everything that isn't part of the correct narrative.
I think Facebook being a source of news is a problem. Their actions here are ripped a bit out of context, but Facebook being a source of "news" in the first place means that context is always lost.
The problem is that up to a few weeks ago, "news" about the virus being manmade was (1) all about malicious intent, and (2) linked with conspiracy theories. This type of trash wasn't news then and isn't news now. It should still be banned if Facebook is at all consistent in their curation.
The official stance has always been "we don't know, but most likely natural". That hasn't changed. The WHO probe couldn't figure it out, but found it unlikely to have come from the lab there. Calling for another investigation and pressuring China to allow that investigation more freedom to do their job is a logical next step. And especially if there is new circunstancial evidence that lab workers were sick with some mysterious something weeks before the outbreak became known, it lends credence to the manmade hypothesis and needs new investigation!
However, Facebook refuses to curate their "news", which means a position like the above and a position that baby murdering serial rapists plotted the demise of humankind at the hands of the Wuhan flu, are somehow equal.
|
On May 27 2021 15:28 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2021 14:27 BlackJack wrote:People that don't see this as a major problem have their heads in the sand. Hell there are people that want facebook to go even further in deciding what is true and what isn't and censoring/silencing everything that isn't part of the correct narrative. I think Facebook being a source of news is a problem. Their actions here are ripped a bit out of context, but Facebook being a source of "news" in the first place means that context is always lost. The problem is that up to a few weeks ago, "news" about the virus being manmade was (1) all about malicious intent, and (2) linked with conspiracy theories. This type of trash wasn't news then and isn't news now. It should still be banned if Facebook is at all consistent in their curation. The official stance has always been "we don't know, but most likely natural". That hasn't changed. The WHO probe couldn't figure it out, but found it unlikely to have come from the lab there. Calling for another investigation and pressuring China to allow that investigation more freedom to do their job is a logical next step. And especially if there is new circunstancial evidence that lab workers were sick with some mysterious something weeks before the outbreak became known, it lends credence to the manmade hypothesis and needs new investigation! However, Facebook refuses to curate their "news", which means a position like the above and a position that baby murdering serial rapists plotted the demise of humankind at the hands of the Wuhan flu, are somehow equal.
I think the possibility of negligent handling of a sample or a specimen(eg. a live bat somewhere) is much higher than the possibility of it being man made. If it was man-made, China would be decades ahead of the rest of the world in terms of being able to genetically engineer a virus.
|
The "man made" theory highlights the main attraction of conspiracy theories and pseudo science. The scientists can only say "unlikely" and "probably" until they are absolutely sure in a way that stands up to intense scrutiny, which opens the gateway for bullshitters offering clear answers. Some fringe scientists have even jumped on the "man-made" bandwagon to create publicity for their own research.
I find it interesting that the Chinese vaccines have largely failed to become dominant. If they made this virus on purpose, wouldn't they have been ahead of the field in that department?
My hope is that the Chinese will conclude that decisively debunking the man-made theory is more important than hiding their failures in the early stages of the pandemic.
|
On May 27 2021 16:06 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2021 15:28 Acrofales wrote:On May 27 2021 14:27 BlackJack wrote:People that don't see this as a major problem have their heads in the sand. Hell there are people that want facebook to go even further in deciding what is true and what isn't and censoring/silencing everything that isn't part of the correct narrative. I think Facebook being a source of news is a problem. Their actions here are ripped a bit out of context, but Facebook being a source of "news" in the first place means that context is always lost. The problem is that up to a few weeks ago, "news" about the virus being manmade was (1) all about malicious intent, and (2) linked with conspiracy theories. This type of trash wasn't news then and isn't news now. It should still be banned if Facebook is at all consistent in their curation. The official stance has always been "we don't know, but most likely natural". That hasn't changed. The WHO probe couldn't figure it out, but found it unlikely to have come from the lab there. Calling for another investigation and pressuring China to allow that investigation more freedom to do their job is a logical next step. And especially if there is new circunstancial evidence that lab workers were sick with some mysterious something weeks before the outbreak became known, it lends credence to the manmade hypothesis and needs new investigation! However, Facebook refuses to curate their "news", which means a position like the above and a position that baby murdering serial rapists plotted the demise of humankind at the hands of the Wuhan flu, are somehow equal. I think the possibility of negligent handling of a sample or a specimen(eg. a live bat somewhere) is much higher than the possibility of it being man made. If it was man-made, China would be decades ahead of the rest of the world in terms of being able to genetically engineer a virus.
What about man-made, but without intent? I never believed this was some great conspiracy, but it doesn't seem unbelievable they were researching viruses, and created this by accident/randomly mutated this? I don't know the next thing about viruses, what do you guys think?
|
On May 27 2021 19:58 aseq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2021 16:06 Amui wrote:On May 27 2021 15:28 Acrofales wrote:On May 27 2021 14:27 BlackJack wrote:People that don't see this as a major problem have their heads in the sand. Hell there are people that want facebook to go even further in deciding what is true and what isn't and censoring/silencing everything that isn't part of the correct narrative. I think Facebook being a source of news is a problem. Their actions here are ripped a bit out of context, but Facebook being a source of "news" in the first place means that context is always lost. The problem is that up to a few weeks ago, "news" about the virus being manmade was (1) all about malicious intent, and (2) linked with conspiracy theories. This type of trash wasn't news then and isn't news now. It should still be banned if Facebook is at all consistent in their curation. The official stance has always been "we don't know, but most likely natural". That hasn't changed. The WHO probe couldn't figure it out, but found it unlikely to have come from the lab there. Calling for another investigation and pressuring China to allow that investigation more freedom to do their job is a logical next step. And especially if there is new circunstancial evidence that lab workers were sick with some mysterious something weeks before the outbreak became known, it lends credence to the manmade hypothesis and needs new investigation! However, Facebook refuses to curate their "news", which means a position like the above and a position that baby murdering serial rapists plotted the demise of humankind at the hands of the Wuhan flu, are somehow equal. I think the possibility of negligent handling of a sample or a specimen(eg. a live bat somewhere) is much higher than the possibility of it being man made. If it was man-made, China would be decades ahead of the rest of the world in terms of being able to genetically engineer a virus. What about man-made, but without intent? I never believed this was some great conspiracy, but it doesn't seem unbelievable they were researching viruses, and created this by accident/randomly mutated this? I don't know the next thing about viruses, what do you guys think?
I mean, it is definitively man-made (or man-made-more-likely-to-happen) in some way.
Without mass animal farming and/or wild animal mass markets, chances that such a virus mutates enough to make the jump to humans is a lot smaller.
Besides being ethically abhorrent, mass animal farming also works as basically a factory for pandemics, be they viral or through massively antibiotics-resistant bacteria.
|
I've always thought the lab origin was plausible, perhaps even likely. Labs in Wuhan were unquestionably working with these viruses and the multiple mutations and cross-species splicing is exactly the kind of thing that might be done in a scientific context. It's far from proof, but I've always found it believable.
I was extremely surprised when the WHO team ruled it out, when the first rule of science is that a negative is the most difficult thing to prove. I am very glad that the US is now pushing back, but at this point we're unlikely to ever know due to the amount of time the CCP has had to wipe the slate.
All this said, a lab origin is obviously not the same as an intentional release as some kind of conspiracy.
|
I think a lot of nuance gets lost when people allow "man-made" to include a lab accident in a legitimate research institute. When I read "man-made", I think "biological weapon", not "lab accident".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
