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 August 13 2021 02:20 Geisterkarle wrote: Why are you all bringing up flu shots? Flu shots are absolutely voluntary! Nobody cares if you do one or not! I did not have a flu shot in my life! My parents (both 70y+) never had one! That is a completely different thing! But ok, if _that_ is the "covid-future" I'm quite open to it. But as I quoted (again) that if it is a forced vaccination again and again and again... nope... not gonna do it! Will migrate to a country that is not completely bonkers or open an island or something!
People are bringing up flu shots because they are annual and the closest to how the Covid virus works. They bring up the other vaccines to show the other end of the frequency spectrum. It really is not complicated.
I think you should go out on your own but for real, somewhere in the wilderness where you are actually self sufficient. People like you always crack me up using all the publicly funded luxuries our society has to offer, internet (yes you didn't pay for all the wire nor did the company), sewages, roads, electricity, clean running water, natural gas, hospitals, schools and so on.
It also cracks me up when it is often the same people mad about masks that don't think Sikhs should be able to wear their turban as cops or inside, or think women should have to cover their breasts or think men and women shouldn't be allowed to just walk around naked whenever or where ever they want.
It is like your life has been so entitled and because you have basically been able to do whatever you want with no consequence that the idea of responsibility is completely foreign to you.
News flash, the government has been telling people what to do for 10's of thousands of years. And with democracies it has been an overwhelming benefit for those people. Because what they tell us is what the majority of us think is the best for us. Is it perfect, hell no, is it better then all living in small huts fighting for survival on the daily, hell ya.
So please, go move into the wilderness and give it a shot. If I never hear from you again congrats you win you are actually self sufficient (Or more likely dead but I thought I'd stay positive). If not then at least show a little self and societal awareness.
I'm not sure if I should report this, because you are clearly harassing me... But I don't really care. But would you read my quote/old post and understand: _I'm vaccinated!_ (well, nearly done, Monday is second shot). I'm no anti-vaxxer! I know what this shit virus is and does! But I still think "if you are not vaccinated you are not allowed into a restaurant" is completely shit and it does not help, but force more hate and we already see violence! As said, make it mandatory; but this "it's not mandatory ... but it actually is" bullshit is imho much worse! Nothing about is like the flu! But if you want to make it like that, I will treat it like that: Not bothering! I have not cared about the flu in my life and I maybe start it if I'm 70! If _you_ vax against the flu every year, good for you! But depending on who you are, you are not the majority! I checked some numbers for Germany: https://www.rki.de/SharedDocs/FAQ/Impfen/Influenza/FAQ17.html Doctors seem to be the "biggest" chunk with over 75% flu-vaccinations. But even for old and people with diseases it is no majority. (very fluctuating there, maybe 40%). I didn't bother to search for numbers of "healthy people", but probably very low! So be lucky that even in the US it is quite possible that more people are currently vaccinated against corona then the flu, even in "before times"!
Why is it bullshit? You can't even go into most restaurants without a shirt on.
You are comparing needing to show a vaccine passport, necessarily kept up to date with 2+ boosters per year, to wearing a shirt?
No shot, no service does have quite the ring to it no?
I don't know where teeel141 is coming from. I can understand that he thinks some governments are withholding information. I do think so, too. I don't trust the Chinese government for example. But I don't believe in a grand scale conspiracy of multiple governments to lead us stupid sheep. The governments are acting with the information available. With new information come new solutions and it may be entirely possible that a new solution is completely opposite of an earlier solution.
@Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
On August 13 2021 12:51 RKC wrote: Thanks for sharing your insider insights, Mohdoo.
Delta variant is truly sobering. Whilst politicians and public health spokespeople are going "Relax, we've got this", seems like the real scientists at the back are shaking to their bones and going "Game over, man, game over!"
The unfortunate reality is that epidemiology feels really illogical and like a giant overreaction when done right. You can't really let public opinion be a thing with epidemiology. So long as you can have people like Rand Paul running amuck, we can only defeat easy pandemics. We basically shit the bed when it was manageable and now its something that is 0% manageable.
Small rant: Things like "emergency authority" and whatnot were ideas that we came up with because they were helpful and made sense in some time of human development. It ended up being abused and associated with dictators. We as a society at some point need to understand that emergency authority serves a purpose and can save an insane amount of lives if it has proper checks and balances. But epidemiology doesn't work so long as it needs to also be politically favorable/supported. We can't have a situation where senators are playing a role or have any involvement whatsoever.
Senators needs to win elections --> senators give opinions on things that people care about --> people care about a pandemic --> senators need to do/say things that people support.
Big problem. It is a fundamental design rule. Epidemiology will never be largely supported during a pandemic if done in accordance with accepted science.
Yeah, that is the big problem. If you react correctly to a potential pandemic, and are successful, it looks as if you have been overreacting.
On August 13 2021 02:20 Geisterkarle wrote: Why are you all bringing up flu shots? Flu shots are absolutely voluntary! Nobody cares if you do one or not! I did not have a flu shot in my life! My parents (both 70y+) never had one! That is a completely different thing! But ok, if _that_ is the "covid-future" I'm quite open to it. But as I quoted (again) that if it is a forced vaccination again and again and again... nope... not gonna do it! Will migrate to a country that is not completely bonkers or open an island or something!
People are bringing up flu shots because they are annual and the closest to how the Covid virus works. They bring up the other vaccines to show the other end of the frequency spectrum. It really is not complicated.
I think you should go out on your own but for real, somewhere in the wilderness where you are actually self sufficient. People like you always crack me up using all the publicly funded luxuries our society has to offer, internet (yes you didn't pay for all the wire nor did the company), sewages, roads, electricity, clean running water, natural gas, hospitals, schools and so on.
It also cracks me up when it is often the same people mad about masks that don't think Sikhs should be able to wear their turban as cops or inside, or think women should have to cover their breasts or think men and women shouldn't be allowed to just walk around naked whenever or where ever they want.
It is like your life has been so entitled and because you have basically been able to do whatever you want with no consequence that the idea of responsibility is completely foreign to you.
News flash, the government has been telling people what to do for 10's of thousands of years. And with democracies it has been an overwhelming benefit for those people. Because what they tell us is what the majority of us think is the best for us. Is it perfect, hell no, is it better then all living in small huts fighting for survival on the daily, hell ya.
So please, go move into the wilderness and give it a shot. If I never hear from you again congrats you win you are actually self sufficient (Or more likely dead but I thought I'd stay positive). If not then at least show a little self and societal awareness.
I'm not sure if I should report this, because you are clearly harassing me... But I don't really care. But would you read my quote/old post and understand: _I'm vaccinated!_ (well, nearly done, Monday is second shot). I'm no anti-vaxxer! I know what this shit virus is and does! But I still think "if you are not vaccinated you are not allowed into a restaurant" is completely shit and it does not help, but force more hate and we already see violence! As said, make it mandatory; but this "it's not mandatory ... but it actually is" bullshit is imho much worse! Nothing about is like the flu! But if you want to make it like that, I will treat it like that: Not bothering! I have not cared about the flu in my life and I maybe start it if I'm 70! If _you_ vax against the flu every year, good for you! But depending on who you are, you are not the majority! I checked some numbers for Germany: https://www.rki.de/SharedDocs/FAQ/Impfen/Influenza/FAQ17.html Doctors seem to be the "biggest" chunk with over 75% flu-vaccinations. But even for old and people with diseases it is no majority. (very fluctuating there, maybe 40%). I didn't bother to search for numbers of "healthy people", but probably very low! So be lucky that even in the US it is quite possible that more people are currently vaccinated against corona then the flu, even in "before times"!
Why is it bullshit? You can't even go into most restaurants without a shirt on.
You are comparing needing to show a vaccine passport, necessarily kept up to date with 2+ boosters per year, to wearing a shirt?
No shot, no service does have quite the ring to it no?
Well, speaking as someone who lives where there has been ‘mandatory’ QR code checkins for 9 months now at every business and workplace i’ve seen compliance drop below 50%.Just too much hassle pulling your phone app out every time you go to a different store and nobody really polices it.For the first few weeks they might be strict but after that, it will drop off pretty quick.
Of course they could be extra strict, scare off customers and lose business.When they roll out boosters for all in a couple months there will be many 2 shotters who turn it down.There will be 3 shotters who turn down the 4th shot.And then what, they are treated the same as someone with no jabs?
There will be vaccinated people questioning why they need bother with the constant checkins, since they are vaccinated and are safe from the unvaccinated, apparently.No, I can’t see this working out at all.
On August 13 2021 02:20 Geisterkarle wrote: Why are you all bringing up flu shots? Flu shots are absolutely voluntary! Nobody cares if you do one or not! I did not have a flu shot in my life! My parents (both 70y+) never had one! That is a completely different thing! But ok, if _that_ is the "covid-future" I'm quite open to it. But as I quoted (again) that if it is a forced vaccination again and again and again... nope... not gonna do it! Will migrate to a country that is not completely bonkers or open an island or something!
People are bringing up flu shots because they are annual and the closest to how the Covid virus works. They bring up the other vaccines to show the other end of the frequency spectrum. It really is not complicated.
I think you should go out on your own but for real, somewhere in the wilderness where you are actually self sufficient. People like you always crack me up using all the publicly funded luxuries our society has to offer, internet (yes you didn't pay for all the wire nor did the company), sewages, roads, electricity, clean running water, natural gas, hospitals, schools and so on.
It also cracks me up when it is often the same people mad about masks that don't think Sikhs should be able to wear their turban as cops or inside, or think women should have to cover their breasts or think men and women shouldn't be allowed to just walk around naked whenever or where ever they want.
It is like your life has been so entitled and because you have basically been able to do whatever you want with no consequence that the idea of responsibility is completely foreign to you.
News flash, the government has been telling people what to do for 10's of thousands of years. And with democracies it has been an overwhelming benefit for those people. Because what they tell us is what the majority of us think is the best for us. Is it perfect, hell no, is it better then all living in small huts fighting for survival on the daily, hell ya.
So please, go move into the wilderness and give it a shot. If I never hear from you again congrats you win you are actually self sufficient (Or more likely dead but I thought I'd stay positive). If not then at least show a little self and societal awareness.
I'm not sure if I should report this, because you are clearly harassing me... But I don't really care. But would you read my quote/old post and understand: _I'm vaccinated!_ (well, nearly done, Monday is second shot). I'm no anti-vaxxer! I know what this shit virus is and does! But I still think "if you are not vaccinated you are not allowed into a restaurant" is completely shit and it does not help, but force more hate and we already see violence! As said, make it mandatory; but this "it's not mandatory ... but it actually is" bullshit is imho much worse! Nothing about is like the flu! But if you want to make it like that, I will treat it like that: Not bothering! I have not cared about the flu in my life and I maybe start it if I'm 70! If _you_ vax against the flu every year, good for you! But depending on who you are, you are not the majority! I checked some numbers for Germany: https://www.rki.de/SharedDocs/FAQ/Impfen/Influenza/FAQ17.html Doctors seem to be the "biggest" chunk with over 75% flu-vaccinations. But even for old and people with diseases it is no majority. (very fluctuating there, maybe 40%). I didn't bother to search for numbers of "healthy people", but probably very low! So be lucky that even in the US it is quite possible that more people are currently vaccinated against corona then the flu, even in "before times"!
Why is it bullshit? You can't even go into most restaurants without a shirt on.
You are comparing needing to show a vaccine passport, necessarily kept up to date with 2+ boosters per year, to wearing a shirt?
The former is a matter of life and death and global catastrophe though, so I'm fine if it's less convenient than merely putting on a shirt.
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: @Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
Like me, you have "Germany" at the top of your profile. I hope you know, that Germany has a mandatory vaccination against measles! Ok, "just" kids and teachers and similar. But there _is_ a mandatory vaccination; so what exactly is against the law? You should also check out the list of France here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impfpflicht#Impfpflicht_in_weiteren_Ländern Yeah, some countries could have no laws. But what blocks them to make one? Because "they said so"!? Stupid! Yes, they go around that. As I said: they "made" something, that is not a mandatory vaccination, but basically is one but worse! I don't really know why anyone could like that!?
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: I don't know where teeel141 is coming from. I can understand that he thinks some governments are withholding information. I do think so, too. I don't trust the Chinese government for example. But I don't believe in a grand scale conspiracy of multiple governments to lead us stupid sheep. The governments are acting with the information available. With new information come new solutions and it may be entirely possible that a new solution is completely opposite of an earlier solution.
@Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
I still haven't figured out yet if teeel141 and/or Geisterkarle are posting in good faith, given some of the things they're writing, but I do have a question for you regarding the proposed solution of an *anti-vax tax*: Does that tacitly give permission for wealthy people to stay unvaccinated, since they won't really have any tangible consequences? Perhaps there are previous examples of how adding a tax for some reason has deterred a significant percentage of people from doing/buying something that was originally more financially accessible to the average person? Not sure how effective it'll be, and given that this is a serious public health crisis that affects other people - not just the anti-vax individuals - it'll be really important to make sure that as many unvaccinated people as possible are persuaded to change their selfishness.
I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: @Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
Like me, you have "Germany" at the top of your profile. I hope you know, that Germany has a mandatory vaccination against measles! Ok, "just" kids and teachers and similar. But there _is_ a mandatory vaccination; so what exactly is against the law?
Afaik it's not mandatory. You just can't go to school without it But I may be wrong there.
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: I don't know where teeel141 is coming from. I can understand that he thinks some governments are withholding information. I do think so, too. I don't trust the Chinese government for example. But I don't believe in a grand scale conspiracy of multiple governments to lead us stupid sheep. The governments are acting with the information available. With new information come new solutions and it may be entirely possible that a new solution is completely opposite of an earlier solution.
@Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
I still haven't figured out yet if teeel141 and/or Geisterkarle are posting in good faith, given some of the things they're writing, but I do have a question for you regarding the proposed solution of an *anti-vax tax*: Does that tacitly give permission for wealthy people to stay unvaccinated, since they won't really have any tangible consequences? Perhaps there are previous examples of how adding a tax for some reason has deterred a significant percentage of people from doing/buying something that was originally more financially accessible to the average person? Not sure how effective it'll be, and given that this is a serious public health crisis that affects other people - not just the anti-vax individuals - it'll be really important to make sure that as many unvaccinated people as possible are persuaded to change their selfishness.
Sorry I wrote that wrong. There won't be an actual tax on non-vax The situation is like this: Coming October, tests will cost money If you are non-vax and want to go to a restaurant (or places with "low" risk of infection), you have to get tested with the cheap test. Means extra hassle and a biot of extra money (about 10-15 €) If you are non-vax and want to go to a concert (or places with "high" risk, crowds and stuff like that), you have to get tested with the expensive test (PCR I think). Means extra hassle (make appointment and whatnot) and quite some extra money (about 40-50 €) And you can't just make a test everywhere because you need like a government sealed approval
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
Let's be honest, there's a loud section in this thread who's quick to condemn others with any kind of opinion or information which diverges even so slightly with the conventional* narrative. Someone who says "We should improve ventilation in school" will instantly get suspected for being an anti-vax trying to shift the focus. To live through the pandemic, we need a combination of solutions. Just because someone says that we should be trying more of X doesn't mean that he's against Y.
The idea of this thread is to share experiences and information. Thankfully, there's an equal number of reasonable folks whose voices are worth listening to amidst the noise.
* this is just a loose term to describe what they deem as normal (sometimes, their sense of normalcy doesn't necessarily sync with many other parts of the world)
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
I'm extremely thankful that he's not a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer, and politeness definitely has a place in open discourse. I would definitely prefer there to be more Geisterkarles than teeel141s out there. There were simply a series of comments he made that were incredulous to me, but they were already addressed by others. For example, his responses to JimmiC, from accusing people of being "angels of death" for trying to *avoid* their families experiencing harm from others, to drawing parallels between racial segregation and business owners turning away unvaccinated people from their businesses. I couldn't help but be a little incredulous when reading remarks like those. I personally don't categorize those as reasonable responses.
I've seen some of his arguments from other people, such as being annoyed that people may need booster shots, or that forcing vaccinations will cause unvaccinated people to get mad, or the ironic frustration that business owners totally have the freedom to turn away potentially-dangerous people from their doors... those comments didn't surprise me. I wouldn't accuse someone of trolling just because of remarks like those.
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
Let's be honest, there's a loud section in this thread who's quick to condemn others with any kind of opinion or information which diverges even so slightly with the conventional* narrative.
That doesn't mean that every statement made in this thread is unimpeachably reasonable or merely a difference of opinion or necessarily made in good faith.
Someone who says "We should improve ventilation in school" will instantly get suspected for being an anti-vax trying to shift the focus.
Is there an example of this actually happening? I mean, I'm a teacher, and my classroom has zero windows, so I'll be the first to stand up and say that improved ventilation in schools would be extremely helpful in lowering the risk of infecting each other, for those schools that insist on reopening and having in-person learning. I also teach high school students, so I would love to start seeing some pressure on these teenagers to get vaccinated (and in the United States, almost all states require parental consent, so we need to be educating/pressuring the parents).
Unless you're implying that someone is taking the position that we don't need to vaccinate our population as long as we have good ventilation, I don't see how your comparison isn't a strawman. Of course, if someone takes that position, I would be more than happy to disagree with it. Ventilation is important, but so is vaccination.
On July 22 2021 08:08 Magic Powers wrote: Findings from 2021, June 25th on the efficacy of face masks under various conditions.
"Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission"
The following abstracts are in regards to common mask-wearing by the general population. The bold parts are the most relevant findings for those short on time.
"We show that variations in mask efficacy can be explained by different regimes of virus abundance and are related to population-average infection probability and reproduction number. For SARS-CoV-2, the viral load of infectious individuals can vary by orders of magnitude. We find that most environments and contacts are under conditions of low virus abundance (virus-limited), where surgical masks are effective at preventing virus spread."
"In this work, we develop a quantitative model of airborne virus exposure that can explain these contrasting results and provide a basis for quantifying the efficacy of face masks. We show that mask efficacy strongly depends on airborne virus abundance. On the basis of direct measurements of SARS-CoV-2 in air samples and population-level infection probabilities, we find that the virus abundance in most environments is sufficiently low for masks to be effective in reducing airborne transmission."
The following infographic shows how it works in the abstract. A key factor in why masks work or don't work is the "virus-richness" of the environment. To put it simply there's a threshold of present virus particles up until which various common masks are effective, and anything beyond overwhelms the protection (note that it takes only a small load of virions to infect a host). This is why masking up (below FFP3) becomes most effective with social distancing. So please understand that a critical component to ending the pandemic is to reduce face-to-face interactions to a necessary minimum, even when other measures are taken (like masks, vaccines, other hygiene, etc.) In my understanding, limiting the duration of each interaction is also important (to minimize the cumulative chance of infection from an infected individual).
Furthermore, the switch to FFP2 masks is most likely a good choice, as they provide a lot stronger protection than other commonly sold masks (although those are also effective, so in case you don't have an FFP2 mask, please put on an alternative).
There is almost no difference between surgical masks and FFP2. They are definitely not worth the cost of billions.
Effective ventilation and social distancing will reduce ambient virus concentrations and increase the effectiveness of face masks in containing the virus transmission.
Oh my god, ventilation?! But I am just a non-vaccer and mask hater - what do I know?
People really love to judge others without knowing anything about someone. Shame on many posters in this thread.
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: I don't know where teeel141 is coming from. I can understand that he thinks some governments are withholding information. I do think so, too. I don't trust the Chinese government for example. But I don't believe in a grand scale conspiracy of multiple governments to lead us stupid sheep. The governments are acting with the information available. With new information come new solutions and it may be entirely possible that a new solution is completely opposite of an earlier solution.
@Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
I still haven't figured out yet if teeel141 and/or Geisterkarle are posting in good faith, given some of the things they're writing, but I do have a question for you regarding the proposed solution of an *anti-vax tax*: Does that tacitly give permission for wealthy people to stay unvaccinated, since they won't really have any tangible consequences? Perhaps there are previous examples of how adding a tax for some reason has deterred a significant percentage of people from doing/buying something that was originally more financially accessible to the average person? Not sure how effective it'll be, and given that this is a serious public health crisis that affects other people - not just the anti-vax individuals - it'll be really important to make sure that as many unvaccinated people as possible are persuaded to change their selfishness.
Sorry I wrote that wrong. There won't be an actual tax on non-vax The situation is like this: Coming October, tests will cost money If you are non-vax and want to go to a restaurant (or places with "low" risk of infection), you have to get tested with the cheap test. Means extra hassle and a biot of extra money (about 10-15 €) If you are non-vax and want to go to a concert (or places with "high" risk, crowds and stuff like that), you have to get tested with the expensive test (PCR I think). Means extra hassle (make appointment and whatnot) and quite some extra money (about 40-50 €) And you can't just make a test everywhere because you need like a government sealed approval
How this actually works out will have to be seen
Oh, I see. Thanks for the clarification! That also brings up a good point about anyone who's annoyed at how much of a hassle it'll be to get a booster shot once or twice a year (and uses that as an argument to just... stop caring about covid safety): having that updated covid-vaccination card (or whatever medical proof is accessible) can save a ton of time throughout the year, if unvaccinated people need to keep confirming that they aren't infected when taking part in activities, trips, etc. The covid-vaccination card is essentially an EZ Pass / Fast Pass / shortcut to saving time and money. Might as well avoid all those regular inconveniences by just getting vaccinated, if the "protecting yourself and others" isn't a persuasive enough argument (even though I think it should be).
On July 22 2021 08:08 Magic Powers wrote: Findings from 2021, June 25th on the efficacy of face masks under various conditions.
"Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission"
The following abstracts are in regards to common mask-wearing by the general population. The bold parts are the most relevant findings for those short on time.
"We show that variations in mask efficacy can be explained by different regimes of virus abundance and are related to population-average infection probability and reproduction number. For SARS-CoV-2, the viral load of infectious individuals can vary by orders of magnitude. We find that most environments and contacts are under conditions of low virus abundance (virus-limited), where surgical masks are effective at preventing virus spread."
"In this work, we develop a quantitative model of airborne virus exposure that can explain these contrasting results and provide a basis for quantifying the efficacy of face masks. We show that mask efficacy strongly depends on airborne virus abundance. On the basis of direct measurements of SARS-CoV-2 in air samples and population-level infection probabilities, we find that the virus abundance in most environments is sufficiently low for masks to be effective in reducing airborne transmission."
The following infographic shows how it works in the abstract. A key factor in why masks work or don't work is the "virus-richness" of the environment. To put it simply there's a threshold of present virus particles up until which various common masks are effective, and anything beyond overwhelms the protection (note that it takes only a small load of virions to infect a host). This is why masking up (below FFP3) becomes most effective with social distancing. So please understand that a critical component to ending the pandemic is to reduce face-to-face interactions to a necessary minimum, even when other measures are taken (like masks, vaccines, other hygiene, etc.) In my understanding, limiting the duration of each interaction is also important (to minimize the cumulative chance of infection from an infected individual).
Furthermore, the switch to FFP2 masks is most likely a good choice, as they provide a lot stronger protection than other commonly sold masks (although those are also effective, so in case you don't have an FFP2 mask, please put on an alternative).
There is almost no difference between surgical masks and FFP2. They are definitely not worth the cost of billions.
Effective ventilation and social distancing will reduce ambient virus concentrations and increase the effectiveness of face masks in containing the virus transmission.
Oh my god, ventilation?! But I am just a non-vaccer and mask hater - what do I know?
People really love to judge others without knowing anything about someone. Shame on many posters in this thread.
An excerpt from a conversation weeks ago.
Is that a response to my question? Because I don't see how combining social distancing, ventilation, masks, and vaccines is the same thing as saying that we don't need to be vaccinated as long as there's ventilation. If it's a response to my question, could you please elaborate more?
Edit: Below, Gorsameth pointed out how you may be quote-mining an earlier conversation and taking things out of context, so I'd like to read your response to that accusation as well. In many cases, merely posting an "excerpt" without clarification can lead to misrepresentation, either accidental or purposeful.
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
Let's be honest, there's a loud section in this thread who's quick to condemn others with any kind of opinion or information which diverges even so slightly with the conventional* narrative. Someone who says "We should improve ventilation in school" will instantly get suspected for being an anti-vax trying to shift the focus. To live through the pandemic, we need a combination of solutions. Just because someone says that we should be trying more of X doesn't mean that he's against Y.
The idea of this thread is to share experiences and information. Thankfully, there's an equal number of reasonable folks whose voices are worth listening to amidst the noise.
* this is just a loose term to describe what they deem as normal (sometimes, their sense of normalcy doesn't necessarily sync with many other parts of the world)
your being disingenuous.
that conversation started with
On July 22 2021 03:39 sharkie wrote: I wish politicians and people would fight as hard for good ventilation in schools as for masks...
No one gives a shit about children
To which some people responded that masks are a quick and easy thing and improving ventilation is a lot more expensive and would often require construction. So its less talked about .
Then we got
On July 22 2021 06:25 sharkie wrote: Good ventilation in schools would not only help against corona but also other illnesses... And yes I know the ventilation lobby is not as strong as the mask/vaccination lobby. I just wish some people would actually care about children for once
"The mask lobby" got a few snide comments, after which the conversation turned to discussing Germany requiring ffp2 masks and that being silly over cloth masks.
He was not 'condemned' for diverging from the narrative nor painted as an anti-vaxxer.
On August 13 2021 18:27 Harris1st wrote: I don't know where teeel141 is coming from. I can understand that he thinks some governments are withholding information. I do think so, too. I don't trust the Chinese government for example. But I don't believe in a grand scale conspiracy of multiple governments to lead us stupid sheep. The governments are acting with the information available. With new information come new solutions and it may be entirely possible that a new solution is completely opposite of an earlier solution.
@Geisterkarle You can't just make it mandatory. It's against the law. That's why they want to circumvent the law by restricting access to certain places for not vaccinated/ not tested people. I think the solution is pretty fair actually. Make not vaccinated people pay extra. Everyone can decide if they want to get the shot for free or pay extra for the unforseeable future
I still haven't figured out yet if teeel141 and/or Geisterkarle are posting in good faith, given some of the things they're writing, but I do have a question for you regarding the proposed solution of an *anti-vax tax*: Does that tacitly give permission for wealthy people to stay unvaccinated, since they won't really have any tangible consequences? Perhaps there are previous examples of how adding a tax for some reason has deterred a significant percentage of people from doing/buying something that was originally more financially accessible to the average person? Not sure how effective it'll be, and given that this is a serious public health crisis that affects other people - not just the anti-vax individuals - it'll be really important to make sure that as many unvaccinated people as possible are persuaded to change their selfishness.
Sorry I wrote that wrong. There won't be an actual tax on non-vax The situation is like this: Coming October, tests will cost money If you are non-vax and want to go to a restaurant (or places with "low" risk of infection), you have to get tested with the cheap test. Means extra hassle and a biot of extra money (about 10-15 €) If you are non-vax and want to go to a concert (or places with "high" risk, crowds and stuff like that), you have to get tested with the expensive test (PCR I think). Means extra hassle (make appointment and whatnot) and quite some extra money (about 40-50 €) And you can't just make a test everywhere because you need like a government sealed approval
How this actually works out will have to be seen
Oh, I see. Thanks for the clarification! That also brings up a good point about anyone who's annoyed at how much of a hassle it'll be to get a booster shot once or twice a year (and uses that as an argument to just... stop caring about covid safety): having that updated covid-vaccination card (or whatever medical proof is accessible) can save a ton of time throughout the year, if unvaccinated people need to keep confirming that they aren't infected when taking part in activities, trips, etc. The covid-vaccination card is essentially an EZ Pass / Fast Pass / shortcut to saving time and money. Might as well avoid all those regular inconveniences by just getting vaccinated, if the "protecting yourself and others" isn't a persuasive enough argument (even though I think it should be).
Exactly! Since saving lives isn't a good enough argument for some people, the new thing is to inconvenience people as much as possible without limiting their rights. Time and money are a major inconvenience
The point is that there are people unduly hostile and mean to others in their tone. If you feel the need to dissect specific examples and take everything literally, it's quite obvious which camp you fall in.
This is simply about social civility and courtesy. Not about ventilation and vaccination.
Anyway, no need to digress on this side-note. Back to the virus.
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
I'm extremely thankful that he's not a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer, and politeness definitely has a place in open discourse. I would definitely prefer there to be more Geisterkarles than teeel141s out there. There were simply a series of comments he made that were incredulous to me, but they were already addressed by others. For example, his responses to JimmiC, from accusing people of being "angels of death" for trying to *avoid* their families experiencing harm from others, to drawing parallels between racial segregation and business owners turning away unvaccinated people from their businesses. I couldn't help but be a little incredulous when reading remarks like those. I personally don't categorize those as reasonable responses.
I've seen some of his arguments from other people, such as being annoyed that people may need booster shots, or that forcing vaccinations will cause unvaccinated people to get mad, or the ironic frustration that business owners totally have the freedom to turn away potentially-dangerous people from their doors... those comments didn't surprise me. I wouldn't accuse someone of trolling just because of remarks like those.
Just to be clear I generally perceive you as very level-headed and civil and a pleasant debater. I meant it more as an encouragement towards Geisterkarle (because I think he's also been posting fine, and I think we benefit from people expressing thoughts similar to his thoughts) than as a critique of you. (And like RKC, I don't want to derail the thread further.)
On August 13 2021 21:55 RKC wrote: The point is that there are people unduly hostile and mean to others in their tone. If you feel the need to dissect specific examples and take everything literally, it's quite obvious which camp you fall in.
This is simply about social civility and courtesy. Not about ventilation and vaccination.
Anyway, no need to digress on this side-note. Back to the virus.
On August 13 2021 20:00 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think accusing Geisterkarle of posting in bad faith is pretty rude and unwarranted. 'How to best handle covid' isn't an answer with a clear solution easily agreed upon by everybody, this isn't a 'parallel information reality' kind of thing, but a 'there are things I disagree with' kind of thing. He's not being a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer and he has been more polite in his responses than others have been towards him.
I'm extremely thankful that he's not a conspiratorial anti-vaxxer, and politeness definitely has a place in open discourse. I would definitely prefer there to be more Geisterkarles than teeel141s out there. There were simply a series of comments he made that were incredulous to me, but they were already addressed by others. For example, his responses to JimmiC, from accusing people of being "angels of death" for trying to *avoid* their families experiencing harm from others, to drawing parallels between racial segregation and business owners turning away unvaccinated people from their businesses. I couldn't help but be a little incredulous when reading remarks like those. I personally don't categorize those as reasonable responses.
I've seen some of his arguments from other people, such as being annoyed that people may need booster shots, or that forcing vaccinations will cause unvaccinated people to get mad, or the ironic frustration that business owners totally have the freedom to turn away potentially-dangerous people from their doors... those comments didn't surprise me. I wouldn't accuse someone of trolling just because of remarks like those.
Just to be clear I generally perceive you as very level-headed and civil and a pleasant debater. I meant it more as an encouragement towards Geisterkarle (because I think he's also been posting fine, and I think we benefit from people expressing thoughts similar to his thoughts) than as a critique of you. (And like RKC, I don't want to derail the thread further.)
Totally fair. I just realized that I hadn't justified my incredulity earlier, and that that was the least I could do, out of respect.
On August 13 2021 12:51 RKC wrote: Thanks for sharing your insider insights, Mohdoo.
Delta variant is truly sobering. Whilst politicians and public health spokespeople are going "Relax, we've got this", seems like the real scientists at the back are shaking to their bones and going "Game over, man, game over!"
The unfortunate reality is that epidemiology feels really illogical and like a giant overreaction when done right. You can't really let public opinion be a thing with epidemiology. So long as you can have people like Rand Paul running amuck, we can only defeat easy pandemics. We basically shit the bed when it was manageable and now its something that is 0% manageable.
Small rant: Things like "emergency authority" and whatnot were ideas that we came up with because they were helpful and made sense in some time of human development. It ended up being abused and associated with dictators. We as a society at some point need to understand that emergency authority serves a purpose and can save an insane amount of lives if it has proper checks and balances. But epidemiology doesn't work so long as it needs to also be politically favorable/supported. We can't have a situation where senators are playing a role or have any involvement whatsoever.
Senators needs to win elections --> senators give opinions on things that people care about --> people care about a pandemic --> senators need to do/say things that people support.
Big problem. It is a fundamental design rule. Epidemiology will never be largely supported during a pandemic if done in accordance with accepted science.
Yeah, that is the big problem. If you react correctly to a potential pandemic, and are successful, it looks as if you have been overreacting.
I think this is an important point, because we don't have the capacity for do-overs or show alternate timelines of what would have happened if we had done things a little worse or a little better. When worse outcomes are prevented, some subset of the population is going to simply not believe that those worse outcomes would have actually ever happened at all. It requires a level of trust in the experts making these medical/scientific predictions, and for various reasons, some people don't trust them (and/or don't trust activists/politicians signal boosting those professional recommendations).
EPT
![[image loading]](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/372/6549/1439/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1)
![[image loading]](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/372/6549/1439/F4.large.jpg)
