|
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 December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential?
Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable.
|
On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable.
Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right?
|
|
|
On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right?
No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet.
|
On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet.
We had the pause in 2020. Now it has been 2 years. We shouldn't have any tourism until when? COVID is eradicated? It's becoming more and more obvious that won't happen at all. Please don't defend his nonsense.
|
|
|
On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable.
So the businessmen are allowed to travel to build the hotels, but the tourists aren't allowed to travel to sleep in them. Why not? What makes building a hotel more essential than allowing the guests to come?
As far as the south of Spain is concerned, I can guarantee to you that they consider the tourists considerably more essential than the construction of new hotels. So president Mohdoo would have a problem with his Spanish constituents. Spanish constituents who, btw, are very happy to get vaccinated and generally compliant with strict regulations regarding mask use and social distancing. One of the reasons Spain has had strict measures is precisely because the tourism industry is essential to the economy and 2020 made it very clear that COVID raging is very bad for business.
|
On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet.
That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever".
Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry?
|
Northern Ireland26521 Posts
On December 06 2021 11:33 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet. That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever". Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry?
It’s not just tourism, I would assume most of us here don’t have all our friends/family close by within the same borders.
My issue is/was tourism without meaningful restrictions/precautions, coming shortly enough after lockdowns. It’s a bit of a kick in the teeth and renders adherence at home feeling rather pointless.
In a wider ecological sense it would make sense to reduce how much we travel (this includes work commutes), and the mechanisms we travel by, but it’s going to have negligible impact if we don’t look at our general consumption habits across the board.
So on that level, and on a human level where tourism and travelling can really enrich one’s cultural life experiences I don’t see a sense in just banning it.
There’s the tricky, still up in the air matter of Covid to deal with. The total elimination boat has long since sailed and is docked at Mohdoo IslandTM awaiting further instructions, but what’s the threshold of safe enough/the best we can do that would precipitate a return to normality? And how close are we collectively to that?
|
On December 06 2021 22:06 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 11:33 Acrofales wrote:On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet. That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever". Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry? It’s not just tourism, I would assume most of us here don’t have all our friends/family close by within the same borders. My issue is/was tourism without meaningful restrictions/precautions, coming shortly enough after lockdowns. It’s a bit of a kick in the teeth and renders adherence at home feeling rather pointless. In a wider ecological sense it would make sense to reduce how much we travel (this includes work commutes), and the mechanisms we travel by, but it’s going to have negligible impact if we don’t look at our general consumption habits across the board. So on that level, and on a human level where tourism and travelling can really enrich one’s cultural life experiences I don’t see a sense in just banning it. There’s the tricky, still up in the air matter of Covid to deal with. The total elimination boat has long since sailed and is docked at Mohdoo IslandTM awaiting further instructions, but what’s the threshold of safe enough/the best we can do that would precipitate a return to normality? And how close are we collectively to that?
To further your point, imagine thinking leisure travel should be restricted until at least an unforseeable future and not considering yourself a tyrant (supporter) lmao
The most troubling aspect of this non sense is the casual leap from lets restrict travel/lockdown because of covid into because of climate change. If you think politicians/states are not already making that logic-leap aswell and will use climate change as an excuse to limit civil liberties, with a not so small of group happily cheering for permanent restrictions on travel and government monitoring of citizens, when covid dies off, you are extremely naive.
Vaccine passport cards where "conspiracy theories" just 12 months ago. Now we are verging on 4th vaccine or lose your travel/work privileges in many countries.
|
|
|
On December 06 2021 23:42 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 22:06 WombaT wrote:On December 06 2021 11:33 Acrofales wrote:On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet. That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever". Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry? It’s not just tourism, I would assume most of us here don’t have all our friends/family close by within the same borders. My issue is/was tourism without meaningful restrictions/precautions, coming shortly enough after lockdowns. It’s a bit of a kick in the teeth and renders adherence at home feeling rather pointless. In a wider ecological sense it would make sense to reduce how much we travel (this includes work commutes), and the mechanisms we travel by, but it’s going to have negligible impact if we don’t look at our general consumption habits across the board. So on that level, and on a human level where tourism and travelling can really enrich one’s cultural life experiences I don’t see a sense in just banning it. There’s the tricky, still up in the air matter of Covid to deal with. The total elimination boat has long since sailed and is docked at Mohdoo IslandTM awaiting further instructions, but what’s the threshold of safe enough/the best we can do that would precipitate a return to normality? And how close are we collectively to that? To further your point, imagine thinking leisure travel should be restricted until at least an unforseeable future and not considering yourself a tyrant (supporter) lmao
This argument would be a whole lot stronger if there weren't already tons of travel restrictions... Ever heard of borders and visas? Sure that's not much of an issue if you are from Japan, or Singapore or most Western countries, but good luck just traveling wherever you want if you are from Pakistan, or Palestine, or Kosovo, etc + Show Spoiler +. Not to mention that even with visa free travel you still have restrictions on how long you can stay.
And sure, it's generally not your own government that restrics travel abroad but the government at your desired destination (is this even any different with the vaccine passports?) but for all practical purposes that's irrelevant. The "hassle" of getting a vaccine and the document alongside it amounted to two one hour trips to the doctor. In comparison getting a US visa for an extended trip some 15 years ago required calling the embassy at a bargain price of 2,99€/min to schedule an appointment, traveling 600km to said embassy for a meeting, and waiting months for approval... Don't even start me on getting a simple visa from Bulgaria to Germany 25 years ago, which included days spent at various institutions and the embassy, as well as months upon months of waiting (which is still the reality for most of the world's population).
Sure, nowadays, if you are from a somewhat priviliged country and just want to spend a week at an all-inclusive resort abroad, it is not much of a hassle, but for anything beyond that you'll be facing various restrictions much more severe than requiring a proof of vaccination.
The most troubling aspect of this non sense is the casual leap from lets restrict travel/lockdown because of covid into because of climate change. If you think politicians/states are not already making that logic-leap aswell and will use climate change as an excuse to limit civil liberties, with a not so small of group happily cheering for permanent restrictions on travel and government monitoring of citizens, when covid dies off, you are extremely naive.
Whenever I hear somebody complaining about the "government monitoring" or "government control" that arises from Covid related actions, I wonder in what kind of utopia that person must be living. I have trouble seeing how "the monitoring" has increased beyond what is already required. I have to have a valid ID card that I must be able to present at any given moment if stopped by the police, I have to provide my current address and my income statement within narrow time frames or face fines, and so much more. Not to mention that in Germany there is something called "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" which forces all internet, phone, and mobile service providers to save all my transmitted data for 2 years, so the government can access it if they want. The government can literally know the location of my phone at any given moment in the past 2 years, as well as any website I have visited and probably much more beyond that. The US has it NSA, which also has limitless insight on anyone on US soil (and often enough abroad). Pretty sure many other countries have similar digital monitoring on their citizens. These things seem much more worrying than "the government" knowing if I am vaccinated or not...
Vaccine passport cards where "conspiracy theories" just 12 months ago. Now we are verging on 4th vaccine or lose your travel/work privileges in many countries.
In what practical way does the required vaccine passport differ from a regular passport when traveling? Good luck crossing a border without a valid ID.
|
Northern Ireland26521 Posts
On December 06 2021 23:42 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 22:06 WombaT wrote:On December 06 2021 11:33 Acrofales wrote:On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet. That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever". Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry? It’s not just tourism, I would assume most of us here don’t have all our friends/family close by within the same borders. My issue is/was tourism without meaningful restrictions/precautions, coming shortly enough after lockdowns. It’s a bit of a kick in the teeth and renders adherence at home feeling rather pointless. In a wider ecological sense it would make sense to reduce how much we travel (this includes work commutes), and the mechanisms we travel by, but it’s going to have negligible impact if we don’t look at our general consumption habits across the board. So on that level, and on a human level where tourism and travelling can really enrich one’s cultural life experiences I don’t see a sense in just banning it. There’s the tricky, still up in the air matter of Covid to deal with. The total elimination boat has long since sailed and is docked at Mohdoo IslandTM awaiting further instructions, but what’s the threshold of safe enough/the best we can do that would precipitate a return to normality? And how close are we collectively to that? To further your point, imagine thinking leisure travel should be restricted until at least an unforseeable future and not considering yourself a tyrant (supporter) lmao The most troubling aspect of this non sense is the casual leap from lets restrict travel/lockdown because of covid into because of climate change. If you think politicians/states are not already making that logic-leap aswell and will use climate change as an excuse to limit civil liberties, with a not so small of group happily cheering for permanent restrictions on travel and government monitoring of citizens, when covid dies off, you are extremely naive. Vaccine passport cards where "conspiracy theories" just 12 months ago. Now we are verging on 4th vaccine or lose your travel/work privileges in many countries.
I’m not seeing a logic leap, advocates for mitigating climate change have been talking about the necessity to cut travel, general consumer consumption, altering food changes for forever.
Covid may provide a testing ground to actually enact it, but it’s not any expansion of ambition. In a vaguely analogous sense advocacy for a wider expansion of working from home was made for varying reasons, never widely implemented due to a lack of imagination, until it was forced and what do you know it’s totally viable and has side-benefits.
I don’t think politicians/states will do these things, because I don’t think of them as discrete entities that can just independently decide to do things, they’re part of giant, complex ecosystems of people and power struggles and dynamics.
Expansion of monitoring powers wasn’t just pushed by legislators in the wake of 9/11, it was demanded by much of the populace to stop scary terrorism.
Some of these powers were abused and applied way beyond scope, so I agree it is worth looking at a worst case application of an expansion of the power of the state, I just find it an equally naive framing of how the world works to posit there’s a top-down implementation by ‘elites’ or ‘the state’ or what have you.
I’m open to alternatives, from where I’m sitting I haven’t heard a credible one that doesn’t (potentially) open the door to a further public health disaster
|
On December 06 2021 11:13 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. So the businessmen are allowed to travel to build the hotels, but the tourists aren't allowed to travel to sleep in them. Why not? What makes building a hotel more essential than allowing the guests to come? As far as the south of Spain is concerned, I can guarantee to you that they consider the tourists considerably more essential than the construction of new hotels. So president Mohdoo would have a problem with his Spanish constituents. Spanish constituents who, btw, are very happy to get vaccinated and generally compliant with strict regulations regarding mask use and social distancing. One of the reasons Spain has had strict measures is precisely because the tourism industry is essential to the economy and 2020 made it very clear that COVID raging is very bad for business.
The right way to handle it is for the government to keep everyone's salary flowing while unsafe stuff is closed. In the absence of a competent government, yes, people will behave like animals and find ways to get what they need. Spain sounds like they are doing a great job. They are mostly alone in that. I did not take the time to research the effectiveness of various region's approach to infection mitigation. I am sure plenty of places are doing a good job. Most are not. Unfortunately when it comes to infection, it isn't sufficient to have less than 1% of regions doing a good job.
|
Wait what?
www.cnbc.com
“The question is, if you keep priming and boosting with a strain, which is basically to make an immune response against the ancestral strain, will that limit your ability then to make an immune response to a virus, which is very much different than the ancestral?” said Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.
Offit is describing a phenomenon immunologists call “original antigenic sin” in which the body’s immune system relies on the memory of its first encounter with a virus, sometimes leading to a weaker immune response when it later encounters another version of the virus.
Theoretically, it could apply to Covid, too, Offit said.
He said that some experts have argued it may be better for those not at high risk of severe disease to wait to get a booster until a variant-specific option is available.
What is going on? I thought it was just anti vaxer nonsense
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26521 Posts
On December 07 2021 03:22 teeel141 wrote:Wait what? www.cnbc.comShow nested quote +Offit is describing a phenomenon immunologists call “original antigenic sin” in which the body’s immune system relies on the memory of its first encounter with a virus, sometimes leading to a weaker immune response when it later encounters another version of the virus. Show nested quote +He said that some experts have argued it may be better for those not at high risk of severe disease to wait to get a booster until a variant-specific option is available. What is going on? I thought it was just anti vaxer nonsense
It largely is.
If it can be demonstrated to be a factor in effecting vaccine efficacy, then it isn’t. Your own linked article and the expert cited within said article said theoretical.
I am speaking purely personally, but I’m pretty confident this opinion is shared with many here.
The issue isn’t antigenic sin not being a real phenomena, but that people who both already have a set bias, and don’t really know what they’re talking about have grasped hard on the phenomena to justify pre-existing positions against vaccination.
There are huge, huge gaps in the knowledge of the layman, including myself about the totality of the human immune response, vaccination etc.
Also experts in natural immunity being superior to vaccine immune response which, conveniently dovetails with their own political position on the matter.
There’s also the pesky question of well, so what?
Scenario A I get the vaccine, it’s already shown to be less effective against delta than the original strains. Data isn’t in on omicron but it seems less effective again.
Scenario B I don’t get a vaccine, so alpha thru delta can kick my arse as I have zero antibodies to prevent this. But, as is likely if I navigate this and survive alright, I’ve got ‘natural’ antibodies that are as equally subject to antigenic sin as if I had a vaccine.
Unless someone more learned tells me I’m wrong here, it seems a complete no-brainier to go with scenario A, in a scenario of limited Covid restrictions
In a scenario of lockdowns and limited normal exposure where vaccines limit future protection, then maybe there’s an argument there. I.e the majority of people get limited protection down the line, but also aren’t widely exposed so wouldn’t naturally encounter Covid
In THAT scenario, which is specific, maybe.
|
On December 06 2021 23:42 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2021 22:06 WombaT wrote:On December 06 2021 11:33 Acrofales wrote:On December 06 2021 08:41 Artisreal wrote:On December 06 2021 08:20 BlackJack wrote:On December 06 2021 05:33 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2021 16:16 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2021 13:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Great example why there shouldn't be non-essential international travel. The entire idea that we still have tourists flying around so they can look at stuff is mind boggling. The SA travel ban was justified and smart. The travel ban should have been expanded to the entire planet other than essential travel, with global mandatory 2 week quarantine+testing. Define essential please. Let me give some examples and you can say yes/no so we can get some idea. Is an epidemiologist travelling to South Africa to study omicron essential? Is an aspiring epidemiologist travelling to Germany to start a residency in a hospital there essential? Is a university student studying medicine travelling from France to Norway for a 6-month exchange program (Erasmus) essential? Replace medical student with fine arts student in the situation above. Is a nurse from Kenya travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is an IT specialist from Bangalore travelling to the US for a new job essential? Is a Mexican bricklayer travelling to the US for a temp job on a construction site essential? Is a Mexican farm worker travelling to the US for a temp job harvesting tomatoes essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Pfizer's vaccine essential? Is a business trip to secure the supply line for Apple essential? Is a business trip to oversee construction of a new hotel in Southern Spain essential? Is a blue collar laborer going to spend a few days in a hotel in Southern Spain essential? Everything you described except the hotel stay would be approved by president Mohdoo. Anything that isn’t just fulfillment or emotional jacking yourself off is acceptable. Fuck everyone whose livelihood is dependent on tourism, right? No, fuck a system that needlessly cannot handle a much needed pause in exhausting both people and planet. That's a rather different argument than COVID is too dangerous and therefore all non essential travel needs to be shut down for "forever". Rather than COVID it's stating tourism as an industry should just plain not exist, and we need to change the system to avoid it? Seems the wrong thread, but just for a brief exploration: Spain is not good agricultural land (mainly because most of it is a desert, and what isn't a desert is mountains) and isn't exactly the Ruhr area in terms of industrial productivity. What it does have is hundreds of kilometers of Mediterranean coastline, a legacy of art and architecture, a great cuisine and plenty of infrastructure for enjoying all of the above. Why is making money off these things inherently worse than making money off agricultural land or manufacturing industry? It’s not just tourism, I would assume most of us here don’t have all our friends/family close by within the same borders. My issue is/was tourism without meaningful restrictions/precautions, coming shortly enough after lockdowns. It’s a bit of a kick in the teeth and renders adherence at home feeling rather pointless. In a wider ecological sense it would make sense to reduce how much we travel (this includes work commutes), and the mechanisms we travel by, but it’s going to have negligible impact if we don’t look at our general consumption habits across the board. So on that level, and on a human level where tourism and travelling can really enrich one’s cultural life experiences I don’t see a sense in just banning it. There’s the tricky, still up in the air matter of Covid to deal with. The total elimination boat has long since sailed and is docked at Mohdoo IslandTM awaiting further instructions, but what’s the threshold of safe enough/the best we can do that would precipitate a return to normality? And how close are we collectively to that? Vaccine passport cards where "conspiracy theories" just 12 months ago. Now we are verging on 4th vaccine or lose your travel/work privileges in many countries.
That's some wild revisionism at least when it comes to Europe. Vaccine passports were discussed as a possible measure as early as March 2020 in many countries.
|
On December 07 2021 03:22 teeel141 wrote:Wait what? www.cnbc.comShow nested quote +“The question is, if you keep priming and boosting with a strain, which is basically to make an immune response against the ancestral strain, will that limit your ability then to make an immune response to a virus, which is very much different than the ancestral?” said Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Show nested quote +Offit is describing a phenomenon immunologists call “original antigenic sin” in which the body’s immune system relies on the memory of its first encounter with a virus, sometimes leading to a weaker immune response when it later encounters another version of the virus. Show nested quote +He said that some experts have argued it may be better for those not at high risk of severe disease to wait to get a booster until a variant-specific option is available. What is going on? I thought it was just anti vaxer nonsense
Not sure who you think said “it” (I assume the antecedent is “antigenic sin”) was “anti vaxer nonsense.” What I did say was that it wasn’t especially useful to bring up unless you would also explain, in your own words, what significance it would have on our course of action. To my knowledge you still haven’t, but based on this article let me take a crack at expressing your position, and you can tell me how close I am:
A lot of people are going all-in on pushing booster shots for everyone on the premise that more protection is better, but one of the biggest continuing threats is the possibility of a variant (maybe omicron, maybe a different one) evading immunity, and in that case booster shots might actually inhibit the effectiveness of future variant-specific vaccines due to antigenic sin. I don’t think we should ignore the possibility that we’d be better off a year from now if we wait for that variant to emerge, and base a mass booster campaign on a variant-specific vaccine, rather than boosting everyone now.
I suspect that isn’t your position, but I really have no way of knowing unless you actually state your position yourself. I don’t like having to guess what other people think because they’re being coy.
If that is your position, reasonable enough! I might disagree but I would hesitate to take a strong position because the question depends on variables I have no good way of estimating. How likely is it that future boosters would be inhibited? By how much? How likely is a variant with significant immune evasion to emerge and become widespread? How much could an immediate booster campaign decrease that likelihood by giving the virus fewer chances to mutate now?
I’m not an expert on any of those questions. The real experts seem to mostly (but not unanimously) fall on the “we should just do boosters now” side, and I don’t feel qualified to check their work so I’m tentatively taking their word for it.
On a mostly unrelated note: I’m a little nervous I’m developing a reputation as resident expert in the thread, a reputation I neither want nor have qualifications for. I hope the moral of my posts is not “this expert says x so I should believe him,” but rather “if you have a high school-level scientific understanding and a few minutes to Google stuff, you should be able to understand this yourself.” Hopefully that was already clear to everyone, but thought I’d say it explicitly.
|
Northern Ireland26521 Posts
On December 07 2021 04:35 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2021 03:22 teeel141 wrote:Wait what? www.cnbc.com“The question is, if you keep priming and boosting with a strain, which is basically to make an immune response against the ancestral strain, will that limit your ability then to make an immune response to a virus, which is very much different than the ancestral?” said Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Offit is describing a phenomenon immunologists call “original antigenic sin” in which the body’s immune system relies on the memory of its first encounter with a virus, sometimes leading to a weaker immune response when it later encounters another version of the virus. Theoretically, it could apply to Covid, too, Offit said. He said that some experts have argued it may be better for those not at high risk of severe disease to wait to get a booster until a variant-specific option is available. What is going on? I thought it was just anti vaxer nonsense Not sure who you think said “it” (I assume the antecedent is “antigenic sin”) was “anti vaxer nonsense.” What I did say was that it wasn’t especially useful to bring up unless you would also explain, in your own words, what significance it would have on our course of action. To my knowledge you still haven’t, but based on this article let me take a crack at expressing your position, and you can tell me how close I am: Show nested quote +A lot of people are going all-in on pushing booster shots for everyone on the premise that more protection is better, but one of the biggest continuing threats is the possibility of a variant (maybe omicron, maybe a different one) evading immunity, and in that case booster shots might actually inhibit the effectiveness of future variant-specific vaccines due to antigenic sin. I don’t think we should ignore the possibility that we’d be better off a year from now if we wait for that variant to emerge, and base a mass booster campaign on a variant-specific vaccine, rather than boosting everyone now. I suspect that isn’t your position, but I really have no way of knowing unless you actually state your position yourself. I don’t like having to guess what other people think because they’re being coy. If that is your position, reasonable enough! I might disagree but I would hesitate to take a strong position because the question depends on variables I have no good way of estimating. How likely is it that future boosters would be inhibited? By how much? How likely is a variant with significant immune evasion to emerge and become widespread? How much could an immediate booster campaign decrease that likelihood by giving the virus fewer chances to mutate now? I’m not an expert on any of those questions. The real experts seem to mostly (but not unanimously) fall on the “we should just do boosters now” side, and I don’t feel qualified to check their work so I’m tentatively taking their word for it. On a mostly unrelated note: I’m a little nervous I’m developing a reputation as resident expert in the thread, a reputation I neither want nor have qualifications for. I hope the moral of my posts is not “this expert says x so I should believe him,” but rather “if you have a high school-level scientific understanding and a few minutes to Google stuff, you should be able to understand this yourself.” Hopefully that was already clear to everyone, but thought I’d say it explicitly.
I’m just annoyed you assumed the mantle ahead of me, obviously. Joking aside, you make a good point.
I profoundly disagree with you though, I think the problem precisely is ‘I have a high-school level scientific understanding and a few minutes to google’.
That isn’t sufficient, at all IMO to have people make the judgments they have, and certainly not with the confidence they pronounce them with.
If you want to bring that level of understanding and discuss a particular thing, then go for it, as you said. I very much think it’s a reasonable barrier of entry to enter with which to engage earnest discourse, it’s massively insufficient in determining sweeping conclusions in isolation.
I will, and have outright stated on numerous occasions that I think my own knowledge of the science is 100% insufficient to determine things without deference to other people.
I like to think my posting hasn’t made me out to be a total idiot, unable to parse and applying information, but independently I have huge limitations in this area. Limitations I depend on others to fill.
Culturally I think we have problems when people even less qualified than me have massive levels of surety over their particular ‘analysis’ of things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
