10 ms·

> Some do not. This one does. I am sure you believe what you are saying, and I am also not doubting that you have some education on the topic, but I have to d

> Some do not. This one does. I am sure you believe what you are saying, and I am also not doubting that you have some education on the topic, but I have to disagree. Take for example, this study [1] demonstrating significant loss of grey matter in the brain for COVID patients, both hospitalized and non-hospitalized. As our understanding of virology evolves it is becoming more and more clear that the notion of ephemeral infections is just flat out incorrect. You likely maintain SOME impact from that infection, its just a question of how severe, or in some cases WHEN (see: chicken pox -> shingles). Viruses wreak havoc, and that is a point which is well documented, and slowly but surely people are starting to pay attention. My gripe with your comment is that it completely disregards this point and treats the risk of viruses and either death, or no risk at all. The truth is far more nuanced than that, and there's legitimate reasons to want overall CASE COUNT to come down. It's about saving quality of life, including, actual life. Vaccination is the path to do that. I also don't agree with your comment that "If the choice is to completely up-end our society to prevent people from ever getting sick again, then I'm strongly opposed." Asking for proof of vaccination is not "completely up-ending" our society. It's quite reasonable to ask for certain personal hygiene requirements (shirts, shoes, etc.) but we can't ask that someone be reasonably protected from a getting and spreading a very dangerous virus? You're somehow OK with being required to wear clothes, which provide almost no protection from anything, but not OK with being asked to show that you're an unlikely COVID carrier/spreader? [1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.11.21258690v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.11.21258690v...

timr 5y ago
> I am sure you believe what you are saying, and I am also not doubting that you have some education on the topic, but I have to disagree. Reasonable people can disagree on questions like this. But you came out of the gate insisting that I "didn't understand", which isn't true. I understand, I just disagree that this is a disproportionate threat to our society that requires disproportionate response. > Take for example, this study [1] demonstrating significant loss of grey matter in the brain for COVID patients, both hospitalized and non-hospitalized. FWIW, that study is terrible. It is a statistical fishing expedition, is improperly controlled (i.e. are the changes due to Covid, or something else? You can't tell!), and the whole field of "looking at MRI for reductions in gray matter" is littered with spurious findings. Here's a comment where I go into this in much greater detail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27927568 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27927568 > As our understanding of virology evolves it is becoming more and more clear that the notion of ephemeral infections is just flat out incorrect. It's not "flat out incorrect"...as I said before, we know that post-viral syndromes are real. This is not new information. Having a cough or shortness of breath (by FAR the most common "long covid" symptoms) after a infection are no more an indication that the virus is lingering in your body, than leg pain after a cast is removed is an indication that you continue to have a broken leg. It takes time to heal.
- rubicon33 5y ago
  That's fair, my apologies for proclaiming that you don't understand. I should have known better especially on this forum. I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree with your conclusion. The post you linked, makes a strong case for not jumping to conclusions based on grey matter studies, which I think is sound advice. That said, I maintain that given the option to get COVID or not get COVID, I would greatly prefer the later. You similarly won't find me gaming long hours, and I make sure to get plenty of sleep. In other words, taking precautions that avoid injury is generally a good idea. And FWIW, I don't find the controls in that study to be terrible? I'm not exactly an authority of statistical analysis though, so I'll trust that this is outside my scope of understanding. Where it sounds like we disagree most is whether or not the risk of COVID causing injury is worth something as small (or large) as asking for proof of vaccination. It just so happens that I think asking for proof of vaccination is a relatively minor thing given the possibilities of COVID.
  - jjgreen 5y ago
    It's not "asking for proof of vaccination" though is it? It's denying access to restaurants, bars and so-on to those do not or will not accede to such a demand. I don't see that social apartheid as minor thing.
    - datameta 5y ago
      I had all these concerns prior to this announcement. I wouldn't say all of those are now gone. However I must point out that the vaccine, at least in the US, is not being hoarded by the elite and wealthy. It is in most urban areas being made as readily available as possible. NYC even started providing a pre-paid $100 debit card which offsets time lost from work for those who could not afford that. Perhaps I am missing it - what sort of divide is being drawn?
    - nindalf 5y ago
      Please let’s not throw around words like apartheid and Holocaust in situations that don’t warrant it. Both of those are commonly used by anti-vax community to draw attention to their perceived pain at being requested to vaccinate. But they trivialise the incredible violence done to millions of people, some of the worst crimes committed by our species. Trivialising these just to score points is unconscionable. And let me be clear, taking a shot that is safe and effective is not an unreasonable ask. Restricting access to leisure to people who are willing to take this precaution isn’t unreasonable. And no, it’s in no way comparable to some of the worst crimes committed by humans.
camillomiller 5y ago
Enforcing restrictions that are excessive in order to just keep cases down is in most case even more detrimental to the long-term quality of life of the majority of the population. What so many of the restrictions enthusiasts don’t seem to understand, is the long term mental health impact this upending of society has had on all of us, and especially on the younger generations. I say this as a fully vaccinated individual. Regarding the specific case, to make my position even more nuanced, I don’t have a specific problem with having to prove vaccination or positive test for indoor dining. Here in Berlin that’s the rule they used when reopening last May, and it never went away. This way, nobody has ever really debated it.
mostertoaster 5y ago
> You're somehow OK with being required to wear clothes, which provide almost no protection from anything, but not OK with being asked to show that you're an unlikely COVID carrier/spreader? So natural immunity should be included then? I hear all these arguments but then people pretend like natural immunity is not a thing. Sure maybe it isn’t as effective as a vaccine (though some argue it is better), but it definitely makes you at least unlikely to spread. I might believe this isn’t just a huge power grab and people are actually concerned with the health of individuals, if folks would acknowledge “the science” of natural immunity. Saying it isn’t as good as vaccine means nothing, because we are only trying to eliminate more likely spreaders, not any statistical chance of spreading.
- nindalf 5y ago
  I used to think natural immunity was a thing. Most people in India thought so too. Based on surveys, a majority of people in cities had been infected in the first wave of Covid in 2020. So confident in herd immunity was the Indian government that they were happily organising programs to give away vaccines to countries around the world, thinking it wasn’t necessary in India. As the events of April-July 2021 proved, the new variant ripped through a population that was supposed to have reached herd immunity. As it stands, 80%+ of people in major Indian cities have had an infection. Does that mean that covid will never bother India again? I’m guessing no.
  - rubicon33 5y ago
    I think that speaks to the rapid evolution of the virus, more than to the lack of a natural immunity process. It's terrifying how quickly COVID has evolved, and given more time in the human species, it will evolve further. That's why the push for vaccination is so important. There's even people pushing for prophylactic use of other medications to completely stamp out COVID for the simple reason of - you do NOT want this virus evolving any more than it has.
- rubicon33 5y ago
  Absolutely. I firmly understand that natural immunity is as good, if not better, than the vaccine. The trouble is, how do you prove it? There are antibody tests that maybe are positive even months later? I'm not sure, honestly. The tricky part is just the recording of the matter, not the science behind it.

timr 5y ago

> I am sure you believe what you are saying, and I am also not doubting that you have some education on the topic, but I have to disagree. Reasonable people can disagree on questions like this. But you came out of the gate insisting that I "didn't understand", which isn't true. I understand, I just disagree that this is a disproportionate threat to our society that requires disproportionate response. > Take for example, this study [1] demonstrating significant loss of grey matter in the brain for COVID patients, both hospitalized and non-hospitalized. FWIW, that study is terrible. It is a statistical fishing expedition, is improperly controlled (i.e. are the changes due to Covid, or something else? You can't tell!), and the whole field of "looking at MRI for reductions in gray matter" is littered with spurious findings. Here's a comment where I go into this in much greater detail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27927568 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27927568 > As our understanding of virology evolves it is becoming more and more clear that the notion of ephemeral infections is just flat out incorrect. It's not "flat out incorrect"...as I said before, we know that post-viral syndromes are real. This is not new information. Having a cough or shortness of breath (by FAR the most common "long covid" symptoms) after a infection are no more an indication that the virus is lingering in your body, than leg pain after a cast is removed is an indication that you continue to have a broken leg. It takes time to heal.

rubicon33 5y ago
That's fair, my apologies for proclaiming that you don't understand. I should have known better especially on this forum. I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree with your conclusion. The post you linked, makes a strong case for not jumping to conclusions based on grey matter studies, which I think is sound advice. That said, I maintain that given the option to get COVID or not get COVID, I would greatly prefer the later. You similarly won't find me gaming long hours, and I make sure to get plenty of sleep. In other words, taking precautions that avoid injury is generally a good idea. And FWIW, I don't find the controls in that study to be terrible? I'm not exactly an authority of statistical analysis though, so I'll trust that this is outside my scope of understanding. Where it sounds like we disagree most is whether or not the risk of COVID causing injury is worth something as small (or large) as asking for proof of vaccination. It just so happens that I think asking for proof of vaccination is a relatively minor thing given the possibilities of COVID.
- jjgreen 5y ago
  It's not "asking for proof of vaccination" though is it? It's denying access to restaurants, bars and so-on to those do not or will not accede to such a demand. I don't see that social apartheid as minor thing.
  - datameta 5y ago
    I had all these concerns prior to this announcement. I wouldn't say all of those are now gone. However I must point out that the vaccine, at least in the US, is not being hoarded by the elite and wealthy. It is in most urban areas being made as readily available as possible. NYC even started providing a pre-paid $100 debit card which offsets time lost from work for those who could not afford that. Perhaps I am missing it - what sort of divide is being drawn?
  - nindalf 5y ago
    Please let’s not throw around words like apartheid and Holocaust in situations that don’t warrant it. Both of those are commonly used by anti-vax community to draw attention to their perceived pain at being requested to vaccinate. But they trivialise the incredible violence done to millions of people, some of the worst crimes committed by our species. Trivialising these just to score points is unconscionable. And let me be clear, taking a shot that is safe and effective is not an unreasonable ask. Restricting access to leisure to people who are willing to take this precaution isn’t unreasonable. And no, it’s in no way comparable to some of the worst crimes committed by humans.

camillomiller 5y ago

Enforcing restrictions that are excessive in order to just keep cases down is in most case even more detrimental to the long-term quality of life of the majority of the population. What so many of the restrictions enthusiasts don’t seem to understand, is the long term mental health impact this upending of society has had on all of us, and especially on the younger generations. I say this as a fully vaccinated individual. Regarding the specific case, to make my position even more nuanced, I don’t have a specific problem with having to prove vaccination or positive test for indoor dining. Here in Berlin that’s the rule they used when reopening last May, and it never went away. This way, nobody has ever really debated it.

mostertoaster 5y ago

> You're somehow OK with being required to wear clothes, which provide almost no protection from anything, but not OK with being asked to show that you're an unlikely COVID carrier/spreader? So natural immunity should be included then? I hear all these arguments but then people pretend like natural immunity is not a thing. Sure maybe it isn’t as effective as a vaccine (though some argue it is better), but it definitely makes you at least unlikely to spread. I might believe this isn’t just a huge power grab and people are actually concerned with the health of individuals, if folks would acknowledge “the science” of natural immunity. Saying it isn’t as good as vaccine means nothing, because we are only trying to eliminate more likely spreaders, not any statistical chance of spreading.

nindalf 5y ago
I used to think natural immunity was a thing. Most people in India thought so too. Based on surveys, a majority of people in cities had been infected in the first wave of Covid in 2020. So confident in herd immunity was the Indian government that they were happily organising programs to give away vaccines to countries around the world, thinking it wasn’t necessary in India. As the events of April-July 2021 proved, the new variant ripped through a population that was supposed to have reached herd immunity. As it stands, 80%+ of people in major Indian cities have had an infection. Does that mean that covid will never bother India again? I’m guessing no.
- rubicon33 5y ago
  I think that speaks to the rapid evolution of the virus, more than to the lack of a natural immunity process. It's terrifying how quickly COVID has evolved, and given more time in the human species, it will evolve further. That's why the push for vaccination is so important. There's even people pushing for prophylactic use of other medications to completely stamp out COVID for the simple reason of - you do NOT want this virus evolving any more than it has.
rubicon33 5y ago
Absolutely. I firmly understand that natural immunity is as good, if not better, than the vaccine. The trouble is, how do you prove it? There are antibody tests that maybe are positive even months later? I'm not sure, honestly. The tricky part is just the recording of the matter, not the science behind it.