4 ms·

> 60 to 70 percent threshold that Fauci and other public servants claimed as the target over the last year. That number changed because the delta variant is f

> 60 to 70 percent threshold that Fauci and other public servants claimed as the target over the last year. That number changed because the delta variant is far more infectious now. It's closer to 90 %. But you already knew that, which is why you mentioned the time frame of those statements. If I know that you're making disingenuous arguments, and you know that you're making disingenuous arguments, the healthy reaction would be to change your position until you know longer have to walk around compartmentalizing schizophrenic beliefs. As for that meaning the pandemic has ended: it just hasn't. 1,400 people died every day over the last two week (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html). Now I don't necessarily care about the death of people who themselves don't care, although even idiots don't deserve to die for their stupidity. But the toll on HCWs is something I would rather avoid.

mikem170 5y ago
Your response is very emotional. I didn't think that the facts in the arguments you replied to were disingenuous or schizophrenic. Headlines often are fear-mongering. Politicians are not always following the science. There's a lot of research and data to look at, and not all pointing consistently in the same direction as some might believe. Things like mask effectiveness compared to ventilation and isolation, the fatalities concentrated in obese and aged populations, breakthrough infections, and even the danger that the vaccines are exerting evolutionary pressure towards changes outside the targeted spike portion of the virus, which worst case would mean we get to do this again. Even the 90% number you mentioned involves quite a bit of uncertainty, given that we are probably already there (based on the study showing 83% in May, before additional vaccinations and all the people exposed during the entire delta wave). The idea that populations can mask and vaccinate to stop this does not appear to be working out (breakthrough infections). It appears this will end up like the other existing common cold coronaviruses, where children of the future catch it and shake it off no big deal then have antibodies, annoying many and killing a few. The experts predicted just that as a likely outcome at the beginning of the pandemic. The current U.S. death toll from covid amounts to 1 out of every 492 people, overwhelmingly the old and unhealthy. That doesn't strike me as a lot, certainly not worth the significant and still ongoing disruptions to economies and peoples lives. Worldwide this is comparable to the per-capita 1968 Hong Kong flu death toll. These things happen. We are better than ever at keeping unhealthy and old people alive, until something unusual comes along. In fact our whole complex modern world - hospitals, factories, shipping, mass media, bureaucracy, many individuals, etc - doesn't seem to cope well with the out of the ordinary. In many ways we have grown complacent. Nature reminds us that she's in charge. I know that some people feel different about that 1 in 492 number. I understand that opinions vary. In a democracy we should respect each other and work it out, not shout others down as some kind of heretics.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

mikem170 5y ago

Your response is very emotional. I didn't think that the facts in the arguments you replied to were disingenuous or schizophrenic. Headlines often are fear-mongering. Politicians are not always following the science. There's a lot of research and data to look at, and not all pointing consistently in the same direction as some might believe. Things like mask effectiveness compared to ventilation and isolation, the fatalities concentrated in obese and aged populations, breakthrough infections, and even the danger that the vaccines are exerting evolutionary pressure towards changes outside the targeted spike portion of the virus, which worst case would mean we get to do this again. Even the 90% number you mentioned involves quite a bit of uncertainty, given that we are probably already there (based on the study showing 83% in May, before additional vaccinations and all the people exposed during the entire delta wave). The idea that populations can mask and vaccinate to stop this does not appear to be working out (breakthrough infections). It appears this will end up like the other existing common cold coronaviruses, where children of the future catch it and shake it off no big deal then have antibodies, annoying many and killing a few. The experts predicted just that as a likely outcome at the beginning of the pandemic. The current U.S. death toll from covid amounts to 1 out of every 492 people, overwhelmingly the old and unhealthy. That doesn't strike me as a lot, certainly not worth the significant and still ongoing disruptions to economies and peoples lives. Worldwide this is comparable to the per-capita 1968 Hong Kong flu death toll. These things happen. We are better than ever at keeping unhealthy and old people alive, until something unusual comes along. In fact our whole complex modern world - hospitals, factories, shipping, mass media, bureaucracy, many individuals, etc - doesn't seem to cope well with the out of the ordinary. In many ways we have grown complacent. Nature reminds us that she's in charge. I know that some people feel different about that 1 in 492 number. I understand that opinions vary. In a democracy we should respect each other and work it out, not shout others down as some kind of heretics.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]