3 ms·

Author seems to miss the problem of hospital capacity completely, at least where i am, this is the biggest driver of restrictions, when it looks like hospitals

Author seems to miss the problem of hospital capacity completely, at least where i am, this is the biggest driver of restrictions, when it looks like hospitals are going to run out out beds, restrictions are increased, as capacity increases again, restrictions are relaxed. So, not getting vaccinated is not just a personal choice, and i’m not sure the risk of dying is the same as the risk of being hospitalized. And assesing risks of getting one disease over another fails to take into account it is a new disease and is an addition to existing risks, not an either/or situation. If the unvaccinated also refuse hospital treatment, maybe they can claim it’s a personal choice

ntlind 5y ago
Completely agree. ICUs in my city are at 98% capacity, creating life-threatening situations for both patients and providers. IMO, the author makes a compelling case for why vaccines should be mandatory: people significantly underweight the negative societal externalities of not getting vaccinated.
- HKH2 5y ago
  Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccines, makes many compelling cases why they should not be mandatory.
  - avanderveen 5y ago
    There were many people over many studies that were responsible for mRNA vaccines and you don't hear them agreeing. Robert Malone had a small contribution early on. He's probably stirring controversy for publicity's sake.
    - HKH2 5y ago
      He has said that a lot of people involved have a conflict of interest, and that physicians are being suppressed.
    - DanielleMolloy 5y ago
      Coming up with the landmark experiment for this technology is no „small contribution“. Described in this Nature piece, where the first few paragraphs are about Malone. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w
syntheweave 5y ago
It's a question of what should be normalized, when it comes down to it. The policy question of "should all restrictions be used" could be answered "yes, slow the spread" or "no, we should add more treatment capacity". A like question would be "should we widen the roads to prevent traffic", and that could be answered "yes, everyone should be able to get their car on the road" or "no, we should invest in transit and density instead". Both questions have similarly broad and complex societal implications within their answers, in what's being valued ethically and who shoulders the burden for those values. Collective versus individual and other such questions. What vaccination - and really, the mRNAs specifically - provided was a policy option that wouldn't have been there in a past time: put a shot in everyone's arm ASAP and then lower restrictions in hopes of restoring the economy quickly. And like with every new tech, many of us were quite eager to jump on board and get on with it, while this person was prepared to question that. By their own testimony they otherwise didn't doubt the virus or other restrictions. What the pandemic as a whole accomplished was a pop quiz on societal fitness. It tested things that hadn't been tested in a long time. The sense of "nothing is normal anymore" is related to this, because we've just been asked if our norms are any good, actually. And the particular frenzy of the USA suggests that no, they aren't, not in this instance. South Africa has been subjected to such tests much more frequently in its recent history - and it did not really have the same policy option since it was a latecomer to vaccination. It stands to reason that it would embrace a more measured approach.
DanielleMolloy 5y ago
You‘ve completely missed his point of stratification. What he meant is checking your personal risk of covid hospitalization and death based on age / preexisting conditions / BMI. The former equals your risk of blocking an ICU bed. If you still haven’t estimated your personal risk profile you can do so with this calculator from Oxford (afaik based on data from the more dangerous / less transmissible alpha variant, not on omicron which seemingly is taking over now): https://qcovid.org/ https://qcovid.org/ If you are elderly or obese, also check the risk of a 20yo or 39yo with normal weight and no preconditions. Given the mild covid cases they’ve got, it seems the author assessed his risk pretty well.
- ntlind 5y ago
  The author shouldn't just be considering his individual risk level, though, which is the parent comment's point. Even if the individual's risk is extremely low, the expected negative societal impact can still be high given a) many other people are also taking the same risk at the same time, b) the system has a non-linear "breaking point" / constraint (e.g., a limited supply of hospital resources that are all near capacity), and c) crossing the breaking point causes major problems for people in and out of the system (i.e., doctors, people with QOL procedures that have to be cancelled due to overflow, etc.).
- pixl97 5y ago
  A 3rd of the US is obese, at minimum, rates are likely higher.

ntlind 5y ago

Completely agree. ICUs in my city are at 98% capacity, creating life-threatening situations for both patients and providers. IMO, the author makes a compelling case for why vaccines should be mandatory: people significantly underweight the negative societal externalities of not getting vaccinated.

HKH2 5y ago
Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccines, makes many compelling cases why they should not be mandatory.
- avanderveen 5y ago
  There were many people over many studies that were responsible for mRNA vaccines and you don't hear them agreeing. Robert Malone had a small contribution early on. He's probably stirring controversy for publicity's sake.
  - HKH2 5y ago
    He has said that a lot of people involved have a conflict of interest, and that physicians are being suppressed.
  - DanielleMolloy 5y ago
    Coming up with the landmark experiment for this technology is no „small contribution“. Described in this Nature piece, where the first few paragraphs are about Malone. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w

syntheweave 5y ago

It's a question of what should be normalized, when it comes down to it. The policy question of "should all restrictions be used" could be answered "yes, slow the spread" or "no, we should add more treatment capacity". A like question would be "should we widen the roads to prevent traffic", and that could be answered "yes, everyone should be able to get their car on the road" or "no, we should invest in transit and density instead". Both questions have similarly broad and complex societal implications within their answers, in what's being valued ethically and who shoulders the burden for those values. Collective versus individual and other such questions. What vaccination - and really, the mRNAs specifically - provided was a policy option that wouldn't have been there in a past time: put a shot in everyone's arm ASAP and then lower restrictions in hopes of restoring the economy quickly. And like with every new tech, many of us were quite eager to jump on board and get on with it, while this person was prepared to question that. By their own testimony they otherwise didn't doubt the virus or other restrictions. What the pandemic as a whole accomplished was a pop quiz on societal fitness. It tested things that hadn't been tested in a long time. The sense of "nothing is normal anymore" is related to this, because we've just been asked if our norms are any good, actually. And the particular frenzy of the USA suggests that no, they aren't, not in this instance. South Africa has been subjected to such tests much more frequently in its recent history - and it did not really have the same policy option since it was a latecomer to vaccination. It stands to reason that it would embrace a more measured approach.

DanielleMolloy 5y ago

You‘ve completely missed his point of stratification. What he meant is checking your personal risk of covid hospitalization and death based on age / preexisting conditions / BMI. The former equals your risk of blocking an ICU bed. If you still haven’t estimated your personal risk profile you can do so with this calculator from Oxford (afaik based on data from the more dangerous / less transmissible alpha variant, not on omicron which seemingly is taking over now): https://qcovid.org/ https://qcovid.org/ If you are elderly or obese, also check the risk of a 20yo or 39yo with normal weight and no preconditions. Given the mild covid cases they’ve got, it seems the author assessed his risk pretty well.

ntlind 5y ago
The author shouldn't just be considering his individual risk level, though, which is the parent comment's point. Even if the individual's risk is extremely low, the expected negative societal impact can still be high given a) many other people are also taking the same risk at the same time, b) the system has a non-linear "breaking point" / constraint (e.g., a limited supply of hospital resources that are all near capacity), and c) crossing the breaking point causes major problems for people in and out of the system (i.e., doctors, people with QOL procedures that have to be cancelled due to overflow, etc.).
pixl97 5y ago
A 3rd of the US is obese, at minimum, rates are likely higher.