OT: Covid-19 (Part 44) Closer Together

[Milhouse40]

People hear what they wanna hear

Really interesting article from The Atlantic: The Anti-vaccine Con Job Is Becoming Untenable

Basically argues that the shame associated with being wrong is what prevents people from (publicly at least) changing their mind. It got me thinking. In the old days before social media, you could have an opinion but you didn't broadcast it at scale, on the record for all time for everyone to see. Therefore if it turned out you were wrong on something, you could discreetly just change your mind and get on with your life. Nowadays that's not the case for a lot of people. We build these tribal online identities around these positions, and (if this article is on the right track) this makes it much harder to change your position so you just entrench yourself forever.

See also this article about folks getting vaccinated in secret: Some people in Missouri are getting vaccinated in secret to avoid backlash from loved ones, doctor says | CNN

We're such emotionally fragile creatures

That's a part of it....here's the other part

 

[Canadienna]

That's a part of it....here's the other part

How about no carrot and no stick.

Getting a vaccine should be a health decision, not a way for someone to avoid social harm or gain status.

The amount of times I've heard public health officials talk about "incentivizing vaccines" by restricting some kind of access for unvaccinated makes me sick. Get the vaccine because it may save your life not because you want to create some caste system.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

For context as a UK parent of school age kids who just happens to be a risk professional (yes, assessing business and financial risk is 100 % a transferable skill as its all about data and controls).....

There exists an effectively zero risk to my kids from Covid, irrespective of "variant". I have placed my unequivocal withholding of consent for any mRNA based treatment with their school and won't review that position until worldwide clinical trails of these experimental treatments, complete with uncensored disclosure of adverse reactions, is completed.
P
They are more likely to come to serious harm every time they cross a road. Feel free to use a stastical, not rhetorical, argument to convince me of the danger they face from Covid.

How can you possibly determine there’s virtually zero risk irrespective of any variant?

 

[Walrus26]

The risks associated with the vaccine are even lower than that. They are, look it up.

I promised myself to leave this thread....damn

I have looked it up, trust me. Do your own searches for VAERS (just one of the US adverse reactions logging systems) and the uK's MHRA "yellow card" system. Usual testing phases for new jabs run for several years, so these datasets are a long way from being complete.

Once all the data is in, or if there's new data which conclusively proves a material risk of death for my kids' demographic, I'll think again.

For illustration , if the Covid mortality rate for UK under 18s is, say, 0.0002% per month (2 in a million), a jab risk of 0.001% (1 per 100k) per month represents 5 times the risk.

The average age of UK residents who've died within 28 days of a positive Covid test (the UK measure) remains above 82.

 

[Per Sjoblom]

People hear what they wanna hear

Really interesting article from The Atlantic: The Anti-vaccine Con Job Is Becoming Untenable

Basically argues that the shame associated with being wrong is what prevents people from (publicly at least) changing their mind. It got me thinking. In the old days before social media, you could have an opinion but you didn't broadcast it at scale, on the record for all time for everyone to see. Therefore if it turned out you were wrong on something, you could discreetly just change your mind and get on with your life. Nowadays that's not the case for a lot of people. We build these tribal online identities around these positions, and (if this article is on the right track) this makes it much harder to change your position so you just entrench yourself forever.

See also this article about folks getting vaccinated in secret: Some people in Missouri are getting vaccinated in secret to avoid backlash from loved ones, doctor says | CNN

We're such emotionally fragile creatures

Spot on!

 

[jackeymoon]

I think sceptism that a group of frauds (government and big pharma) actually care about your health or well-being is warranted. Cicero questioned many things in his society, was largely right, and was disregarded by many of his peers

I don't think threats or insulting the public does anything other than to ferment long lasting hatred and that may indeed be the point. Not making an opinion on it one way or the other but being open and empathetic towards another view isn't a bad thing

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I promised myself to leave this thread....damn

I have looked it up, trust me. Do your own searches for VAERS (just one of the US adverse reactions logging systems) and the uK's MHRA "yellow card" system. Usual testing phases for new jabs run for several years, so these datasets are a long way from being complete.

Once all the data is in, or if there's new data which conclusively proves a material risk of death for my kids' demographic, I'll think again.

For illustration , if the Covid mortality rate for UK under 18s is, say, 0.0002% per month (2 in a million), a jab risk of 0.001% (1 per 100k) per month represents 5 times the risk.

The average age of UK residents who've died within 28 days of a positive Covid test (the UK measure) remains above 82.

But, isn’t that kind of the point of assessing risk? You won’t know the data on the new variants until the data is in. We’re seeing reports of children’s admissions spiking now.

How can you sit there and confidently say there’s no risk for children with the new variants as they emerge?

 

[Crusher117]

Sounds like Trois-Rivières will be our ground zero for vaccine passport trials.
Region is spiking hard ahead of Le grand prix de Trois-Rivières that runs from the 6th to 15th. Many restos and bars are currently closed because of staffed being tested. Gonna be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of days.
But I'm ready to bet that by October 1st, the entire province has a covid passport system in place.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

For context as a UK parent of school age kids who just happens to be a risk professional (yes, assessing business and financial risk is 100 % a transferable skill as its all about data and controls).....

There exists an effectively zero risk to my kids from Covid, irrespective of "variant". I have placed my unequivocal withholding of consent for any mRNA based treatment with their school and won't review that position until worldwide clinical trails of these experimental treatments, complete with uncensored disclosure of adverse reactions, is completed.

They are more likely to come to serious harm every time they cross a road. Feel free to use a stastical, not rhetorical, argument to convince me of the danger they face from Covid.

Don’t expect one.

 

[Walrus26]

How can you possibly determine there’s virtually zero risk irrespective of any variant?

Do your own analysis of under 18 Covid deaths since March 20 per population and again by comparison to reported overall reported cases, compare those with all other causes of under 18 deaths figures for the same time frame, compare both of those with total not dead under 18s and let me know just how big a risk there is.

 

[Non Player Canadiens]

Do your own analysis of under 18 Covid deaths since March 20 per population and again by comparison to reported overall reported cases, compare those with all other causes of under 18 deaths figures for the same time frame, compare both of those with total not dead under 18s and let me know just how big a risk there is.

Two things:

1. Why would we look at old data from your study, when we're getting slammed by Delta now? That old data is not relevant anymore. And the preliminary data that's coming out indicates it's a bigger risk to younger people. That's not 'rhetoric', that's data.
2. Sounds like your argument is not that there's no risk to children, but simply that there's an acceptable risk to children. Is that right? If so, what's your acceptable level of children's deaths due to COVID? Just wanna know where you stand on that one. Give me a hard number because I know you're a big fan of those.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Do your own analysis of under 18 Covid deaths since March 20 per population and again by comparison to reported overall reported cases, compare those with all other causes of under 18 deaths figures for the same time frame, compare both of those with total not dead under 18s and let me know just how big a risk there is.

Why limit it to deaths? If they don’t die it doesn’t count?

 

[HBDay]

In 2018-2019 the CDC reported 199 influenza related deaths in children under five.

You guys were at Disney world with your kids with no mask.

 

[covfefe]

I think sceptism that a group of frauds (government and big pharma) actually care about your health or well-being is warranted. Cicero questioned many things in his society, was largely right, and was disregarded by many of his peers

I don't think threats or insulting the public does anything other than to ferment long lasting hatred and that may indeed be the point. Not making an opinion on it one way or the other but being open and empathetic towards another view isn't a bad thing

It certainly isn't - but by the opposite token, I suspect you'd be somewhat hesitant to let the front of house come into the kitchen and tell you how to confit duck.

Which is exactly what we've witnessed from start-finish of the last year and beyond. As we listen to the world's risk managers conflating their professional competencies with those of the world's leading epidemiologists and pharmacologists...

 

[Walrus26]

But, isn’t that kind of the point of assessing risk? You won’t know the data on the new variants until the data is in. We’re seeing reports of children’s admissions spiking now.

How can you sit there and confidently say there’s no risk for children with the new variants as they emerge?

That's reasonable. I'll clarify by saying that none of the available data on all the known variants proves anything other than an effective mortality risk to young people of zero, i.e a lot less than 0.01%.

We must also not lose sight of the standard path of virus evolution, which is to say that they predominantly become more contagious and less severe symptomatically as they evolve. I will be very wary indeed of any claims saying that a new variant is suddenly likely to kill, say, 10% of infectees when the current mortality rate for all demographics combined is (I think) less than 0.3%.

 

[Walrus26]

Why limit it to deaths? If they don’t die it doesn’t count?

Kids get unwell all the time, have done forever and will continue to do so. It comes with the territory. I was in hospital as a kid with whooping cough (got it before I got a vaccination, really young) and one of my kids had a meningitis scare.

I don't recall the last flu / measles / whooping cough / chicken pox / meningitis / senior citizen pneumonia outbreak lockdowns. We're having local lockdowns now, so why not then?

Average UK flu deaths hover around 20 - 25k per annum, so 400 to 500 per week. Every. Single. Year.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Kids get unwell all the time, have done forever and will continue to do so. It comes with the territory. I was in hospital as a kid with whooping cough (got it before I got a vaccination, really young) and one of my kids had a meningitis scare.

I don't recall the last flu / measles / whooping cough / chicken pox / meningitis / senior citizen pneumonia outbreak lockdowns. We're having local lockdowns now, so why not then?

Because millions people have died from it worldwide. And hundreds of Millions have gotten sick... and that was WITH a lockdown... and that’s a little over a year. Compare that to flu deaths every year. It’s not close.

I seriously hope you’re not trying to equate the two...

 

[OnTheRun]

Just wait 3~4 weeks and data will start pouring out of the US.

It will likely confirm what is currently preliminary:
Children make up more than 2,000 of the new COVID-19 cases reported in Louisiana

Dr. Mark Kline is Physician-in-Chief at Children’s Hospital New Orleans. He joined the governor at the press conference.
“I am as worried about our children today as I’ve ever been. This virus, the Delta variant of COVID is every infectious disease specialist and epidemiologist worst nightmare,” said Kline.
The highly contagious Delta variant has taken hold in Louisiana and is fueling the latest surge in cases.
Some people thought kids could not get the virus or get sick enough from it to require hospitalization.
Dr. Leron Finger is Chief Quality Officer at Children’s Hospital New Orleans.
“I think that they’re wrong. I think that in the first 15 months of this disease kids were certainly hospitalized at rates much lower than in the adult population but over the last month we’ve seen many more children admitted to our hospital and pediatric hospitals across the country,” he said.
Dr. Jennifer Avegno is the Director of the New Orleans Health Department.
“This is just further evidence that Delta is really different than what we’ve seen in the past. It is certainly more contagious, so one person can infect a lot more people,” said Avegno.
Children’s Hospital had seven kids with COVID hospitalized on Monday. Last week the number was 20.
“There were people who said children don’t get the disease, they can’t transmit the disease, we knew that those were fallacies all along but particularly now that the Delta variant has emerged it has become very clear that children are being heavily impacted by this organism, and by this pandemic at this point, perhaps more than ever before,” said Kline.
“And if you remember in our previous waves children really were spared, either they, for the vast majority either they didn’t have symptoms or they had very mild symptoms. We had a few rare cases of kids being affected and then of some long-term complications but nothing like we’re seeing now where our Children’s Hospital went from zero cases to 20 cases in you know about a week and a half,” said Avegno.

Now for the people who see this as a binary problem, 1 = Alive 0= dead, most kids hospitalized will survive covid. I still can't compute why anyone would risk their kid to spend weeks in a medically induced coma, hooked on a machine, just because the baseline chance of "survival" are great, but whatever.

 

[Walrus26]

Two things:

1. Why would we look at old data from your study, when we're getting slammed by Delta now? That old data is not relevant anymore. And the preliminary data that's coming out indicates it's a bigger risk to younger people. That's not 'rhetoric', that's data.
2. Sounds like your argument is not that there's no risk to children, but simply that there's an acceptable risk to children. Is that right? If so, what's your acceptable level of children's deaths due to COVID? Just wanna know where you stand on that one. Give me a hard number because I know you're a big fan of those.

Sure.
When 1 in a thousand kids die every month from Covid (i.e. 0.1%, approx), then the brown stuff is hitting the air circulation unit. That's still a lot lower than than the overall mortality rate currently.

Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional - Office for National Statistics >>> the Office For National Statstics excel for cumulative data up to the end of July 21 here will show you that 44 people aged 19 or less in the UK have died within 28 days of a positive Covid test since the start of the pandemic.

That's less than 3 people under 20 a month. Out of the entire U-20 population of England and Wales. (Very rough guess of 5 to 7 million?)

You tell me what the risk to them is from Covid. I've proved there isn't one, materially speaking. You don't need to be an epidemiologist to understand data.

(Edited original figures as I've clearly had too much wine tonight and hadn't scrolled far enough up the worksheet!!!!!, apologies - you DO need to be sober to understand data!)

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

That's reasonable. I'll clarify by saying that none of the available data on all the known variants proves anything other than an effective mortality risk to young people of zero, i.e a lot less than 0.01%.

We must also not lose sight of the standard path of virus evolution, which is to say that they predominantly become more contagious and less severe symptomatically as they evolve. I will be very wary indeed of any claims saying that a new variant is suddenly likely to kill, say, 10% of infectees when the current mortality rate for all demographics combined is (I think) less than 0.3%.

That doesn’t seem to be the case. Early reports are that this strain is stronger than past ones. And once again, it’s not just fatalities you should be looking at.

 

[ryan callahan]

Old people blaming young people for the pandemic while it should literally be the opposite. If the world population was uniquely 40 and under, COVID would just be a dime a dozen weak virus.

 

[Walrus26]

That doesn’t seem to be the case. Early reports are that this strain is stronger than past ones. And once again, it’s not just fatalities you should be looking at.

OK, so let's ignore "early reports" and wait for the data.

It would have to be 10 times more deadly (literally) to move the data dial from 0.005 to 0.05% mortality in a demographic group, for example. I don't doubt that it's more alarming than that for senior citizens with existing, severe, health problems.

 

[Milhouse40]

In 2018-2019 the CDC reported 199 influenza related deaths in children under five.

You guys were at Disney world with your kids with no mask.

Yeah but the flu R-naught is like 5 to 8 times less than the one from the Delta.

 

[HBDay]

Now for the people who see this as a binary problem, 1 = Alive 0= dead, most kids hospitalized will survive covid. I still can't compute why anyone would risk their kid to spend weeks in a medically induced coma, hooked on a machine, just because the baseline chance of "survival" are great, but whatever.

I am not here to argue. I've done that.

But I will answer your last paragraph and also make a comment on your link.

The reason we are fine with risking it, is because that risk. Was always there. Always. And we value our children's life experience over that perceived risk. I can pull up studies until I'm blue citing both the immense impact all this had had on children, and citing the contrary of what your link is saying. Just as you could.

Which is why you choose your studies. And I choose mine. And I will never be able to convince you otherwise, and you will never be able to convince me otherwise.

But there is, the current numbers, which don't even have Covid CLOSE to the flu in child death, not even close. And we weren't up in arms then, but we are now, and it seems strange.

And just as you are frustrated that I can't seem to see what you're saying, I am just as frustrated that you ignoring hard facts. I know. You'll say delta.

I know, the variant, you don't know and I don't know , we don't know, government doesn't know, doctors don't know, and that's the end of it. We can do this until we are blue. The delta surge is already pretty well over in England, it's trending down, and they don't have any panic child death rate to tote about.

"I think that Covid-19 in children is still, in the vast majority of cases a very mild illness"

"One UK analysis, published in the medical journal the lanclet, in mid february, compared the effect of the B117 variant, first identified in that country - with the initial strain of Covid. The researchers found "no evidence of more severe desease I'm children"

"The variants of concern could be both more transmisible and more capable of causing serious illness. But that doesn't seem to be translating to more severe symptoms among Kids"

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6006172

You have your view. I have mine. We can do this until we are blue.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

OK, so let's ignore "early reports" and wait for the data.

It would have to be 10 times more deadly (literally) to move the data dial from 0.005 to 0.05% mortality in a demographic group, for example. I don't doubt that it's more alarming than that for senior citizens with existing, severe, health problems.

Again... you are only looking at mortality rates. That's not the only risk.

If I tell you that there's no risk in jumping into a pit of snakes because the most that would happen is that you'll get sick, you'd say I'm crazy. It's not just mortality rates that factor in here. More and more kids are starting to get sent to the hospitals. The data on that will be in soon enough. But even if the mortality rate is 0 percent, that doesn't mean it's good.

You seem to think "risk" only means death... it doesn't. There are all kinds of long term problems that are associated with this virus. It's not just death you have to worry about. Let alone just plain being really, really sick and having to deal with that.

You may be good with your kid going through that and see it as 'zero risk.' I'm not and I don't.

And of course... that's just the kids. Nevermind the spiking numbers, the hospital overloads, the mutations that are rapidly occurring... there's all kinds of shit that comes along with not being vaccinated and spreading this shit around.