Jump to content

Comparing Corona Virus Success Stories with Abysmal Failures


Alex_Krycek
 Share

Recommended Posts

Vaccination rates are going incredible well in Australia at this time...NSW is now at 91% fully vaxxed, and other states are fast approaching that, and the average over all of Australia is now reached the 70% double vaxxed...Borders are opening up and restrictions generally relaxed. Yet as usual we still have that loud noisy minority screaming their tonsils out claiming it is against their rights and freedoms.

Perhaps if we stick them all on the remote Herd/McDonald Islands and let them sort it out...On second thought that prisitine environment would then suffer. 

gives self an uppercut!!

Still, thankfully, many sections of the workforce, as it gets back to normal, is only accepting fully vaxxed employees, and the same is applying to entry to most clubs and pubs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/27/2020 at 10:42 AM, StringJunky said:

Here's a link to the pdf: http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/research_articles/2020/covid_paper_MEDRXIV-2020-043752v1-Murray.pdf

The prediction doesn't tally well with Trump saying that things will be easier at Easter and they all can start going back to work.

 

 

US COVID Trajectory.PNG

I was putting together some estimates on SARS-CoV-2 infections and was revisiting some older estimates. It is interesting to see that quite a few of them underestimated death rates in the US by a fair bit.

1 hour ago, beecee said:

70% double vaxxed...Borders are opening up and restrictions generally relaxed. Yet as usual we still have that loud noisy minority screaming their tonsils out claiming it is against their rights and freedoms.

Yeah, that is especially annoying as that level is very unlikely to prevent spread. The argument that now seems to go around that if there are still infections despite vaccinations, the latter obviously does not work and you should not get vaccinated in the first place (never mind that it cuts down fatalities).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

It is interesting to see that quite a few of them underestimated death rates in the US by a fair bit.

They  didn’t underestimate death rates in the US so much as they underestimated idiocy, ignorance, and intransigence.

4 minutes ago, CharonY said:

The argument that now seems to go around that if there are still infections despite vaccinations, the latter obviously does not work and you should not get vaccinated in the first place

Much like car accidents still kill people despite the introduction of seatbelts. Obviously, seatbelts don’t work and shouldn’t be worn at all. That’s just common sense right there.

We should also get rid of airbags and crumple zones and stop lights while we’re at it. If it’s not perfect, it’s not needed… that’s what I always say. 🙄 ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, iNow said:

They  didn’t underestimate death rates in the US so much as they underestimated idiocy, ignorance, and intransigence.

That is pretty much the point, actually. The models often do not take behavioral aspects into account. I was asked at various point to predict likely infection rates and I tend to point to things like large gatherings, mask mandates and similar factors rather than exclusively detection rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CharonY said:

That is pretty much the point, actually. The models often do not take behavioral aspects into account. I was asked at various point to predict likely infection rates and I tend to point to things like large gatherings, mask mandates and similar factors rather than exclusively detection rates.

Indeed +1, much like the plague/black death, probably, didn't have a single cause...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

It's starting to happen in Canada.
Not content with educating people ( or evidently, doing a really bad job at it ), Canadian Governments are vilifying unvaccinated people.
This is especially true of the Quebec provincial government

Chris Selley: Quebec's anti-vax tax could lead us to some very dark places (msn.com)

and the federal Liberal government of J Trudeau

Tasha Kheiriddin: The unvaccinated must be deterred from harming others (msn.com)

I would assume the next group of people that will be taxed for 'stressing' the universal ( ? ) health care system, will be smokers, drinkers, overweight people, drug users, malnourished people, etc.
Exactly the people who are disadvantaged/uneducated, and immigrants or indigenous. The same people who can least afford the extra taxation.

I have always said ideologies are a dangerous thing.

Edited by MigL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MigL said:

I would assume the next group of people that will be taxed for 'stressing' the universal ( ? ) health care system, will be smokers, drinkers, overweight people, drug users, malnourished people, etc.

I think that is a false equivalency. Neither of these conditions are contagious. 

Edit: Also, alcohol is already severely taxed in Canada, so is tobacco. Assuming these measures are ideology-based, it would indicate that they are historically ingrained. Likewise, I presume, measures like fines for not wearing seatbelts and drunk driving. The latter are perhaps a better comparison as those also increase of risks surrounding the individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always nice 'sparring' with you CharonY.

Very well.
What would your reaction have been if they taxed people who contracted HIV/AIDS by having unprotected, or much more risky sodomy  ?
Would that not target gay males ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, MigL said:

Always nice 'sparring' with you CharonY.

Very well.
What would your reaction have been if they taxed people who contracted HIV/AIDS by having unprotected, or much more risky sodomy  ?
Would that not target gay males ?

Well the target would depend on what you are actually taxing (say, unprotected sex). But there would be a lot to unpack here, especially as sodomy laws were actually on the books, but for entirely different reasons. Also, with regard to HIV there are actually protective laws in place and in many countries, where it is required to disclose HIV positivity to potential sexual partners. IOW, there are laws in place targeted at curbing transmissions.

I will also say that this discussion is not new. Smallpox vaccinations in the early 20th century was made mandatory in many countries. In the fines for non-compliance went to the supreme court and was upheld. In fact, it is part of a much longer discussion regarding how much a society should compel individuals to minimize risk to themselves and others and it is not an easy either/or situation. But it is also not a simple slippery slope situation, either. Looking back we had have many, many of those regulations, some based on moral considerations, others based on immediate emergencies and so on. Some of those have been eventually removed as society changed their attitudes, others still persist. But what has not happened is that our society has been increasingly constrained by ever-expanding regulations or governmental control.

Things have come and gone, depending on the attitudes of a given generation and if anything, the world now appears more complex due to the availability of more information and higher interconnectivity. Finding the right approach appears more difficult than ever, but in part it is because we realized that things we did actually do not work.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MigL said:

It's starting to happen in Canada.
Not content with educating people ( or evidently, doing a really bad job at it ), Canadian Governments are vilifying unvaccinated people.
This is especially true of the Quebec provincial government

Chris Selley: Quebec's anti-vax tax could lead us to some very dark places (msn.com)

and the federal Liberal government of J Trudeau

Tasha Kheiriddin: The unvaccinated must be deterred from harming others (msn.com)

I would assume the next group of people that will be taxed for 'stressing' the universal ( ? ) health care system, will be smokers, drinkers, overweight people, drug users, malnourished people, etc.
Exactly the people who are disadvantaged/uneducated, and immigrants or indigenous. The same people who can least afford the extra taxation.

I have always said ideologies are a dangerous thing.

That's pure 'slippery slope' fallacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you recall our past conversations, CharonY, you'll recall that I have also argued for stricter vaccination rules, and possible penalties for the willful unvaccinated.

But it is always helpful, even necessary, to investigate both sides of an argument, so as to arrive at an equitable solution.
( no matter what Stringy thinks )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

That's pure 'slippery slope' fallacy.

I think folks that want to invoke the slippery slope should provide some historic data to substantiate such claims. Too often it just a single data point extrapolation. The whole current situation looks like a repeat of the 1918 pandemic (or measles or smallpox etc.), but in colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think folks that want to invoke the slippery slope should provide some historic data to substantiate such claims. Too often it just a single data point extrapolation. The whole current situation looks like a repeat of the 1918 pandemic (or measles or smallpox etc.), but in colour.

...and 4K. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MigL said:

 

I would assume the next group of people that will be taxed for 'stressing' the universal ( ? ) health care system, will be smokers, drinkers, overweight people, drug users, malnourished people, etc.
Exactly the people who are disadvantaged/uneducated, and immigrants or indigenous. The same people who can least afford the extra taxation.

I have always said ideologies are a dangerous thing.

Citizens being asked not to spread contagion is a centuries old practice that has been done in almost every culture.  We expect poor citizens to drive with headlights on, and fine them the same as the affluent.  Some laws are about critical matters of public safety and nothing new ideologically.  

Would you have preferred raising your children in a society where polio vax shots were optional?  Think about this carefully.  

33 minutes ago, TheVat said:

 

To the recent downvoter:

Please tell me the nature of your disagreement, instead of downvoting anonymously.  I will accord you the same respect.  Regards, 

Paul

Edited by TheVat
Blechdfgpe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheVat said:

To the recent downvoter:

Please tell me the nature of your disagreement, instead of downvoting anonymously.  I will accord you the same respect.  Regards, 

Paul

You seem to have edited out the part I objected to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave a couple upvotes to downvoted posts, but decided it was off-topic so removed mention of that.  I've already given my reasons, a while back, in a feedback thread, on why I'm not wild about downvoting.  

Back to topic: In any case, I look forward to @MigL reply to my question, "Would you have preferred raising your children in a society where polio vax shots were optional?"  and hope he can speak freely without accruing DVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not about whether I think people should be vaccinated; of course they should.
But if the government thinks it is that important, they should make vaccination mandatory.
( never mind all the crap about the 'right' not to be vaccinated ) 
Like it was for us when we were kids; no one objected to mandatory vaccination to be able to attend school.
Why the objections to Covid vaccines now ?

The problem, as I see it, is the government subjecting a certain group to an additional tax, so as to be able to use what is supposed to be Universal Health Care. Does it not then become 'two- tier' health care ? What if you can't afford the additional tax ? Are you then denied care ?
Maybe that is a strange concept to you Americans, but I would expect Stringy and other Brits, to understand.
As for 'slippery slope', that is the very definition of taxation.
Taxation has always increased, and once put in place are never removed, even if their original purpose is removed, they are simply 're-purposed'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MigL said:

Like it was for us when we were kids; no one objected to mandatory vaccination to be able to attend school.

Actually, tons of people did. This isn’t new. 

3 hours ago, MigL said:

Why the objections to Covid vaccines now ?

Social media and the ease with which bad actors can spread disinformation and echo propaganda across information consumption channels. 

3 hours ago, MigL said:

The problem, as I see it, is the government subjecting a certain group to an additional tax, so as to be able to use what is supposed to be Universal Health Care. Does it not then become 'two- tier' health care ? What if you can't afford the additional tax ? Are you then denied care ?
Maybe that is a strange concept to you Americans

Except even private insurers here in the US are charging more / covering less for unvaccinated folks, both in premiums and in rejected claims for reimbursement. Private employers are even charging employees higher insurance premiums when unvaccinated. Delta Airlines is one off the top of my head. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, starting in Victorian times in the UK and elsewhere vaccines against e.g. smallpox were mandatory. Fines were implemented due to non-compliance. It was basically the same issue as now. If there was a slippery slope, we would expect progression somewhere. Yet here we are pretending that this new, indicating that no slope is present. We are back at the top of the presumed slide again.

Moreover tax burden have gone up and down over the long term, when accounting for inflation. See below a plot of tax burden in Canada, which clearly refutes the always increases parts.

While there is discussion to be had regarding impact, we should make sure we keep the facts straight. Moreover, we have over 100 years of precedence of pretty much the same discussion, so it is not like we are in entirely new territory. Rather than a "it's starting" situation we are in a "it's happening again" sort of thing. Perhaps the next pandemic will happen soon enough that we don't forget, but considering all we have seen i am prepared to assume that we will be absolutely surprised again on all levels and rehash all points.

I will say that it is unclear whether fines are more effective than e.g. mandates and social media likely has changed the game. 

Fig-4_FI-report.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CharonY said:

Perhaps the next pandemic will happen soon enough that we don't forget, but considering all we have seen i am prepared to assume that we will be absolutely surprised again on all levels and rehash all points.

I don't want to pursue this here in this thread since it's slightly off-topic, but interestingly the same thing occurs in our response to economic downturns. There were huge mistakes made in response to the Great Depression with austerity policies and the like, then when the Great Recession hit a little over a decade ago, all of the same types of voices tried to force us to implement austerity and make matters worse. 

In that and in this with public health issues, what old too often becomes new again... at least "new to me" for far too many folks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iNow said:

I don't want to pursue this here in this thread since it's slightly off-topic, but interestingly the same thing occurs in our response to economic downturns. There were huge mistakes made in response to the Great Depression with austerity policies and the like, then when the Great Recession hit a little over a decade ago, all of the same types of voices tried to force us to implement austerity and make matters worse. 

In that and in this with public health issues, what old too often becomes new again... at least "new to me" for far too many folks. 

I think part of it is that we often build narratives for our own personal histories and then also apply them to the past and future. It sometimes feels that we only have a short-lived bubble of reality and anything beyond that is susceptible to distortions of own memories as well as external narratives (I don't think I am expressing myself clearly here, but right now I am too tired to try to formulate it properly). In a way, the amount of information we got nowadays made us remember less, not more, I feel sometimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's almost as if the flood of information to which we're exposed has reduced our experience of "object permanence" and it just disappears when it's no longer in front of us. 

No worries on the fatigue. I'm feeling it, too. Tying this back to the thread, it sure looks like my 4 year old who's too young for any vaccine shots has covid now and none of us slept last night. It's going to be an interesting holiday weekend for us all. 

Cheers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a book in 2020 on pandemics that was written several years prior to COVID. In it they described different pandemics and the reaction to them. Governments tried to enforce lockdowns. Foreigners were blamed. Businesses minimized the impact so as to not lose revenue. Individuals complained about loss of freedoms and government overreach. You could easily have changed the name of the pandemic described in the book with COVID-19 and no one would have noticed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.