NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

[Torn Mind]

A big complaint of people was why do they have to wear the mask if they're vaccinated. With Alpha this was much less of a problem because the vaccines induced enough immunity to be basically sterilizing against it. So guidance on mask wearing was relaxed to encourage vaccination. Enter Delta and the picture has changed making that no longer advisable.

It does not make sense to me to complain about changing guidance in a clearly changing situation. What was true before might not hold and adjusting instead of pretending otherwise is sound.

It actually does make sense to question why government chose economic stimuli over safety. Not even the WHO endorsed what the CDC implemented in May.

It's rather obvious many people cannot comprehend the concept of time. The original virus used not be present but it spread EVERYWHERE. So where was the caution when Delta was already in the country because they let everyone go hog wild. In the case of uncertainty, you pick the option with the least potential repercussions if the worst does happen.

 

[Tweak155]

Actually, I expect Dr. Fauci to act like a doctor and give advice based on solid medical advice. Instead, he IS acting like a politician and probably telling people what his focus group told him would be the most effective messaging at the time. He got bad advice.

You're expecting him to deliver certainty when science rarely offers that, especially on an evolving virus. Your expectations are flawed, not his messages.

 

[K1052]

It actually does make sense to question why government chose economic stimuli over safety. Not even the WHO endorsed what the CDC implemented in May.

People respond to incentives. At the time I think the argument that it made sense then was probably pretty good. Conditions changed though and so did the recommendations.

 

[Brainonska511]

Actually, I expect Dr. Fauci to act like a doctor and give advice based on solid medical advice. Instead, he IS acting like a politician and probably telling people what his focus group told him would be the most effective messaging at the time. He got bad advice.

I'd say that his advice has been largely solid.

Take masks: at the start of the pandemic, there was a multi-fold issue: unclear transmission routes (contact transmission, pure aerosolization [like measles], or some intermediate state), mask shortages, and some mediocre studies on mask usage/disease transmission in general populations. Those mediocre studies suggested that masks were neutral to negative for general users, as many users would not wear masks properly, and the effect of constant face touching would increase exposure to contact pathogens, rendering general mask use ineffective. Coupled with the massive mask shortage for trained people in known high risk environments (read: people working in healthcare and trained to use masks properly) and a relatively unclear understanding of the primary methods of transmission, it made sense AT THE TIME to suggest that masks aren't needed for the general population, both from a scientific perspective and a public health perspective. As we understood more and the situation evolved, the guidance changes.

People are griping about changing guidance because hindsight is 20/20 and a lot of people have decided to completely politicize pandemic.

 

[Scarpozzi]

People are griping about changing guidance because hindsight is 20/20 and a lot of people have decided to completely politicize pandemic.

The problem with everything is that you couldn't get good data on how easily the virus was transmitted last year because so many places went into lockdown. Local areas would see spikes in their numbers over a week after the people were infected....meaning the lag in data and reporting of that data was always making them reactive. The decision to proactively continue lock downs was based on the expectation that the new cases were exponential if each new infection passed it onto X new people (which doesn't always happen).

Of course, now it seems we're in far worse shape because everyone is burned out and many are ignoring the risk. There's also this issue with people not fully understanding the role masks and vaccines play. Cloth masks protect others if YOU are sick. Vaccines protect the vaccinated individual from severe illness or death. Neither are foolproof, but logic says if you help prevent even some illness it will help the hospitals make it through the surge and save both COVID and non-covid patient lives.

Anyone not willing to at least do one of those two things for the sake of being an individual is going to be sorry if they get sick and will likely hurt others. My wife has patients all the time that get sick with COVID and they say, "I feel really bad. Can I get vaccinated now?" She has no sympathy for them because she's been warning all of her patients of the risks...it's not like they've never heard of the vaccine or had multiple opportunities. But yes...it's a choice they made and get to live with...or not.

 

[dullard]

It's not the message that I have a problem with, it's the messenger. In the last 18 months, this guy has gone from saying:

You don't need to wear a mask (Because none are available anyway, and we don't want to cause a panic)
Actually, you should probably wear a mask
You NEED to wear a mask!
Actually, you probably only need to wear it indoors
Maybe you should probably wear two masks?
Never mind, you don't need to wear a mask indoors anymore if you're vaccinated (Because we need to get more people to get those shots!)
Actually, you should wear a mask indoors even if you're vaccinated

Doesn't this guy understand the importance of consistent messaging? By changing the guidelines constantly, he's lost all credibility and quite frankly he's pissing people off. When the words, "OK, you actually need a third shot, but this will probably be the last one, OK?" come out of HIS mouth, it actually strengthens my belief that annual COVID booster shots are going to be a thing.

The CDC probably should have been telling us to wear masks all along, but it's probably too late for that now.

What I'd like to hear NOW is something more along the lines like "Sorry about all that bad advice from Dr. Fauci. He's a moron, we fired him. Here's our new head medical expert, with some new guidelines..."

So, lets say after you stuff yourself at a big party, maybe Thanksgiving. Do you (A) keep stuffing yourself or (B) with the change of the conditions stop stuffing yourself and wait until you are hungry later to eat again? Meaning, do you eat and then not eat depending on the circumstances? Or do you just stick one path throughout regardless?

I can't take your posts seriously if you choose option (B), that is too inconsistent for me.

 

[Torn Mind]

People respond to incentives. At the time I think the argument that it made sense then was probably pretty good. Conditions changed though and so did the recommendations.

It made no sense since the crisis was not over and everything was at level of reasonable grounds or preponderance of the evidence. Having insurance is not proof of preventing an accident. Nor does it excuse having another method of insurance.

Policy in such a crisis has to be proactive but science is reactive; it gets results after the shit happens.

I mean people can live without smoke detectors. That doesn't mean it isn't smart. It also doesn't mean that an extinguisher is not good to have.

 

[Torn Mind]

The problem with everything is that you couldn't get good data on how easily the virus was transmitted last year because so many places went into lockdown. Local areas would see spikes in their numbers over a week after the people were infected....meaning the lag in data and reporting of that data was always making them reactive. The decision to proactively continue lock downs was based on the expectation that the new cases were exponential if each new infection passed it onto X new people (which doesn't always happen).

Of course, now it seems we're in far worse shape because everyone is burned out and many are ignoring the risk. There's also this issue with people not fully understanding the role masks and vaccines play. Cloth masks protect others if YOU are sick. Vaccines protect the vaccinated individual from severe illness or death. Neither are foolproof, but logic says if you help prevent even some illness it will help the hospitals make it through the surge and save both COVID and non-covid patient lives.

Anyone not willing to at least do one of those two things for the sake of being an individual is going to be sorry if they get sick and will likely hurt others. My wife has patients all the time that get sick with COVID and they say, "I feel really bad. Can I get vaccinated now?" She has no sympathy for them because she's been warning all of her patients of the risks...it's not like they've never heard of the vaccine or had multiple opportunities. But yes...it's a choice they made and get to live with...or not.

If the virus were treated as a housing code matter, there would never, ever have been the relaxation of requirements of masking. Oh, it's only a few people dying of electric shock, let's start using the 1970s code again.
Let's not force people to install anti-tip brackets on appliances; it's only a few kids.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I hate to break it to you, but if you have a drivers license and passport, the government already has enough identifiable info on you anyway. Got bluetooth on your phone or in your car? They use that to track your movement for "traffic patterns". If you city/province is anything like the shit ass town I lived in Oklahoma, I bet they never once made the public aware of the technology and thought to ask people if they would approve it.

I get what you are trying to say, and believe me I am right there with you, unfortunately the cap is already off the bottle and we're not gonna be able to put the genie back in.

The big difference is driver's license and passport is just a physical document so it's not actively tracking you. They have a record of you from any time you need to show it but it's not really tracking your every move in the background. They also don't require you to show it to do simple things like getting groceries.... yet. Passports do have a chip in them though but I think it's just RFID that's inactive when it's just sitting there. With an app they will track your every move. In Australia their app actually dings you at random and you need to take a selfie using face ID (so you need a newer phone too!) so they know where you are. Non compliance gets you fined. I know we're already being tracked, but this is yet another avenue for them to do it. I turn off blutooth and location for what it's worth. I don't know how effective it really is though. I've honestly been thinking of ditching the smartphone altogether, or at least upgrading to one that supports a 3rd party OS. One where they stripped out all the Google stuff and that is more transparant. I avoid installing apps willy nilly in general too but in the case of native android everything is probably spying on me at OS level anyway.

Regular passports are a good example of how these things become permanent though. They were never a thing before 9/11 then suddenly they are, and are required to travel anywhere. Though at least they are only really for travel so I don't think they're as bad as the vaccine passport where it will eventually be needed just in order to live life. But this is how the government gets us. They add these things to our lives a bit at a time so that people don't really care or notice what's happening.

 

[jpiniero]

People respond to incentives. At the time I think the argument that it made sense then was probably pretty good.

That was 100% pressure from Big Retail about the growing labor shortage at the very low end. Can't force people to look to work if you say it's dangerous to go to outside, to the store, etc.That's what the mandates are saying in effect.

Something like 10 million that were still on PUA as of the middle of August.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

It's not the message that I have a problem with, it's the messenger. In the last 18 months, this guy has gone from saying:

You don't need to wear a mask (Because none are available anyway, and we don't want to cause a panic)
Actually, you should probably wear a mask
You NEED to wear a mask!
Actually, you probably only need to wear it indoors
Maybe you should probably wear two masks?
Never mind, you don't need to wear a mask indoors anymore if you're vaccinated (Because we need to get more people to get those shots!)
Actually, you should wear a mask indoors even if you're vaccinated

Doesn't this guy understand the importance of consistent messaging? By changing the guidelines constantly, he's lost all credibility and quite frankly he's pissing people off. When the words, "OK, you actually need a third shot, but this will probably be the last one, OK?" come out of HIS mouth, it actually strengthens my belief that annual COVID booster shots are going to be a thing.

The CDC probably should have been telling us to wear masks all along, but it's probably too late for that now.

What I'd like to hear NOW is something more along the lines like "Sorry about all that bad advice from Dr. Fauci. He's a moron, we fired him. Here's our new head medical expert, with some new guidelines..."

You don't need to wear a mask (Because none are available anyway, and we don't want to cause a panic)
^At this point we didn't know the transmission method, and hospitals didn't need a run on masks because of idiots.
Actually, you should probably wear a mask
^At this point we were pretty sure it was primarily airborne/particulate, and masks were likely to be pretty effective.
You NEED to wear a mask!
^At this point we knew it was particulate, and masks were very effective, based on actual data.
Actually, you probably only need to wear it indoors
^At this point we determined it had poor transmission in outdoor environments due to air circulation. We also made a few discoveries in environments with good air circulation (like commercial aircraft).
Maybe you should probably wear two masks?
^News to me.
Never mind, you don't need to wear a mask indoors anymore if you're vaccinated (Because we need to get more people to get those shots!)
^Was entirely accurate, until *drumroll*
Actually, you should wear a mask indoors even if you're vaccinated
^Delta, FUCK YOU. Masks everywhere.

Quit whining because reality doesn't fit your narrative. Just wear a damn mask.

 

[nakedfrog]

Regular passports are a good example of how these things become permanent though. They were never a thing before 9/11 then suddenly they are, and are required to travel anywhere.

LOL

 

[purbeast0]

Regular passports are a good example of how these things become permanent though. They were never a thing before 9/11 then suddenly they are, and are required to travel anywhere.

Wait ... what?

 

[sdifox]

The big difference is driver's license and passport is just a physical document so it's not actively tracking you. They have a record of you from any time you need to show it but it's not really tracking your every move in the background. They also don't require you to show it to do simple things like getting groceries.... yet. Passports do have a chip in them though but I think it's just RFID that's inactive when it's just sitting there. With an app they will track your every move. In Australia their app actually dings you at random and you need to take a selfie using face ID (so you need a newer phone too!) so they know where you are. Non compliance gets you fined. I know we're already being tracked, but this is yet another avenue for them to do it. I turn off blutooth and location for what it's worth. I don't know how effective it really is though. I've honestly been thinking of ditching the smartphone altogether, or at least upgrading to one that supports a 3rd party OS. One where they stripped out all the Google stuff and that is more transparant. I avoid installing apps willy nilly in general too but in the case of native android everything is probably spying on me at OS level anyway.

Regular passports are a good example of how these things become permanent though. They were never a thing before 9/11 then suddenly they are, and are required to travel anywhere. Though at least they are only really for travel so I don't think they're as bad as the vaccine passport where it will eventually be needed just in order to live life. But this is how the government gets us. They add these things to our lives a bit at a time so that people don't really care or notice what's happening.

... I have had at least one passport since 1983... I could get two more, but since I don't use them, there is no point.

 

[H T C]

I've been wearing a mask whenever i leave my home, both indoors and outdoors since April 2020. I even use a mask IN MY OWN HOME whenever i receive guests, EVEN IF they are family members.

Finally got called by our Health Services to get my 1st dose in June and got my 2nd dose in July.

Do you know what changed in my masking habits since being vaccinated? NOTHING: i still use the same masking practices i was using before being vaccinated.

 

[Artorias]

The problem with scientists is that their vision is ultimately narrow. If policy was created solely from their recommendations everyone would be living in a god damn bubble, they have no business being in PR.

That's why you have politicians who evaluate and look at the macro view of the whole situation.

 

[Scarpozzi]

If the virus were treated as a housing code matter, there would never, ever have been the relaxation of requirements of masking. Oh, it's only a few people dying of electric shock, let's start using the 1970s code again.
Let's not force people to install anti-tip brackets on appliances; it's only a few kids.

Yeah. That's a good analogy....but it's also a free country and people don't like shots. Antivaxxers aren't exactly new to this ordeal either.... there's just a lot of empowerment when they feel like they can defy the recommendation for the sake of the defiance....or out of true fear that the vaccine is going to control their minds.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Actually, I expect Dr. Fauci to act like a doctor and give advice based on solid medical advice. Instead, he IS acting like a politician and probably telling people what his focus group told him would be the most effective messaging at the time. He got bad advice.

You want static recommendations for a dynamic environment. His advice isnt the problem, you refusing to recognize the changing environment is. What changed during the timeline of those seemingly contradictory statements?

No need for a mask (we didn't know it was airborne).

Better wear a mask (we found out it was primarily airborne)

Don't need to wear a mask if you're vaccinated (breakthrough cases relatively rare).

Better wear a mask if you're vaccinated (delta variant making breakthrough cases more likely)

His advice has always reflected the best knowledge at the time. As the knowledge changed, so did the recommendations.


You thinking that means his credibility is shot makes you an idiot, not that he doesn't know what he's doing.

 

[Captante]

Changing his opinion in light of Delta is not a "flip flop". It's adjusting based on new conditions. Delta is flatly FAR more transmissible than Alpha which the vaccines were originally trialed against. Also, this would hardly be the first vaccine to require three doses for maximum efficacy.

I must say that I'm no longer giving much credence to what "the powers that be" in general have to say about this sort of thing anymore, no special lack of credibility for Fauci.

The reason for this in my case however, is that I just don't believe anyone really "knows" what the hell they are talking about anymore when it comes to Covid.

 

[Kaido]

You want static recommendations for a dynamic environment. His advice isnt the problem, you refusing to recognize the changing environment is.

This is a glitch in the matrix for human beings. In general, people have a really, really hard time mentally adjusting to changing environments. Our first line of thinking in a situation becomes the permanent line of thinking because it requires mental energy to re-asses & most people are already living in a maxed-out, low-mental energy state 24/7 as is. This happens publicly, too - whoever invents something gets to name it, or whoever does something publicly gets known for it, ex. the moonwalk by Michael Jackson or shouting "Kobe!" when shooting a ball (or trash into a garbage can, haha!).

Living in a world where (1) COVID isn't locked down to just one specific set of symptoms, and (2) at a time when politics are mixed with science & mistrust runs rampant, thanks in no small part to social media, means that people have an ultra-hard time pivoting when new information is presented to them. COVID is a highly fluid situation & requires regular updates & recommendations based on the best information available at the time. In an ideal world, we would have simply locked down the country like New Zealand. They just pulled a second rabbit out of the hat by curbing the Delta variant:

New Zealand sees success in curbing Delta outbreak as new cases plunge

New Zealand reported 28 new cases of COVID-19 on Friday, a big drop compared to the last few days, as authorities said the country was breaking the chain of transmission of the highly infectious Delta variant of coronavirus.

www.reuters.com

That could be us, but the freedoms we enjoy in America are often a two-edged sword, because having choices also means having the choice to make bad decisions.

 

[manly]

This is a glitch in the matrix for human beings. In general, people have a really, really hard time mentally adjusting to changing environments. Our first line of thinking in a situation becomes the permanent line of thinking because it requires mental energy to re-asses & most people are already living in a maxed-out, low-mental energy state 24/7 as is. This happens publicly, too - whoever invents something gets to name it, or whoever does something publicly gets known for it, ex. the moonwalk by Michael Jackson or shouting "Kobe!" when shooting a ball (or trash into a garbage can, haha!).

Living in a world where (1) COVID isn't locked down to just one specific set of symptoms, and (2) at a time when politics are mixed with science & mistrust runs rampant, thanks in no small part to social media, means that people have an ultra-hard time pivoting when new information is presented to them. COVID is a highly fluid situation & requires regular updates & recommendations based on the best information available at the time. In an ideal world, we would have simply locked down the country like New Zealand. They just pulled a second rabbit out of the hat by curbing the Delta variant:

New Zealand sees success in curbing Delta outbreak as new cases plunge

New Zealand reported 28 new cases of COVID-19 on Friday, a big drop compared to the last few days, as authorities said the country was breaking the chain of transmission of the highly infectious Delta variant of coronavirus.

www.reuters.com

That could be us, but the freedoms we enjoy in America are often a two-edged sword, because having choices also means having the choice to make bad decisions.

I'm highly impressed by NZ and that's kind of a model way of handling a pandemic (enforcing a zero COVID strategy). But I disagree wholeheartedly that there's any universe where "that could be us." Our closest comps are the populous western European nations, and although we look worse than pretty much all of them besides UK, none excelled. Germany came closest to doing relatively well but even they were hard hit by the winter surge.

I'd assert that if we did everything well enough by western standards (not by East Asian or NZ standards), our per capita outcomes would resemble Germany's (and probably a little worse because of the generally poor health of Muricans). Any fanciful scenarios where we locked down for months on end don't exist in the real world. People here were grumbling after a few weeks, and no place in the U.S. actually locked down. Shelter in place with exceptions are not lock downs.

 

[jpiniero]

Shelter in place with exceptions are not lock downs.

If Cops have the power to arrest people for being outside for no reason, that's absolutely a lockdown. I'm not sure that actually happened in the US though outside of riot related curfews.

 

[gill77]

Another country that has been put forward as a model for the proper handling of covid is Taiwan. Early on, I had occasion to speak with a Taiwanese university professor who has a sister still in Taiwan who is a practicing medical doctor. Most people are usually eager to boast of their country's successes, and I fully expected him to tell me how badly we were screwing up.

He was very straight forward. You just cannot compare the two. Taiwan is an island nation with a relatively small population and one international airport. In addition, the culture is much different and they have had previous experience with SARS.

This experience changed the way I looked at comparing the data from one country to the next. Live and learn.

 

[manly]

If Cops have the power to arrest people for being outside for no reason, that's absolutely a lockdown. I'm not sure that actually happened in the US though outside of riot related curfews.

What do the riot related curfews have to do with the April 2020 pandemic restrictions? Absolutely nothing. Was there a single arrest in April 2020 anywhere in the U.S. for someone breaking shelter in place rules?

As for cops, they arrest people for no reason frequently.

 

[K1052]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1433852295624761356