original paper:
Makes sense. About 25% of common colds are caused by (not-Sars-Cov-2) coronaviruses. That there may be some degree of crossreactivity is not shocking, but I would suspect itâs fairly low-grade. Not the same as a vaccine, although I am certain some covidiots will take it that way.
If the numbers in the article are representative, then it implies that the lower bound on the frequency of Long COVID has it affecting about 6 times more people than die. The article suggests that the cohort identified is one where the Long COVID severe enough that they are being treated as outpatients for disability.
Shit. So weâre looking at likely at least 5M USians now living with disability from this thing?!? So far?
This is pandemic-relatated, and would I consider it good news. We need good news, donât we?
Suspicion is that it will lie in the 10-20% range, and also vary based on severity and duration. Lower in kids (we think), higher in older folks (probably.) In pediatrics, we are seeing 4-10% ish. But, huge but here, there is no long term yet, the disease has not existed long enough for that. WDKS as usual, but the preliminaries are concerning.
ETA: so yeah, 6x the roughly somewhat-less-than 2% mortality are seeing is 10-12%, same range given the very preliminary numbers and confounding variables.
Yahoo reprint
The growing frustration of the vaccinated majority in the West against its unvaccinated minority is reaching a crescendo in some countries.
Yes, in for sure, eh? Thatâs Conservative Party leader Erin OâToole being lampooned in todayâs Toronto Star Editorial Cartoon.
To be completely fair, the role of our opposition parties is to oppose, even if they actually agree with a position on some level. The art of that job lies in not looking completely stupid in the process.
I feel like this was always where a lot of antivaxers were going to end up .
ETA: thereâs already a post about it:
OT, but thatâs the most clear and succinct way Iâve ever seen it explained. Basically, itâs the format of debate or Model UN, not the 24/7 all-or-nothing that we see in U.S. political parties.
An opposition isnât just contradiction. An opposition is the articulation of a connected series of policies intended to establish an alternative possible set of actions and priorities for government.
It isnât just contradiction. Opposition is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other party says.
Which is to say, itâs not just âwhatever they say we have to be against itâ, because thatâs how we get into these messes in the first place. âTheir party stands for small puppies and delicious food. Well, then we have to stand for crocodiles and gruel, because thatâs just how it works!â. The idea is that an opposition party holds the government to account, and provides a workable vision of what could be done differently (and, ideally, better).
Sometimes opposition parties run with âeverything they do is wrong, and we stand for everything theyâre notâ, and sometimes they do really well with that⌠until they win, and are the government, and it turns out that, like the dog that caught the car, they have no idea what to do with it except systematically ruin everything the other side built for the sole reason that it was them who built it.
If the opposition party agree with a position, thereâs no rule that says they have to disagree with it, because that way lies madness. What if the position is an unarguable good? (Gov: Our policy is that starving children is a bad thing. Opp: Yeah? Well our policy is that starving children is a good thing and we need more of it!) The opposition might bring a new perspective on it, or different approaches to how itâs best addressed, but they donât Ââ they shouldnât be expected to â automatically gainsay everything the other party says just because they said it.
Heâs not going to get alot of traction unless he threatens excommunication
And here I thought that for the past couple of years, weâve been in the Being Hit on the Head Lessons room.
Thatâs refreshing, but the stark reality is, we canât vaccinate the entire world every 6 months. Even if we want to, we havenât even vaxxed the entire world thatâs willing in over a year. We definitely canât do this 2 times a year for the entire planet.
Noone said this would be needed, aimed at or wanted.
This is an anti-vaxers narrative, and it serves noone to repeat it.