NBA protocols/Covid/Vaccine - Discussion thread

[michaelm]

triple

[michaelm]

double

[michaelm]

Interesting that an article linked to in that Atlantic article spruiks the Novavax vaccine which has always appealed to me the most on general principles. As you have said previously we would both be astonished if this vaccine which doesn't involve the mRNA vaccine technology at all changed anything though.

Typical of Fox with a modus operandi of tawdry sophistry to search high and low for a maverick who will go along with them and claim this proves everyone else wrong. Their anti-mask guy in Australia has found a neurosurgeon to agree with them.

Hard to know based on the article whether this guy had credit stolen from him, but this is certainly not unheard of. Very clear that while his original work over 30 years ago may have been seminal he has had absolutely no involvement with the current mRNA vaccines though. Again like anyone else if he has data I am very happy to see it, and once again it is pretty obvious where many antivaxx people source their 'science'.

I saw that! Novavax getting some serious buzz.. I unfortunately have no insight on this yet but I'm getting a little excited that the medical community is getting excited. I do think that there is higher potential, because its important to remember that Pfizer/Moderna/J&J made their vaccine for the alpha variant only, had absolutely no data on any other variants. Novavax has that advantage, and might make a stronger vaccine because of it. That's just reading tea leaves though, not based on anything specifically that I've read

But even if Malone had some credit stolen from him (typically sole credit is only given when one person leads a team to achieve his/her idea and that clearly wasnt the case with him).. he's been out of the mRNA game for so long, and as you note he's not pushing qualified data, just randomly grabbing twitter headlines and cherry picking bits and pieces to fit what he wants to be the truth.

I'm sure the next antivaxxer who pops in here will start pimping Alex Berenson.. the dance will continue, I'm sure.

There are many people like Malone in the sciences. Plenty of people that had a paper once or a thought that they never followed through, that others then followed through with great success. These people always get upset but the reality is that people have ideas in science all the time. Following through on ideas is hard, plenty of people follow through to dead ends.

I think people like Malone are the worst in science, willing to sabotage a lot of peoples work because they have regret that they never followed up on one specific idea. I find the behavior of this guy completely abhorrent.

Sure, it can cut both ways, and not infrequently the leaders of research groups are the people with the ideas/a direction of research with which their collaborators run, and credit is at the very least due to both. I am no researcher myself, but have a colleague and a relative who are world class researchers, both brilliant people who are sought out by post graduate students, and passionate about what they do and hardworking, over several decades in my colleague's case

Spruiking Ivermectin, particularly on Fox, in this context just about disqualifies people as scientists for me, but I stand to be corrected by someone with your background.

[zimpy27]

I saw that! Novavax getting some serious buzz.. I unfortunately have no insight on this yet but I'm getting a little excited that the medical community is getting excited. I do think that there is higher potential, because its important to remember that Pfizer/Moderna/J&J made their vaccine for the alpha variant only, had absolutely no data on any other variants. Novavax has that advantage, and might make a stronger vaccine because of it. That's just reading tea leaves though, not based on anything specifically that I've read

But even if Malone had some credit stolen from him (typically sole credit is only given when one person leads a team to achieve his/her idea and that clearly wasnt the case with him).. he's been out of the mRNA game for so long, and as you note he's not pushing qualified data, just randomly grabbing twitter headlines and cherry picking bits and pieces to fit what he wants to be the truth.

I'm sure the next antivaxxer who pops in here will start pimping Alex Berenson.. the dance will continue, I'm sure.

There are many people like Malone in the sciences. Plenty of people that had a paper once or a thought that they never followed through, that others then followed through with great success. These people always get upset but the reality is that people have ideas in science all the time. Following through on ideas is hard, plenty of people follow through to dead ends.

I think people like Malone are the worst in science, willing to sabotage a lot of peoples work because they have regret that they never followed up on one specific idea. I find the behavior of this guy completely abhorrent.

Sure, it can cut both ways, and not infrequently the leaders of research groups are the people with the ideas/a direction of research with which their collaborators run, and credit is at the very least due to both. I am no researcher myself, but have a colleague and a relative who are world class researchers, both brilliant people who are sought out by post graduate students, and passionate about what they do and hardworking, over several decades in my colleague's case

Spruiking Ivermectin, particularly on Fox, in this context just about disqualifies people as scientists for me, but I stand to be corrected by someone with your background.

Yeah Ivermectin spruiking is probably all you need to know about this person. I think Malone is just trying to be famous, same with that Peter McCullough guy. They get treated like gods and true heroes by people daily. It's a shame that you get scientists and clinicians behaving this way and for these reasons.

[Neutral 123]

There are many people like Malone in the sciences. Plenty of people that had a paper once or a thought that they never followed through, that others then followed through with great success. These people always get upset but the reality is that people have ideas in science all the time. Following through on ideas is hard, plenty of people follow through to dead ends.

I think people like Malone are the worst in science, willing to sabotage a lot of peoples work because they have regret that they never followed up on one specific idea. I find the behavior of this guy completely abhorrent.

Sure, it can cut both ways, and not infrequently the leaders of research groups are the people with the ideas/a direction of research with which their collaborators run, and credit is at the very least due to both. I am no researcher myself, but have a colleague and a relative who are world class researchers, both brilliant people who are sought out by post graduate students, and passionate about what they do and hardworking, over several decades in my colleague's case

Spruiking Ivermectin, particularly on Fox, in this context just about disqualifies people as scientists for me, but I stand to be corrected by someone with your background.

Yeah Ivermectin spruiking is probably all you need to know about this person. I think Malone is just trying to be famous, same with that Peter McCullough guy. They get treated like gods and true heroes by people daily. It's a shame that you get scientists and clinicians behaving this way and for these reasons.

I agree. People like that can't be trusted.

[zimpy27]

Sure, it can cut both ways, and not infrequently the leaders of research groups are the people with the ideas/a direction of research with which their collaborators run, and credit is at the very least due to both. I am no researcher myself, but have a colleague and a relative who are world class researchers, both brilliant people who are sought out by post graduate students, and passionate about what they do and hardworking, over several decades in my colleague's case

Spruiking Ivermectin, particularly on Fox, in this context just about disqualifies people as scientists for me, but I stand to be corrected by someone with your background.

Yeah Ivermectin spruiking is probably all you need to know about this person. I think Malone is just trying to be famous, same with that Peter McCullough guy. They get treated like gods and true heroes by people daily. It's a shame that you get scientists and clinicians behaving this way and for these reasons.

I agree. People like that can't be trusted.

I mean, I have disagreed with Fauci in the past for other reasons. And yeah he's flawed, we're all flawed. But if in doubt, at least listen to the majority of experts, he had done this well over the course of the pandemic. Don't single out the outliers and follow them on something this important and complex.

[Neutral 123]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

[nikster]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

[michaelm]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Which side is Fauci on ?.

I am not sure he is on any side, including the side of science, and am unimpressed regardless, and don't understand why an 80 year old man wants to run the Covid response in the USA, or why the USA has him running said response.

What is ridiculous imo are vaccination, and even more so mask wearing, being political issues at all, which seems to be close to an order of magnitude more prominent in the USA than pretty much anywhere else.

[michaelm]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

True, but the issue has become a matter of politics in the USA which it certainly doesn't have to be, so the ship has sailed as far as I can see as far as getting a rate of vaccination likely to be very effective.

I think there are groups for whom vaccination should be mandatory everywhere, mainly health workers, and don't understand how anyone can in conscience work looking after patients without being vaccinated when vaccination is available, the same as with hepatitis B vaccination.

If people not in high risks jobs don't want to get vaccinated fine, but I don't see how they can be irate about restrictions imposed to protect vulnerable others, or that it is reasonable for them to try to impede vaccination in general.

[Neutral 123]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Which side is Fauci on ?.

I am not sure he is on any side, including the side of science, and am unimpressed regardless, and don't understand why an 80 year old man wants to run the Covid response in the USA, or why the USA has him running said response.

What is ridiculous imo are vaccination, and even more so mask wearing, being political issues at all, which seems to be close to orders of magnitude more prominent in the USA than pretty much anywhere else.

What many people from around the world don't understand is the ideas of personal freedom. This is the difference. They take it as obvious that they should do things in groups and as such, need a leader to direct the group.

This issue had to be political. Either you believe in individual choice and merely led by recommendations, or you believe in group identity/greater good and you lead by one uniform mandate.

To say that everyone should be vaccinated is a view consistent with personal freedom. To say that everyone must be vaccinated is not. Covid has brought out a lot of the latter.

[Neutral 123]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

The science may be clear, but the nature of science means nothing is final. So it is reasonable for someone who is young and healthy who may get very marginal benefit in terms of risk reduction from the vaccine knowing that the science may change down the line.

As for your second point, I absolutely disagree. The first point should have no bearing on the first. Third parties deciding what is best is antithetical to individual freedom even if said third parties are correct about a particular issue.

[Neutral 123]

The science changes. That's the very nature of science. It can and often does change.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-08/iceland-joins-nordic-peers-in-halting-moderna-covid-vaccinations

[michaelm]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Which side is Fauci on ?.

I am not sure he is on any side, including the side of science, and am unimpressed regardless, and don't understand why an 80 year old man wants to run the Covid response in the USA, or why the USA has him running said response.

What is ridiculous imo are vaccination, and even more so mask wearing, being political issues at all, which seems to be close to orders of magnitude more prominent in the USA than pretty much anywhere else.

What many people from around the world don't understand is the ideas of personal freedom. This is the difference. They take it as obvious that they should do things in groups and as such, need a leader to direct the group.

This issue had to be political. Either you believe in individual choice and merely led by recommendations, or you believe in group identity/greater good and you lead by one uniform mandate.

To say that everyone should be vaccinated is a view consistent with personal freedom. To say that everyone must be vaccinated is not. Covid has brought out a lot of the latter.

With rights come responsibilities. No one has ever been free to do absolutely anything they feel like with no consideration for the welfare of others, including in the USA , and particularly in regard to infectious diseases, with neither the constitution nor any amendments thereto giving citizens the freedom to spread communicable diseases afaik. Such freedom certainly hasn't applied to diseases like typhoid, syphillis, and TB, or leprosy for that matter more historically. All manner of restrictions including isolation measures, curfews etc were imposed including in the USA during the Spanish Influenza epidemic post WW1, perhaps somewhat comparable to the current situation with spread being mainly airborne. Perhaps Covid 19 will not be as severe a threat, particularly long term, as those diseases but it has certainly looked fairly nasty at times during the current pandemic.

I have been to the USA probably 40 times, and to many other places in the world, and can't say I have noticed freedom to be particularly greater there than in other western democracies in any case.

Again, I wouldn't particularly argue for mandatory vaccination of NBA players. However, does the NBA have the right to run their business in a manner they consider safe or to regard Covid as a threat to that business ?; it certainly was and curtailed the income of the league last year. There are all manner of regulations covering food providers and governing health workers, including mandatory vaccination for hepatitis B for health workers in most places and declaration of immune status for several other infectious diseases, and restrictions placed on carriers of viruses such as hep c, although some of those medical scientists no one should trust have come up with a cure for hepatitis c infection.

[michaelm]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

The science may be clear, but the nature of science means nothing is final. So it is reasonable for someone who is young and healthy who may get very marginal benefit in terms of risk reduction from the vaccine knowing that the science may change down the line.

As for your second point, I absolutely disagree. The first point should have no bearing on the first. Third parties deciding what is best is antithetical to individual freedom even if said third parties are correct about a particular issue.

You had better move somewhere else then, because such freedom doesn't exist in the USA and never has.

[JayMKE]

Considering the NBA operated just fine for two postseasons during covid with masks/social distancing/testing, what’s the logic of mandating a vaccine on players now that doesn’t even prevent spread?

Also what’s the point of local ordinances that only apply to home players?

[ATLTimekeeper]

Considering the NBA operated just fine for two postseasons during covid with masks/social distancing/testing, what’s the logic of mandating a vaccine on players now that doesn’t even prevent spread?

Also what’s the point of local ordinances that only apply to home players?

They apply to more than just basketball players.

The NBA didn't operate just "fine" Like 1/5th of the league went into protocol last year.

[Neutral 123]

Which side is Fauci on ?.

I am not sure he is on any side, including the side of science, and am unimpressed regardless, and don't understand why an 80 year old man wants to run the Covid response in the USA, or why the USA has him running said response.

What is ridiculous imo are vaccination, and even more so mask wearing, being political issues at all, which seems to be close to orders of magnitude more prominent in the USA than pretty much anywhere else.

What many people from around the world don't understand is the ideas of personal freedom. This is the difference. They take it as obvious that they should do things in groups and as such, need a leader to direct the group.

This issue had to be political. Either you believe in individual choice and merely led by recommendations, or you believe in group identity/greater good and you lead by one uniform mandate.

To say that everyone should be vaccinated is a view consistent with personal freedom. To say that everyone must be vaccinated is not. Covid has brought out a lot of the latter.

With rights come responsibilities. No one has ever been free to do absolutely anything they feel like with no consideration for the welfare of others, including in the USA , and particularly in regard to infectious diseases, with neither the constitution nor any amendments thereto giving citizens the freedom to spread communicable diseases afaik. Such freedom certainly hasn't applied to diseases like typhoid, syphillis, and TB, or leprosy for that matter more historically. All manner of restrictions including isolation measures, curfews etc were imposed including in the USA during the Spanish Influenza epidemic post WW1, perhaps somewhat comparable to the current situation with spread being mainly airborne. Perhaps Covid 19 will not be as severe a threat, particularly long term, as those diseases but it has certainly looked fairly nasty at times during the current pandemic.

I have been to the USA probably 40 times, and to many other places in the world, and can't say I have noticed freedom to be particularly greater there than in other western democracies in any case.

Again, I wouldn't particularly argue for mandatory vaccination of NBA players. However, does the NBA have the right to run their business in a manner they consider safe or to regard Covid as a threat to that business ?; it certainly was and curtailed the income of the league last year. There are all manner of regulations covering food providers and governing health workers, including mandatory vaccination for hepatitis B for health workers in most places and declaration of immune status for several other infectious diseases, and restrictions placed on carriers of viruses such as hep c, although some of those medical scientists no one should trust have come up with a cure for hepatitis c infection.

I don't want to go too far down this road since it's veering off topic but laws are generally formed with the idea that you are not allowed to infringe on the freedom of others. To assume that someone who is unvaccinated has covid and is a danger to everyone else is NOT consistent with that structure. It IS consistent with a group worldview, one that sees things in terms of 'we' aka the govt needs to tell everyone else what to do for the good of the group.
These measures are consistent with a leftist worldview are incompatible with individual freedom. Fauci and other experts have addressed this and even they concede that they want to take away individual freedoms for the alleged benefit of society. That is politics, and that is a socialist/leftist POV.

[ATLTimekeeper]

The issue is not even about listening to experts at this point. The issue is whether we should be forced to do whatever experts tell us. I don't agree with that, especially when it's painfully obvious when even those with a majority view are seeking fame and fortune. A real shame that people have made gods out of people who represent whatever side they resonate with.

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

The science may be clear, but the nature of science means nothing is final. So it is reasonable for someone who is young and healthy who may get very marginal benefit in terms of risk reduction from the vaccine knowing that the science may change down the line.

As for your second point, I absolutely disagree. The first point should have no bearing on the first. Third parties deciding what is best is antithetical to individual freedom even if said third parties are correct about a particular issue.

John Stuart Mill would hold your hand while you took the vaccine. Enough of this, it's childish to post pictures of Fauci as a boogeyman.

[Neutral 123]

Well there's is 2 separate issues.
First is whether or not everyone should get the vaccine, both for individual and societal benefit. Here the science is clear.

2nd is whether or not there should be mandates or coercion. Here it is impossible to have a rational discussion without both parties accepting the reality of the first point

The science may be clear, but the nature of science means nothing is final. So it is reasonable for someone who is young and healthy who may get very marginal benefit in terms of risk reduction from the vaccine knowing that the science may change down the line.

As for your second point, I absolutely disagree. The first point should have no bearing on the first. Third parties deciding what is best is antithetical to individual freedom even if said third parties are correct about a particular issue.

You had better move somewhere else then, because such freedom doesn't exist in the USA and never has.

Not completely, but more than most anywhere else and what is going on now is clearly a move away from individual freedom. I still have to chuckle at the my body my choice people being the first ones to support forced injections.