OT: COVID-19 thread #3

[Mr. Tibbs]

They have been in violation of local ordinances. Las Vegas had a rule prohibiting gatherings of more than 50 people, which Trump ignored.

Restaurants don't have hundreds, sometimes thousands of people crowding together. And what if studies showed that 700 people have died from one particular restaurant not following CDC and local protocols for Covid safety? And most restaurants do try to keep people social distanced.

It would be hard to prove that a particular death was caused by attending a rally. But if you have 700 cases to go over, I think you could make a pretty good case that with a lot of these people, it would be pretty likely that they caught it at his rally. It would be circumstantial, but enough circumstantial evidence is enough to convict somebody.

Whatever restaurants try to do, and i don't think it is much in most cases except the absolute minimum required, going to restaurants has been shown to be one of the highest risk thing people are doing. I would guess our willingness to allow indoor dining or count the sealed tents as outdoor dining are responsible for more spread and deaths than trumps rallies.

I would agree that dining has caused more deaths than Trump rallies. You could, however, make the argument that what Trump is doing is more dangerous and more reckless, since I would guess that there is a higher probability of either catching Covid or dying going to a Trump rally than you do going out to eat.

The other argument against Trump, which is a moral argument and not a legal one, is that restaurant owners are opening in order to keep from losing their business and their livelihood. Trump is holding rallies for no other reason than to hold onto his political power, and he is endangering (and in fact, killing) the very people he has pledged to try to protect.

I plus 1'd your initial post even though I think it's safe to say he'd never get charged with anything nor do I think should he. I just wanted to emphasize how irresponsible and morally reprehensible it was to see those rallies crapping on science and public health in every way. Years from now when covid is being studied in textbooks ala the 1918 Spanish flu, pictures like those will nicely illustrate why things got as bad as they did.

[Dez]

An entire week of 0 new cases and deaths in Victoria to go with an Australia wide 0 today.

F***ing stoked.

[jmajew]

Pfizer CEO just announced their vaccine right now shows 90% efficacy and no safety concerns. This is the best news we could have gotten. This means we will soon be having a vaccine that is highly effective and could very easily eradicate this virus. There is clearly light at the end of the tunnel. Time to start getting excited.

[ImSlower]

Terrific news to wake up to. My father is at significant risk, and it's been a heavy burden trying to balance my own independent life, and spending much of my time working on their house, or being their sole outlet to the world. Dad basically hasn't gone into public in eight months.

[Bullbleep]

Pfizer CEO just announced their vaccine right now shows 90% efficacy and no safety concerns. This is the best news we could have gotten. This means we will soon be having a vaccine that is highly effective and could very easily eradicate this virus. There is clearly light at the end of the tunnel. Time to start getting excited.

In Denmark, they are scrambling to contain a new strain of COVID that emerged in commercial mink farms and now has spread to humans. The new strain is apparently resistant to antibodies generated by the current strain, which means the vaccines under development won’t be effective against it. Maybe the Danes will be effective in containing this new strain, although COVID has shown to be extremely difficult to contain. However, the bigger picture is that with 17M active cases worldwide and growing rapidly, human/animal transfer (and visa versa...) becomes more likely, raising the likelihood of additional new strains. Yeah, it’s good news about the progress with Pfizer’s vaccine, but this is looking more like a war than a battle. Thank god we’ll have a President that understands COVID is a real threat to us, not just a nuisance...

[jmajew]

Pfizer CEO just announced their vaccine right now shows 90% efficacy and no safety concerns. This is the best news we could have gotten. This means we will soon be having a vaccine that is highly effective and could very easily eradicate this virus. There is clearly light at the end of the tunnel. Time to start getting excited.

In Denmark, they are scrambling to contain a new strain of COVID that emerged in commercial mink farms and now has spread to humans. The new strain is apparently resistant to antibodies generated by the current strain, which means the vaccines under development won’t be effective against it. Maybe the Danes will be effective in containing this new strain, although COVID has shown to be extremely difficult to contain. However, the bigger picture is that with 17M active cases worldwide and growing rapidly, human/animal transfer (and visa versa...) becomes more likely, raising the likelihood of additional new strains. Yeah, it’s good news about the progress with Pfizer’s vaccine, but this is looking more like a war than a battle. Thank god we’ll have a President that understands COVID is a real threat to us, not just a nuisance...

Well the WHO said this...

Earlier, the WHO said it was monitoring the mutation, which was a "concern," but that it was too early to tell if it posed any risk to humans or would undo the impact of a potential vaccine.

"This is a global pandemic and many millions of people have been infected, many millions of animals have been exposed," Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO Health Emergencies Program, said during a virtual press conference from Geneva.

"Right now, the evidence that we have doesn't suggest that this variant is in any way different in the way it behaves ... it is still the same virus."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/who-downplays-coronavirus-mink-mutation-risk-after-denmark-orders-huge-n1246726

[Ice Man]

While like others I am excited by the Pfizer news, can the company really claim no safety concerns for the vaccine? Surely some vaccines have long-term effects that are not immediately apparent. And of course, Pfizer has had no opportunity to evaluate such things, as its trials have only existed for a few months.

[jmajew]

While like others I am excited by the Pfizer news, can the company really claim no safety concerns for the vaccine? Surely some vaccines have long-term effects that are not immediately apparent. And of course, Pfizer has had no opportunity to evaluate such things, as its trials have only existed for a few months.

My wife and I have had that same conversation. She doesn't want to take it right away. I'm willing to take it day one as I think the long term potential risk is low enough that I'm willing to accept it with getting my life back to normal. I can't keep living like this.

[dougthonus]

While like others I am excited by the Pfizer news, can the company really claim no safety concerns for the vaccine? Surely some vaccines have long-term effects that are not immediately apparent. And of course, Pfizer has had no opportunity to evaluate such things, as its trials have only existed for a few months.

Unless you want to wait 10 years, this is where we are at risk wise with any vaccine. I don't mean this to be critical at all, my wife and I talked about this too, but fundamentally, how long is long enough?

If the phase 3 trial lasts for 3 months? 6 months? 1 year? 5 years? At what point do you feel there are no safety concerns or long term effects? If the vaccine is out there in mass volume for 3 months and we don't see anything, I'm not sure we're going to see anything different after a year, maybe 5 years or 10 years, but are you waiting 5 years or 10 years? Maybe. Who knows. Its an individual decision for everyone.

[Dez]

11 days with zero new cases, down to 4 total active cases.

[Michael Jackson]

While like others I am excited by the Pfizer news, can the company really claim no safety concerns for the vaccine? Surely some vaccines have long-term effects that are not immediately apparent. And of course, Pfizer has had no opportunity to evaluate such things, as its trials have only existed for a few months.

Unless you want to wait 10 years, this is where we are at risk wise with any vaccine. I don't mean this to be critical at all, my wife and I talked about this too, but fundamentally, how long is long enough?

If the phase 3 trial lasts for 3 months? 6 months? 1 year? 5 years? At what point do you feel there are no safety concerns or long term effects? If the vaccine is out there in mass volume for 3 months and we don't see anything, I'm not sure we're going to see anything different after a year, maybe 5 years or 10 years, but are you waiting 5 years or 10 years? Maybe. Who knows. Its an individual decision for everyone.

Pretty sure I have the antibodies already, so I’m outdoors pass myself on the first wave but down the road, 6 months or so I would be on board.

[nike1]

11 days with zero new cases, down to 4 total active cases.

you're almost up to tasmania levels there ...
which is 91 days
69 since last active case.

[jmajew]

11 days with zero new cases, down to 4 total active cases.

Is everything back open there? Or are there still restrictions?

I was shocked the other day when Scott Gottlieb said that the 100k cases a day is actually a low number and that the US is actually at 500k a day we just aren't testing enough. Using logic behind that I would assume you still have quite a few restrictions because you never know.

[jc23]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

[Michael Jackson]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

I think it points to how much everyone wanted Trump out. He is too much of a wild card for everyone in government and business but he does have a large fan base, so they play ball with that. That’s what that looks like to me.

[dougthonus]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

Are you suggesting it is positive for Trump? For Biden? I have no idea what this even means, but I don't see how this reflects on anyone in any meaningful way politically.

What's great news is we hopefully will have a vaccine soon.

[jc23]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

Are you suggesting it is positive for Trump? For Biden? I have no idea what this even means, but I don't see how this reflects on anyone in any meaningful way politically.

Its ok to to question coincidence is all. Heard talk earlier in the year that a vaccine would directly follow the election and boom goes the dynamite.

And yes a vaccine is Cliff Levingston.

[MrSparkle]

One thing is for sure; it's foolish to think this 4th Q can be saved by a vaccine. It's actually impossible; no one will deliver an un-thoroughly tested vaccine within a 1-2 month timeline. Unless it's the People's Republic of China.

The blurb of "90% more effective" is for all intents and purposes, basically a useless non-conclusive statement. A 90%-effective vaccine needs more than 7 days to prove its effect and safety. The vaccines have been moving along "very well" the past few months, so it's not surprising that we're nearing the end of the year and more up-beat news is coming out.

Question for Alex Jones: if the vaccine 90% news came out a week before the election, would it have been a questionable coincidence? You can expend a labyrinth of energy trying to reason 'yes' or 'no,' depending on your personal preference for the situation. The nature of conspiracy theories.

[dougthonus]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

Are you suggesting it is positive for Trump? For Biden? I have no idea what this even means, but I don't see how this reflects on anyone in any meaningful way politically.

Its ok to to question coincidence is all. Heard talk earlier in the year that a vaccine would directly follow the election and boom goes the dynamite.

And yes a vaccine is Cliff Levingston.

Your post certainly implies something conspiratorial though, and let's say I did believe in conspiracy theories, what side does this benefit, because I'm not sure. Of course that's why I also don't believe its a conspiracy because the correct answer is no one.

Trump tried to take credit for the vaccine and Pfizer came out and said they worked 100% independently from the government and didn't take warp speed funds which makes any credit given to him laughable. Biden obviously has no claim to any credit. Its just a non event in any way I look at it.

[Michael Jackson]

Im no Alex Jones but very convenient timing to have such positive vaccine news.

Are you suggesting it is positive for Trump? For Biden? I have no idea what this even means, but I don't see how this reflects on anyone in any meaningful way politically.

What's great news is we hopefully will have a vaccine soon.

Not for either, but definetly could have been withheld until after the election so that Trump wouldn’t get votes. Feels more like a personal preference from Pfizer than a support for either side imho but the timing surely didn’t help Trump!