a thoughtful web.
Share good ideas and conversation.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by goobster
goobster  ·  66 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Moderna has a vaccine that will be easier to distribute than Pfizer

Fortunately, they'll pretty much die off once the rest of us are vaccinated.

Vaccination causes old people.

Notice none of the anti-vaxxers are over 30. (ish)

wasoxygen  ·  66 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Why would anti-vaxxers under 30 suddenly start dying when the vaccine appears?

goobster  ·  65 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Because they will reduce their already low compliance with best practices for avoidance of contact with the virus. They will feel "safer" since everyone else CAN'T get the virus, that there's less chance for them to contract it. So they will relax their precautions. (As will the 50% of people who are asymptomatic spreaders.)

And even if they recover from their bout with COVID, there's the permanent lung and brain damage, as well as the tendency for major organs to suddenly have blood clots. And, the younger they are, the longer they have to live for one of these knock-on effects of COVID to kill them before they "should have" died.

It'll be a cleansing of biblical proportions. It only takes one person in a crowd to spread it to hundreds of people and kill dozens. And if you are already an anti-science anti-vaxxer, you aren't even adhering to the most rudimentary protection measures... and are probably having other anti-vaxxers over for coffee and conspiracy-watching sessions on YouTube with other people with poor hygiene... and that's just a matter of time before everyone in that "club" get it, and has lifelong health issues from it.

wasoxygen  ·  65 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The infection fatality rate is 0.01% at age 25.

goobster  ·  64 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Yep. Mortality from COVID.

But they will have an entire (short) lifetime of ongoing health problems. There is no "recovery" from COVID. The flu-like symptoms will subside (in most people), but the long term brain, lung, and blood issues turn the individual into a fragile health risk and make them more susceptible to other maladies in the future. (At least that's what it seems at this point, with the long term studies that are coming out now that we have about a year of cases under out belts to examine...)

And the reason that concerns me, is that our health system is due for a very large socialized overhaul... just as the Boomers are getting VERY expensive to keep alive, and the generation behind me doesn't respect the potential long-term effects of COVID.

There's already a historically low number of people in my generation propping this whole Ponzi Scheme up with our taxes and profligate spending... and I don't see us being able to support half of America's healthcare, while also keeping everything else running and in proper condition (roads, bridges, military, etc)...

There's a macro economic problem coming, and half the population of America is expecting ME to be their blood bag...

wasoxygen  ·  64 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Can you provide any citation showing evidence of long-term health damage to people under age 30?

goobster  ·  64 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Obviously the data is preliminary, since the first subjects were only infected 11 months ago, and the most vulnerable (aka the elderly and immunocompromised) make up a very large percentage of the critical data we have. That's because you don't get to go to the doctor when your symptoms are mild, and those people are often refused care, especially if they don't fall into a high-risk demographic.

As "critical" infections dwindle and the number of infected and tested increase, the current thinking is that there will be issues cropping up throughout the recovered-person's life, due to these other effects.

(Note that "long-haulers" - those with sustained, long-term COVID symptoms - are a different class.)

There are two good studies I recently found, from the Mayo Clinic and Harvard, which look specifically at the long term damage to heart, lungs, and brain function, and what that might mean for young people who get it and recover.



Again, these are Ns of under 10 for now, because it hasn't been a long time, and infected young people are grossly underrepresented in the data we have today.

wasoxygen  ·  64 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The article by "Mayo Clinic Staff" says that "Even in young people, COVID-19 can cause strokes" but there is no link to show which of the 16 references might back that up.

The blog post from Harvard says "even young individuals are seven times more likely to have a stroke from this coronavirus versus a typical flu virus" with a link to an article in The Lancet "COVID-19 related stroke in young individuals".

The Lancet mentions "a 7.6-fold increase in the odds of stroke with COVID-19 compared with influenza" citing Merkler which says "The youngest patient with ischemic stroke in the cohort was age 51 years."

The Lancet also describes "a 7-fold increase in the rate of large vessel stroke in young people compared with the previous year" citing Belani which gives a median age of 65.5 ± 15.3 for the 41 cases and does not mention a minimum age.

am_Unition  ·  64 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Tyranny of the majority, baby. Most people decided they'd prefer not to be part of this little coronavirus experiment.

Trope-tastic, but: good science takes time. We don't understand covid well enough that anyone should be recommending something like "Yeah, should be OK if only young folks get it." OK, what protective orders are in place preventing the virus from getting into nursing homes? Not restrictions. A testing program? Rising positivity rate concerns aside, a robust testing program doesn't definitively prevent the virus from walking through the front door. A positive test for a nursing home worker is like a "Congratulations, it's pretty likely someone you tend to is about to die. Oh, and the nursing home is now a prison." I'm sure there're enough existing business incentives that almost every nursing home has some mask requirements, though, so that's good.

Edit: Of course, only wealthy families can afford to put up N̶a̶n̶ NaN somewhere she'll be safer than at home with the grandkids, who brought it back from school, or wherever. There are many, many ways in which covid is screaming out the depths of our societal wealth inequality. Obviously, wealth inequality also breaks down along racial lines, hence one major reason why the virus "targets" minorities.

Medical professionals are collectively saying: "Other than the fact that it's much more deadly without hospitalization, and the fact that we are running out of hospital space, we simply do not know enough about this virus to recommend anything but extreme measures."

Counter argument: "I'm not a doctor, but Scott Atlas and I are not concerned with the virus, it's not so bad, do NOT stop working, because that would destroy the economy."

Probably almost no doctor enjoys recommending a gov't-imposed lockdown. But neither do gov't researchers and doctors enjoy shit like being slandered and having their science politicized, which, hey, led to the lockdown recommendations. Ugh, I'm fortunate to study something that would be much more difficult to demonize.

We don't know that covid-19 won't mutate into an even worse strain, or become more transmissive, or able to more effectively harm children, whatever. The sooner herd immunity is reached, by whatever ratio of vaccinating and infections, the more unlikely or more prolonged an effective mutation would be. edit 2: no, actually, I think attempting to reach herd immunity via infections could also potentially facilitate a wicked mutation, as the cumulative "virus rolling dice for yahtzee" time is minimized with a vaccine. A vaccination developed by a company outside of the gov't, though incentivized by the federal government, is acceptable to me. I don't automatically hate the various business groups honing their anti-covid brews, so long as they are conducting sound science confirmable by peer review. The vaccine could prevent another million deaths-ish... We may have 10% or 15% nationwide exposure, tops, and so herd resistance is probably another 7x to 4x the existing covid death toll. Sorry, got sidetracked, but a mutation could always be a possibility, unless we eradicate it. Probably not this side of at least thirty years, if ever. Personally, I might try to go the vaxxin' route in maybe... March? April?

I think we should ship vaccine to elders who volunteer first. I'm sure the Trump administration has also spent plenty of time thinking about the best way to distribute the vaccine like that, or with another medically-informed rationale. LOL Dr. Atlas will be X-raying all of the vaccines on their way out the door to check for drugs, inadvertently destroying every dose.

The out-of-control transmission centered around Sturgis is a pathetic failing of Donald Trump and at least one comically stupid governor. I don't think it's equivalent to point to Cuomo, NY is probably the national epicenter of international mixing, and we had almost no idea what we were dealing with at the time, thanks, again, in some part to Trump ignoring the advice of experts (major theme, here). Truly, I pity Trump's base up in the heartland. They were lied to. They still haven't hit "critical mass" for that to sink in, I'm worried. Hopefully they're close.

All corrections and weigh-ins on my pro-establishment propaganda are welcome.

wasoxygen  ·  63 days ago  ·  link  ·  

How much do you value credibility?

When the president said a vaccine was around the corner in October, I didn't believe him because he has repeatedly demonstrated willingness to say things that aren't true.

Is the mask & vaccine message so important that it justifies trampling the truth? I think that's a dangerous path to follow.

What's wrong with appealing to young people with honesty?

"Hey kids, you probably don't worry too much about your health. You're right, there has never been a safer time for young people to live. But that's not an excuse to be stupid, nobody is immortal. Over a million people have died while infected with this virus, and we don't yet know what the long term health effects will be for people who recover, even young people. Old people are scared, the chance of surviving infection at age 85 is only 85%.

You can help slow down the spread of the virus, so fewer vulnerable people get sick before a vaccine is available to reduce their risk. Using a mask and reducing socializing in person is inconvenient but effective. A thin layer of fabric helps people say it, don't spray it. Keeping your hands clean and away from your face can reduce other diseases too, like annoying colds. Our grandparents survived world wars with gas masks, we can make some sacrifices to help keep them safe."

Compare that to "If you don't wear a mask and get vaccinated, you're going to die in biblical proportions, and it will be your own fault because you are selfish and unscientific."

OftenBen  ·  65 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The unfortunate truth of Covid-19 is that symptom-less spread is indeed possible, and most young-ish people of modest health won't suffer much.

They will however spread the disease to everyone else.

They will however thwart all attempts at high compliance rates with vaccination.