Interesting timeline of events driven by incompletely thought out policies and rules and the resulting stupidities. He lost my interest and support when his analysis and facts were extended to embrace a political philosophy.
It’s depressing how anti vax people never accept that doing things that might reduce the chance of serious infection, or might reduce the time they can spread it to more at risk people or possibly reduce the viral load is worth their consideration or inconvenience. Last time I checked, a college environment has a broad range of people of all ages, some of who are (far) more at risk.
So it goes. I hope the politicalization of covid does not reduce willingness to take vaccines in general. Or makes people ignore the next novel virus. Recall that before omicron showed up covid was far more serious. And, in the case of related viruses sars and mers the “healthy” age cohort did far worse than those most affected by covid due to cytokine storm.
Nature is what it is, and no amount of wishing will make it conform to somebody’s world view. I think it’s good and appropriate to look out for others who might not be doing as well as I am. I’m also quite interested in whatever biological hacks might keep me in the game.
The author had a Covid infection and had previously taken both shots. By all accounts of the latest scientific literature on the subject, the booster was an unnecessary risk for him. Also, the author lived off campus which meant he was not putting anybody else at risk. Why did he need to comply?
> might reduce the time they can spread it to more at risk people or possibly reduce the viral load
That the vaccines could do this (especially for the new variants) was never demonstrated in any rigorous randomized controlled trials whatsoever, and if anything the experience of highly vaxxed countries and jurisdictions (hello, Bay Area!) suggests that they are actually increasing the rate of infection. It's possible that the main effect of the vaccines is to suppress immune response, which helps prevent the immune-induced cytokine storm which leads to severe disease, but also allows for higher asymptomatic viral loads.
The reference to "inconvenience" shows you are really either unfamiliar or obtusely dismissive of the skeptics' reasons for declining COVID vaccines.
drallison|3 years ago
sn0w_crash|3 years ago
jleyank|3 years ago
So it goes. I hope the politicalization of covid does not reduce willingness to take vaccines in general. Or makes people ignore the next novel virus. Recall that before omicron showed up covid was far more serious. And, in the case of related viruses sars and mers the “healthy” age cohort did far worse than those most affected by covid due to cytokine storm.
Nature is what it is, and no amount of wishing will make it conform to somebody’s world view. I think it’s good and appropriate to look out for others who might not be doing as well as I am. I’m also quite interested in whatever biological hacks might keep me in the game.
DevKoala|3 years ago
IdEntities|3 years ago
That the vaccines could do this (especially for the new variants) was never demonstrated in any rigorous randomized controlled trials whatsoever, and if anything the experience of highly vaxxed countries and jurisdictions (hello, Bay Area!) suggests that they are actually increasing the rate of infection. It's possible that the main effect of the vaccines is to suppress immune response, which helps prevent the immune-induced cytokine storm which leads to severe disease, but also allows for higher asymptomatic viral loads.
The reference to "inconvenience" shows you are really either unfamiliar or obtusely dismissive of the skeptics' reasons for declining COVID vaccines.
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]