Octopus Overlords

https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/ ... 1287122951

Imagine me telling you 18 months ago that 1,500 Americans dying a day wouldn’t be the biggest story in America. Or that there wouldn’t be any real political (or legal!) consequences for the party helping to cause those deaths.

Moat_Man wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:07 pm There is so much irony in that video. Some will look at it as a victory and others will see it as admitting defeat. Deliciously stupid.

Even the ACC tweet can be taken both ways. When I first read it, I read it in Smoove's "what the fuck are we doing"? voice and it made sense. Then I read it in the ACC "football's back, baby!" voice, probably as intended, and it fit as well.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Sep 06, 2021 9:52 am

Moat_Man wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:07 pm There is so much irony in that video. Some will look at it as a victory and others will see it as admitting defeat. Deliciously stupid.

Even the ACC tweet can be taken both ways. When I first read it, I read it in Smoove's "what the fuck are we doing"? voice and it made sense. Then I read it in the ACC "football's back, baby!" voice, probably as intended, and it fit as well.

To add to that same theme - I showed the video to my wife, and she assumed someone had dubbed the Enter Sandman song on there for the irony (she had missed the first couple seconds of the video as I handed her my phone).

Another (depressing) data point:

https://twitter.com/oni_blackstock/stat ... 4462578699

90,000 scripts a week for ivermectin up from a pre-pandemic avg of 3,600 weekly.

Wondering who these prescribing HCPs are & why there seems to be no consequences for HCPs who are prescribing an unauthorized & unapproved + potentially dangerous med to patients.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Sep 06, 2021 9:52 am When I first read it, I read it in Smoove's "what the fuck are we doing"? voice and it made sense. Then I read it in the ACC "football's back, baby!" voice, probably as intended, and it fit as well.

Another example.

https://twitter.com/AggieSoccer/status/ ... 0476490755

It's not that all these people don't know that COVID-19 is currently surging, it's that they don't care. I continue to shout into the void but I'm well aware the war has been lost.

The void welcomes your shout with glee, as it feeds off your impotent rage.

It doesn't help that "Aggies" (Texas A&M) are often jokingly referred to as the rednecks of Texans (i.e. even more hick than usual), at least when I lived there.

Can someone make a poster (or post the one that was already made) consist of

You can either wear this now (a regular mask) or this later (full oxygen mask, as the one they clip onto you in a hospital). Your choice.

Probably would be more biting in the form of:

MAGA-cap wearing COVIDiot shouting "No mask because FREEDOM!"

Then next panel

MAGA-cap wearing COVIDiot in hospital COVID ward on oxygen feebly wheezing "... free--dom..."

Or just a coffin with a MAGA hat on top, and a eulogist saying, "He gave his life defending freedom..."

https://twitter.com/AssumeNormality/sta ... 2596711430

It boggles my mind that after sacrificing so much last year, we have completely and utterly given up

Do people just not know that COVID rates are four times as high as they were at this time last year?

If only last wasn't so few sacrificing for so many.

Blackhawk wrote: Mon Sep 06, 2021 3:42 pm Or just a coffin with a MAGA hat on top, and a eulogist saying, "He gave his life defending freedom..."

With quarantine tape about it. COVID-19 death, do not approach within 6 ft

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Sep 06, 2021 11:52 pm https://twitter.com/ENirenberg/status/1 ... tQ2HQ&s=19

It's rather naive to think they're confused. Controversy sells better than consensus. They know what they're doing.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:54 am

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Sep 06, 2021 11:52 pm https://twitter.com/ENirenberg/status/1 ... tQ2HQ&s=19

It's rather naive to think they're confused. Controversy sells better than consensus. They know what they're doing.

Definitely. I actually canceled our WaPo subscription this weekend due to the Berenson nonsense. Will prob re-sub at some point, but this seems to be a growing issue over there.

In other news, Vox's piece this am--America Must Decide How Much Covid-19 Risk It Will Tolerate--seems on point to me as it becomes increasingly clear that we as a country are not in a place where we're ever likely to tamp this down nearly completely due to our own actions.

It's something I'm struggling with, attempting to determine what my tolerance will be once my kids are vaccinated in a few months. My family has been in the 'way more cautious than most' camp for the entire pandemic, but I'll admit it's getting much more difficult for me to hold the line there given the country's general determination that we're just over this bullshit.

Obviously we'll continue until our kids are fully vaxxed, and we'll continue getting whatever boosters are required long-term. But avoiding all indoor spaces, avoiding most travel, continuing to mask everywhere when the risk to ourselves is very low and the risk to the unvaccinated / dumbasses of the world isn't going away due to our actions? What is the 'acceptable line,' given that COVID is likely here to stay in a form that will kill many tens of thousands/year for many years to come, regardless of my actions?

Looking out to the point when my kids are likely to be fully vaccinated, we will have been in lockdown for 24% of my youngest's life. I'm in my 40s. How much more is 'worth it,' to my family and to the others that my family's actions might impact?

I'm not aiming to throw these questions around flippantly, but in the context of the Vox piece--these are questions we all need to ask ourselves. I know that in my own case, my answers would be different if we were even largely united as a country, and had a realistic chance to bring things down to extremely low levels. But just the college football scene this weekend is enough to strip me of any misguided vision of the country working together on this any longer.

Only you can answer that.

I know that my personal opinion on it is different from my wife’s (and middle kid) for instance.

Everyone’s ratios and tolerance for: risk of being infected vs risk of infecting others vs mental health for self and kids of returning to some kind of normalcy are different.

Ideally we would all (or at least most) be on the same page, and view this as a HEALTH issue, and not a political one. Or at least treated it as a health issue first, with political ramifications. But being the dysfunctional country/government/society that we are today, it’s all about the tribalism.

Had we been unified, We probably could have beat this into submission by now.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:39 am Only you can answer that.

I know that my personal opinion on it is different from my wife’s (and middle kid) for instance.

Everyone’s ratios and tolerance for: risk of being infected vs risk of infecting others vs mental health for self and kids of returning to some kind of normalcy are different.

Ideally we would all (or at least most) be on the same page, and view this as a HEALTH issue, and not a political one. Or at least treated it as a health issue first, with political ramifications. But being the dysfunctional country/government/society that we are today, it’s all about the tribalism.

Had we been unified, We probably could have beat this into submission by now.

Yes, agreed with all of this. And the last part is what makes all the rest so frustrating.

Idaho begins rationing care as hospitals crumple under COVID load

The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare on Monday activated its "crisis standards of care" in 10 northern hospitals hard-hit by staff shortages, hospital bed shortages, and a "massive increase in patients with COVID-19 who require hospitalization," the department announced Tuesday.

The crisis standards mean that the quality of care in those hospitals will be reduced for all patients. Resources will be rationed, and patients with the best chances of survival may be prioritized.

In practice, that could mean that: emergency medical services may prioritize which 9-1-1 calls they respond to; some people who would normally be admitted to the hospital will instead be turned away; some admitted patients may be sent home earlier than typical or may find their hospital bed in a repurposed area of the hospital, like a conference room; and, in the worst cases, hospital staff might not be able to provide an intensive care unit bed or a ventilator to a patient that has a relatively low chance of survival.

"Crisis standards of care is a last resort. It means we have exhausted our resources to the point that our healthcare systems are unable to provide the treatment and care we expect," Dave Jeppesen, director of Idaho's Department of Health and Welfare, said in a statement. "This is a decision I was fervently hoping to avoid. The best tools we have to turn this around is for more people to get vaccinated and to wear masks indoors and in outdoor crowded public places. Please choose to get vaccinated as soon as possible—it is your very best protection against being hospitalized from COVID-19."

Anti-vaxxers and unmaskers are making doctors do battlefield triage. That's insane.

This is why many are saying that healthcare isn't about to collapse - it already has:

For a year or so, we’ve been told repeatedly that the American health system has been on the brink of collapse. In the past month, this phrase has been used to describe the plight of hospitals in Oklahoma, Louisiana, Alabama, and Alaska; last winter, it was used to describe health systems in California and Idaho. Mississippi’s health care system, in a recent New Yorker essay, was observed to be approaching statewide failure, while in a Politico headline at the start of the pandemic, hospitals in New York were quickly reaching a breaking point. Descriptions of health systems at the very limit of functionality rank among other COVID clichés like new normal and in these trying times.

But to say that our health care system is on the brink of collapse is to sugarcoat it. The story of a veteran dying near a city known for having some of the best hospitals in the world—and from a very treatable ailment—illustrates that our health system has already collapsed.

The idea that we need to start communicating it as a way to let the public know just how bad thing are (not how much worse they're going to get) I think is important.

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:28 pmThe idea that we need to start communicating it as a way to let the public know just how bad thing are (not how much worse they're going to get) I think is important.

I am a big fan of truth telling but there is a huge problem now. No one is listening.

A big piece of my motivation in getting in shape (almost 50 pounds lost this year, and in better shape than I have been since probably high school) was realizing that I wouldn't be able to count on the healthcare system if something went wrong, and that making sure that nothing went wrong needed to be a priority.

I realized that it is a bad time to be a high-risk person.

Max Peck wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 9:48 pm Idaho begins rationing care as hospitals crumple under COVID load

The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare on Monday activated its "crisis standards of care" in 10 northern hospitals hard-hit by staff shortages, hospital bed shortages, and a "massive increase in patients with COVID-19 who require hospitalization," the department announced Tuesday.

The crisis standards mean that the quality of care in those hospitals will be reduced for all patients. Resources will be rationed, and patients with the best chances of survival may be prioritized.

In practice, that could mean that: emergency medical services may prioritize which 9-1-1 calls they respond to; some people who would normally be admitted to the hospital will instead be turned away; some admitted patients may be sent home earlier than typical or may find their hospital bed in a repurposed area of the hospital, like a conference room; and, in the worst cases, hospital staff might not be able to provide an intensive care unit bed or a ventilator to a patient that has a relatively low chance of survival.

"Crisis standards of care is a last resort. It means we have exhausted our resources to the point that our healthcare systems are unable to provide the treatment and care we expect," Dave Jeppesen, director of Idaho's Department of Health and Welfare, said in a statement. "This is a decision I was fervently hoping to avoid. The best tools we have to turn this around is for more people to get vaccinated and to wear masks indoors and in outdoor crowded public places. Please choose to get vaccinated as soon as possible—it is your very best protection against being hospitalized from COVID-19."

Frankly, Covid patients who are un-vaccinated should go to the back of the line. Others shouldn't suffer due to their irresponsibility.

Grifman wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:16 pm Frankly, Covid patients who are un-vaccinated should go to the back of the line. Others shouldn't suffer due to their irresponsibility.

In a perfect world, sure. But why isn't the person vaccinated? Are they a minor? Do they have other diseases? Are they vaccine hesitant? Or are they truly militant anti-vax and have repeatedly refused all prior attempts.

I have been trying really hard to not broad-brush the unvaccinated as a single, unified cohort. To be clear, I despite the militant anti-vax and I'm 100% done with them. I just want to make sure others in that unvaccinated group aren't pulled down with them, and I'm not sure when someone is showing up for potentially life-saving treatments medical staff can add that to the triage evaluation.

Beyond the issues raised by Smoove_B above, how do you send people already taking up beds to the back of the line? In an engineering sense this isn't primarily a queueing issue. It is a capacity issue.

Traditionally that could never happen, but I could imagine a new triage ethic that places self-administered injuries behind innocent victims.

malchior wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:20 pm Beyond the issues raised by Smoove_B above, how do you send people already taking up beds to the back of the line? In an engineering sense this isn't primarily a queueing issue. It is a capacity issue.

Right - all of these hospitals are a mass-causality event away from a nightmare scenario. If there's a passenger bus that hits an 18 wheeler in a fog bank on a local highway? I don't know what they're going to do.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:19 pm

Grifman wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:16 pm Frankly, Covid patients who are un-vaccinated should go to the back of the line. Others shouldn't suffer due to their irresponsibility.

In a perfect world, sure. But why isn't the person vaccinated? Are they a minor? Do they have other diseases? Are they vaccine hesitant? Or are they truly militant anti-vax and have repeatedly refused all prior attempts.

I have been trying really hard to not broad-brush the unvaccinated as a single, unified cohort. To be clear, I despite the militant anti-vax and I'm 100% done with them. I just want to make sure others in that unvaccinated group aren't pulled down with them, and I'm not sure when someone is showing up for potentially life-saving treatments medical staff can add that to the triage evaluation.

They can't and won't.

They don't do it for auto accidents (were they DUI, distracted, speeding?) or shootings (are they bangers, shot in commission of a crime) or drug overdoses. Why would they make an exception for COVID?

Unless it becomes a government mandate, not happening.

What about whatever body governs medical ethics? Could they, in seeing that the self-inflicted COVID people are killing other people, provide new guidance to alleviate the problem (and to thus further incentivize the anti-vaxxers?)

Blackhawk wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:28 pm What about whatever body governs medical ethics? Could they, in seeing that the self-inflicted COVID people are killing other people, provide new guidance to alleviate the problem (and to thus further incentivize the anti-vaxxers?)

Possibly, but not for this go-round. Maybe they can hammer out the specifics in a few years.

It's still very problematic and I don't see it happening via the ethics approach anytime soon.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:19 pm

Grifman wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:16 pm Frankly, Covid patients who are un-vaccinated should go to the back of the line. Others shouldn't suffer due to their irresponsibility.

In a perfect world, sure. But why isn't the person vaccinated? Are they a minor? Do they have other diseases? Are they vaccine hesitant? Or are they truly militant anti-vax and have repeatedly refused all prior attempts.

I have been trying really hard to not broad-brush the unvaccinated as a single, unified cohort. To be clear, I despite the militant anti-vax and I'm 100% done with them. I just want to make sure others in that unvaccinated group aren't pulled down with them, and I'm not sure when someone is showing up for potentially life-saving treatments medical staff can add that to the triage evaluation.

I think you're going to see more non vaccinated dying before getting treated anyway.

https://www.wxyz.com/news/coronavirus/m ... d-19-costs

"Free" Covid care is working its way out of insurance

According to research done by Blue Cross Blue Shield, the average cost for a hospitalized patient with COVID could reach as high as $45,000 and over $100,000 for patients in the ICU.

So you hit your max out of pocket oh wait...

“Anytime a specialist came in, it was like like ‘oh, that’s out of network,’"

If you think the AntiVax crowd aren't going to push going to the doctor until the last moment when faced with the idea that treatment is going to cost 10s of thousands of dollars out of pocket. Yeah, They're going to start being on their deathbeds before they seek help.

Finally catching up on some stuff and yes, this is exactly what's happening.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 4745745409

Perspective: We want things to be normal so badly that we’re resorting to magical thinking

Of note:

At the game, face coverings were “encouraged but not required.” So, too, were vaccines. And it was held outside. So it should be fine, right? But the national one week-average covid case count on Sept. 1 was 166,780. Last year on Sept. 1, it was 42,296 — a time when opening the stadium was deemed unsafe. In 2020, Big Ten games were played sans spectators, unless the games were outright canceled because the players had covid. Now, with numbers higher than they were then, spectators are back, vaccinated or not, vulnerable or not.

...

Being a preteen this past year — and, some parents would say, living with one — was a certain kind of hell. I’ve spun a narrative that sending her to real-live school five days a week is a good idea during a once-in-a-century pandemic. It’s a time when our public health guru Anthony Fauci predicts that “normal” won’t come until next spring at the earliest, and cases are rising around the country, even among the vaccinated. A hundred thousand Americans — the capacity of that stadium — are predicted to die before year’s end. Setting aside all these facts, I pack her a lunch every day and wave goodbye, out of a belief that learning her locker combination, being out of the house seven hours a day and sharing space with hundreds of other kids is the best way forward at this point. I wish it made sense. I know it doesn’t.

Kasey Chang wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 4:10 am Apparently COVID + MLM = DEATH. Attendees of an MLM convention (Paparazzi Jewelry) in Las Vegas MGM Grand August 2-4 are falling sick from COVID despite a mask-on policy for 20000 attendees. Supposedly 8 deaths have been reported on social media so far, and unvaxxed folks who attended are testing positive for COVID upon return. Media is calling it a "likely superspreader event".

There's a joke hiding in there somewhere.

What happened in Vegas did not stay in Vegas?

Blackhawk wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:28 pm What about whatever body governs medical ethics? Could they, in seeing that the self-inflicted COVID people are killing other people, provide new guidance to alleviate the problem (and to thus further incentivize the anti-vaxxers?)

A death panel?

Victoria Raverna wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:57 pm

Blackhawk wrote: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:28 pm What about whatever body governs medical ethics? Could they, in seeing that the self-inflicted COVID people are killing other people, provide new guidance to alleviate the problem (and to thus further incentivize the anti-vaxxers?)

A death panel?

Not in the context it was previously used. This is a situation where we're already having to prioritize patients to determine who gets care and who gets to fend for themselves. That's happening regardless. It's about choosing how people are prioritized, placing, in essence, the victims ahead of the victimizers.

Study regarding convalescent plasma is...rather surprising (emphasis added):

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/14 ... 8732816384

New @NatureMedicine A randomized trial of convalescent plasma shows it not only didn't help, but actually harmed
"Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% versus 26.4%; RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.02–1.57, P = 0.034)."

The problem obviously is that they didn't include enough ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

What is "convalescent plasma"? Is that related to Regeneron-type treatments?

El Guapo wrote: Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:12 pm What is "convalescent plasma"? Is that related to Regeneron-type treatments?

Yes, convalescent plasma comes directly from people that had COVID-19 and recovered. They donate their blood and it is processed to isolate and concentrate the antibodies that are then provided to a sick person.

Regeneron uses the same idea but the antibodies are created in mice or horses or pigs after being sourced from humans. It's the same basic idea, but the point is that it can be produced faster and in greater quantities than if we just asked sick people that have recovered to donate their blood.

I don't know if Regeneron is "technically" considered convalescent plasma as defined by this study then. I'm guessing they would argue no and that their product is better, because profits.