Octopus Overlords

And there's this: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ng-results

Oh sure, I'm ignoring Formix but then just gloss right over my next post. (actually giving evidence to your point)

LordMortis wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 10:13 am Oh sure, I'm ignoring Formix but then just gloss right over my next post. (actually giving evidence to your point)

My bad. I saw it in the finance thread.

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 9:42 am I take a contrary opinion when one person regulates someone else's vices but doesn't really experience harm. Ergo, banning smoking in restaurants? Fine. Banning it in a home? Not so much.

Just to echo SmooveB, when trying to decide what’s “acceptable” or not. The easy thing to focus on is death, that’s the only thing that exists in the eyes of the anti-vaxxers, and specifically THEIR perceived risk of death.

The case fatality rate for COVID is still over 2%. But they read that back in March 2020 it was all old people and they aren’t old (yet). They aren’t big on understanding that they might be old someday, or in updating their information (to note the delta skewed those numbers down significantly age-wise).

They locked in on “there’s a 99% chance I’ll be fine so fuck everyone else.”

What they meant by “fine” is simply !dead. I don’t know that they have any concept of long COVID. My wife had issues for months after getting COVID (seems to be ok now).

I agree that over time, barring an unfortunate mutation that changes the game (I don’t personally know the likelihood of this specific virus mutating in a way that increases lethality or evades the vaccine), the changes of dying from this will be substantially reduced.

But there is a really large economic cost to that. Vaccines ain’t free. Boosters ain’t free. Hospitalizations ain’t free. Managing chronic illness ain’t free.

And the current state of affairs is what it is in part because of how many people still not working in close proximity to others? I’ve been to my office maybe 10 times since 3/16/2020. What happens when Army compels me to return full time?

Every time we push back the barriers that are trying to hold COVID at bay, another wave begins and hospitals get taken to the brink, continuing to wear out and already weary healthcare workers.

It’s not as simple as “fuck it we will just live like this.” This isn’t sustainable.

Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:38 am Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

I agree with you (and RM9, and Smoove, and we're totally fucked). But just to niggle--the height of the pandemic is now. Worldometers has the US active cases at~9.2M, which while starting to trend downward is still higher than the peak of any of the prior waves (Jan 2021 peaked at just over 9M).

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:46 amBut just to niggle--the height of the pandemic is now.

That should be the name of the thread at this point.

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:46 am

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:38 am Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

I agree with you (and RM9, and Smoove, and we're totally fucked). But just to niggle--the height of the pandemic is now. Worldometers has the US active cases at~9.2M, which while starting to trend downward is still higher than the peak of any of the prior waves (Jan 2021 peaked at just over 9M).

That can't be right. 50% of California cases can't be right now (ie 5% of their citizens have COVID NOW). There's something wrong with their numbers.

I agree there is a data issue there. I'd guess that Active Cases is probably a little unreliable as a bucket. Active cases go in consistently as they are reported but draining the bucket is probably unreliable as recovery reporting is non uniform.

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:49 am

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:46 am

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:38 am Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

I agree with you (and RM9, and Smoove, and we're totally fucked). But just to niggle--the height of the pandemic is now. Worldometers has the US active cases at~9.2M, which while starting to trend downward is still higher than the peak of any of the prior waves (Jan 2021 peaked at just over 9M).

That can't be right. 50% of California cases can't be right now (ie 5% of their citizens have COVID NOW). There's something wrong with their numbers.

You're right on that (though CA doesn't show 50%, the 45% it does show is clearly not a correct #). However, I'd stand behind the idea that we're still in a peak-y point of the pandemic. Daily new cases, while well off the peaks, are still higher today than they have been during the majority of the panedmic's 20-mo history. They were higher during 3 months of this current wave, during 4 months of the prior wave, and for a very brief week-ish period in summer 2020.

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:49 am
That can't be right. 50% of California cases can't be right now (ie 5% of their citizens have COVID NOW). There's something wrong with their numbers.

I wouldn't trust active numbers as they've always struck me as off. I suspect part of the reason is that it may be difficult to count closed cases (eg, if someone has a mild cases where the person gets a positive test and just self quarantines until they recover - does anyone get notified at that point? Did the people who did the testing follow up?)

We still aren't largely testing enough and definitely not tracking breakthrough cases nationally. I am 100% sure the number of actual cases is way higher than what the data is reporting because testing has been a mess this entire time - and continues to be a joke.

noxiousdog wrote:Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

What does that mean? What am I theoretically right about that I have to forget about practically.

My point was just that the current state of things is unsustainable. We can’t keep going like this indefinitely. And if we do even less than we’re doing now, it will get even worse.

I don’t know what that means, other than we’re fuct as long as these idiots refuse to vaccinate because freedom.

RunningMn9 wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:45 pm

noxiousdog wrote:Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

What does that mean? What am I theoretically right about that I have to forget about practically.

My point was just that the current state of things is unsustainable. We can’t keep going like this indefinitely. And if we do even less than we’re doing now, it will get even worse.

I don’t know what that means, other than we’re fuct as long as these idiots refuse to vaccinate because freedom.

Maybe he's saying we're practically fuckt?

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 12:08 pm

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:49 am

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:46 am

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:38 am Theoretically, you're right.

Practically, forget about it. We couldn't get people to wear masks during the height of the pandemic. How are you going to get people to do it now?

I agree with you (and RM9, and Smoove, and we're totally fucked). But just to niggle--the height of the pandemic is now. Worldometers has the US active cases at~9.2M, which while starting to trend downward is still higher than the peak of any of the prior waves (Jan 2021 peaked at just over 9M).

That can't be right. 50% of California cases can't be right now (ie 5% of their citizens have COVID NOW). There's something wrong with their numbers.

You're right on that (though CA doesn't show 50%, the 45% it does show is clearly not a correct #). However, I'd stand behind the idea that we're still in a peak-y point of the pandemic. Daily new cases, while well off the peaks, are still higher today than they have been during the majority of the panedmic's 20-mo history. They were higher during 3 months of this current wave, during 4 months of the prior wave, and for a very brief week-ish period in summer 2020.

Looking at year over year hospitalizations, deaths, and new cases I'd say we're coming off the last peak, which was the height of the pandemic. Will the holiday season take us to all new highs? Don't know. I'm inclined to doubt it but I don't doubt it will be as serious (or nearly as serious) as it was last holiday season.

I do hold out hope that vaccine and previous infection rates take us down and that adding Merck and Pfizer antivirals along with the six figure regeneron treatments that we see noticeable relief coming in to winter, comparatively speaking.... But again. "as long as it takes..."

All I know is that we seem to have bottomed out, and that this trough is higher than any of the previous ones.

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 9:18 am

noxiousdog wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 3:40 pm I'm not sure what either of your responses have to do with answering Formix.

I'm sorry, it's probably my reflex as you've historically voiced opinions (non-COVID) that we spend too much energy focused on regulating things for all based on minimal death experienced by few. Your post (to me) suggested you believed that COVID-19 will eventually move into some level of acceptable death and we shouldn't be worried about it anymore. Apologies if that is a mis-read.

Formix wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 4:44 am Not to be Debbie Downer, but the part that I am personally struggling with, is that if this virus is endemic now, and it continues to mutate, and if there is a significant percentage that continues to ignore it, how do we avoid what I see as the only 2 scenarios? A) eventually a more deadly mutation/one that ignores the vaccine, so we're back where we started, (wash, rinse, repeat until it all falls apart) or B) just accepting that we will lose the elderly, immunocompromised and ~1% of the population for the rest of our lives (The Randian Logan's Run scenario)? Honestly, if it wasn't for wanting some kind of future for my kids, I'd just say "screw it, we're a stupid species, and we're reaping what we've sown."

Your two scenarios aren't the only scenarios. At the risk of being told I'm a broken record, we have no idea what's going to happen. I've seen virologists arguing online over the "likely" outcome over the last year - will we see a more virulent version? Will a less virulent strain emerge and "settle" into the human population. I think that is the only message - we don't know; everything is still a guess.

And to clarify, the virus is absolutely not endemic now; we're still in the throes of a global pandemic despite what people might want to believe (or tell you is true). The virus is still circulating globally and there is uncontrolled spread pretty much everywhere at this point - that is what defines a pandemic.

This is terrible for all the death and suffering its causing right now; thinking about future scenarios isn't nearly as useful (to me) as we're not even close to being out of this one. And with that, your (A) is absolutely a concern to the degree that the more it spreads the more there's a chance of a mutation that does *something* not good. But there could also be a mutation that somehow makes it even more likely to spread but causes less illness - this goes back to what virologists have been arguing about. We've never seen anything like this so everyone is still guessing.

And to get to my own point, death isn't the only outcome here. I think once we start to get a better handle on what chronic COVID is actually doing to people and to what degree people are suffering it's also going to change how we look at this. At least, I hope it's going to change how we look at this. While death is obviously terrible, I fear we're going to get to a point where uncontrolled spread is acceptable because death is largely manageable. And so instead of people dying, there's going to be some new baseline level of people living with chronic impacts for a generation or so until the virus reaches some new equilibrium. To me,that's depressing as hell - that collectively as a society we would just accept some level of trauma, because freedom.

Thanks for the clarification. Despair is rarely rational, so I suppose my fears were(are) also irrational. This "accepting some level of trauma" seems to be 100% where most folks I run into are at right now. Everyone is just so fatigued, and ready to move on, but as you've noted many times, viruses don't get tired, they can wait forever. I have done everything as recommended, including getting my booster, but I could still get a breakthrough and end up with long covid, or some functional reduction because someone across the office has asymptomatic covid.
We don't know where the virus is headed, but we do know you can catch it more than once, with varying outcomes, and we do know folks are making increasingly risky choices. My company recently went from "everyone must be masked unless they are in a single office with their door closed", to "50 people in one cube farm all day? Go ahead and unmask". But if you leave your cube, you need to mask. And we're a medical facility for chrissakes. I think our folks making the decisions know that if they stay as restricted as we were, some folks will go batty. But then you have folks like me looking at the current policy and feeling like it's security theater, and not wanting to put on my mask at all, because what's the use?
Don't get me wrong, I'm super happy that my chances of being hospitalized or dying if I get covid are very low, but getting a shot every 6 months for the next howeverlong isn't really a preferred option either. At that point, just nationalize Pfizer, you're giving them a de facto subsidization anyway if vaccines are going to keep being covered. Same goes for a $700 pill treatment.

We may have lost the battle for masks , but the battle for vaccinations has hit a turning point. Threat of covid death or long covid didn't impact them personally, so they didn't care. But the direct threat of job loss is hitting pretty personal. Sure there is still some very vocal folks, but there are far fewer of those then the number of folks who actually need their jobs.

Jaymon wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 12:38 pm But the direct threat of job loss is hitting pretty personal. Sure there is still some very vocal folks, but there are far fewer of those then the number of folks who actually need their jobs.

Right, but now the lawsuits have started and it's anyone's guess as to how it's going to go in the lower courts.

Formix wrote: Sat Nov 06, 2021 6:16 pm We don't know where the virus is headed, but we do know you can catch it more than once, with varying outcomes, and we do know folks are making increasingly risky choices. My company recently went from "everyone must be masked unless they are in a single office with their door closed", to "50 people in one cube farm all day? Go ahead and unmask". But if you leave your cube, you need to mask. And we're a medical facility for chrissakes. I think our folks making the decisions know that if they stay as restricted as we were, some folks will go batty. But then you have folks like me looking at the current policy and feeling like it's security theater, and not wanting to put on my mask at all, because what's the use?

I legitimately cannot imagine not being masked indoors in a public location (or an office setting) until at least Spring of 2022, not while virus circulation is out of control and continuing to escalate as I type this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm super happy that my chances of being hospitalized or dying if I get covid are very low, but getting a shot every 6 months for the next howeverlong isn't really a preferred option either. At that point, just nationalize Pfizer, you're giving them a de facto subsidization anyway if vaccines are going to keep being covered. Same goes for a $700 pill treatment.

I suspect we're headed to another booster in Fall of 2022, though that might change based on data that's collected over the next 6-8 months from people that have been boostered.

But yes, there's very much now a switch to "we can just treat you with a pill", which is going to continue to whittle away at whatever group that's left thinking vaccination isn't important. And it will help to justify mask removals because there's nothing more American than getting a disease and spending 100x the amount to treat it than you would in prevention.

Bigger picture is the number of childhood vaccinations that were just missed over the last ~20 months + vaccination resistance. If I'm to believe the ID doctors I follow, we're in real danger of having random diseases we'd previously controlled surging as well. I've said it before, but there really are days where it feels like we're careening back into the Dark Ages.

An excellent piece in the Atlantic this morning about how going back to normal only works until you test positive:

When I first received the invitation to the wedding where I would eventually get COVID, I was on the fence about attending at all. My best friend had gone through a tough divorce and was remarrying. I was thrilled for him. His wedding had been put off repeatedly because of COVID, and this was the couple’s second try at a real ceremony. As a bonus, the wedding would take place in New Orleans, where my friend lives. I hadn’t seen him since before the pandemic. New Orleans is a miraculous place, and my favorite city to visit in America. The notion of a trip there shone out of the fog and dreariness of this whole era of history.

The downside, of course, was the risk of exposure to COVID. Sure, I’m vaccinated—two shots of Pfizer—and the wedding’s other attendees would all be vaccinated too. But breakthrough cases happen, and we’d be in New Orleans in October, a place where cases were still high and vaccination was inconsistent. One could not expect to not get exposed to COVID.

...

But the real worst-case scenario was everything that happened to the people around me. My kids had to come out of school and isolate with my wife. A raft of tests had to be taken by everyone I’d had even limited contact with. (I was one of at least a dozen people at the wedding who got sick.) I had been with several older people, including my mother-in-law. For my wife and children, the tests went on for days and days, each one bringing a prospective new disaster and 10 to 14 more days of life disruption or worse.

But for me, the very worst part was my children. They knew, cognitively, that I was vaccinated and unlikely to get really sick. That said, COVID-19, for them, is a terrible thing. The past year and a half of their lives has been disrupted by this virus. They take precautions every single day not to have this happen.

...

For people pondering edging back into normal life, or trying to jump in headfirst as I did, it’s easy to do the risk calculation only about physical health; that’s really what this was about for so long. But the vaccines changed that, and we need to update our mental spreadsheets. The life disruption—the logistical pain you cause those around you—is now a major part of any bad scenario. As I write this, I’m now 10 days past my first symptoms, but I continue to test positive on antigen tests, and so I have not returned home. I haven’t hugged my kids for 10 days. They missed a whole week of school, and my wife’s work life got turned upside down—even though they never tested positive or got sick. I blame no one but myself for this. We cannot will this pandemic to be over. Lord knows I tried.

In closing:

In social worlds like mine, though, where most people do work from home, where people have minimized risk and gotten vaccinated, we’re at a weird moment. Things aren’t likely to change that much for quite some time. Even after however many kids get vaccinated, there will still be breakthrough infections. Other variants could spread. Maybe we’re in this space for another year or two or three. One way to put the question of endemicity is: When do we start treating COVID like other respiratory illnesses?

I don’t know the answer. And I’m not even sure who should be trying to answer the question. There are many outstanding mysteries about long COVID. There are still so many unvaccinated Americans, and that number seems unlikely to shift a lot anytime soon.

Right now most policies appear designed to make life seem normal. Masks are coming off. Restaurants are dining in. Planes are full. Offices are calling. But don’t be fooled: The world’s normal only until you test positive.

Of course all this assumes you respond in responsible way. If you're acting without a care and don't even begin to think about those around you, this whole essay likely seems overthought and overblown.

I've been in the office 5 days a week since late June of 2020 because I've had to be. My daughter has been in school 5 days a week since the beginning of September because she has had to be.

I get the guy's dilemma but it's not as black.amd white as he makes it out to be (just stay home).

We are still facing disjointed policies and conflicting advice. I have to wear a mask in an empty grocery store but not a crowded bar. Some employees have to be vaccinated, others don't. Sure, most of it is calculated chaos driven by the party of anti-science but we're all living in it.

Now we get to fight over an endemic disease for the next decade and we're already at 3/4M deaths in the US alone. Some otherwise healthy guy facing family and social circle disruption for a few weeks because he opted to attend a wedding on New Orleans? Doesn't really ping.

Just got word that they're shutting down a local (I think K-8?) public school in my neighborhood for 10 days due to a COVID outbreak. What I've heard through the grapevine through parents is something like 25 cases among kids there, which I assume includes at least some intra-school transmission. I've also heard that no kid is seriously ill (yet, anyway), though again this is indirect so who knows for sure. My kids don't go there, but they have a number of friends who do.

Fun fun fun.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 4:08 pm Some otherwise healthy guy facing family and social circle disruption for a few weeks because he opted to attend a wedding on New Orleans? Doesn't really ping.

This. I guess that's because I go to work and isolate. I stay at home and isolate. I shop much less. I see my parents once or twice a month. I have a social circle of one I hang out with once or twice a month in an isolated residence. I have sat in a mostly empty restaurant as opportunity has allowed to eat and not linger four times now since March of 2020. That's going on pause now that it's getting colder.

I am ready as anyone to be done with this, to got to a bar and just be somewhere else with a beer and relax around people, even if I don't talk to them. But, nope. Ask again in spring.

Well, Sunday was my friend's funeral fest. There were probably 200 people at the memorial, then 100 of them crammed into a house at the first reception, then a dozen or so at the second one (my friend's house). Almost no masks, and lots of young people (teens and 20s). I wore my mask for awhile, but kept pulling it down so I could be heard when I spoke. The whole point of these gatherings was to socialize and offer condolences and remembrances. I even caved and allowed a couple of hugs and handshakes.

IDK yet if anyone got sick or not. This was by far the riskiest thing I've done, and I won't willingly repeat it any time soon. If I do catch covid, there's no question where it came from.

Andy Slavitt, speaking truth.

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1458304302682763267

COVID Update: One too many smart people has told me or said on TV this week that the pandemic is over.

I offer this thread as a single, uniform response to everyone. It is still here.

There are still 1200 people dying every day. That’s a rate of 440,000 deaths/year.

40,000 from accidents
70,000 from opioids

I have a work colleague in the hospital right now who got COVID last week. It’s serious & we don’t know the outcome. I don’t know the amount of vaccinations we need to have it end here, but we’re not there.

Russia has 1/3 of the country vaccinated. And it’s not pretty.

Denmark has 70% and it’s not enough.Much of the US looks like Denmark and much of it looks like Russia in vaccination rates.

Proud of Sputnik but can’t get Russians to take it. Misinformation is a bitch, isn’t it Russia?

But most important here:

The signs people look at aren’t really signs.

To be clear, when cases dip it’s not over. When boosters come, it’s not over. When kids are vaccinated, it’s not over. When therapies are approved, it’s not over.

All are reasons I’ve heard in the last week. Let me put it more directly: just because you decide the pandemic is over for you doesn’t mean it’s over for everybody.

And as a "temperature check", lets check in with public health experts and see how they would handle a number of current situations.

To try to gauge where things stand, we asked a number of infectious diseases experts about the risks they are willing to take now, figuring that their answers might give us a sense of whether we’re making our way out of the woods.

Their responses signal some progress — but not as much, to be honest, as we had hoped. The experts — like much of the American public — have made clear that they aren’t going to give up another Thanksgiving for the sake of trying to stem the spread of Covid. And while they were more willing to go to indoor weddings or the movies (some even said they’d munch on popcorn), many were still very wary of hitting the gym, and flatly refuse to attend an indoor concert or sporting event.

The problem is that Slavitt is right, but it doesn't really matter. The country is done. We're not going back to the sorts of things that would actually help end this. Colorado is having a healthcare crisis due to COVID hospitalizations again, and even our D governor isn't even floating the idea of mask mandates or closures anymore--instead, we're instituting crisis care standards in healthcare. If ever there was a time to lock down, it's now. Even by the same Governor's prior statements. The Biden admin certainly isn't stepping up to try to do what's needed. It's simply not happening. The pandemic is going to play out largely along the lines it's done recently, regardless of what the small minority who continue to do the ideal thing do or do not do.

Goes back to my questions last week--given that we're not going to contain this or do what we need to do on a societal level, then what?

COVID will be here, for years going forward. This is a thing that's going to happen, because we can't have and don't deserve nice things. As a thought experiment, let's say it's 25 years (clearly it won't be, but when this started people were wondering whether it was worth it for a handful of months. Now we're looking at 2 years minimum, plus at least a couple more years endemic). Is it worth being the outcast who huddles at home for those 25 years, because we know it's the 'right' thing to do despite 90%+ of society not doing that? We're already at the point where my kids are falling behind their peers in extracurriculars, for example.

Of course the health impacts matter, but so do lots of other things. At what point am I harming my kids by working to protect their health just a little bit more (after we're boosted and they're vaxxed, and given that we're all extremely likely to catch COVID at some point regardless of precautions), at the expense of, for example indoor parties, gymnastics, school trips etc with their friends? They (and our family) are already looked at askew due to our consistent following of COVID precaution best practices. My kids are well behind their former martial arts and other sporting friends. Their Spanish is trash relative to their former peers. Many friends are not nearly as close as before, due to not seeing my kids at all for 17 months, and now still not playing with them nearly as much because their precautions don't match ours. Thankfully my kids have been pretty young during this, so these issues have time to resolve, and the impact on their long-term growth is hopefully not huge. But that's not the case forever.

I'm sure I'm a broken record on this at this point, but while I'm all for the 'right stuff' to contain this thing, I also think the healthcare folks need to recognize that we've lost the plot, and it's not coming back. How does that impact the guidance given? Why continue to advise things that aren't going to be adhered to and won't actually move us forward? Why are we discussing mask advisories while innumerable entirely-full football stadiums have almost no masks every week? Why are we suggesting folks stay home while simultaneously allowing packed indoor sporting events without requiring vaccinations? These are serious questions, but I recognize that there may not be answers when they're essentially asking why a particular field won't pivot and go against what they've known all their professional lives, because the public is dumb.

In my field, (infosec), if the folks in charge insist that we purchase anti-malware apps but allow end-users to disable them at will while preventing me from instituting DLP, pen-testing, etc, I'm having a frank conversation with management about either resolving that, ensuring that we're accepting the fact that we're engaged solely in security theater, or I'm departing the job. It feels like we're now just stuck in the security theater scenario while pretending that we're not.

I can't really disagree with anything you've said. The biggest issue for me is that the theater is likely "worse" in that it's confusing the message; the half measures and inconsistent recommendations and policies undermine what should really be happening.

We're still averaging ~1000 cases a day (weekly) here in NJ - the post-Halloween bump is happening right now. Our hospitalizations and ICU bed use is down, but consistent...I think around 35% usage, so not setting off alarms. I just cannot process the acceptance here. I cannot disregard everything I know and what I've been trained to do because America has decided it's over. I feel like I've been saying it for almost two years, but the whole thing is surreal to me, personally and professionally. 57% of my county's population is fully vaccinated, though that is only 12+; it hasn't been updated yet for 5+. We're at ~27/100K cases, almost identical to a year ago. We're one of the highest (if not the highest) risk areas in the state but you'd never know looking out your window.

I did see that CO is also surging - that they made models last week suggesting hospitals would be overwhelmed by the end of the month and instead, it happened 3 days later.

I guess for me right now I keep saying I need to get to Spring 2022 - April/May, which I acknowledge is likely not a common or well-accepted belief. I do know there is just no way I'm going to be intentionally removing layers of protection as we head into what will absolutely be another pandemic winter in America.

I don't know how this ends for me or my family, but I'm tired.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 12:50 pmI guess for me right now I keep saying I need to get to Spring 2022 - April/May, which I acknowledge is likely not a common or well-accepted belief. I do know there is just no way I'm going to be intentionally removing layers of protection as we head into what will absolutely be another pandemic winter in America.

That's my internal goal, as well. The kids will be vaxxed by Christmas, but I don't see my family loosening up much until the weather warms up again. After that is what I'm really getting at--it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to justify the active harm I'm doing my kids in exchange for less and less incremental health benefit to them, while the country-wide outlook for community action drops even further.

I don't know how this ends for me or my family, but I'm tired.

You and me both, sir.

Like, this is where we're at (Jesse Paul is a local journalist. Jared Polis is our Governor.).


https://twitter.com/JesseAPaul/status/1 ... 13509?s=20
https://twitter.com/jaredpolis/status/1 ... 21729?s=20

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 12:50 pm I guess for me right now I keep saying I need to get to Spring 2022 - April/May, which I acknowledge is likely not a common or well-accepted belief. I do know there is just no way I'm going to be intentionally removing layers of protection as we head into what will absolutely be another pandemic winter in America.

I don't know how this ends for me or my family, but I'm tired.

I'm not nearly as knowledgeable as you but this is me. My best guess is evaluate 2 weeks after St Patrick's Day weekend. That has been the harbinger of spring doom that needs to pass the legacy of the last two years. If things look positive coming in to April, then I'm ready to move to the next thing, whatever that may be. Positive does not mean the populace being done but to have truly made early April 2022 look better YOY than April 2021 and April 2020 before it.

I lean that the governors are not closing things down or mandating the way they were before because the vaccines are readily available to those that want them. The people in the hospitals and dying are overwhelmingly unvaccinated. There is only so much you can do to protect people from their own bad decisions. Before the vaccines were easy to come by they used mandates and lockdowns to protect the populous from a danger we did not have the tools to protect ourselves from. Now we have the tools. If we choose not to use them then it falls on us not the government. They have done everything they can.

Of course, my district still has a mask mandate and takes precautions so......I might feel differently if I worked some place that did not take precautions and mitigation into consideration.

It comes down to a few things for me. First, making sure as many 5-11 year olds are vaccinated as possible. I don't know what's realistic here. The early numbers are good (number being vaccinated), but I suspect they're going to drop fast - like someone hit a light switch. In other words, we'll see a surge of 5-11 year olds will be vaccinated and then...nothing. Not surprisingly the early numbers are also suggesting overwhelmingly it's white kids being vaccinated, so efforts to reach communities where access is an issue need to ramp up.

But even after we reach some magical number of 5-11 year olds, now we're down to the 1-4 year olds left unprotected. I really just...don't feel right opening the floodgates and acting like everything is normal again when you have somewhere around 6% of the population that cannot be vaccinated (I'm kinda guessing here as the typical age breakdown is 0-5, not 1-4). If that can happen in Q1 2022 (vaccinating kids under 5), that would make me feel better.

So yeah, for me, maintaining course through the winter in the hopes that circulating virus levels can drop off significantly in the Spring would be the goal. But for all we know the pattern will continue and as the NE and Midwest emerge from our second pandemic winter, maybe cases will then shift south again for the summer. It really is crazy that the shifting pattern is holding (again) but people just seem to not care anymore.

In unrelated news, strange things are afoot in Colorado:

https://twitter.com/NewsHour/status/1458815989487919106

"This seems to be a little different than earlier, with patients who would languish a little while at home...then get sick. We're now seeing younger people who really have no business getting this sick being dramatically ill very quickly," one doctor said.

Other news. Saw that in China r_0 has gone from 3 to 6 and that they are considering more lock downs. In Germany, they are experiencing a fourth wave which is starting to overwhelm the ICU's again.

The overall numbers seem to hint that they should be doing more extensive genetic sequencing on the current variant to figure out if something more significant has changed through a new mutation.

gilraen wrote: Thu Nov 11, 2021 12:37 pm The overall numbers seem to hint that they should be doing more extensive genetic sequencing on the current variant to figure out if something more significant has changed through a new mutation.

I'd personally want to know (1) when they were vaccinated and (2) what vaccine they had. If there's a pattern to be concerned about, that's the quickest and cheapest way to figure it out.

I haven't really seen much (lately) about mutations and strains; I'd thought we were still at like 98% Delta right now.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Nov 11, 2021 1:01 pm I haven't really seen much (lately) about mutations and strains; I'd thought we were still at like 98% Delta right now.

That's what the CDC data shows from the weekly summaries.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracke ... roportions