Octopus Overlords

He was critical of the COVID-19 lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, telling the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in August 2021, "I hug people in the middle of COVID ... I understood stopping life for a little while, but they cannot continue to stop life because of politics." He opposed mask mandates and described a person who called for people on airplanes to wear masks as a "Nazi" and "power-mad". Meat Loaf then said: "If I die, I die, but I'm not going to be controlled."

On the evening of January 20, 2022 admist the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, Meat Loaf had reportedly serious ill and died of COVID-19 complications in Nashville, Tennessee, at the age of 74.[5][161][162] After his health rapidly declined, his two daughters rushed to see him in hospital with his wife being beside him as he died from virus.[163] His daughter had posted to Instagram in early this month that: "We are not sick, but we have too many friends and family testing positive, but doing OK"

Meat Loaf was a vegetarian from 1981 to 1992. Discussing the confusion caused by his contrasting stage name and dietary habits, he once told Entertainment Weekly, "There've been vegetarians who wouldn't speak to me because of my name. I was sitting with Jon Bon Jovi at one of those awards things, and I say, 'Oh, man, I love k.d. lang. I'd really like to meet her.' They went to find out if it was okay, and she goes, 'No. His name is Meat Loaf.' I stopped being a k.d. lang fan after that."

Daehawk wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:18 am Saw this about the singer Meat Loaf today. Im a bit shocked actually.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:14 am https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1504424902681628678

President Biden’s Covid czar, Jeffrey Zients, is stepping down. His replacement, Ashish Jha, could signal a new pandemic approach for Mr. Biden.

Probably not. Dr. Jha is a medical doctor with a public health add-on degree. He has no practical experience working in "boots on the ground" public health - the kind of skillset we need right now to be in charge. He's definitely someone that should be at the federal table right now providing guidance, but as the person in charge? Not convinced this is a good move. Better than Zients, but color me skeptical over this change.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:23 am

Daehawk wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:18 am Saw this about the singer Meat Loaf today. Im a bit shocked actually.

You need to adjust your time traveling crystals.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:44 am

EDIT: I should also probably clarify that a big theme for the last 2+ years (in the public health profession - what we talk about) is that non-public health people are leading the pandemic response and shaping the conversation. On the surface, this looks to be more of the same, but maybe I'm wrong.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:23 am

Daehawk wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:18 am Saw this about the singer Meat Loaf today. Im a bit shocked actually.

You need to adjust your time traveling crystals.

All epidemics trigger the same dispiriting cycle. First, panic: As new pathogens emerge, governments throw money, resources, and attention at the threat. Then, neglect: Once the danger dwindles, budgets shrink and memories fade. The world ends up where it started, forced to confront each new disease unprepared and therefore primed for panic. This Sisphyean sequence occurred in the United States after HIV, anthrax, SARS, Ebola, and Zika. It occurred in Republican administrations and Democratic ones. It occurs despite decades of warnings from public-health experts. It has been as inevitable as the passing of day into night.

Even so, it’s not meant to happen this quickly. When I first wrote about the panic-neglect cycle five years ago, I assumed that it would operate on a timescale of years, and that neglect would set in only after the crisis was over. The coronavirus pandemic has destroyed both assumptions. Before every surge has ended, pundits have incorrectly predicted that the current wave would be the last, or claimed that lifesaving measures were never actually necessary. Time and again, neglect has set in within mere months, often before the panic part has been over. The U.S. funds pandemic preparedness “like Minnesota snow,” Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, told me in 2018. “There’s a lot in January, but in July it’s all melted.”

Or, as it happens, in March.

“We are closely watching the recent rise in global COVID numbers and, given both previous trends with regard to spread and our location as an international nexus for travel and trade, we do anticipate that we will eventually see an increase in the number of cases in New Jersey,” Murphy and state Health Commissioner Judith Persichilli said in a statement.

“However, at this time, we do not anticipate any need to reinstate universal statewide mandated protective measures,” they added.

“We are not going to manage COVID to zero nor are we impervious to the virus,” they added. “We expect COVID to continue to mutate and cases to continue to ebb and flow. Moving to an endemic status still means we must all take personal responsibility to protect ourselves and our loved ones.”

My reasoning is that if our goal is to protect the most immune-compromised members of the community—people in whom vaccines provide zero protection against infection let alone severe disease—then perhaps it would be acceptable to drop indoor mask mandates when case counts are low enough that the highest-risk adults can attend to something like daily living and have less than a 1% chance of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 in a 4-month period.

...

Here's what I came up with: for a person doing all of the activities above (or similar), we’d need to keep SARS-CoV-2 under 50 cases per 100,000 people weekly, if one-way N95 masking in those public settings were to be safe enough that the 4-month risk of infection would be under 1% for an immune-compromised person in whom vaccines offer no protection.

That figure is striking—almost uncanny—because it falls right at the upper limit of the CDC’s old “moderate transmission” category, which was the agency’s previously stated threshold (from July 2021) for advising universal indoor masking regardless of vaccination status. It’s also the exact proposal that Dr. Gregg Gonsalves had proposed to me a couple weeks ago! For the United States, it would mean around 25,000 new cases per day (I already baked in the assumption that we miss 2 out of 3 infections).

Can we get there? We actually achieved that during the end of May, June, and into July last year (but at that time N95 masks were not so widespread, and Evusheld was not available). That means that, yes, this metric is achievable.

I’d also propose that if we were below 50 cases per 100,000 people weekly for a while but inched back up over that threshold (into the CDC’s old “substantial transmission” territory), we could temporarily strongly suggest/advise public indoor masking, but keep it strictly optional. Enough concerned people would voluntarily mask that we’d keep the 4-month infection risk below 1% for the high-risk immune-compromised people we’re worried about. But if case counts got too high, say above 100 cases per 100,000 people per week (the CDC’s previous “high transmission” zone), mandates would again be necessary.

Blackhawk wrote: Fri Mar 18, 2022 2:06 pm Officials, at this point, no longer have the option to take the necessary steps. At one point they were choosing to do so, and some tried. But at this point the issue has been decided for them by politics.

Any measure most of them could take would simply be overruled or ignored.

Again, it isn't a battle that can be won. I can't really blame them for letting go when their hands are effectively tied.

New York state reports 2,642 new coronavirus cases, an increase of 47% from last week

The summary: vaccination definitely seems to reduce the risk of #LongCovid, often by 40-50%.

*But* solidly 9.5%-14% of breakthroughs still result in Long Covid.

These figures make sense to me, given the estimated rate of LC in unvaccinated people (~10-30%).

A caveat: many of these studied people who had been vaccinated relatively recently, so as always, we can expect these findings to change a bit as immunity wanes.

...

In summary: get vaccinated to reduce your risk of #LongCovid, but be aware that if you get a breakthrough, the risk is still high!

A Phase 2 clinical trial is testing the new drug’s ability to reduce mortality in older people hospitalized with COVID-19. By directly targeting immune aging, BGE-175 could effectively treat emerging COVID variants that evade vaccine-based immunity.

The immune system deteriorates with age, making COVID-19 particularly deadly in older people — but to date, no clinically available medication addresses this key risk factor. A study published today (March 21, 2022) in Nature shows that an oral drug that reverses multiple aspects of immune aging effectively prevents death in a mouse model of COVID-19, suggesting that the medication could be used to protect the elderly patients who are at greatest risk in the pandemic.

Defiant wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 3:20 pm Im a little wary of trusting the national numbers dropping, given reports that some states will only be reporting once or twice a week (we'll need to see the pattern over a longer period of time to tell).

Defiant wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 3:20 pm Im a little wary of trusting the national numbers dropping, given reports that some states will only be reporting once or twice a week (we'll need to see the pattern over a longer period of time to tell).

Zarathud wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 10:36 pm I figure 2 weeks after St. Patrick’s Day is the time to reevaluate. But since I’m going to a gaming conference (vaccination or clear test required), I’ll give it another week.

Then I’m in tax season crunch anyway.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 10:17 pm Today I learned that "COVID virgin" is a thing. I was having beers with a friend of mine. He broke up with his girlfriend in December 2019 and said he was a "COVID virgin": hasn't had sex since COVID lockdowns started. He said he's ready to get back out there. The bartender is taking him to Reno next week so that's probably the end of that.

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 10:31 pm Huh. I'd've guessed that COVID virgin meant someone who hasn't been infected yet.

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 10:42 pm

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 10:31 pm Huh. I'd've guessed that COVID virgin meant someone who hasn't been infected yet.

Quest Diagnostics, one of the largest testing companies in the country, told ABC News that patients who are not on Medicare, Medicaid or a private health plan will now be charged $125 dollars ($119 and a $6 physician fee) when using one of its QuestDirect PCR tests either by ordering a kit online or visiting one of the 1,500 Quest or major retail locations that administer the tests, such as Walmart or Giant Eagle.

More than 30 million Americans had no insurance during the first half of 2021, according to CDC estimates.