WHO Says Delta is the Fastest and Fittest Covid Variant and Will 'Pick Off' Most Vulnerable (cnbc.com) 305
The highly contagious delta variant is the fastest and fittest coronavirus strain yet, and it will "pick off" the most vulnerable people, especially in places with low Covid-19 vaccination rates, World Health Organization officials warned Monday. From a report: Delta, first identified in India, has the potential "to be more lethal because it's more efficient in the way it transmits between humans and it will eventually find those vulnerable individuals who will become severely ill have to be hospitalized and potentially die," Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO's emergencies program, said during a news conference. Ryan said world leaders and public health officials can help defend the most vulnerable through the donation and distribution of Covid vaccines. "We can protect those vulnerable people, those frontline workers," Ryan said, "and the fact that we haven't, as Director-General (Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus) has said, again and again, is a catastrophic moral failure at a global level." The WHO said Friday that delta is becoming the dominant variant of the disease worldwide. The agency declared delta a "variant of concern" last month. A variant can be labeled as "of concern" if it has been shown to be more contagious, more deadly or more resistant to current vaccines and treatments, according to the health organization.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We are going to be dealing with the long term consequences of four years of "America First" for generations.
Re: This is what you get (Score:2)
Re:This is what you get (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is what you get (Score:5, Informative)
There are plenty of people self-excluding from vaccination regardless of where it's being distributed
From Here Are The Biggest Groups That Are Still Refusing The Covid-19 Vaccine, Poll Finds [forbes.com]
There were also discrepancies between unvaccinated respondents who said they would “definitely not” get the vaccine and those who just plan to “wait and see”: The “definitely not” group is overwhelmingly more white (70% of respondents), Republican (67%) and concentrated in the 30-49 age group (48%).
The “wait and see” group, by contrast, is more evenly divided politically—39% are Democrats and 41% Republicans—and are slightly more likely to be Black or Hispanic (22% Black and 20% Hispanic, versus 5% and 11% in the “definitely not group”), though 72% are still between the ages of 18 and 49.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: This is what you get (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is some vaccinated people are going to die because of these idiots. And also some people who can't be vaccinated (rare allergies or conditions).
Re: (Score:2)
And the under 12's. In Brazil, there are quite a few kids dying. Seems some of these new variants hit the young much harder then the original and who knows when a vaccine will be OKed for kids and what new variants might appear.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't get fully vaccinated at the moment for medical reasons. I'm already finding that I'm disadvantaged and there is very little sympathy, people just assume I'm refusing because I saw some stupid YouTube video or something.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't get fully vaccinated at the moment for medical reasons. I'm already finding that I'm disadvantaged and there is very little sympathy, people just assume I'm refusing because I saw some stupid YouTube video or something.
Ach - that's not good. But you can at least play it safe while the anti-vaxx people are being idiots.
Will it be possible to get the vaccine eventually?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
To a degree although let's not underestimate just how big the task is towards immunizing an entire planet.
But when the world is filled with information like this [youtu.be] it can be doubly hard towards fulfilling a task.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Across the globe, the Response to COVID was just Idiots leading the stupid, and promoted by the numb nuts.
There is actually a global partisan infighting and bickering and one ups man ship going on (well beyond Americans Liberal vs Conservative).
When it Hit China first, China should has let the world know sooner, and be open about what it knows about it, its risks and hazards. Other countries should had came to aid China. However they basically politically correctly just pointed and laughed at look at the m
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't equivocate what the CCP did to disappear whistleblowers and reporters and deliberately mislead the world about the pandemic, to the actions and missteps taken by other countries.
Remember too that any action taken by the US to help contain the virus, would be attacked by the partisan left because any loyalties they have will be to themselves, and any opportunity to score cheap political points will be taken advantage of. Even if it means stabbing the country in the back.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
which I think would also include isolating recent visors to/from those countries.
That works well when you're an isolated country outside of its tourist season. When the virus was discovered in Italy it spread through two places: Ski resorts, and god damn Carnival. There is no more internationally significant superspreading event. People from the entire world were travelling to Italy for that event, and hopping from carnival celebration to carnival celebration throughout Europe.
There was no isolating Italy. When it was discovered in Italy it was effectively discovered in Spain, Belgium,
Re: This is what you get (Score:2)
Re:This is what you get (Score:5, Insightful)
The vaccine has been readily available for months. It's people of a certain political affiliation who keep turning it down.
There is overlap (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The vaccine has been readily available for months. It's people of a certain political affiliation who keep turning it down.
That may be true in the US, but it certainly isn't true in most of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
and I, for one, support the right of the Right, to die for their cause.
I completely and fully support that.
hell, I encourage it!
Re:This is what you get (Score:5, Insightful)
This is an entirely expected result of inequitable vaccine distribution.
This is what you get and was entirely expected when millions of Hindus jump into a river [reuters.com] to take a bath together despite warnings.
"Almost everyone forgot that there was ever corona," added the panel, headed by Chief Justice Vikram Nath.
A full opening of the economy from last year's crippling lockdown, coupled with the mass religious festivals and political rallies in states heading to elections have fuelled the crisis. ... authorities appeared unwilling or unable to stop events that could lead to a calamitous spread of the disease.
Re:This is what you get (Score:5, Insightful)
By excluding some of the most populous areas from vaccination
I agree with your point, but you seem to be suggesting India was excluded. They weren't. India has the largest vaccine manufacturing program in the world (pre-pandemic they produced 60% of the global supply), but rather than recognize the danger of their population and to their population, and then vaccinating them as quickly as possible, they put their people's lives at risk by exporting tens of millions of vaccine doses, leaving them without anyone vaccinated when delta hit. They're now dealing with the repercussions of that decision, with their people being the ones to pay the price.
With a population of 1.3 billion people, do you want to guess how big India's largest order for vaccination doses was by the end of February 2021? 16 million. That's doses, mind you. They finally made a large-scale order in March, but it was only for 120 million doses. They followed it up in April with another order for 160 million, but those won't fully arrive until next month. This is far too little, too late, and it was a situation that might have been avoided had they vaccinated their own people with the supply they had readily available.
Instead...well, this story is from a month-ish ago and I don't know how things have changed since then, but someone we know from India was saying that when a friend's husband died from COVID at 1am, the Mumbai authorities took the body and burned it in a mass pyre before 3am. Word on the street was that the reality of the situation was probably 4x worse than what was being reported in statistics. Take it with a heaping of salt, of course.
Again, I agree that we need to be doing everything we can for other countries, if for no reason other than the selfish justification that they're a breeding ground for variants that can affect us, but India's issues in this regard are largely ones of their own making. They need help, of course, but there should also be a reckoning among those that allowed this to happen.
Re: This is what you get (Score:2)
India vaccinated 7.5 million people yesterday.
https://www.voanews.com/covid-... [voanews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This is an entirely expected result of inequitable vaccine distribution (I will readily acknowledge that a vaccination distribution program that distributes evenly based on population would not necessarily have been the best response, but it likely would have been better than what we did).
I read your post three times and couldn't figure out which political party you're blaming. Please be more specific.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
We have a Global Response (Score:5, Insightful)
By excluding some of the most populous areas from vaccination we created an environment ideal for selecting a more contagious virus.
No area is being excluded. All the vaccines produced are being injected into humans who are vulnerable to COVID. As countries' vaccination rates are reaching saturation and there is spare supply those countries are redirecting their supply to others to help them - the US did this for Canada and others and now Canada is close to being in a position to pass it on and support the effort.
Yes, wealthy countries were at the head of the queue for vaccines but, at the same time, those are the countries who are also producing the vaccines or producing the supplies needed to make the vaccines so securing their economies so that they can continue to do this makes a lot of sense. This is especially the case when you realize that those same economies are now going to be paying to buy the vaccines for the rest of the planet that would otherwise struggle to afford them.
This might not be the global response you want but fortunately, the one we have is far more grounded in political and economic reality which makes it much more likely to actually work and be effective.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, wealthy countries were at the head of the queue for vaccines but, at the same time, those are the countries who are also producing the vaccines or producing the supplies needed to make the vaccines so securing their economies so that they can continue to do this makes a lot of sense.
Look up the world's vaccine producers and you will see India very very high on the list. Look up the world's wealthy countries and you won't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is an entirely expected result of inequitable vaccine distribution
What difference does it make who is vaccinated first?
Re: (Score:2)
So given there is not nearly enough vaccine to go around initially, is it not better to entirely vaccinate some regions than to spread vaccines throughout the world - but have only 10-20% of people vaccinated in any one country?
Exactly this. Even to the the medical rationale, we can see what happened as India stopped exporting vaccine. As well, some countries refused the vaccines on liability issues.
But back to India. This becomes an issue - "Why are you purposely allowing our citizens to die, while exporting vaccines that might save them to other countries?" and "How dare you not export vaccines to my country - our citizens will die!"
I mean Nationalism can be bad, but nothing like this to lose power, or global allies.
Re: (Score:2)
There is one good side effect of all the mayhem in India -- the number of spam/scam robocalls has dropped to almost zero. Who knew that a major disease outbreak could have such fortuitous consequences?
You're pretty lucky. We still get dozens a day on our landline, which I have not been able to convince my wife to get rid of.
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite. It's probably better to have only 10-20% of the oldest and most vulnerable people vaccinated in any one country, to quickly reduce the death rate. The vaccines are only 90% effective or whatever, but even so, the total number of deaths worldwide should be lower under such a
"experts" (Score:2)
Seeing as it goes against what many experts seem to think
Curious what "experts" think that vaccinating 10% of people in all countries is better than vaccinating 70% in most.
I mean, I thought reaching herd immunity in populations was an important milestone but I'll guess your "experts" don't believe in herd immunity either...
Re: (Score:2)
Curious what "experts" think that vaccinating 10% of people in all countries is better than vaccinating 70% in most.
Most? Someone can't count.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wouldn't it be more widespread otherwise (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm curious, too. It seems to me that, given how hard it is to store many of those vaccines, it would take a much longer time to distribute them in poorer countries, which means that the best way to get the most people vaccinated as quickly as possible is to concentrate on wealthy countries, where it is relatively easy to handle the distribution, and while you're doing that, independently try to solve the distribution problems in poorer countries so that by the time you're done vaccinating the wealthy countries, the infrastructure is ready.
I can't imagine anybody in their right minds suggesting the reverse — vaccinating the third world first — unless that person just doesn't understand the real-world problems involved in distributing an ultra-refrigerated vaccine in countries with an inconsistent electrical supply.
There's not an easy way to solve the fairness problems. The vaccines that are easiest to store are also the ones that are least effective and have the worst risks associated with them. So if you say that you'll divert all of those vaccines to poorer countries, you've shifted the vaccine risk so that it disproportionately affects those countries, and then people complain about that unfairness. You can't win. The best you can do is concentrate on protecting as many people as you can, as quickly as you can, and encourage the people complaining to do something about the fundamental inequality that makes that approach unavoidable.
Mutations are the main issue (Score:2)
And that's why you should avoid unnecessary trips.
Since suddenly you'd end up with a mutation causing serious trouble making the current waves seem insignificant.
Re: (Score:2)
> And that's why you should avoid unnecessary trips.
Unnecessary trips where: internationally, cross country, in your city, to the grocery store?
Jesus, how far away *is* your grocery store? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty much common sense. Right now, a fly fishing trip to Vermont is as safe as anything. A mass Hindu religious festival in India -- maybe put that one off for a year.
In much of the US COVID is relatively well controlled. If the moving average of new cases there is down under 10 cases/day and staying there, there's little reason for vaccinated people to curtail their outings there unless they involve a transport hub like an airport. But there are isolated hot spots [cdc.gov] right now where even vaccinate
Re: (Score:2)
>"Mutations are created by the vaccinated, not by the unvaccinated."
I don't think that is accurate.
But it isn't completely accurate to reverse the statement, either. Mutations are a "natural " occurrence and WILL occur over time, regardless of what we do or don't do. Some things can accelerate development and number of mutations, however. I believe the more cases that are contracted and over a longer time, the more likely valid mutations will occur and spread. So the more a population is vaccinated,
Re: (Score:3)
The number of mutations is linear with the number of virii. As they reproduce better in unvaccinated people, the majority of mutations are due to unvaccinated people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No, each replication is a chance for mutation. Far, FAR fewer replications occur in vaccinated people - in fact infection rarely takes hold in vaccinated people at all.
Note that several mutations occurred before any vaccines were available, which by itself refutes your assertion.
Don't matter to me (Score:5, Funny)
I fly Southwest.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I fly Southwest.
left over fathers day dad joke?
Government Should Play Pandemic (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously. Play the pandemic online game, the one where you build a virus to try to wipe out humanity.
What is the first thing the game does to prevent spreading? Close the borders.
Something so bloody simple, and yet international and regional travel is still allowed.
Close the fucking borders. Between countries. Between States and between provinces. Just shut it down...
The economy will bounce back eventually. The lives lost due to profits over people mentality will not.
Just shut it down.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if it works in a video game, it must work in the real world, right?
Shutting the border only delays the inevitable by a few days/weeks. Either you close everything, all airports, all maritime transport, prevent all people from passing the border, including patrolling huge terrestrial borders, every fucking single thing should be stopped; or there will be a guy with the virus that will pass and spread it at some point. But your country cannot survive without global trade. It doesn't even have enough che
Re:Government Should Play Pandemic (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, if it works in a video game, it must work in the real world, right?
The developer of Plague, Inc., which closely follows Pandemic's gameplay, gave a talk at the CDC back in 2013, and even incorporated a number of things they learned from the CDC back into the game. Likewise, a large number of organizations conducted epidemiological studies into the Corrupted Blood incident that occurred in World of Warcraft [wikipedia.org] back in 2005. Even the CDC reached out to Blizzard to get data about the incident.
So while you can't assume that every game maps neatly back to reality, you shouldn't be so dismissive either.
And yes, even if closing a border only buys you a few weeks before the onset or a mass outbreak, those few weeks can be enough time to see what isn't working elsewhere, educate people appropriately, write up and put into effect new processes, switch manufacturing lines to medicine/PPEs, and distribute supplies. Result: the curve is flatter, your medical system doesn't get overloaded as easily, and your economy isn't as impacted.
Also worth noting: if you do see infections, studies from the 1918 Spanish Flu indicate that major US cities that shut down earlier and stayed locked down for longer were consistently the least economically impacted in the long-run, as measured by the time it took them to recover to their pre-pandemic state. As it turns out, the permanent loss of lifetimes of productivity/sales resulting from the deaths of employees/customers has an ongoing cost that takes far more time to recoup than a few months of reduced productivity and sales resulting from a lockdown.
Re: (Score:3)
You’re contradicting yourself. If the game perfectly maps to reality, as you said, then the Madagascar of the game proves that closing borders works. But if closing borders didn’t work, as you just said, then the game doesn’t perfectly map to reality.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, if it works in a video game, it must work in the real world, right?
Actually it does work in the real world. See NZ and Australia as examples.
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly Plague Inc: Evolved [steampowered.com] approaches the issue from an opposite angle.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously. Play the pandemic online game, the one where you build a virus to try to wipe out humanity.
What is the first thing the game does to prevent spreading? Close the borders.
Something so bloody simple, and yet international and regional travel is still allowed.
Close the fucking borders. Between countries. Between States and between provinces. Just shut it down...
The economy will bounce back eventually. The lives lost due to profits over people mentality will not.
Just shut it down.
Economies are pretty damn interconnected now. How do you get food to the supermarkets? Medications to the hospitals and drug stores? I'm sure there's some regional stockpiles, but for a real border closure you're talking some major, major disruptions. And those disruptions don't ease off as time goes on, if anything they get worse as the stockpiles of imported goods dry up.
Island nations can manage this because their import/export is done through international shipping and is a lot easier to keep track of,
Time to start measuring such predictions (Score:2, Troll)
No one would hope to run a company, a lab or a government department without measuring successes and failures.
Yet organisations like WHO and the CDC (and SAGE in the UK) continually utter the most exaggerated and frightening warnings - which mostly come to nothing.
Dr Ferguson and his team at Imperial have made completely wrong predictions five times in a row; yet no one seems to notice, care, or take any appropriate steps.
Isn't the saying "three strikes and you're out"? For senior scientists dealing with su
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://theferret.scot/fact-ch... [theferret.scot]
Re: (Score:3)
As always, a fact check site that happily ignores the facts.
For instance, Ferguson was part of the team that produced the erroneous computer model that was used to justify the illegal slaughter of millions of healthy animals in the Foot & Mouth outbreak.
That the fact checker couldn't find the evidence merely shows their incompetence in researching, not that the facts are flawed.
As a someone currently living in Texas (Score:5, Funny)
... I say, thank you, bring it on!
Look, I'm not saying you kill all the folks who refuse to mask up and get a vaccine. Just enough to adjust the voting blocks, and the majority of elected officials in state government.
And for my third wish, take the racists too.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the original COVID. Now that everyone knows it only increased the death rate +0.14%, let's hype the Delta variant. .
0.14% ? What the hell was killing everybody over the last 18 month, then? Chemtrails? 5G? Mossad?
Re: (Score:2)
My pick is: Mossad. I mean, the Secret Mossad, not the normal Mossad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously 3.9M people faked their deaths. For one, I didn’t see any funeral processions during the pandemic, and with that kinda carnage there would have been endless streams of them, but there were no cars on the road, so it obviously it’s fake. The other hint is that there were zero job fairs. With that many dead folks there would have been tons of openings and people lined up to interview to fill those openings. Think I’m gonna go run for office, that was too easy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Learn some math, moron. 0.86% to 1% is not a .14% increase, it is a 16% increase.
Re: (Score:2)
Why choose annual rates? Let's choose weekly rates.
The natural death rate for humans is 0.016%, but covid increase it to about 0.020%. Therefore covid only increased death rate by 0.004%. No problem!
Wait, let's choose hourly rates.
The natural death rate for humans is 0.00008%, but covid increase it to about 0.00010%. Therefore covid only increased death rate by 0.00002%. No problem!
Wait, let's choose per-minute rates, etc
Idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
The title should be changed from 'most vulnerable' to 'most stupid' because that's really what it comes down to.
I have always said that Stupid should hurt. Looks like this time it will.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, all Southern states are seriously lagging and the midwest states have set themselves up for another round of die offs at meat packing plants [denverpost.com].
A part of this is still the rural distribution is terrible. There are people who would like to get vaccinated, but live in a one traffic light town and have to drive an hour to get anywhere they can get the vaccine while they only have 45 minutes or an hour total for lunch.
It's admittedly a small portion, but still.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are that far from civilization you are at a much less risk to get it. It's the areas with a high population where the virus thrives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
2020 will go down in history as the start politicization of a health crisis. All politicians who used it for political gain, regardless of what side of the aisle they're on shouldn't be in office now.
Re: (Score:2)
> I seem to recall the "Blue" candidates just last November stating they wouldn't trust any vaccine that resulted from Trumps administration and I recall people agreeing with Biden/Harris on that.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news... [msn.com]
They stick to their guns on Russiagate but flip-flop on the one thing they were right about: the rushed vaccine.
If Trump was still in office they would have no problem destroying the economy. But now they have the power back it's all about flipping the narrative.
Re:This means Red states (Score:4, Insightful)
I seem to recall the "Blue" candidates just last November stating they wouldn't trust any vaccine that resulted from Trumps administration and I recall people agreeing with Biden/Harris on that.
Can you back up your recollection? I don't recall anyone saying that. I do recall Kamala Harris saying that she would not trust _Trump_ about the vaccine. That makes perfect sense to me. There are people out there who, if they tell you that water is wet, you might want to double check, and Trump is one of them.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
She didn't trust a vaccine coming from his administration. (Trump administration - Trump. The same holds true for Biden)
This attempt to use a completely literal interpretation to what she said is absurd unless she honestly believed that Trump was working in the labs making the vaccine.
Re:This means Red states (Score:4, Informative)
She didn't trust a vaccine coming from his administration. (Trump administration - Trump. The same holds true for Biden)
This attempt to use a completely literal interpretation to what she said is absurd unless she honestly believed that Trump was working in the labs making the vaccine.
You seem to have forgotten that at the time Trump was pushing the vaccine makers and the FDA to accelerate production and approval. Since he was trying to shortcut the normal processes, he was essentially pushing to release vaccines that weren't fully tested. He was making claims about having a vaccine ready and deployed before Election Day. Harris was saying that she wouldn't trust Trump's word that a vaccine was safe or effective because he was trying to shortcut the normal processs, though she didn't bother saying the "because" part because that was the context of the statement and at the time didn't need to be repeated.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
All polictions are liars and you are stating that we shouldn't be able to question multiple things from vaccines to election results. That even having questions is destructive.
Re: (Score:2)
How can you tell a politician is lying?
Its lips are moving.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Selling masks is politicizing now?
Re: (Score:2)
Selling masks is politicizing now?
not anymore. even amazon cant get rid of the truckloads of masks that have FINALLY been made and are for sale..
yeah, I'm partially joking, but it was quite something to behold, how our supply chain 1000% failed us. first world nation and we had to resort to drones flying single rolls of toilet paper to friends, at the peak of the lockdown.
and now, we finally have more TP, sanitizer and masks than we'll need even for the next 100 year 'flu^2'.
Re: (Score:2)
uh yeah [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Old people are SUPPOSED to die. Evolution makes no mistakes. Disease thinning the weak is a positive force for evolution and let us remember the only evolved "purpose" of species is SPECIES not individual sustainment.
Individuals past the age where they contribute instead of consume are without evolutionary value (not to be confused with sentiment).
Re: (Score:2)
That story is over a year old you dipshit.
Re: (Score:2)
"and you're more likely to get a larger, more likely fatal dose of the virus in a dense area"
Viruses are not poisons. They are more analogous to bacterial infection. When exposed to an insignificant amount that is not causing damage the immune system is not mobilized to fix it. It is only when the presence rises to the level of forming a colony which causes "damage" does the immune system respond.
Unlike silly hooman ugly-bags-of-mostly-water designed shit-shows, the immune system does not fix that which
Re: (Score:2)
Viruses are not poisons. They are more analogous to bacterial infection. When exposed to an insignificant amount that is not causing damage the immune system is not mobilized to fix it. It is only when the presence rises to the level of forming a colony which causes "damage" does the immune system respond.
The basic idea lower initial dose gives immune system more time to respond as more doublings are needed to reach levels that make people ill.
There are centuries of experience with variolation prior to vaccines and lots of research for other non sars2 viruses showing relationship between initial dose and outcomes as well as controlled animal experiments.
Re: (Score:2)
"and you're more likely to get a larger, more likely fatal dose of the virus in a dense area"
Viruses are not poisons. They are more analogous to bacterial infection. When exposed to an insignificant amount that is not causing damage the immune system is not mobilized to fix it. It is only when the presence rises to the level of forming a colony which causes "damage" does the immune system respond.
Sorry, but that's not really true [medpagetoday.com]. Initial exposure dose has a statistically significant impact on the severity of viral infection. That's why young, healthy healthcare workers who were exposed to bodily fluids of COVID patients had such a high risk of dying from the disease compared with other people in their age group. This has been understood [nih.gov] for a while. In fact, this was actually the basis for early vaccines (variolation).
On the flip side, being exposed to low doses repeatedly is worse than a singl [asm.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Density matters.
No it doesn't.
https://ourworldindata.org/gra... [ourworldindata.org]
Re: (Score:2)
You can't just take a giant steaming pile of non-comparable data and throw it into a graph and expect to get useful results. Density matters within the context of areas that are otherwise similar in every way. The major factors that your graph ignores are:
So you're basically comparing pure noise to pure noise and hoping to spot a pattern.
Re: (Score:3)
Allow me to suggest less hate and more kindness.
Re: (Score:3)
Allow me to suggest less hate and more kindness.
Though your UID would suggest otherwise, you must be new here. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Noting that unpaid / uncollected medical bills eventually get passed along to others in the form of higher insurance premiums.
Re: (Score:2)
There are still a bunch of scared ignorant hillbillies who won't get vaccinated here. I sincerely hope that this Delta version hits them, and that the hospital bills financially ruin them and their families.
"People are afraid and ignorant, so I hope they suffer financial ruin and/or die." Fuck you, sociopath.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest percentage of Americans is white, at around 73%. Depending on whether the 56%/64% number includes white Hispanic people, it seems very likely that white Americans were actually undercounted by the poll.
If that is the case, then African Americans could potentially be overrepresented in the data, so if they have a higher rate of hesitancy, then Trump Republicans are even more likely to be the anti-vaxxers than this poll's numbers suggest, not less.
If that number does not include Hispanics, then w
Re: (Score:2)
Don't me jealous of my non-pandemicness
Re: (Score:2)
no FUD, this is actually concerning, every time someone is infected we roll the dice on the possibility of creating a new variant that can re-infect people or that spread easier or that is more lethal, if you have one variant that already is more contagious it just causes the number of times the dice are rolled to increase, and that what is concerning.
Also there is a myth that diseases get milder with time, what they tend to get, if nothing is done, is more infectious, if the disease has the host spreading
Re: (Score:2)
The good doctor [youtu.be] makes a valid point about those who have had only one shot.