Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
This guy seems to have no trouble quantifying harm: "They have done more harm than good across this pandemic"
Coronavirus 12: Don't Abandon Hope
- Thread starter Aiken_Drumn
- Start date
- Status
Clearly depends on the demographic. It's rather bizarre to claim the 2 years of lockdowns/other did more good than harm to (eg) young people who lost their job and social circle; according to stats they had virtually zero risk of damage by covid.
If TMIT had suggested that level of specificity, I don't think he would've gotten the replies he did. But I'm sure he can argue for himself.
Narz
keeping it real
Gonna check out this podcast
Narz
keeping it real
Yeah I'd say malice is a strong word. I think disregard is a better one. Anyway it's silly to argue about because no one can 'prove' someone's emotional reasons
Vaccination couldn't have ended the pandemic, just reduced the overload on local healthcare.
The technology wasn't capable of being rolled out at scale, we were incapable of stamping out the reservoirs in the majority of the world, the virus was too capable of mutating around the vaccines we did have. Sure, better restrictions and vaccine acceptance would have saved lives, but there was no 'ending this pandemic' with our current infrastructure.
Given that the next pandemic could be orders of magnitude worse, there's a lot of improvement that needs to be done between then and now. I definitely agree that vaccines are the only real tool we have after we fail to contain the next bioweapon, lab leak, or zoonotic leap. But if we want them to be the actual tool that we use to end the next pandemic, then a lot of work needs to be done.
Paying people to stay home and ordering more takeout to support local businesses is woefully insufficient investment
The technology wasn't capable of being rolled out at scale, we were incapable of stamping out the reservoirs in the majority of the world, the virus was too capable of mutating around the vaccines we did have. Sure, better restrictions and vaccine acceptance would have saved lives, but there was no 'ending this pandemic' with our current infrastructure.
Given that the next pandemic could be orders of magnitude worse, there's a lot of improvement that needs to be done between then and now. I definitely agree that vaccines are the only real tool we have after we fail to contain the next bioweapon, lab leak, or zoonotic leap. But if we want them to be the actual tool that we use to end the next pandemic, then a lot of work needs to be done.
Paying people to stay home and ordering more takeout to support local businesses is woefully insufficient investment
The problem is what you're alluding to is basically infrastructure work (or at least, that's how I'm interpreting as what would be a more sufficient investment). Which means spending. Recent decades in the UK at least have shown us that infrastructure is patched when necessary more than it actually is invested in. Look at roads, for crying out loud.
A good example is here. Lots of good investment, for sure. But decades after these roads were built. Like, half a century (or more) in some cases. That's the kind of timeline these things typically operate on. I wish I had faith that we'd look at stuff like ventilation and the like in public buildings (especially in states schools, which can also be decades old) and actually work in a timely manner to improve them.
Switzerland's numbers jumped to 30000 daily infections today. Basically, our government seems to hope that early reports of omicron being a lot milder are going to prove true, or we'll be in deep trouble in a few weeks. Hospitals are already full from the last delta wave in nov/dec
According to source below: as such the capacity will be there this year for 2-3 jabs per year for the global population.
"The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations says that the drug industry’s current production rate of 1.5 billion doses per month means that over 24 billion doses of covid vaccines could be produced by June 2022.30 Ensuring they are made where they are needed is the next challenge".
From:
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2375
Such capacities and relevant know-how have high idling cost when not needed.
But the vulnerability in terms of national security and economical-political stability can no longer be ignored.
Who is gonna pay up ?
What will be the price ?
When Big Pharma owns the know-how and capacities, incurring all those often idling cost, it will be the countries, their people, who will pay a premium price for outsourcing strategic goods. Something no country will do with military defense unless it is a vassal state who pays tribute to another country (in some way or another).
Countries or country alliances who are powerfull enough towards enough Big Pharma capacities can choose to pay a premium price without getting blackmailed when the horsehocky hits the fan.
But more likely you will get, like that other national security issue, a national or alliance wide military-industrial complex.
And also imo likely: powerfull countries or alliances will use vaccine aid (or before last generation production transfer aid) as geopolitical influence tool just like now with military aid and selling military equipment.
Countries as such too small for efficient vaccine production in terms of capacities and know-how, but having a strong appetite to be independent from Big Powers or Big Pharma (like for example Turkey) will also develop their own production. The same for countries in international sanction positions, like for example Cuba.
Pandemic risks having become a new element in the equation of global hybrid competition up to hybrid warfare between countries with currently as bonus the great ease by which the "stitious cohort" of people can be provoked into destabilising governments-institutions.
"The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations says that the drug industry’s current production rate of 1.5 billion doses per month means that over 24 billion doses of covid vaccines could be produced by June 2022.30 Ensuring they are made where they are needed is the next challenge".
From:
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2375
Such capacities and relevant know-how have high idling cost when not needed.
But the vulnerability in terms of national security and economical-political stability can no longer be ignored.
Who is gonna pay up ?
What will be the price ?
When Big Pharma owns the know-how and capacities, incurring all those often idling cost, it will be the countries, their people, who will pay a premium price for outsourcing strategic goods. Something no country will do with military defense unless it is a vassal state who pays tribute to another country (in some way or another).
Countries or country alliances who are powerfull enough towards enough Big Pharma capacities can choose to pay a premium price without getting blackmailed when the horsehocky hits the fan.
But more likely you will get, like that other national security issue, a national or alliance wide military-industrial complex.
And also imo likely: powerfull countries or alliances will use vaccine aid (or before last generation production transfer aid) as geopolitical influence tool just like now with military aid and selling military equipment.
Countries as such too small for efficient vaccine production in terms of capacities and know-how, but having a strong appetite to be independent from Big Powers or Big Pharma (like for example Turkey) will also develop their own production. The same for countries in international sanction positions, like for example Cuba.
Pandemic risks having become a new element in the equation of global hybrid competition up to hybrid warfare between countries with currently as bonus the great ease by which the "stitious cohort" of people can be provoked into destabilising governments-institutions.
Yeah, it's infrastructure. Luckily (?) it's not infrastructure that has only one paying stakeholder, so different people have incentive to move forwards. As well, because many of the solutions have a networking effect and a public good effect (economically), people's selfish defensive efforts contribute to the net capacity (much like how vaccines are both of selfish benefit and help protect others).
But we definitely need much more investment if we want to have any chance of success against the future threats. And that means that someone needs to be doing the investing.
Last edited:
As I always say, 45.3% of all statistics posted on the Internet are made up on the spot and 18% of the time people do not bother to follow them up.
Zardnaar
Deity
95% stats on the internet are made up- Abraham Lincoln.
Berzerker
Deity
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.14.472632v1
Omicron might have mutated within a mouse and returned to a human
Omicron might have mutated within a mouse and returned to a human
EnglishEdward
Deity
Absolutely fascinating.
Meanwhile down-under in kangaroo land:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-59889522
While this sounds possible from what they say (and would indeed be fascinating), I'd say that there's really not enough evidence
.
True, but if it is capable of such "easy" species jumping that is significant in the trajectory of the pandemic.While this sounds possible from what they say (and would indeed be fascinating), I'd say that there's really not enough evidence
amadeus
burning out his fuse out here alone
Hey if Djoko don’t like it he can go back to Belgrade and sit on his pile of drachmas. Why should he be exempt just because he’s rich? I’m thinking of word that rhymes with “Norse chit”—anyone want to take a guess?
Berzerker
Deity
maybe instead of our mad scientists creating more lethal bugs in labs they could create less lethal but more spreadable bugs to inoculate the world, that should make it harder for the deadlier bugs to gain a foothold in the body
noooooo...they got me playing god now
nm
noooooo...they got me playing god now
nm
- Status
