All things CoronaVirus

[a fan]

the government paid for the bailouts and covid tests and r&d? where'd they get the money?

Well, we could certainly try free market for all this, and see what happens. Is that your preference? F the poor?

please back up the bolded above with research on your claim vs kram's list. when you have time.

We already played this game in the spring. We've been aware of this virus for less than 12 month. Asking for perfect research and cause and effect in the middle of a pandemic is absurd. It's like stopping in a burning building to check on research as to which exit door to use. You pick one, and hope for the best.

And yep, you can pick to not take an exit door at all. That's fine, too. But you still have to make a decision.

[Typical Lax Dad]

We all have the right to be personally irresponsible. I may chew some food and spit it in a salad bar.

[wgdsr]

the government paid for the bailouts and covid tests and r&d? where'd they get the money?

Well, we could certainly try free market for all this, and see what happens. Is that your preference? F the poor?

please back up the bolded above with research on your claim vs kram's list. when you have time.

We already played this game in the spring. We've been aware of this virus for less than 12 month. Asking for perfect research and cause and effect in the middle of a pandemic is absurd. It's like stopping in a burning building to check on research as to which exit door to use. You pick one, and hope for the best.

And yep, you can pick to not take an exit door at all. That's fine, too. But you still have to make a decision.

well, actually, there has been a lot of research since spring on a number of items that kram posted, and you said all of them fit into the category of minimization. which is now patently untrue as a result. including from our experts at the who and cdc. we're still using them, right?

you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap. his main point from that being that his own behavior will be what he'll rely on to be safe from the virus. and he's right. our behaviors will get us out of this, or not. that has been true from the start, and it's true now. if more people took that attitude, we might be much better off.

either people can't read, or read what they want to or think they see.

[Typical Lax Dad]

the government paid for the bailouts and covid tests and r&d? where'd they get the money?

Well, we could certainly try free market for all this, and see what happens. Is that your preference? F the poor?

please back up the bolded above with research on your claim vs kram's list. when you have time.

We already played this game in the spring. We've been aware of this virus for less than 12 month. Asking for perfect research and cause and effect in the middle of a pandemic is absurd. It's like stopping in a burning building to check on research as to which exit door to use. You pick one, and hope for the best.

And yep, you can pick to not take an exit door at all. That's fine, too. But you still have to make a decision.

well, actually, there has been a lot of research since spring on a number of items that kram posted, and you said all of them fit into the category of minimization. which is now patently untrue as a result. including from our experts at the who and cdc. we're still using them, right?

you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap. his main point from that being that his own behavior will be what he'll rely on to be safe from the virus. and he's right. our behaviors will get us out of this, or not. that has been true from the start, and it's true now. if more people took that attitude, we might be much better off.

either people can't read, or read what they want to or think they see.

A lethal pandemic is hard sledding. No easy answer but letting folks go free range isn’t really an option. 300,000 people have died in 9 months with mitigation efforts.... is that number likely to be higher or lower if we took no effort to mitigate... there are a lot of unintended consequences that are negative but imagine if hospitals were overwhelmed and we were sitting on 1/2 a million dead now?

[a fan]

well, actually, there has been a lot of research since spring on a number of items that kram posted, and you said all of them fit into the category of minimization. which is now patently untrue as a result.

Really? Conclusive, peer reviewed? Iron clad science? The results proven by second and third studies?

including from our experts at the who and cdc. we're still using them, right?

Yep. Those are guidelines. Not the same as hard science, my friend. But you know that.

you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap.

I don't understand what you're talking about here. Can you rephrase?

his main point from that being that his own behavior will be what he'll rely on to be safe from the virus. and he's right. our behaviors will get us out of this, or not.

That's great if you're Kramerica.

Now tell me what you're supposed to do if you're a governor? Especially so, if you want said governor to do follow (even loosely) suggestions from scientists.

that has been true from the start, and it's true now.

Revisionist. We didn't even know how Covid19 spread back in the spring.

[wgdsr]

well, actually, there has been a lot of research since spring on a number of items that kram posted, and you said all of them fit into the category of minimization. which is now patently untrue as a result.

Really? Conclusive, peer reviewed? Iron clad science? The results proven by second and third studies?

including from our experts at the who and cdc. we're still using them, right?

Yep. Those are guidelines. Not the same as hard science, my friend. But you know that.

you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap.

I don't understand what you're talking about here. Can you rephrase?

his main point from that being that his own behavior will be what he'll rely on to be safe from the virus. and he's right. our behaviors will get us out of this, or not.

That's great if you're Kramerica.

Now tell me what you're supposed to do if you're a governor? Especially so, if you want said governor to do follow (even loosely) suggestions from scientists.

that has been true from the start, and it's true now.

Revisionist. We didn't even know how Covid19 spread back in the spring.

we are obviously on a different wavelength. kram... good luck!!

[a fan]

we are obviously on a different wavelength.

No. It's not obvious. You've been drifting into Fattylax territory with too many pronouns with no antecedents. I can't tell what you're saying this past week.

Example? You advocated a couple weeks ago that governors listen to scientists.

Now you've done a 180, and are suggesting we go laissez faire with Kram, and go every man for himself.


I have no clue which path you think we should take.

And I still have no idea what this means.......you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap.

What line? What reaction? What point? And what leap?

[wgdsr]

we are obviously on a different wavelength.

No. It's not obvious. You've been drifting into Fattylax territory with too many pronouns with no antecedents. I can't tell what you're saying this past week.
ok, fine. the way you cut up posts, take them out of context and/or give them an opposite context, as you did above --- i can't keep up with and keep correcting. and as you say -- you can't read my writing form. which is on me. i promised to try to change this several weeks ago, but really i gave it no effort so far. so there. different wavelengths.
Example? You advocated a couple weeks ago that governors listen to scientists.

Now you've done a 180, and are suggesting we go laissez faire with Kram, and go every man for himself.
it's at least possible i'm the one having trouble with reading comprehension re: kram. however, my interpretation is not the "laissez faire" and balls to the wall that people interpreted. tbd (to be determined).

I have no clue which path you think we should take.

And I still have no idea what this means.......you're just last in line here, but i'm fluxxomed at the reaction and the co-opting of his point (into now government dollars). it's a leap.
by "last in line" --- i replied to you -- when several others had been doing the same or similar to mr kramerica. and as it stands now, there is a lineup of people that believe he was saying one thing, and i believe he was saying quite another. so really given all of the above, it's not real useful to keep on here.
What line? What reaction? What point? And what leap?

[a fan]

ok, fine. the way you cut up posts, take them out of context and/or give them an opposite context, as you did above --- i can't keep up with and keep correcting.

Ah, why didn't you say so? I'm not INTENTIONALLY taking things out of context. I cut up posts with the intent of making it clear as to the EXACT sentence that I'm responding to.....and to make it easy on the eyes. I do it to make my thoughts clearer. Or at least that's my intent.

Have you notice how much clutter you get when two posters simply hit the "quote" button, and don't trim the posts down? It fills a whole thread up, and is redundant.

I'm trying to help make things clearer. I'm happy to stop doing it if it's doing just the opposite!

[Typical Lax Dad]

Ghost of Christmas Future shows up with this:


https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00966-w

We sticking with let the ignorant people decide how to tackle it...personal irresponsibility is a right.

(And before some Einstein points it out....the headline is could and not would).

[jhu72]

...bad news on the vaccine front. Sanofi has announced a delay of 6 months in getting product through clinical trials. Their vaccine is currently not effective for patients over 50 YO. They are now a year away (if ever). The University of Queensland in Australia has canceled their program after a failure in clinical trials. Astrazeneca's product is significantly less effective that the competition's, so they intend to mix it with the Russian offering and see what that does. Nothing new on the J&J front. Near term it looks like Pfizer, Moderna and perhaps J&J is all there will be and perhaps some darker horse.

If I were Biden, I would go the defense production act route, force licensing and get others beside Pfizer and Moderna producing these vaccines. I am assuming Moderna will do as well as Pfizer in the coming weeks.

[JoeMauer89]

...bad news on the vaccine front. Sanofi has announced a delay of 6 months in getting product through clinical trials. Their vaccine is currently not effective for patients over 50 YO. They are now a year away (if ever). The University of Queensland in Australia has canceled their program after a failure in clinical trials. Astrazeneca's product is significantly less effective that the competition's, so they intend to mix it with the Russian offering and see what that does. Nothing new on the J&J front. Near term it looks like Pfizer, Moderna and perhaps J&J is all there will be and perhaps some darker horse.

If I were Biden, I would go the defense production act route, force licensing and get others beside Pfizer and Moderna producing these vaccines. I am assuming Moderna will do as well as Pfizer in the coming weeks.

Two and likely a third Vaccine is A MILLION times better than NONE. Not bad news, just part of the process. Work on your framing.

Joe

[MDlaxfan76]

...bad news on the vaccine front. Sanofi has announced a delay of 6 months in getting product through clinical trials. Their vaccine is currently not effective for patients over 50 YO. They are now a year away (if ever). The University of Queensland in Australia has canceled their program after a failure in clinical trials. Astrazeneca's product is significantly less effective that the competition's, so they intend to mix it with the Russian offering and see what that does. Nothing new on the J&J front. Near term it looks like Pfizer, Moderna and perhaps J&J is all there will be and perhaps some darker horse.

If I were Biden, I would go the defense production act route, force licensing and get others beside Pfizer and Moderna producing these vaccines. I am assuming Moderna will do as well as Pfizer in the coming weeks.

Two and likely a third Vaccine is A MILLION times better than NONE. Not bad news, just part of the process. Work on your framing.

Joe

Vaccines that work well and are safe are good news. 72 and everyone else thinks so and has said so. We're ALL enthusiastic about that news.

Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it.

Now, the problem is that the US bet on the portfolio broadly instead of securing supply from those that proved successful. That strategy may or may not have been rational, but the result is that supply of effective vaccines will be much more limited than if the portfolio had been successful across the board...meaning it will take much longer to get enough people in the US (and the world) vaccinated to actually crush the virus spread.

That's BAD NEWS.
Unequivocally.

So, 72 throws out a possible policy move that Biden could take that could address this issue, perhaps...that's a constructive response, not curling up in the fetal position in the face of BAD NEWS.

Perhaps you should be less concerned with and critical of how others are 'framing' and instead constructively deal with the actual issues being discussed yourself?

[JoeMauer89]

...bad news on the vaccine front. Sanofi has announced a delay of 6 months in getting product through clinical trials. Their vaccine is currently not effective for patients over 50 YO. They are now a year away (if ever). The University of Queensland in Australia has canceled their program after a failure in clinical trials. Astrazeneca's product is significantly less effective that the competition's, so they intend to mix it with the Russian offering and see what that does. Nothing new on the J&J front. Near term it looks like Pfizer, Moderna and perhaps J&J is all there will be and perhaps some darker horse.

If I were Biden, I would go the defense production act route, force licensing and get others beside Pfizer and Moderna producing these vaccines. I am assuming Moderna will do as well as Pfizer in the coming weeks.

Two and likely a third Vaccine is A MILLION times better than NONE. Not bad news, just part of the process. Work on your framing.

Joe

Vaccines that work well and are safe are good news. 72 and everyone else thinks so and has said so. We're ALL enthusiastic about that news.

Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it.

Now, the problem is that the US bet on the portfolio broadly instead of securing supply from those that proved successful. That strategy may or may not have been rational, but the result is that supply of effective vaccines will be much more limited than if the portfolio had been successful across the board...meaning it will take much longer to get enough people in the US (and the world) vaccinated to actually crush the virus spread.

That's BAD NEWS.
Unequivocally.

So, 72 throws out a possible policy move that Biden could take that could address this issue, perhaps...that's a constructive response, not curling up in the fetal position in the face of BAD NEWS.

Perhaps you should be less concerned with and critical of how others are 'framing' and instead constructively deal with the actual issues being discussed yourself?

MD,

"So, 72 throws out a possible policy move that Biden could take that could address this issue, perhaps...that's a constructive response, not curling up in the fetal position in the face of BAD NEWS."

This part of the post is actually fine, that's a positive response. The rest of it is just pure negativity, in the vain of the majority of his posts, thinly disguised as worry or concern. That's all I'm getting at. When you say something enough you start to believe it, the constant negativity on this thread is alarming. Being constantly positive DOES NOT mean I'm burying my head in the sand. You can find the positive in anything. JHU CANNOT, unless it comes at the expense of blasting DJT. That's a fact, backed up by many posts. That's my point.

Joe

[wgdsr]

or maybe misinformation and framing is the issue?

as an example, what you got out of it was "Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it."

which vaccines are now "not working" or were "cancelled" in the last 24 hours that affect the united states? one trial was postponed. that affects us for depth in like june or july if everyone else's not yet approved prove to be ineffective. but they were way behind everyone else in our portfolio. postponement had nothing to do with whether their vaccine was effective, as 72 said. but again, they were last in line by months anyway.

[jhu72]

I forgot, there is also Sinovac, which is currently being deployed. But no idea what is real there. I would bet it is more effective than the Russian offering, but don't know. I doubt either would ever be submitted to the FDA. I could imagine China, looking for exports might do an EU submission, which is very similar to FDA quality certification. Astrazeneca could be a backdoor for Russia if it is real.

[jhu72]

or maybe misinformation and framing is the issue?

as an example, what you got out of it was "Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it."

which vaccines are now "not working" or were "cancelled" in the last 24 hours that affect the united states? one trial was postponed. that affects us for depth in like june or july if everyone else's not yet approved prove to be ineffective. but they were way behind everyone else in our portfolio. postponement had nothing to do with whether their vaccine was effective, as 72 said. but again, they were last in line by months anyway.

There is also the issue of what is the motivation to continue for a company who is going to be a year behind, in the western markets.

[wgdsr]

or maybe misinformation and framing is the issue?

as an example, what you got out of it was "Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it."

which vaccines are now "not working" or were "cancelled" in the last 24 hours that affect the united states? one trial was postponed. that affects us for depth in like june or july if everyone else's not yet approved prove to be ineffective. but they were way behind everyone else in our portfolio. postponement had nothing to do with whether their vaccine was effective, as 72 said. but again, they were last in line by months anyway.

There is also the issue of what is the motivation to continue for a company who is going to be a year behind, in the western markets.

did we figure out how long protection lasts for any of these, is that what you mean -- that everyone they can market to will be vaccinated by 3rd quarter and then best one(s) will then do it annually? that's great news!
a potentially recurring 7.8 billion person market for effective vaccines sounds like holding trials for 30k people when the vaccine has already been developed makes sense. i'll bet they do based on your projection.

[MDlaxfan76]

or maybe misinformation and framing is the issue?

as an example, what you got out of it was "Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it."

which vaccines are now "not working" or were "cancelled" in the last 24 hours that affect the united states? one trial was postponed. that affects us for depth in like june or july if everyone else's not yet approved prove to be ineffective. but they were way behind everyone else in our portfolio. postponement had nothing to do with whether their vaccine was effective, as 72 said. but again, they were last in line by months anyway.

If 72 was incorrect in his list of the NEWS, that's one thing, however, there's really no question that it's BAD when a vaccine in the portfolio of possibles fails, more so when several such do, whether because results come in disappointingly or are otherwise cancelled or postponed.

This is a race against the virus, the drive to have enough people vaccinated as swiftly as possible. Obviously.

Again, his suggestion in response to this NEWS was constructive, IMO.

I think people are overly sensitive to news that isn't "framed" in the most optimistic way, but rather presented realistically so as to suggest the need to address such reality.

[MDlaxfan76]

...bad news on the vaccine front. Sanofi has announced a delay of 6 months in getting product through clinical trials. Their vaccine is currently not effective for patients over 50 YO. They are now a year away (if ever). The University of Queensland in Australia has canceled their program after a failure in clinical trials. Astrazeneca's product is significantly less effective that the competition's, so they intend to mix it with the Russian offering and see what that does. Nothing new on the J&J front. Near term it looks like Pfizer, Moderna and perhaps J&J is all there will be and perhaps some darker horse.

If I were Biden, I would go the defense production act route, force licensing and get others beside Pfizer and Moderna producing these vaccines. I am assuming Moderna will do as well as Pfizer in the coming weeks.

Two and likely a third Vaccine is A MILLION times better than NONE. Not bad news, just part of the process. Work on your framing.

Joe

Vaccines that work well and are safe are good news. 72 and everyone else thinks so and has said so. We're ALL enthusiastic about that news.

Vaccines not working, programs being cancelled, are bad news...not two ways about it.

Now, the problem is that the US bet on the portfolio broadly instead of securing supply from those that proved successful. That strategy may or may not have been rational, but the result is that supply of effective vaccines will be much more limited than if the portfolio had been successful across the board...meaning it will take much longer to get enough people in the US (and the world) vaccinated to actually crush the virus spread.

That's BAD NEWS.
Unequivocally.

So, 72 throws out a possible policy move that Biden could take that could address this issue, perhaps...that's a constructive response, not curling up in the fetal position in the face of BAD NEWS.

Perhaps you should be less concerned with and critical of how others are 'framing' and instead constructively deal with the actual issues being discussed yourself?

MD,

"So, 72 throws out a possible policy move that Biden could take that could address this issue, perhaps...that's a constructive response, not curling up in the fetal position in the face of BAD NEWS."

This part of the post is actually fine, that's a positive response. The rest of it is just pure negativity, in the vain of the majority of his posts, thinly disguised as worry or concern. That's all I'm getting at. When you say something enough you start to believe it, the constant negativity on this thread is alarming. Being constantly positive DOES NOT mean I'm burying my head in the sand. You can find the positive in anything. JHU CANNOT, unless it comes at the expense of blasting DJT. That's a fact, backed up by many posts. That's my point.

Joe

Joe, I don't think my post accused you of anything. Right?

It simply disagreed with your objection to '72's post, pointing out that of course we're ALL hugely relieved, happy, etc that there are ANY vaccines that are going to work...while then addressing the most recent NEWS that is not good, it's bad.

This is the reality, there's both good news and bad news...the question then is to how best to deal with it...which is what '72's post was actually about. First recognizing the challenge, then suggesting a constructive solution.

You seem more inflamed by an animosity at '72 and/or your perception that people are 'negative' about the virus... killing so many people, causing such economic and social costs...than you are actually responding to the content of a specific post.

I suggest you chill a bit and not get so adversarial unless someone picks a fight with you personally.

BTW, I have to remind myself to do this from time to time as I too get testy...