Manic of a panic is geopolitical

[The Carnivore]

Originally Posted by retina

Just as bad. Not everyone is freezing. Only a certain class of people are freezing. In this case people in one location.

To fulfil your analogy you would have people in all places being herded into vans and taken to shelter because parts of Texas have no electricity. We have to be "fair" right? Even though the other places don't need it, well, we can't let them miss out, that would be unfair. So everyone gets a turn in the van.

No, my analogy makes sense. Not everyone is freezing since some people are wearing multiple layers of clothes and are in little to no danger of hypothermia. But you dedicate your resources to getting as many people into the van as quickly as possible instead of searching the neighborhood to find those in tank tops and flip flops.

Edit: Since nearly all Americans and Europeans have a significant chance of being exposed to the virus, they're pretty much all in Texas in that analogy. Getting Hawaiians into the van would be like vaccinating people in New Zealand, which has minimal cases.

[masser]

You said:

"This scenario is just as likely:"

and I'm saying: "No it's not."

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

No, my analogy makes sense.

Yours fails in that there is not a single person driving around in a large town. There are lots of people going around their own overlapping areas. If one van misses someone (the driver was looking on the other side of the street at the time), another one will swing by.

Further your earlier assumption that people with pre-existing conditions are solely responsible for it because of something they did is false. Type-2 diabetes is has risk factors, but those are the exclusive causes. People who have had industrial exposure to chemicals are victims of accidents (like a former coworker is such a case, they were alerted about SARS back in the day before almost anyone had heard about it.) Birth defects account for many pre-existing conditions. Cystic fibrosis is such a condition and is not the result of personal behaviour. There are genetic predispositions to high cholesterol that increase the risk of heart problems (and would put someone at increased risk of COVID). Sailors that were exposed to asbestos did not choose that risk (which may have been unknown at the time). The soldiers that got dosed with Agent Orange did not choose that.

[The Carnivore]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

your earlier assumption that people with pre-existing conditions are solely responsible for it because of something they did is false. Type-2 diabetes is has risk factors, but those are the exclusive causes. People who have had industrial exposure to chemicals are victims of accidents (like a former coworker is such a case, they were alerted about SARS back in the day before almost anyone had heard about it.) Birth defects account for many pre-existing conditions. Cystic fibrosis is such a condition and is not the result of personal behaviour. There are genetic predispositions to high cholesterol that increase the risk of heart problems (and would put someone at increased risk of COVID). Sailors that were exposed to asbestos did not choose that risk (which may have been unknown at the time). The soldiers that got dosed with Agent Orange did not choose that.

I never said that:
https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...&postcount=110
https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...postcount=1301

Likely!=solely

In most developed countries, poor people are likely to have made one or more significant bad decisions in their lives. Of course, there are plenty of people who're poor even though they've done everything right, which is why there needs to be a good social safety net. But that's a different topic for a different thread.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

Likely!=solely

Your implication that it is the overriding factor in their health. Please support that with data.
Looking at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html I see the following that are risk factors that are absolutely not caused by the person's knowing behavioural choice or almost certainly not caused by it:

Cancer
Chronic kidney disease
Down Syndrome
Immunocompromised state (weakened immune system) from solid organ transplant
Pregnancy
Sickle cell disease
Asthma (moderate-to-severe)
Cystic fibrosis
Immunocompromised state (weakened immune system) from blood or bone marrow transplant, immune deficiencies, use of corticosteroids, or use of other immune weakening medicines
Neurologic conditions, such as dementia
Pulmonary fibrosis (having damaged or scarred lung tissues)
Thalassemia (a type of blood disorder)
Type 1 diabetes mellitus

Pregnancy is a normal human condition. It is not a behaviour that is a poor choice (except with explicit prior knowledge.)

In most developed countries, poor people are likely to have made one or more significant bad decisions in their lives.

Not supported by the data: https://ihpi.umich.edu/news/why-poverty-not-personal-choice-reflection-society
https://nlihc.org/resource/point-view-poverty-choice
Being born into poverty is not a choice. When many full time jobs won't pay enough for a person to have a living wage, there is a structural problem. Instead of a safety net alone, having a path that is wide enough for both feet is a better first step. Safety nets are often thin and people fall through them. Over the past 3 years I have been dealing with people that have had safety nets fail. Some of them only started to get caught again because COVID required the net to be tightened for the benefit of society as a whole.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

<snip>
Alternative version:
<snip>
The man gets infected, has minimal or no symptoms, and proceeds to infect hundreds of other people while working as a cashier at the grocery store.>
<One of those people infected by the man would have gone on to discover a cure for cancer, end world hunger, and prove RH and P=NP. But he dies before getting that opportunity.>

IMO for a grocery store cashier to infect "hundreds" of others on the job, both the cashier and the store would really have to work at it.

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

<snip>
In most developed countries, poor people are likely to have made one or more significant bad decisions in their lives.

I reckon all adults in any country are likely to have made one or more significant bad decisions in their lives.

[The Carnivore]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Your implication that it is the overriding factor in their health. Please support that with data.
Looking at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html I see the following that are risk factors that are absolutely not caused by the person's knowing behavioural choice or almost certainly not caused by it:
Cancer
...

The first risk factor you cite is ~40% preventable:
https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/m...k-factors.html

Obesity is also a risk factor, and ~40% of US adults are obese:
https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

Another ~15% of the country's adult population smokes, which is another risk factor:
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_sta...king/index.htm

There's some overlap in those groups, but it would be fair to say that around half of the US adult population has a risk factor that's preventable. Of the remaining half, a considerable number have no risk factors, so the percentage of people with risk factors that are not preventable is quite small.

[The Carnivore]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Not supported by the data: https://ihpi.umich.edu/news/why-poverty-not-personal-choice-reflection-society
https://nlihc.org/resource/point-view-poverty-choice
Being born into poverty is not a choice. When many full time jobs won't pay enough for a person to have a living wage, there is a structural problem. Instead of a safety net alone, having a path that is wide enough for both feet is a better first step. Safety nets are often thin and people fall through them. Over the past 3 years I have been dealing with people that have had safety nets fail. Some of them only started to get caught again because COVID required the net to be tightened for the benefit of society as a whole.

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/t...dle-class/amp/

"three major responsibilities: at least finish high school, get a full-time job and wait until age 21 to get married and have children.

Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class"

Does the minimum wage need to be increased? Yes. Should people who've been laid off receive more benefits than what they're currently getting? Of course. Are there people who're poor even though they've done everything they could? Definitely. But none of that changes the fact that most poor people in developed countries are poor because of the bad choices and decisions they took in life. And again, most != all, there are many exceptions.

[retina]

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

No, my analogy makes sense. Not everyone is freezing since some people are wearing multiple layers of clothes and are in little to no danger of hypothermia. But you dedicate your resources to getting as many people into the van as quickly as possible instead of searching the neighborhood to find those in tank tops and flip flops.

You have already divided people into separate classes. Those in areas of high risk of freezing (Texas), and other areas with minimal or no risk (everywhere else). So following your analogy for vaccination, we should be offering van rides to people everywhere, even those that don't need it in low risk places.

The same with this virus. Divide people into classes, high risk vs low risk. And offer services to those at high risk first. Don't start out by offering it to low risk people. That is wasteful and silly.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by retina

<Granny goes on to [...] prove RH and P=NP>

Bwaaa haha
Didn't see that coming!

[Dr Sardonicus]

J&J’s 1-dose shot cleared, giving US 3rd COVID-19 vaccine

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. is getting a third vaccine to prevent COVID-19, as the Food and Drug Administration on Saturday cleared a Johnson & Johnson shot that works with just one dose instead of two.

Health experts are anxiously awaiting a one-and-done option to help speed vaccinations, as they race against a virus that already has killed more than 510,000 people in the U.S. and is mutating in increasingly worrisome ways.

The FDA said J&J's vaccine offers strong protection against what matters most: serious illness, hospitalizations and death. One dose was 85% protective against the most severe COVID-19 illness, in a massive study that spanned three continents - protection that remained strong even in countries such as South Africa, where the variants of most concern are spreading.