So coronavirus is definitely going to kill a few of us.

[sonatine]

also the VUI202012/01 strain is about to change a lot of lives for the worse.

flagged in italy just now.

[dwai]

also the VUI202012/01 strain is about to change a lot of lives for the worse.

flagged in italy just now.

OH NO ANOTHER STRAIN OF THE WEAKEST VIRUS KNOWN TO MAN


ROFL FUCKING DOOMER FAG

[Jayjami]

The city is under siege. All able men to the front. There is a shortage of guns, and your strategy is to give one to grandma holed up her nursing home? Good thing you weren’t in charge of St. Petersburg in WWII.

im guessing someones mom and dad waved around a sack of cash to cut the line and were told to fuck themselves.

So you’ve implying Jew gold can’t buy everything?

One subject that hasn’t been brought up. Trump’s mass genocide of the elderly is going to avert the insolvency of social security and Medicare for at least another 10 years. MAGA.

[sonatine]

im guessing someones mom and dad waved around a sack of cash to cut the line and were told to fuck themselves.

So you’ve implying Jew gold can’t buy everything?

One subject that hasn’t been brought up. Trump’s mass genocide of the elderly is going to avert the insolvency of social security and Medicare for at least another 10 years. MAGA.

you should know that yes i laughed out loud but it wasnt an emotionally healthy sort of laughter.

[Dan Druff]

Before anyone tries to defend this:

Explain to me why a 95-year-old with major preexisting conditions can't get the vaccine for a month, but a 25-year-old healthcare or essential worker can get it before them.

Does this make any fucking sense?

you might be the most scientifically illiterate poster on your own site.

healthcare workers save lives. by protecting them from a disease they are able to provide care that can save hundreds/thousands of lives.

without them, we dont have health care. for anything.

jesus dude read a book.

"jesus dude", 80% of the people dying are over 65.

There hasn't been a grave shortage of healthcare workers due to being knocked out of service by COVID. Almost none of them die, since they're mostly under 65.

There have actually been studies about this which show that more people will die by making old people wait.

So Nate Silver is also anti-science?

[Dan Druff]

Before anyone tries to defend this:

Explain to me why a 95-year-old with major preexisting conditions can't get the vaccine for a month, but a 25-year-old healthcare or essential worker can get it before them.

Does this make any fucking sense?

"BBBBBBUT THEM ESSENTIAL WORKERS DUN SPREAD DA DISEASE MORE"

Yeah, but if you vaccinate the group which is dying from it, then "spreading the disease more" will matter much less, amirite?

It's amazing how little the science is actually followed by the left. As Nate Silver (who is no right-winger, obviously) tweeted above, he has "bit his tongue" for a long time about the poor public policy decisions being made by certain politicians who falsely claim to be "following the science".

And he's not talking about Trump or the right.

The city is under siege. All able men to the front. There is a shortage of guns, and your strategy is to give one to grandma holed up her nursing home? Good thing you weren’t in charge of St. Petersburg in WWII.

Terrible analogy.

When a city is under siege, everyone is vulnerable.

Here if you take away old people and those with major preexisting conditions, almost nobody is dying.

I'll take the statistical analysis from a pot-selling former lawyer over Nate Silver any day, though.

[Dan Druff]

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/jcompson_iii/status/1339814935346499584

Science!!!!!

[Dan Druff]

The consensus among most modelers is that if the main goal is to slash mortality rates, officials must prioritize vaccinating those who are older, and if they want to slow transmission, they must target younger adults.

“Almost no matter what, you get the same answer,” says Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch. Vaccinate the elderly first to prevent deaths he says, and then move on to other, healthier groups or the general population. One recent study modeled how Covid-19 is likely to spread in six countries—the U.S., India, Spain, Zimbabwe, Brazil, and Belgium—and concluded that if the primary goal is to reduce mortality rates, adults over 60 should be prioritized for direct vaccination. The study, by Daniel Larremore and Kate Bubar of the University of Colorado Boulder, Lipsitch, and their colleagues, has been published as a preprint, meaning it has not yet been peer reviewed. Of course, when considering Covid-19's outsized impact on minorities—especially Black and Latino communities—additional considerations for prioritization come into play.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...vaccine-first/

Oh.

I'll take that apology now from our very scientific friends, Jayjami and sonatine.

[Dan Druff]

"BBBBUT MUH NURSES AND MUH GROCERY STORE CHECKERS!!!!"

[Dan Druff]

The very scientific goal should be to equalize per capital deaths by race, not lower all deaths across the board, you see.

Racial COVID justice!!!!!!!!111

Keep da unions happy!!!!!111

SCIENCE!!!

[dwai]

LOL DRUFF PWNING HEADS

[lol wow]

i dont like when todge picks on tine hes an older fat man be nice to him

[gimmick]

The consensus among most modelers is that if the main goal is to slash mortality rates, officials must prioritize vaccinating those who are older, and if they want to slow transmission, they must target younger adults.

“Almost no matter what, you get the same answer,” says Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch. Vaccinate the elderly first to prevent deaths he says, and then move on to other, healthier groups or the general population. One recent study modeled how Covid-19 is likely to spread in six countries—the U.S., India, Spain, Zimbabwe, Brazil, and Belgium—and concluded that if the primary goal is to reduce mortality rates, adults over 60 should be prioritized for direct vaccination. The study, by Daniel Larremore and Kate Bubar of the University of Colorado Boulder, Lipsitch, and their colleagues, has been published as a preprint, meaning it has not yet been peer reviewed. Of course, when considering Covid-19's outsized impact on minorities—especially Black and Latino communities—additional considerations for prioritization come into play.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...vaccine-first/

Oh.

I'll take that apology now from our very scientific friends, Jayjami and sonatine.

Let me guess, you didn't read the whole article and there's no chance you spent any time even glancing at the actual study. I mean if you had, you would have stumbled into this...

"While the earliest doses of vaccines will be given to front-line health care workers under plans such as those from the COVAX initiative and the US NASEM recommendations (3), our work is focused on informing the prioritization of the doses that follow."

...i'm sure you're already profusely apologizing the next time i glance at this thread.

[Tellafriend]

So, why are the large life insurers, prudential, met life; Lincoln, etc are almost back at their highs? Covid wasn’t a part of their actuarial calculations.

Similarly, how are the big funeral home operations playing this out? Honest question as I haven’t looked.

[dwai]

also the VUI202012/01 strain is about to change a lot of lives for the worse.

flagged in italy just now.

[Sanlmar]

So, why are the large life insurers, prudential, met life; Lincoln, etc are almost back at their highs? Covid wasn’t a part of their actuarial calculations.

Similarly, how are the big funeral home operations playing this out? Honest question as I haven’t looked.

No one has left their basement going on a year. Expedia highs too.

[sonatine]

shits getting real sporty boys.

[Dan Druff]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...vaccine-first/

Oh.

I'll take that apology now from our very scientific friends, Jayjami and sonatine.

Let me guess, you didn't read the whole article and there's no chance you spent any time even glancing at the actual study. I mean if you had, you would have stumbled into this...

"While the earliest doses of vaccines will be given to front-line health care workers under plans such as those from the COVAX initiative and the US NASEM recommendations (3), our work is focused on informing the prioritization of the doses that follow."

...i'm sure you're already profusely apologizing the next time i glance at this thread.

The debate is a lot more than front-line healthcare workers.

That part is mildly controversial, but the real outrage is coming from the plan to vaccinate "essential workers" ahead of the super elderly.

By the way, this study does NOT validate the vaccine being given to frontline healthcare workers over the elderly. It simply concedes that this plan is already in place, so there's no point in studying it. It attempts to study who comes next, without commenting on the plan for healthcare workers being priority 1.

BTW, I'd be fine with frontline COVID-related workers being priority one. The problem is that ALL healthcare workers are getting the vaccine as top priority, including administrators who have zero contact with patients.

But as I said, that's not even the main issue. It's this "essential workers" crap, which is mostly due to woke politicking and union influence. Anyway, are you saying you agree that frontline healthcare workers should get it first, and the elderly can go second? Because that's not very woke of you.

[zealanddonk]

shits getting real sporty boys.

Given german airforce security are heavily armed gun toting ninjas I can see this ending well for all involved.

[dwai]

PEOPLE FIGHTING OVER WHO GETS THE TRUMP VACCINE FIRST, CAN'T STOP WINNING