How to Judge Pandemic Policies

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by GordMay

As has the contrarian movement's disinformation campaign:

“Inside a COVID-19 conspiracy boot camp” ~ by Katie Pedersen, Eric Szeto, Asha Tomlinson

"While Canadian health authorities fight back against what Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam has called "an infodemic" — the spread of false information about the COVID-19 pandemic — others are working just as hard to target the public with conspiracy theories.
CBC 'Marketplace' journalists took part in a U.S. COVID-19 conspiracy "boot camp," where aspiring activists — including the leader of one of Canada's prominent misinformation campaigns — learn tactics of persuasion to sow seeds of doubt about information coming from public health authorities ..."

More ➥ https://www.cbc.ca/news/marketplace/...camp-1.5963503

Hey.. Your working for the BBC.. more repeats..
Covid Boot Camp..
Two sides of the same coin but does it change the price of beer..

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Amazing powers of hindsight. Then again, a wise poster recently stated:

I've done research (non-pandemic related) where you have many variables changing simultaneously...anyone who commits with surety is likely feeding you an agenda or at least feels the need to come to a conclusion.

Yes, it was hard to get everything just right, especially as the pandemic was unfolding.

It's this obsession to brand the first mask messaging as "lying" that bugs me. With hindsight, yes, of course it would have been better to have had a better understanding of asymptomatic transmission so that in that initial message, cloth or surgical masks were recommended over N95 masks, and why... and putting more emphasis on the potential shortage of PPE as a factor. Even to prohibiting sales of N95 masks to the general public... but how do you think that would have gone over? Generated a panic maybe, and an instant black market in N95 masks?

And no-one is taking into account the effect on healthcare if there had been a run on N95 masks.

I've already shown that the protection to the wearer of even N95 masks in the hands of the general public is not a given (so no lie there), and many of you conveniently forget that there are 2 major classes of masks, and 2 main goals of mask policy.

Anyway, we're past all that. This after-the-fact claim of "lying" seems to be coming mainly from the right wing, I guess in an effort to shift blame from the liar-in-chief (who still holds sway over the GOP), who did more than anyone to throw US pandemic response into disarray.

Still seems too early to play the blame game, but whatever.

Not hindsight...I saw the lie back in March (as did many others I spoke with) but no one was interviewing me for the evening news. This wasn't some new scientific discovery that was made after months with the pandemic. Masks have been mandatory in hospital situations for decades. They have been commonly used in asia when you are feeling sick for years. Trying to re-message as if it's a new discovery months into the pandemic is just disinformation trying to obscure the issue.

Turns out the lies had little impact initially as there was still a run on N95 masks. Honesty and a sales prohibition to the general public likely would have been at least as effective (far easier to control distributors as opposed to the general public) and would not have created the distrust that we are fighting now.

The part that bugs me is they admitted to lying and then did it some more and keep doing it. They never admitted it was a mistake that never should have happened and that they were going to stop it (in fact they have talked public members into defending it). So rather than working to fix the damage, they are reinforcing it...all while complaining about anti-vaccers and the like, that they had a big hand in creating.

You can't fix a problem until you admit you have a problem.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The Pandemic Policy has been pretty simple really..
Induce irrational fear into people over a relatively mild desease..
There are various theories as to why.. a cover for introducing draconian laws to make population control easier, a reset of a mismanaged world economy by the dominant Western powers, a grand plan by the Illuminatti and even manipulation control by alien life forms.

Oh well, the things people obsess about when they have too much time on their hands...

I view this whole COVID episode as the equivalent of a moonshot. This is the most proactive response to a global pandemic that we've yet mounted. Granted the disease isn't as deadly as SARS or Ebola, but they aren't as contagious or as hard to control, either.

Did we got it right? Did we do the right things? Hard to say yet... but it certainly gave some untested pandemic planning a workout, and the advances in vaccine science and speed of development are major. There's even renewed talk of a single vaccine that would be effective against all coronaviruses.

Think a minute about what would have happened if we'd done less, or nothing. Well for most CFers, not much would have happened. Modern Darwinism - survival of the richest. Maybe that's the source of all the callousness here.

Anyway, the pandemic happened, we tried. Regardless of how history judges this, we should do much better when the next one pops out. Like how the lessons of 2008 informed the response to the pandemic financial crisis, which most experts agree was faster and much better targeted.

[Group9]

I was looking at some numbers last night, and maybe my math is wrong, but here is what I found as some interesting statistics.

The CDC says they have administered 126,000,000 doses of Covid vaccine, with 2216 related deaths, for a percentage of about .0018, for getting the vaccine and dying from it. Not bad odds, I will admit.

On the other hand, in my county of 52,000 people, we have had 84 Covid related deaths (as reported to the CDC), for a percentage of about .0016, as a chance of anybody in our county getting Covid and dying from it. Also, not bad odds.

But,.....

Now, are my calculations wrong, or do I have a better chance of taking the vaccine and dying from it than I have so far had of dying from Covid, in my county, just based on the numbers?

Feel free to check my math. Maybe, I missed a decimal point.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by GordMay

More than 130 nonprofits, from across a broad spectrum of industries and political persuasions, issued a statement March 20, 2020, that urged a measured response, that serves the public interest.
“We strongly urge government branches and agencies to recommit to, and not retrench from, their duty to include the public in the policy-making process, including policies relating to COVID-19 as well as the routine ongoing functions of governance,” the organizations wrote.
The National Freedom of Information Coalition, a nonprofit that provides education and research for citizens in acquiring government information, organized the statement.

Some of the recommendations include:
- Postpone nonessential government business decisions until after the pandemic has subsided, when the public can once again fully engage.
- Move necessary decisions online in livestreamed meetings accessible to all, including opportunities for public input and questions. Record the streams and post the recordings so people can view it later.
- Do not conduct the public’s business via private channels, such as social media, texting, and phone calls. (This holds true all the time, but especially now.) All official communications should be preserved and made accessible to the public online.
- Post documents and data online as a matter of course, so people don’t have to request it and government workers don’t have to take the time to retrieve and disseminate them.
- Officials can provide journalists greater access to hospitals and other health installations, applying safety precautions and protecting the privacy of victims.

Efforts to make government more accessible now, can result in permanent improvements in the future, to better serve citizens.

Sometimes it takes a crisis to pull together, and move forward, as citizens and government working together, fully engaged and well informed.

"132 Organizations Sign Statement on Government Coronavirus Emergency Transparency and Public Access" [March20,2020]
➥ https://www.nfoic.org/sites/default/...%2C%202020.pdf

I like it

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The problem is when you have dozens of variables changing and you can't isolate individual actions it becomes a bit of a guessing game unless an action is completely and totally overwhelming.

Even worse, many policies are the same in word but not in deed.

I've done research (non-pandemic related) where you have many variables changing simultaneously...anyone who commits with surety is likely feeding you an agenda or at least feels the need to come to a conclusion.

I agree completely with this, especially the underlined part.


We CAN draw some conclusions -- deep mathematical, data-science analysis does tell us some things -- but the conclusions are tenative, mostly negative things, not positive (I mean, it's easier to know what is NOT the case than what IS the case).



The Stanford study is really useful: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/eci.13484

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Not hindsight...I saw the lie back in March (as did many others I spoke with) but no one was interviewing me for the evening news. This wasn't some new scientific discovery that was made after months with the pandemic. Masks have been mandatory in hospital situations for decades. They have been commonly used in asia when you are feeling sick for years. Trying to re-message as if it's a new discovery months into the pandemic is just disinformation trying to obscure the issue.

That's spin.

Turns out the lies had little impact initially as there was still a run on N95 masks. Honesty and a sales prohibition to the general public likely would have been at least as effective (far easier to control distributors as opposed to the general public) and would not have created the distrust that we are fighting now.

...and hindsight. It's insane that this one message is viewed as trigger for mistrust when most of an entire political party was actively downplaying the pandemic and disparaging the mitigation efforts. THAT - toxic partisanship - is the real source of confusion and distrust. Handwaving about "lying" while ignoring the partisan investment in downplaying the pandemic is just more of the same campaign.

The part that bugs me is they admitted to lying and then did it some more and keep doing it.

List all those "lies", please.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Science isn’t enough to save us

Policymakers need insight from humanities and social sciences to tackle the pandemic, argues Hetan Shah, the chief executive of the British Academy in London.
“Science gave us vaccines, but SHAPE (social sciences, humanities and the arts for people and the economy) disciplines help us get to social realities, such as vaccine hesitancy,” notes Shah.
Shah gives an overview of a British Academy report on the pandemic’s social impacts, which traces the contours of COVID-19’s long shadow, and outlines how to reverse our losses.

“COVID-19 recovery: science isn’t enough to save us” ~ by Hetan Shah
Policymakers need insight from humanities and social sciences to tackle the pandemic.
➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00731-7

I've been saying this all along.


Pandemic policy is NOT a simple exercise of science. Policymaking involves balancing of interests, balancing of risks, probabilities, consequences, to come up with a policy which will provide the best possible outcome under the circumtances, or rather, the most likely best possible outcome. You have to start with science, but it does not indeed end with science.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

That's spin.

No, it's the simple truth.

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

...and hindsight.

No, it was a deliberate and conscious manipulation.

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

It's insane that this one message is viewed as trigger for mistrust when most of an entire political party was actively downplaying the pandemic and disparaging the mitigation efforts. THAT - toxic partisanship - is the real source of confusion and distrust. Handwaving about "lying" while ignoring the partisan investment in downplaying the pandemic is just more of the same campaign.

Who is ignoring the partisan nonsense which blighted the pandemic response? I'm not. No one said that the mask disinformation was the main thing or even an especially important thing. Lots worse things were done, including what you mention (which I agree with). But politicization of the pandemic was done by both sides, and was really toxic and harmful -- I agree with you.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Group9

The CDC says they have administered 126,000,000 doses of Covid vaccine, with 2216 related deaths, for a percentage of about .0018, for getting the vaccine and dying from it. Not bad odds, I will admit.

Those 2216 are not all confirmed to have been caused or triggered by the vaccine. This becomes apparent when you read them. Actual count of otherwise healthy people whose death was actually triggered by the vaccine is probably still under 100 in the US.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Oh well, the things people obsess about when they have too much time on their hands...

I view this whole COVID episode as the equivalent of a moonshot. This is the most proactive response to a global pandemic that we've yet mounted. Granted the disease isn't as deadly as SARS or Ebola, but they aren't as contagious or as hard to control, either.

Did we got it right? Did we do the right things? Hard to say yet... but it certainly gave some untested pandemic planning a workout, and the advances in vaccine science and speed of development are major. There's even renewed talk of a single vaccine that would be effective against all coronaviruses.

Think a minute about what would have happened if we'd done less, or nothing. Well for most CFers, not much would have happened. Modern Darwinism - survival of the richest. Maybe that's the source of all the callousness here.

Anyway, the pandemic happened, we tried. Regardless of how history judges this, we should do much better when the next one pops out. Like how the lessons of 2008 informed the response to the pandemic financial crisis, which most experts agree was faster and much better targeted.

I think if there was a post count done one would find the obsessives are You, GordMay and Mike O'Riely..
Personally I have no agenda to push being neither anti nor pro vaccination.. just a believer in an individuals choice.
When I see blatant bullying and denigration of people I tend to stick my nose in..
If this bugs people.. that's their problem not mine.
Or to put it another way.. Laughing because a man broke the glass ceiling of Non-Contribution and was awarded a Peace Prize does not make me a Trump supporter.. seemingly the new ultimate N American insult..
Its always amused me how the Left clamor and campaign for peoples rights and freedoms then do everything to take them away in the name of the Greater Good..

[Group9]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Those 2216 are not all confirmed to have been caused or triggered by the vaccine. This becomes apparent when you read them. Actual count of otherwise healthy people whose death was actually triggered by the vaccine is probably still under 100 in the US.

I'm just taking the CDC's word for it. Do you have a better source?

The other thing, the county data doesn't factor in anything else either, like co-morbidity. It's just raw data, too. I would imagine my real odds, being in pretty good health (and, not being in a New York nursing home), would be better.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Group9

I was looking at some numbers last night, and maybe my math is wrong, but here is what I found as some interesting statistics.

The CDC says they have administered 126,000,000 doses of Covid vaccine, with 2216 related deaths, for a percentage of about .0018, for getting the vaccine and dying from it. Not bad odds, I will admit.

On the other hand, in my county of 52,000 people, we have had 84 Covid related deaths (as reported to the CDC), for a percentage of about .0016, as a chance of anybody in our county getting Covid and dying from it. Also, not bad odds.

But,.....

Now, are my calculations wrong, or do I have a better chance of taking the vaccine and dying from it than I have so far had of dying from Covid, in my county, just based on the numbers?

Feel free to check my math. Maybe, I missed a decimal point.

Are the CDC numbers about dying FROM the vaccine, or dying from whatever cause, within a certain period of time aftere taking the vaccine? This is important.

As of 15 January (last time they updated this figure), the CDC estimated that 25% of Americans had already caught COVID. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...es/burden.html. So if you figure that you have a 1:4 chance of catching it in the future if you don't get vaccinated (which is a wild guess), then your odds of dying from COVID if you decline to get vaccinated depend on your age.

If you're 70-79 years old, the case fatality rate is 8%. If 60-69, then 3.6%. If 50-59, then 1.3%. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global...atality-rates/

So it means 25% x 8% = 2% (more than 3 orders of magnitude more than any possible association with the vaccine) for people in their 70's, 0.8% for 60's (more than 2 orders of magnitude), and 0.38% for 50's (two orders of magnitude), then somewhat more or less depending co-morbidities etc.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Group9

I'm just taking the CDC's word for it. Do you have a better source?

The CDC is logging all occurences of deaths "adjacent" to a vaccination. As was discussed here a bit earlier, there's a lot of "noise" in that data. Many of the reported deaths were of people already in the last stages of palliative care, lots of high-risk comorbidities. There were several people who already had COVID when they were vaccinated, or caught it shortly thereafter, before any immunity had developed (takes a few weeks). And recall that the vulnerable were prioritized in the first rounds of vaccination. Read a few, it will put your mind at ease about the real risks to a healthy person from the vaccines.

And before anyone inevitably goes off about "same with COVID deaths!", remember that, worst-case, 2216 is still very much smaller than 559,897.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Are the CDC numbers about dying FROM the vaccine, or dying from whatever cause, within a certain period of time aftere taking the vaccine? This is important.


As of 15 January (last time they updated this figure), the CDC estimated that 25% of Americans had already caught COVID. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...es/burden.html. So if you figure that you have a 1:4 chance of catching it in the future if you don't get vaccinated (which is a wild guess), then your odds of dying from COVID if you decline to get vaccinated depend on your age.


If you're 70-79 years old, the case fatality rate is 8%. If 60-69, then 3.6%. If 50-59, then 1.3%. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global...atality-rates/


So it means 25% x 8% = 2% (more than 3 orders of magnitude more than any possible association with the vaccine) for people in their 70's, 0.8% for 60's (more than 2 orders of magnitude), and 0.38% for 50's (two orders of magnitude), then somewhat more or less depending co-morbidities etc.


So -- do you feel lucky?

I wouldn't say I feel lucky, so much as I feel that statically, I am unlikely to die from either Covid or the vaccine, and that from the figures I see, it's about the same.

Keep in mind, I worked in a job, most of my life, where our violent and sudden death rate some years was greater than one in 500. Which at around .002 percent, would be slightly worse than the Covid death rate in my county. And, I never lay in bed at night worrying that would happen.

So, back to the figures. Do you think my numbers are wrong? Then give me the number you think is true for Covid vaccine related deaths and where you got it, and let's plug it into the calculator.

Or, you could just call me an anti-vaccer, plant your flag and declare victory.