lb0

True.

I'm not saying the same is necessarily true of any given 'contagious' animal vaccine, but it could be.

That's what I think I wanted to say.. there is a huge difference to anything self-spreading / replicating - be it self-reproducing true AI nano robotors, simple things as self replicating plants (and here we have already a dozen examples of promised containment not working with bad consequences involved - oops) or 'contagious' vaccines.. it needs to be magnitudes safer, not?

So if as an individual there is a minimal risk to my health by taking a mRNA vaccine, I can decide for myself vs the risk of infection or consequences, or also let my doctor decide. It is also easy to run "trials" among the population for studies. But if there is a risk to our complete biosphere, that is just very different for the risk calculation?

Because when the original thing didn't work as intended (with which we were pretty sure, otherwise we'd never done it cause of the risks) then the kill switch will work 100% as intended for sure, and also have no unexpected side effects?

totaling 8 now .. but in the end will need another one really going down bad to stop all the sudden pro-nuclear movement here in Europe, which I can imagine only must have some astroturfing behind.

But til then, blow more money into insurable and as much green as coal and gas power plants :(

(And that calculations done by real experts didn't even include all the other uneconomic issues from getting that stuff from somewhere til storing the waste - but yeah I know, all these waste will be taken by those new shiny molten reactors that have no problem at all on paper and will eat all the waste - both things just so far from reality in practice, which almost does not exist even).

The common stance and knowledge here at HN about all this is consternating :(

How cynical, if that was what how colonialism there and everywhere else was like, wow..

Yeahyeah, freedom over all, and everything natural is also good, right ? :D Please also reflect on the rhetorics you bring up here :D This is black and white painting, there are a lot of levels between..

No, they should not have accepted being barred.

But what if most accepted those limitations, and while personally a disaster, found it on the other hand right to follow common sense and obey rules applying to everyone for the greater cause of society? Rules applying to everyone the same is one of the basic foundations of a just society...

Also expelling a person who has already got in the country physically and attended a courts makes no sense from the epidemiological point of view - he has already brought the virus

No matter what you argue beyond, the epidemiological aspect is now not really the point here anymore. He faked stuff for entry one or the other way (I think it is even more likely he wasn't positive at all, but that the second test was just created so he counts as recovered, which was the requirement to get in if not vaccinated..) - so its good to see consequences on that.

Short term - long term we realize now it is eroding and "destryoing" it - like tech debt it is creating soil debt :)

Romantic but far off topic from what it is about here?

With that, death becomes indeterministic for everybody, because unless believing that everything is predetermined, if someone will be remembered/thought off again is .. (even with the clacks thing btw).

And then also, what about people living, and noone ever thinking of them, are they dead too? :s

We must be looking at very different numbers - or what do you mean with regulation, requiring some safety standards?

Nowhere nuclear got economic, required massive subsidies - and in the end has been driven by the need for the precious byproducts?

Not understanding what you are both getting at ... the situation has maybe changed now.

But before, here at least, it was repeatedly underestimating the in the aftermath clearly visible exponential growth, exactly as the r factor is calculated? Which scientist/MD doesn't understand there is a saturation, in the extreme even schoolers understand you cannot have more than 100% infected.

Yes, at some point it is becoming logistic, but the previous waves were not about getting anywhere there, but going from 0.1% to 1% or more, and there it was truly exponential growth and overwhelming the health care system, what the start of that logistic curve is about..?!

And that thinking is insane to me, long-term best is to have renewables and not pollute - nuclear is no alternative but just another bad with too many problems, bad economics, and waste produced.

Now we bring another very specific for that location argument, while the general new consensus for here seems to be that is the ultimate solution to the climate crisis? The rhetoric strawman is also pretty cheap...

Yes, and they as enough still others believe that you don't solve one huge problem by going back to another huge problem.

Just dig out the numbers and realize this project is as expensive and uneconomic as every other of our +50year history record before..

And as if this was the only problem and it hadn't a lot of huge others, nuclear proponents will use this now as an example how nuclear is the way out of the climate crisis, and how comparing nuclear with renewables is wrong..

No, the best future would be neither fossil nor nuclear.

I find it problematic that the university requires any cookie consent whatsoever in the first place.

Totally right, and also

If someone else is okay with the data transfer, he can opt-in if he wants to. I should not carry the burden of having to opt-out of it.

so much this. If something is spiraling out of hands it is the cookie usage, which is 99% AD tracking.

The current law is badly implemented, or lead to bad implementation. Now almost every site asking your for their necessary or "helping" cookies, most often using dark patterns to trick you into just accepting all - and because you get this stupid cookie prompt on every page now, everybody just wants to click it away as fast as possible, which misses the target totally, too :(

Still, its not data protection spiraling out of hand, but that basically every site, even ones where I don't login to or want to drop off any other data, but just fetch a small information, wants to set cookies is ridiculous. We all should have never accepted that, but too late?

True .. and also you can bet that most obese people, if it would be a simple as taking a shot to get rid of that, most would likely do it at some point (similar for smokers).

Also haven't heard of just infecting others with obesity..

draconian measures

really?

What's the fuzz about anti vaxxers always talking about "won't stop infection" or "stop the pandemic" - 1st this is not black and white - 2nd and nowhere I have seen that these are the actual arguments for these measures?

Which lockdowns in our hemisphere had the goal of stopping the virus? All I know about (or have been part of) never stated that goal, only goal was to break waves and avoid overload of health care systems, which most at least helped with.

And then it goes on because measures are reduced, and zero-covid never was a goal... would even go so far that some few countries pretty successfully did zero-covid strategies and stopped their virus, though sure, that is a pretty futile thing if the world is not "globally" doing this and you are likely not isolating forever/completely - so we just start to live with it.

Very confusing statements, any sources?

To start with one, https://twitter.com/maxplanckpress/status/146668793563865497...

I agree, its strange the different bubbles we live in, but none of my news sources didn't have the "Omicron likely weaker" headline?!

So no matter what the US does criminal against its own or international law (yeah I know, US give a fuck about Geneva conventions and also Den Haag.. another shame) - if they declared it "secret data" they can declare a foreign journalist helping in uncovering that crime himself committing crimes and require extradition? Just so backwards...

Yeah I know, we can argue endless forever about the details, real lawyers too.. but to be honest on a higher level: It is such a shame for the US as a country claiming "democracy", "freedom" and more to go on with this ridiculous show trail, just such a ridiculous shame.

For the UK the same, of course.

Just read that overspecific prepared weasel language... I cannot stand it.

But in their ruling on Friday, they sided with the US authorities after a near-unprecedented package of assurances were put forward that Assange would not face those strictest measures either pre-trial or post-conviction unless he committed an act in the future that required them.

We all know what will happen.. as a Westerner ashamed myself :(

Fines are there for good valid reason?

Rarely they change behavior of companies, because fines are still peanuts compared to profit they gain by this.. so not really getting your comment.. they are relatively so small we cannot even call them fines.

Spot on - this annoys me so much.

So much, from quantum til cosmos, so much in life is not boolen / black or white.

"Oh, someone got sick though he was vaccinated, vaccinations don't work" "Oh, someone got sick, and didn't die, it must not be serious" "Oh, its is not an exponential curve, it is sigmodial... " "Oh but now 50% on the ICUs are still vaccinated??" "Oh, but vaccinated, transmission is still possible?!"

So many strawman and itself maybe right statements, but wrong conclusions drawn.

I would hope we could educate ourselves better, it is not just booleans, it is also not just relative percentages, it is never simple.

It is also always about absolute numbers, it is also about probability theory, it is even more about also conditional probability (that seems so counterintuitive to many) .. etc. etc.

But people stick to argue with single observations or boolean statements as the gound truth so many places :( It is like children argueing "Yes it is" "No it isnt".

To come back to what you said: Yes after all we know right now: The probability of transmission is reduced on multiple levels: your virus load is smaller, your infectious time is shorter, maybe more

Expert on tv explained it just yesterday.. 3 shots is actually what you need for most vaccines and is the common procedure for most if you remember..

1st shot "warns" your immune system 2nd shot really triggers your immune system (that's also why most people see strongest side effects here) 3rd shot then makes your immune remind, and massively increases B+T lymphocytesmemory memory cells

So yeah, you can expect a lot from it.

Most people already early convinced themselves by pure logic that masks should have an impact, still today you see this opposed here&there.

Looks like a well carried out study and another data point, many influencing factors considered, data available.

Full tweet: The case for masking up: new study shows tight-fitting #FFP2 & vKN95 face masks drastically reduce the risk of #COVID19 infection - but even ill-fitting masks still significantly reduce the risk of infection https://bit.ly/31m9JKE @maxplanckpress

Their summary: https://www.mpg.de/17916867/coronavirus-masks-risk-protectio... "Well-fitting FFP2 masks reduce the risk at least into the per thousand range."

Full paper: "An upper bound on one-to-one exposure to infectious human respiratory particles" https://www.pnas.org/content/118/49/e2110117118

Doesn't need to be 100% - has been well modelled 85% would be enough.

Also the pressure on the health care system would be much lower then - alternatively, if everyone who is unvaccinated would just sign off that he doesn't want hospital treatment and stays home I would be almost fine as well (still annoyed by the innocent victims they maybe infect..).

especially those under 60 and without any co-morbidities the chances of COVID requiring hospitalization, let alone ICU admission is negligible.

So wrong, please look again at our numbers, small percentage on big numbers is unfortunately still too much.

anyone who doesn't get the vax is selfish

Here, in this situation, with all we know, it currently 100% is, 110% YES.

Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. Forcing them to comply is probably a cure worse than the disease - even a disease like COVID

Yeah, please please come here and find a way to "unloose" these people, I'm out of clue. We have a lot of failures here in Germany that surface, everything is too slow, from bad organization to corruption (like most western democracies), behind in digitalization, behind in taking the right measures, slow decisions even after 2 years into this pandemic situation.. true, a big chance to clear up and maybe hopefully do better in the future.

But those people (the last 10-20% radical idiotic percent that drives the rest forward)? I really start hating my country and fellow citizens, so many spoiled brats living in prosperity, complaining about everything, believing in total bullshit, it is unbelievable. If you attempt your best in an open and honest discussion, you are called a liar with the first word that comes out of your mouth....

Want a war? That’s what you’re going to get if you persist with this paranoid hypochondriac fascism.

That's a perfect description for those people, not the vaccination, phew..if we get a war it will be by further catering to the far right. And btw, most of these people who go demoing right now (except the few violent far right ones that are under them), I bet most have never been to a real demonstration in their lives - now standing up for their personal party freedom while limiting the freedom of everyone else - again and again.

And btw please.. everyone who gets triggered by the word "lockdown" get your facts right first - there are lockdowns and there are lockdowns. We had very strict lockdowns over the last year in most our neighbors (e.g. France, Italy, Spain) - fines when you went out on the street at the wrong times .. we in Germany were up to that once close, though I believe noone here ever got fined for anything.

What we discuss and have as "lockdown" right now in Germany is actually just the "lockdown of the unvaccinated" - means 2G in shops that are not essential - oh yeah, poor unvaccinated crowd cannot go Christmas shopping, while health personal is crying for help, ERs and intensive cares are filling up, and a newspaper already appealed to stop driving unless totally necessary, because of injury risk.

Yeah sorry, I'm totally fed up :( Read too much on twitter and also here again, and I feel also a little bad and dizzy. Have been waiting 1h in the cold and another hour inside today to get my booster shot - bad organized Germany, again, but not complaining today! I'm happy to see so many people still trying to do their littlest part to relieve the health care workers and try to help get the hospitals some space for people that really need it for reasons that couldn't be avoided. And a little proud to be part of it - In that sense, the dizzyness is appreciated and better than a Feierabendbeer, the injected chip is working, the 5G in my brain is getting activated and well welcomed. gn8

Those ""longterm"" fears to me are just an excuse.

No vaccine (or please tell me one) ever showed any "long term" effects in that sense that bad things showed up > 3 months after the vaccination, actually almost all side-effects happen instantaneously.

The reason talking about "long term" side effects is that you usually need to reach very high numbers on your studies to e.g. correlate one in a million side effect to a medication, and thus need very "long term" studies.

However, for those vaccines we are now MUCH beyond these numbers already! That is also what people mostly don't get in general right now: (In the very beginning maybe yes, but now not anymore)

Those studies are NOT! pushed anymore with shortcuts and exceptions, the contrary, because due to the pandemic situation the necessary numbers (get x people of test persons infected) were so quickly passed now.. similar now for those side effects. It just doesn't make any sense to pull that argument anymore (though science vs belief is hard).

And if you are really like "Meh.. but these totally new mRNA vaccines will grow me horns" => Comparing mRNA vs old-school vector vaccines is maybe like comparing LDC TVs of today vs old tube TVs that even bombarded you with little xrays... it is just such a technology jump.. and if you are into the topic and really concerned about that this mRNA will inject something into your cells/genes.. then you actually should be much more afraid of vector vaccines or just some viruses out there like Corona doing the same but much more reliably..

Sorry, but are you saying that, now that we have fire and clothing and "whole cities in permafrost", hardly anybody really dies of cold anymore?

No, but how & how many people die to cold right now will be significantly different to how & how many people may die due to heat in the future due to climate change.

It is really just a strawman apples to oranges comparison to make here at all, because also:

And I'm further saying that climate change will likely also not change due to how many people die to cold right now.. where do you have this from? We get more persistant extremes both directions, right now!

no point arguing mere statistical matters.

That's cheap... so no numbers or relative scale?

Whether you agree about the relative scale of cold and heat deaths doesn't matter. Are you arguing that lives lost due to warmer temperatures matter, but lives saved by warmer temperatures don't?

I'm arguing that the scale matters, so please give me numbers, which you seem to know at least for the now?

It is surely not a 1-to-1 exchange right now, and not in the future.

So how many lives lost due to heat vs due to cold now?

And what are your predictions for the future (that as far as I get it deviate extremely from scientific consensus)?

say homeless and poor people dying of the cold, is too trivial in your opinion to matter in public policy discussions?

Oh come one, now you are trolling me. I didn't say and mean that at all..