@CDCgov @NikkiFried Just now 6 kids are in hospital with Covid in Fl pneumonia is a given, here’s what a 9 yr old with pneumonia looks like. He spent 3 days in P-ICU 6 days in all in the hospital. If you could prevent a child from going through this just by wearing masks why the hell wouldn’t you?
More from Covid
A teachable moment for Bayesian reasoning – when one study finds a result that's massively different than all the others, and, moreover, conflicts with what we know about the science, there's a pretty good chance it's either a fluke or it's wrong.
The Israeli estimate of relatively high immune escape from Delta that a lot of you were freaking out about now looks like it was the result of sloppy statistical analysis. https://t.co/F5sHsJDFF1
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) July 28, 2021
Bullshit.
I have family members all the way up the Fox News Facebook misinformation hole, and they didn’t get vaccinated because they felt respected; they got vaccinated because their children told them they wouldn’t get to see their grandchildren until they got vaccinated.
3 observations:
People don't tend to change their worldviews from a place of comfort.
When selfish assholes decide to behave like selfish assholes, the problem isn't that others aren't coddling their feelings enough.
Selfish assholes aren't everyone else's job to fix.
Selfish assholes would love for you to *think* they are everybody else's job to fix.
It puts them at the center and in control.
That means when they act like a selfish asshole, it's *your* fault. You should have been more persuasive. Daddy hits you because you made him angry.
Truth is, vaccine resistors are behaving this way because their feelings ARE being respected.
Malicious media entities created self-feeding networks that reassure selfish assholes they can be selfish assholes and still be respected.
Antvax, racist, sexist, all are welcome.
The way you make a selfish asshole stop being a selfish asshole is well known.
You draw a clear boundary and then you enforce that boundary. You tell them that their bullshit won't be tolerated, and then you don't tolerate their bullshit.
I think we all know that, actually.
I have family members all the way up the Fox News Facebook misinformation hole, and they didn’t get vaccinated because they felt respected; they got vaccinated because their children told them they wouldn’t get to see their grandchildren until they got vaccinated.
Vaccine resisters can\u2019t be persuaded if they feel disrespected | Opinion by @michaelbd https://t.co/nwszm47IOf
— National Review (@NRO) July 16, 2021
3 observations:
People don't tend to change their worldviews from a place of comfort.
When selfish assholes decide to behave like selfish assholes, the problem isn't that others aren't coddling their feelings enough.
Selfish assholes aren't everyone else's job to fix.
Selfish assholes would love for you to *think* they are everybody else's job to fix.
It puts them at the center and in control.
That means when they act like a selfish asshole, it's *your* fault. You should have been more persuasive. Daddy hits you because you made him angry.
Truth is, vaccine resistors are behaving this way because their feelings ARE being respected.
Malicious media entities created self-feeding networks that reassure selfish assholes they can be selfish assholes and still be respected.
Antvax, racist, sexist, all are welcome.
The way you make a selfish asshole stop being a selfish asshole is well known.
You draw a clear boundary and then you enforce that boundary. You tell them that their bullshit won't be tolerated, and then you don't tolerate their bullshit.
I think we all know that, actually.
Breaking—UK scientists just reported a case-control study that the mutated UK 🇬🇧B.1.1.7 variant is not associated w/ more severe #COVID19— “found no significant differences in hospital admissions and case fatality at 28 days, & occurrence of reinfections”, says @mvankerkhove
2) That said, the new UK mutated strain is a more transmissible (contagious) variant. Keep transmissibility and illness severity separate. They are two different things. Don’t get them confused.
3) The new UK variant severity study is included in today’s WHO report, to be released soon this afternoon according to WHO sources. Waiting for it to drop. I’ll keep folks posted on the details.
4) Update: here is UK Technical report on #SARSCoV2 variant of concern (B.1.1.7) in 🇬🇧 with prelim findings from their case-control study of no increased severity for the new variant that I reported yesterday.
5) Also keep in a mind that a virus that spreads faster (more contagious) yields much worse total outcomes than a virus that is just merely more severe.
All things equal, a new mutated variant that is more contagious & no more severe is worse. And that is what we now have.
2) That said, the new UK mutated strain is a more transmissible (contagious) variant. Keep transmissibility and illness severity separate. They are two different things. Don’t get them confused.
3) The new UK variant severity study is included in today’s WHO report, to be released soon this afternoon according to WHO sources. Waiting for it to drop. I’ll keep folks posted on the details.
4) Update: here is UK Technical report on #SARSCoV2 variant of concern (B.1.1.7) in 🇬🇧 with prelim findings from their case-control study of no increased severity for the new variant that I reported yesterday.
5) Also keep in a mind that a virus that spreads faster (more contagious) yields much worse total outcomes than a virus that is just merely more severe.
All things equal, a new mutated variant that is more contagious & no more severe is worse. And that is what we now have.
Why a SARS-CoV-2 variant that's 50% more transmissible would in general be a much bigger problem than a variant that's 50% more deadly. A short thread... 1/
— Adam Kucharski (@AdamJKucharski) December 28, 2020
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
