COVID-19 Megathread 6: Return of the Omicron

[Mr. Morden]

Interesting poll results here:

https://twitter.com/ArgoJournal/status/1298639971730051072

[Mr. Morden]

I mentioned this on the 2020 board where this poll was originally posted (since it includes a Biden/Trump horserace matchup), but latest poll on who's willing to get a vaccine:

https://twitter.com/ArgoJournal/status/1306261432179331074

[Mr. Morden]

From this poll: https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/9j7sr0my95/econTabReport.pdf#table.188

https://twitter.com/ArgoJournal/status/1326578200495992841

[Mr. Morden]

Here's the latest poll on who's willing to get a vaccine when it's available:

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/jy5um9f1tw/econTabReport.pdf

https://twitter.com/ArgoJournal/status/1331647643970367489

Looks like the numbers have been gradually increasing over the last few months.  E.g., here's the same poll in September:

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=402803.msg7581075#msg7581075

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/GaryGrumbach/status/1333508638154121234

[Mr. Morden]

Depressing graphs of the day:

So in order for the #s on the second graph to make sense, I guess that would be *cumulative* deaths so far, rather than deaths per day?  That would explain why it's always going up.  Except Spain had a brief drop in May, which doesn't make sense unless people can come back to life.  I guess that was just a reporting error that got corrected?

[Mr. Morden]

New poll on who's willing to be vaccinated:

https://apnews.com/article/us-news-race-and-ethnicity-coronavirus-pandemic-4d98dbfc0a64d60d52ac84c3065dac55

[Mr. Morden]

New YouGov poll on who's willing to be vaccinated:

https://twitter.com/ArgoJournal/status/1339217129581793284

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/vmsalama/status/1351306939091836929

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/vmsalama/status/1351306939091836929

But he won't be president on January 26...

Obviously, the order will be signed before he leaves office.  Biden can issue a new one if he wants, but this'll be the new default if Biden does nothing.

[Mr. Morden]

And actually, there's more context here.  The CDC already announced that Jan. 26th is the day when a new policy will start, that will require a negative covid test before anyone (even American citizens) fly into the US:

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0112-negative-covid-19-air-passengers.html

So (again, unless Biden reverses this) this'll be the new travel policy, replacing the old restrictions.

[Mr. Morden]

https://news.yahoo.com/fauci-cdc-mask-mandate-155642381.html

Dr. Anthony Fauci said Sunday that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is examining whether to reinstate mask guidance even for fully vaccinated people in public.

"This is under active consideration," Fauci told CNN anchor Jake Tapper, when asked if masks should be brought back for vaccinated Americans.

Tapper had cited CNN's reporting, which said that the Biden administration's top health officials are holding "preliminary conversations" on whether to urge vaccinated people to wear masks again in public. The Washington Post also reported that the talks were in a "preliminary phase and their result could be as simple as new messaging from top White House officials."

[Mr. Morden]

It’s clear at this point that Republicans are trying to prolong the pandemic in order to gain political points. They want Biden’s term to be as chaotic as possible to win in 2022, and then steal 2024.

That is a huge mistake on their part, since the red states are being hit the hardest by the current surge of covid

I mean just look at the Covid case spike in a state like Vermont


and compare that to what is currently going on in Florida



It's blatantly obvious whose voters will suffer more from this
if the GOP continues to play political games with peoples lives...

The Census has already happened, so assuming that one only cares about elections happening in this coming decade, this would have no impact on how many congressional districts or electoral votes Florida gets until 2032.

[Mr. Morden]

Not sure if this is happening elsewhere in the US as well, or if this is a one-off:

https://sfist.com/2021/08/03/if-you-got-the-johnson-johnson-shot-sf-general-will-give-you-a-supplemental/

Starting later this week, if you received the one-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine, you're eligible to drop into the vaccination clinic at SF General and get a "supplemental" mRNA vaccine dose — but don't call it a booster.

The decision was made Monday by Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital (ZSFG) and San Francisco's Department of Public Health (SFDPH), as ABC 7 reports, following multiple reports that the J&J vaccine may not be as effective in preventing infection from the Delta variant as mRNA-based Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. With the first variants of COVID-19 that were spreading last year, the J&J vaccine was seen as highly effective in preventing severe illness, but new data suggests that the mRNA vaccines provide strong protection against what appears to be a stronger and more infectious variant.

But they are being careful to call it a "supplemental dose," not a booster.

[Mr. Morden]

WHO calls for a moratorium on booster shots

The World Health Organization is calling for a moratorium on Covid-19 vaccine booster shots until at least the end of September, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Wednesday.  

“Even while hundreds of millions of people are still waiting for their first dose, some rich countries are moving towards booster doses,” Tedros said. “So far more than 4 billion vaccine doses have been administered globally. More than 80% have gone to high and upper middle income countries, even though they account for less than half of the world’s population.”

Germany, the UK, and Israel have all announced plans to provide booster shots for certain vulnerable populations.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-vaccine-updates-08-04-21/h_ac3c02e64fbb8b0bd50ccd5073493b1a

So between this announcement by the WHO and this article I saw about a golfer's reasons for not getting vaccinated:

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/31958173/bryson-dechambeau-returns-being-covid-positive-regret-not-getting-vaccinated

...it occurred to me that some people in the US may still be hesitant about getting the vaccine because they are worried about denying a scarce dose that could be going to someone in greater need, especially in a less privileged country.  

This is especially true given that so much of the discussion around vaccines in the first half of the year revolved around the ethics of vaccine access for various groups, and how this was tied up with notions of privilege, both within the US and across countries.  

So if someone's argument for not being vaccinated is "I'm young and healthy and privileged, and I'd like the vaccine dose to go to someone who has less access to health care and who is more likely to be affected by the virus", how do we counter that?  And given the recent WHO statement, should we try to counter it?

I would be sympathetic to this argument only from those who pledge to never come into contact with any other people in their community.  Remember that it's not just their own health they're risking by not getting vaccinated.  It doesn't matter if they're young and healthy; that doesn't help the older or immunocompromised person they subsequently infect.

But that's true of all the people in other countries who are not getting the vaccine because rich countries are hoarding so many of the doses.  If we actually cared about doing the most good worldwide instead of just in the US, then why wouldn't we prioritize sending doses of the vaccine to wherever in the world it would do the most good, ahead of young and healthy people in the US?

[Mr. Morden]

Arkansas governor says he regrets ban on mask mandates

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/04/politics/asa-hutchinson-arkansas-mask-mandate/index.html

If he has any 2020 aspirations, they've gone up in flames with this statement alone.

If he had 2020 aspirations that weren't already fulfilled, then it's moot now, since we're now in 2021.

[Mr. Morden]

WHO calls for a moratorium on booster shots

The World Health Organization is calling for a moratorium on Covid-19 vaccine booster shots until at least the end of September, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Wednesday.  

“Even while hundreds of millions of people are still waiting for their first dose, some rich countries are moving towards booster doses,” Tedros said. “So far more than 4 billion vaccine doses have been administered globally. More than 80% have gone to high and upper middle income countries, even though they account for less than half of the world’s population.”

Germany, the UK, and Israel have all announced plans to provide booster shots for certain vulnerable populations.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-vaccine-updates-08-04-21/h_ac3c02e64fbb8b0bd50ccd5073493b1a

So between this announcement by the WHO and this article I saw about a golfer's reasons for not getting vaccinated:

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/31958173/bryson-dechambeau-returns-being-covid-positive-regret-not-getting-vaccinated

...it occurred to me that some people in the US may still be hesitant about getting the vaccine because they are worried about denying a scarce dose that could be going to someone in greater need, especially in a less privileged country.  

This is especially true given that so much of the discussion around vaccines in the first half of the year revolved around the ethics of vaccine access for various groups, and how this was tied up with notions of privilege, both within the US and across countries.  

So if someone's argument for not being vaccinated is "I'm young and healthy and privileged, and I'd like the vaccine dose to go to someone who has less access to health care and who is more likely to be affected by the virus", how do we counter that?  And given the recent WHO statement, should we try to counter it?

I would be sympathetic to this argument only from those who pledge to never come into contact with any other people in their community.  Remember that it's not just their own health they're risking by not getting vaccinated.  It doesn't matter if they're young and healthy; that doesn't help the older or immunocompromised person they subsequently infect.

But that's true of all the people in other countries who are not getting the vaccine because rich countries are hoarding so many of the doses.  If we actually cared about doing the most good worldwide instead of just in the US, then why wouldn't we prioritize sending doses of the vaccine to wherever in the world it would do the most good, ahead of young and healthy people in the US?

I think it's not only reasonable but entirely appropriate for the US -- and every other country -- to place a priority on protecting its own population.  Since we are indeed a wealthy country, I'm all for assisting less wealthy countries by providing surplus vaccines and assistance with distributing them, and I believe the US is doing just that; we've already shipped tens of millions of doses to other countries, or are in the process of ramping up to do so.  But the key word there is "surplus".  Other people may feel differently.

But my underlying question isn’t about US policy itself.  It is about someone essentially saying that they disagree with US policy, and refuse the vaccine because they believe a low-risk person in a privileged country should not receive it before a high-risk person in a less-privileged country.  Should this person be grouped in with the rest of the anti-vaxxers?

Well, I was trying to address Mr. Morden's specific point in the previous post; my response to your question was earlier in the chain, but let me try to restate it here.  Even if the person refusing the vaccine is sincere in their belief (and not just using it as an excuse), it's unrealistic because it treats the relative risk solely on an individual basis.  What I was trying to say is that this creates a false value judgment, because there are also high-risk people in their local community. 

This doesn’t seem like a false value judgment at all.  Yes, there are some unvaccinated high risk people everywhere, but in the US there are certainly fewer than in many other parts of the world, since a high percentage of those who would otherwise be at risk in the US are already vaccinated.  In many other parts of the world, virtually no one is already vaccinated.  There are other parts of the world where an unvaccinated infected person is liable to do more damage to those around them because there are more vulnerable people for them to do damage to.  Or in other words, if one was currently allocating vaccines geographically to wherever in the world the vaccines would do the most good, they probably wouldn’t pick the US as their #1 destination.

You said in your response to my post that “It's not only reasonable but entirely appropriate for the US -- and every other country -- to place a priority on protecting its own population.”  But the question here is not about the US government primarily, but individual Americans choosing to let others get their doses first, before they do, if they believe others are in more need.

Now, the problem is that there’s no legal way for an individual citizen to donate a dose that would otherwise go to them to someone else.  If there’s more of a slowdown in US demand for the vaccine, then does that prompt the US government to donate more doses to other countries where it’s more in need, rather than just hoard all the doses even when they’re not using them?  If it did prompt them to do so, then great.  But if not, and most/all the doses that would otherwise go to Americans just end up getting dumped, then yeah, attempting to let the vulnerable in other countries go first doesn’t work.

[Mr. Morden]

The original plan was a vaccine mandate for students but not faculty and staff.  But the university amended this about two weeks ago and are mandating vaccination now for faculty and staff as well.  And rightly so! 

So presumably everyone on campus is now vaccinated.

Why would you presume that?  If the new rule only came in about two weeks ago, then even if all of the previously unvaccinated went out and got their first shot right away, not enough time has elapsed for a second shot.

[Mr. Morden]

This article says

“Biden is also expected to ask the U.S. Department of Labor to issue a rule that employers with more than 100 employees must require vaccines or testing, according to NBC News.”

Does that mean exactly what it sounds like? Any business with over 100 employees has to require vaccines/regular testing now?  So…not just federal employees?

And I'd assume that it would only apply to employees who are not working from home?  It would be weird for an employer to require employees to be vaccinated if the employee in question never leaves their house, but the article doesn't make that distinction.

[Mr. Morden]

Here's the plan:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21060150-embargoed-path-out-of-the-pandemic-potus-covid-19-action-plan-1

The Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is developing a rule that will require all employers with 100 or more employees to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated or require any workers who remain unvaccinated to produce a negative test result on at least a weekly basis before coming to work. OSHA will issue an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) to implement this requirement. This requirement will impact over 80 million workers in private sector businesses with 100+ employees.

[Mr. Morden]

What is "omnicron"?  A covid variant from the Robocop universe?

[Mr. Morden]

Chicago Teachers Union gearing up for walk out over COVID safety concerns

https://www.wbez.org/stories/chicago-students-to-return-to-class-monday-amid-debate-over-covid-19-safety/086d207e-9bdc-4a74-9eac-7faf5dc1770d

Major development here in Chicago

This is absolutely ridiculous. If you’re scared about COVID, then get vaccinated, and you’ll be fine. There’s absolutely no reason for anyone to want to work at home anymore, unless you’re counting “wanting to do less work” as a reason.

I agree. I’d add that one complicating factor they’re also weighing is staffing shortages. There’s worry over whether, with so many staff in quarantine or isolation, schools will be able to run properly in person.

A simple solution is a vaccine mandate for teachers so this whole issue can be ended.

I work at an office job in which attendance in the office is optional, but anyone who decides to go into the office must prove that they’re vaccinated.  Despite this, there are breakthrough cases, and a few days before Christmas, the office was shut down (and will remain so at least through the end of this week) because of an uptick in breakthrough cases.  There are no known cases so far in which one person with a breakthrough case in the office infected someone else in the office.  But still, whenever someone gets a breakthrough case, they’re sent home, regardless of whether they’re symptomatic.

So this is the question for in person schooling, I’d think: Even if there’s mandatory vaccination, there’ll be breakthrough cases.  With the current Omicron wave, there are quite a few breakthrough cases, but the vaccines limit the severity of the infections, and in many cases they’re asymptomatic.  So if there’s mandatory vaccination, and all teachers and students are vaccinated, but we get a bunch of asymptomatic breakthrough cases amongst teachers, then do we tell them to show up to teach at school anyway, or do we send them home to quarantine?  If the latter, then you could still have staffing shortages despite the vaccination requirement.

This is the same issue that was previously discussed w/ airline pilots.  If they test positive, they're sent home, regardless of whether they have symptoms.

It's not enough to have a vaccine requirement.  The key turn that would have to happen to end this would be to reach a point where someone getting an asymptomatic breakthrough case is treated as no big deal in terms of their threat to others, such that they can continue on the job rather than being sent home.

[Mr. Morden]

WA had one new COVID case with community transmission. 7 in hotel quarantine from interstate.

Population statistics for vaccination.

1st jab : 93.5%
2nd jab : 85.7%
Booster : 12.2%

WA had like 16 thousand news cases.  Are politicians trying to blame interstate travelers again.  Yeah.  Stop doing that S$$$. 

WA - Western Australia not Washington State.

16,000 is next level.

I guess the question is: Why are you posting WA numbers in the US covid thread rather than the international one?

[Mr. Morden]

How long has this thread had Star War references as it’s titles?

Since 1977

It turns out that you're right, given the timestamp on this post:

Due to the popularity of that "Star Wars" movie, I've decided to call this new thread "COVID-19 Wars".  To be honest, I'm not sure why we're interested in the so-called "COVID-19" here in the year 1977, but people asked for this thread, so here it is.

[Mr. Morden]

Here in Daly City, CA, I still see on the street that about half of pedestrians are wearing masks outdoors.