General Corona virus updates

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

ThatOneDude

Commander in @Chief, Dick Army
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
35,382
34,124
The warrant specifies an IP address. So this should be pretty straightforward. What I don't see is that they took that IP address and subpoenaed user information from the internet service provider. so without that piece historically other cases have been dismissed because an IP address is not an identity without server logs from the ISP.

Every bit of it feels like a government overreach and as such I really hope it blows up in their face
Unless they have the documents. Then shes big fucked.
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
Not to say your post isn't completely correct. But does "I'm out of here in a month Trump" strike you as someone playing the long game?
Nope. But I think it's always useful to keep calling it what it is. When Trump goes down to Florida (rumor is he might pout down there through the inauguration lol) and uses a social media and his future news channel to rewrite history, I think highlighting the failures of his interventions remains important.
 
M

member 3289

Guest
Nope. But I think it's always useful to keep calling it what it is. When Trump goes down to Florida (rumor is he might pout down there through the inauguration lol) and uses a social media and his future news channel to rewrite history, I think highlighting the failures of his interventions remains important.
Yeah unfortunately this is Casa de Trump's new home

 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,172
56,519
Trump has stated on more than one occasion that he plans to run in 2024.
What's going to play better in 2024? "We shared the vaccine fairly across the globe." or "Joe Biden wanted to leave America at the back of the line. Project warp speed, America first, cured covid under my presidency, etc"?
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,172
56,519
Nope. But I think it's always useful to keep calling it what it is. When Trump goes down to Florida (rumor is he might pout down there through the inauguration lol) and uses a social media and his future news channel to rewrite history, I think highlighting the failures of his interventions remains important.
Do you also feel his successes should be highlighted? Because I can remember the reaction when during the final debate he said there'd be a vaccine announced in the coming weeks and rolled out by the end of the year under project warp speed.
 

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,474
13,951
There's an eponymous theory that basically states medical interventions seldom stop disease. We typically develop them after the disease has done a majority of its harm and public health interventions are far more important than medical response. We are always late to the game on tech and response. Our medical interventions typically only stop the next one, but always miss the current one.

I am trying to remember the term. But regardless, that's what I see here. We blew it up and by the time we get a vaccine rolled out broadly, we have let the disease cause the majority of its harm and only prevented the next outbreak.
McKeown something something?

Edit: McKeown hypothesis? Lol
 

Qat

QoQ
Nov 3, 2015
16,379
22,495
Do you also feel his successes should be highlighted? Because I can remember the reaction when during the final debate he said there'd be a vaccine announced in the coming weeks and rolled out by the end of the year under project warp speed.
He had a correct prediction? Holy shit. How could people ever vote against him.

Trust the plan.
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
Do you also feel his successes should be highlighted?
Sure but that's a really weird thing to say unless you're trying to neutralize the conversation at hand.
If you want to talk about something related that you think is good go ahead and do it. I'm not keeping score here or trying to balance anything out.
When I say "this is bad and we should remember it when the inevitable spin machine comes again" I don't mean anything else. It is a thought that stands on its own.



Because I can remember the reaction when during the final debate he said there'd be a vaccine announced in the coming weeks and rolled out by the end of the year under project warp speed
Which was? And your point is?
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
He had a correct prediction? Holy shit. How could people ever vote against him.

Trust the plan.
Except even that ignores the context that we don't really have a vaccine in the coming weeks because the executive branch cut the supply and politicized the vaccine so hard that 1> stockpiles are below what they should be and could be 2> safety data is not trusted to the point that many people are saying that they will not get it

Trump begging for credit for a project that he is only undermined and that runs without him.


A vaccine only matters if you give enough of it to enough people and there are enough uninfected people to impact future disease burden to be worth the investment in the vaccine.

(ignoring that the vaccines seem to show much better immune response than the Corona virus itself preventing future outbreaks)
I actually wonder how much less needed an effective the vaccine is going to be by the time we roll out enough because the disease burden has already happened.
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,238
33,225
@Splinty
At the beginning of this when predictions where being made by Fauci.
Didn’t he say worst case we’d lose millions and best case we’d have 200-300k deaths by the end of the year?
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,172
56,519
Which was? And your point is?
If I'm remembering correctly, Biden shook his head disapprovingly, the moderator demanded answers as to who as "that isn't what experts are saying" and then the claim was widely panned in the media as being utter nonsense.

Point is that if you're going to, rightly might I add, criticize his actions of cutting vaccine availability you also should keep in mind that having a vaccine at all should at least partly be credited to his actions and be crediting him with that. I'm not expecting anyone to shower him with praise, he certainly doesn't deserve it, but a little objectivity is deserved.
 

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,474
13,951
Yes I did.
And for anyone following along: Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb confirms U.S. turned down offer for more vaccine doses

This is straight executive failure. I mean, there are things that you just blame on the machine or is really unpredictable that you can't hold the boss accountable. But "should we stock pile extra vaccines while we can or should we gamble that there will be a better vaccine in the future so lets not do that" is a straight up failed executive decision. The cost there would have been 10-19 bucks according to a quick google. So we went in for 50 million = 500-1000 million. But then we decided not to be in for 1500-2000 million. But what's the trade off? Waiting for more not yet made vaccines hoping they will be there and that they would save more money than that???
Should we gamble one billion on a shotgun approach guaranteeing 150million vaccines up front? Downfall if the whole vaccine can't be out you are now out 2000 million instead of 1000 milllion.But you aren't going to save on the next vaccines almost assuredly.



We need to inoculate about half that population to slow this thing to a crawl.
Now we have to manage multiple vaccines with different supply chain requirements to make up the gap.
Even at our clinic and hospital level, that is hard to do because of the inefficiency of ordering, storing, etc.
Just playing Devil's advocate here....don't kill me.

Yeah, but at the time no one even knew if the vaccine was going to work. So the gamble was signing a smaller contract for each manufacturer. Not put all in your eggs in one basket kinda thing.

The contract only promised 100 million by march 2021 with an option of an additional 100-500 million to be added. That option is still on the table. And even if the second 100 million was ordered it wasn't gong to be delivered until June anyway.

At least, that's how I understood it. I could be wrong. Probably not. But maybe.
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
Yeah, but at the time no one even knew if the vaccine was going to work. So the gamble was signing a smaller contract for each manufacturer. Not put all in your eggs in one basket kinda thing.
Gamble would still only be the cost of the excess vaccine if the vaccine didn't work or buying excess vaccines across the board. If you sign with other vaccines later it's the same expenditure here. Delta is still only Pfizer's extra orders. Risk remains only cost above existing purchase. purchasing 50 or 150 million Pfizer vaccines does not preclude you from purchasing other vaccines. 150 million vaccines are still too few so you're still going to buy from others or wait. All we did was make a choice to go from 150 to 50 as a guarantee. Benefit was cost savings if the vaccine didn't work or if other vaccines are more cost effective. Risk is current position of having a delayed vaccine and cost and deaths.
Ending up on the other side of this with extra vaccines would likely cost less than months of additional pandemic and associated harms and interventions
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
The contract only promised 100 million by march 2021 with an option of an additional 100-500 million to be added. That option is still on the table. And even if the second 100 million was ordered it wasn't gong to be delivered until June anyway.

Trying to understand this.
Pfizer was offering a hundred million extra option in March?
For the news article I thought we only ordered 50 million?
If we were always going to get the extra vaccines in June whether we ordered them last summer or now of course I don't understand what the hoopla about
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
@Splinty
At the beginning of this when predictions where being made by Fauci.
Didn’t he say worst case we’d lose millions and best case we’d have 200-300k deaths by the end of the year?

I don't know. I don't follow the spoken soundbytes that closely.

A first Google says from March 30...
Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, reiterated Monday on CNN that "I don't want to see it, I'd like to avoid it, but I wouldn't be surprised if we saw 100,000 deaths."
 

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,474
13,951
Trying to understand this.
Pfizer was offering a hundred million extra option in March?
For the news article I thought we only ordered 50 million?
If we were always going to get the extra vaccines in June whether we ordered them last summer or now of course I don't understand what the hoopla about


The federal contract signed in July called for Pfizer to deliver 100 million doses by March at a cost of $19.50 a dose — if its vaccine worked. It gave the government the option to request 100 million to 500 million additional doses. It was one of six contracts that the Trump administration signed with vaccine makers in a strategy intended to hedge its bets and maximize the chances of success.

*****

Pfizer has struggled to meet initial expectations. This summer, the company predicted that it would have 100 million doses by the end of the year, but in November, it said manufacturing challenges forced the company to scale that back to 50 million. Vaccine manufacturing is notoriously unpredictable, and any number of factors — from shortages of raw ingredients to contaminated batches — could cause further setbacks.

*******

While two vaccines, including Pfizer’s, have proved to be highly effective against Covid-19, and a third also appears at least moderately effective, supplies are shaping up to be scarce in the coming months as infections, hospitalizations and deaths surge to new highs. And while Pfizer is now negotiating with the administration to provide more of its vaccine, people familiar with the talks say the company cannot guarantee that it will be able to deliver more than the initial 100 million doses — enough to inoculate 50 million people since its vaccine requires two shots — before perhaps next June.

*****

 

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,474
13,951
If Moderna isn't complaining of production delays, is easier to transport and store.......

Moderna has only promised 20 million by the end of the year, 100 million by March.