Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

I would excuse states and localities that got hit hard early (Michigan and New Jersey), especially where COVID-19 cases were associated with the demographic of "frequent flyers", a group of comparatively old professionals with high mobility. Later surges were generally more preventable, and they often reflected workshops with sweatshop conditions, religious nutcases who believed that a disease like COVID-19 is the Will of God, and MAGA rallies.

Cupertino, California of course has plenty of "frequent flyers". In Michigan some of the most vulnerable to COVID-19 were involved in Wayne County and Detroit law enforcement. Been there? That's one very troubled area, and when the police get sick because of the 2020 plague, you can imagine what that does to the sorts of people who call for police aid or get arrested.

Epidemiology is a well-established science, and it was as able to track COVID-19 as... HIV/AIDS. In the cases of both diseases, certain behaviors put one much more at risk. Some of those behaviors could be modified for safety. As an example, physicians got far more careful about needles after some contracted HIV/AIDS. People with addictive behaviors, as with sex and IV drugs, were far more reckless and less reachable -- let alone less likely to change their ways. For many on the Right, Donald Trump is practically an addiction in its effects upon behavior and character.

One study counts "excess deaths" which result from all causes  which include:

Quote:a) the total COVID-19 death rate, that is, all deaths directly related to COVID-19 infection; b) the increase in mortality due to needed health care being delayed or deferred during the pandemic; c) the increase in mortality due to increases in mental health disorders including depression, increased alcohol use, and increased opioid use; d) the reduction in mortality due to decreases in injuries because of general reductions in mobility associated with social distancing mandates; e) the reductions in mortality due to reduced transmission of other viruses, most notably influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and measles; and f) the reductions in mortality due to some chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and chronic respiratory disease, that occur when frail individuals who would have died from these conditions died earlier from COVID-19 instead. To correctly estimate the total COVID-19 mortality, we need to take into account all six of these drivers of change in mortality that have happened since the onset of the pandemic.

This allows for reductions in deaths due to accidental deaths (such as vehicle crashes, drowning, and some falls) and some homicides (such as in bar-room brawls) due  to people doing less of risky behavior as well as some communicable diseases such as influenza (measures that people take against COVID-19 also protect people from influenza). But even with these, the number of excess deaths from COVID-19, which include effects on mental health (including substance abuse) and people avoiding medical care out of fear of COVID-19.  This is early unreported cases, especially in nursing facilities that because veritable slaughterhouses in which the cause of death was not sought. 

The official count gives 574,043 identifiable deaths; excess deaths are figured to be 905,289 in the USA alone. The 'excess death count" is even more horrific.  

http://www.healthdata.org/special-analys...-19-deaths

(05-07-2021, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I would excuse states and localities that got hit hard early (Michigan and New Jersey), especially where COVID-19 cases were associated with the demographic of "frequent flyers", a group of comparatively old professionals with high mobility. Later surges were generally more preventable, and they often reflected workshops with sweatshop conditions, religious nutcases who believed that a disease like COVID-19 is the Will of God, and MAGA rallies.  

Cupertino, California of course has plenty of "frequent flyers". In Michigan some of the most vulnerable to COVID-19 were involved in Wayne County and Detroit law enforcement. Been there? That's one very troubled area, and when the police get sick because of the 2020 plague, you can imagine what that does to the sorts of people who call for police aid or get arrested.

Epidemiology is a well-established science, and it was as able to track COVID-19 as... HIV/AIDS. In the cases of both diseases, certain behaviors put one much more at risk. Some of those behaviors could be modified for safety. As an example, physicians got far more careful about needles after some contracted HIV/AIDS. People with addictive behaviors, as with sex and IV drugs, were far more reckless and less reachable -- let alone less likely to change their ways. For many on the Right, Donald Trump is practically an addiction in its effects upon behavior and character.

Unfortunately, even scientists have prejudices, and the prevailing wisdom of the WHO lead to months of excessive handwashing and surface cleansing.  Neither is bad, but neither was effective either.  Then there's masking which was thought to be less important, but is, in fact, the most important preventative. There's a great NY Times commentary by one of my favorite social analysts: Zeynep Tüfekçi (unfortunately long and behind their pay wall), where she dissects the entire epidemiology establishment for being locked into old ideas that were clearly wrong.  They got the transmission method wrong (large air droplets rather than aerosol), and never reexamined the evidence until it became so overwhelming that they had no choice.  We did somewhat better here, but that's faint praise.

(05-08-2021, 08:18 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-07-2021, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I would excuse states and localities that got hit hard early (Michigan and New Jersey), especially where COVID-19 cases were associated with the demographic of "frequent flyers", a group of comparatively old professionals with high mobility. Later surges were generally more preventable, and they often reflected workshops with sweatshop conditions, religious nutcases who believed that a disease like COVID-19 is the Will of God, and MAGA rallies.  

Cupertino, California of course has plenty of "frequent flyers". In Michigan some of the most vulnerable to COVID-19 were involved in Wayne County and Detroit law enforcement. Been there? That's one very troubled area, and when the police get sick because of the 2020 plague, you can imagine what that does to the sorts of people who call for police aid or get arrested.

Epidemiology is a well-established science, and it was as able to track COVID-19 as... HIV/AIDS. In the cases of both diseases, certain behaviors put one much more at risk. Some of those behaviors could be modified for safety. As an example, physicians got far more careful about needles after some contracted HIV/AIDS. People with addictive behaviors, as with sex and IV drugs, were far more reckless and less reachable -- let alone less likely to change their ways. For many on the Right, Donald Trump is practically an addiction in its effects upon behavior and character.

Unfortunately, even scientists have prejudices, and the prevailing wisdom of the WHO lead to months of excessive handwashing and surface cleansing.  Neither is bad, but neither was effective either.  Then there's masking which was thought to be less important, but is, in fact, the most important preventative. There's a great NY Times commentary by one of my favorite social analysts: Zeynep Tüfekçi (unfortunately long and behind their pay wall), where she dissects the entire epidemiology establishment for being locked into old ideas that were clearly wrong.  They got the transmission method wrong (large air droplets rather than aerosol), and never reexamined the evidence until it became so overwhelming that they had no choice.  We did somewhat better here, but that's faint praise.

Everyone has some prejudices. The question is of the harm and offense. Everybody sees everything through some cultural haze. Pure rationality is as much a myth as fire-breathing, maiden-devouring dragons. I question whether pure rationality is possible without one being in deep, constant despair. We all work within some body of preconceptions, and even the most sophisticated in their learning can become so accustomed by their experiences that when truth violates those preconceptions  that they make predictable errors. 

Many old ideas remain valuable, and none but fools would dispose of Euclid's geometry and number theory for obsolescence. Likewise, many of the old standards of morality prove upon some callow challenge why they exist. But even then we can often change our minds when we find a contradiction. Antipathy toward homosexuality is an attitude from antiquity,  and I long had that antipathy. What changed? That I suddenly decided that I might enjoy it? Not in the least. It reduces to a conflict between homophobia and the necessity of law and order for human rights and a civil society.  As with religious and ethnic minorities so it is with homosexuals; they do not deserve to be beaten, robbed, and killed. I'm choosing between two differing standards of morality, and one of them is more desirable. There is nothing post-modern in my change of moral standards on LGBT rights; I recognize a conflict between two traditions. One of those two must yield because they cannot both be right when they conflict.

Reality ultimately decides what intellectual constructs are valid and which ones are valid and which ones are void.

(05-08-2021, 09:18 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-08-2021, 08:18 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-07-2021, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I would excuse states and localities that got hit hard early (Michigan and New Jersey), especially where COVID-19 cases were associated with the demographic of "frequent flyers", a group of comparatively old professionals with high mobility. Later surges were generally more preventable, and they often reflected workshops with sweatshop conditions, religious nutcases who believed that a disease like COVID-19 is the Will of God, and MAGA rallies.  

Cupertino, California of course has plenty of "frequent flyers". In Michigan some of the most vulnerable to COVID-19 were involved in Wayne County and Detroit law enforcement. Been there? That's one very troubled area, and when the police get sick because of the 2020 plague, you can imagine what that does to the sorts of people who call for police aid or get arrested.

Epidemiology is a well-established science, and it was as able to track COVID-19 as... HIV/AIDS. In the cases of both diseases, certain behaviors put one much more at risk. Some of those behaviors could be modified for safety. As an example, physicians got far more careful about needles after some contracted HIV/AIDS. People with addictive behaviors, as with sex and IV drugs, were far more reckless and less reachable -- let alone less likely to change their ways. For many on the Right, Donald Trump is practically an addiction in its effects upon behavior and character.

Unfortunately, even scientists have prejudices, and the prevailing wisdom of the WHO lead to months of excessive handwashing and surface cleansing.  Neither is bad, but neither was effective either.  Then there's masking which was thought to be less important, but is, in fact, the most important preventative. There's a great NY Times commentary by one of my favorite social analysts: Zeynep Tüfekçi (unfortunately long and behind their pay wall), where she dissects the entire epidemiology establishment for being locked into old ideas that were clearly wrong.  They got the transmission method wrong (large air droplets rather than aerosol), and never reexamined the evidence until it became so overwhelming that they had no choice.  We did somewhat better here, but that's faint praise.

Everyone has some prejudices. The question is of the harm and offense. Everybody sees everything through some cultural haze. Pure rationality is as much a myth as fire-breathing, maiden-devouring dragons. I question whether pure rationality is possible without one being in deep, constant despair. We all work within some body of preconceptions, and even the most sophisticated in their learning can become so accustomed by their experiences that when truth violates those preconceptions  that they make predictable errors. 

Many old ideas remain valuable, and none but fools would dispose of Euclid's geometry and number theory for obsolescence. Likewise, many of the old standards of morality prove upon some callow challenge why they exist. But even then we can often change our minds when we find a contradiction. Antipathy toward homosexuality is an attitude from antiquity,  and I long had that antipathy. What changed? That I suddenly decided that I might enjoy it? Not in the least. It reduces to a conflict between homophobia and the necessity of law and order for human rights and a civil society.  As with religious and ethnic minorities so it is with homosexuals; they do not deserve to be beaten, robbed, and killed. I'm choosing between two differing standards of morality, and one of them is more desirable. There is nothing post-modern in my change of moral standards on LGBT rights; I recognize a conflict between two traditions. One of those two must yield because they cannot both be right when they conflict.

Reality ultimately decides what intellectual constructs are valid and which ones are valid and which ones are void.

Well written, Mr. Brower.

(05-09-2021, 12:48 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-08-2021, 09:18 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-08-2021, 08:18 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-07-2021, 04:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I would excuse states and localities that got hit hard early (Michigan and New Jersey), especially where COVID-19 cases were associated with the demographic of "frequent flyers", a group of comparatively old professionals with high mobility. Later surges were generally more preventable, and they often reflected workshops with sweatshop conditions, religious nutcases who believed that a disease like COVID-19 is the Will of God, and MAGA rallies.  

Cupertino, California of course has plenty of "frequent flyers". In Michigan some of the most vulnerable to COVID-19 were involved in Wayne County and Detroit law enforcement. Been there? That's one very troubled area, and when the police get sick because of the 2020 plague, you can imagine what that does to the sorts of people who call for police aid or get arrested.

Epidemiology is a well-established science, and it was as able to track COVID-19 as... HIV/AIDS. In the cases of both diseases, certain behaviors put one much more at risk. Some of those behaviors could be modified for safety. As an example, physicians got far more careful about needles after some contracted HIV/AIDS. People with addictive behaviors, as with sex and IV drugs, were far more reckless and less reachable -- let alone less likely to change their ways. For many on the Right, Donald Trump is practically an addiction in its effects upon behavior and character.

Unfortunately, even scientists have prejudices, and the prevailing wisdom of the WHO lead to months of excessive handwashing and surface cleansing.  Neither is bad, but neither was effective either.  Then there's masking which was thought to be less important, but is, in fact, the most important preventative. There's a great NY Times commentary by one of my favorite social analysts: Zeynep Tüfekçi (unfortunately long and behind their pay wall), where she dissects the entire epidemiology establishment for being locked into old ideas that were clearly wrong.  They got the transmission method wrong (large air droplets rather than aerosol), and never reexamined the evidence until it became so overwhelming that they had no choice.  We did somewhat better here, but that's faint praise.

Everyone has some prejudices. The question is of the harm and offense. Everybody sees everything through some cultural haze. Pure rationality is as much a myth as fire-breathing, maiden-devouring dragons. I question whether pure rationality is possible without one being in deep, constant despair. We all work within some body of preconceptions, and even the most sophisticated in their learning can become so accustomed by their experiences that when truth violates those preconceptions  that they make predictable errors. 

Many old ideas remain valuable, and none but fools would dispose of Euclid's geometry and number theory for obsolescence. Likewise, many of the old standards of morality prove upon some callow challenge why they exist. But even then we can often change our minds when we find a contradiction. Antipathy toward homosexuality is an attitude from antiquity,  and I long had that antipathy. What changed? That I suddenly decided that I might enjoy it? Not in the least. It reduces to a conflict between homophobia and the necessity of law and order for human rights and a civil society.  As with religious and ethnic minorities so it is with homosexuals; they do not deserve to be beaten, robbed, and killed. I'm choosing between two differing standards of morality, and one of them is more desirable. There is nothing post-modern in my change of moral standards on LGBT rights; I recognize a conflict between two traditions. One of those two must yield because they cannot both be right when they conflict.

Reality ultimately decides what intellectual constructs are valid and which ones are valid and which ones are void.

Well written, Mr. Brower.

You both missed the point: evidence abounded that their assumptions were wrong, and yet they persisted.  This is the exact opposite of the scientific method, and a shameful example that cognitive dissonance affects even the best and brightest.  Yes, there is always value in old ideas that have stood the test of time, but that is not the standard that applies to a new and emerging threat.  The correct response: make some assumptions based on evidence at hand and collect data.  If the assumptions prove wrong, abandon them and repeat step one.  Hopefully, the researchers won't have to go through many bad ideas, but the process does lead to a real solution at the end.

BTW, some of that bad thinking is still standing in the way.  A few trite but glaring examples are the CDCD's handling of vaccine passports (they should be encouraged and never illegal), mandatory vaccination of healthcare personnel (so far, only through individual employers) and widespread use of the passports to allow the vaccinated a return to normalcy (encouraging the reluctant to get them as well). Instead, Nero rosins his bow.

(05-09-2021, 07:52 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]You both missed the point: evidence abounded that their assumptions were wrong, and yet they persisted.  This is the exact opposite of the scientific method, and a shameful example that cognitive dissonance affects even the best and brightest.  Yes, there is always value in old ideas that have stood the test of time, but that is not the standard that applies to a new and emerging threat.  The correct response: make some assumptions based on evidence at hand and collect data.  If the assumptions prove wrong, abandon them and repeat step one.  Hopefully, the researchers won't have to go through many bad ideas, but the process does lead to a real solution at the end.

BTW, some of that bad thinking is still standing in the way.  A few trite but glaring examples are the CDCD's handling of vaccine passports (they should be encouraged and never illegal), mandatory vaccination of healthcare personnel (so far, only through individual employers) and widespread use of the passports to allow the vaccinated a return to normalcy (encouraging the reluctant to get them as well). Instead, Nero rosins his bow.

True. I may have been drawn to a side issue itself interesting. COVID-19, like AIDS, seemed to come from apparently nowhere, and huge (often with lethal consequences) came from mistakes involving responses to the two diseases. (They are of course very different in cause and consequences, so a perfect comparison is impossible. This said, there are parallels).

Wise people generally rely upon experiences and learning that can suddenly become irrelevant to a specific circumstance. Responses to AIDS were mixed at best, and so it was to COVID-19. People who had no problem with physicians taking greater care with "sharps" and those managing the supply of blood with blood potentially infected, but it could treat social pariahs such as gay men (they are not that anymore) and sex workers and IV drug users (who still are social pariahs), many could refer to AIDS as Divine Judgment. If the people dying from COVID-19 got no respect to begin with, then there might be more mass neglect. The victims at first were often people who were respectable before they got COVID-19 and were still respectable if they died. If they died, then assessments of respectability lost all relevance. 

It is hardly news that people vastly misjudge risk. As an example, some people still smoke or otherwise use tobacco. Some people drink heavily and often or binge drink. Some people drive 20 or more miles above posted speed limits. Some people fail to heed warning signs. Some people use street drugs. Some people keep bears, Big Cats, or venomous snakes around. But all that is stupidity.  

I accept that masks were the best defense against COVID-19, keeping people from spreading or contracting it. It is not quite sure whether masks did more to stop the spread by keeping people who already had it from emitting it or those who did not have it from receiving it. Cleaning surfaces and objects was a good idea,  especially in the presence of people who had COVID-19, but not as strong. Social distancing helped. Deferring or denying large congregations of people really helped. This was before mass inoculations, and those seem definitive -- but not available for the critical months.   At this point I see little cause for any adult to not have already been inoculated. Then again, I see no excuse for using heroin or meth... or messing with rattlesnakes.

From the medical journal Lancet. It rarely goes into political discussions, but on rare occasions medicine can be politicized. In such cases it is patients who suffer the consequences. Physicians in most countries, including India, are well-off enough that the vast majority can put the welfare of patients above personal gain and any rewards of political cronyism. 

COVID-19 is far from strictly an American problem, and a change of the American Presidency seems to have done much good. I can celebrate the death of my personal risk of death and organ disease from COVID-19 with a toast with of all things a certain brand of beer.  

Cited material:

Quote:The scenes of suffering in India are hard to comprehend. As of May 4, more than 20·2 million cases of COVID-19 had been reported, with a rolling average of 378 000 cases a day, together with more than 222 000 deaths, which experts believe are likely to be substantial underestimates. Hospitals are overwhelmed, and health workers are exhausted and becoming infected. Social media is full of desperate people (doctors and the public) seeking medical oxygen, hospital beds, and other necessities. Yet before the second wave of cases of COVID-19 began to mount in early March, Indian Minister of Health Harsh Vardhan declared that India was in the “endgame” of the epidemic. The impression from the government was that India had beaten COVID-19 after several months of low case counts, despite repeated warnings of the dangers of a second wave and the emergence of new strains. Modelling suggested falsely that India had reached herd immunity, encouraging complacency and insufficient preparation, but a serosurvey by the Indian Council of Medical Research in January suggested that only 21% of the population had antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. At times, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Government has seemed more intent on removing criticism on Twitter than trying to control the pandemic.

Despite warnings about the risks of superspreader events, the government allowed religious festivals to go ahead, drawing millions of people from around the country, along with huge political rallies—conspicuous for their lack of COVID-19 mitigation measures. The message that COVID-19 was essentially over also slowed the start of India's COVID-19 vaccination campaign, which has vaccinated less than 2% of the population. At the federal level, India's vaccination plan soon fell apart. The government abruptly shifted course without discussing the change in policy with states, expanding vaccination to everyone older than 18 years, draining supplies, and creating mass confusion and a market for vaccine doses in which states and hospital systems competed.

The crisis has not been equally distributed, with states such as Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra unprepared for the sudden spike in cases, quickly running out of medical oxygen, hospital space, and overwhelming the capacity of cremation sites, and with some state governments threatening those asking for oxygen or a hospital bed with national security laws. Others, such as Kerala and Odisha, were better prepared, and have been able to produce enough medical oxygen in this second wave to export it to other states.

India must now pursue a two-pronged strategy. First, the botched vaccination campaign must be rationalised and implemented with all due speed. There are two immediate bottlenecks to overcome: increasing vaccine supply (some of which should come from abroad) and setting up a distribution campaign that can cover not just urban but also rural and poorer citizens, who constitute more than 65% of the population (over 800 million people) but face a desperate scarcity of public health and primary care facilities. The government must work with local and primary health-care centres that know their communities and create an equitable distribution system for the vaccine.

Second, India must reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission as much as possible while the vaccine is rolled out. As cases continue to mount, the government must publish accurate data in a timely manner, and forthrightly explain to the public what is happening and what is needed to bend the epidemic curve, including the possibility of a new federal lockdown. Genome sequencing needs to be expanded to better track, understand, and control emerging and more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants. Local governments have begun taking disease-containment measures, but the federal government has an essential role in explaining to the public the necessity of masking, social distancing, halting mass gatherings, voluntary quarantine, and testing. Modi's actions in attempting to stifle criticism and open discussion during the crisis are inexcusable.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation estimates that India will see a staggering 1 million deaths from COVID-19 by Aug 1. If that outcome were to happen, Modi's Government would be responsible for presiding over a self-inflicted national catastrophe. India squandered its early successes in controlling COVID-19. Until April, the government's COVID-19 taskforce had not met in months. The consequences of that decision are clear before us, and India must now restructure its response while the crisis rages. The success of that effort will depend on the government owning up to its mistakes, providing responsible leadership and transparency, and implementing a public health response that has science at its heart.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lance...7/fulltext

Age, education, gender,  breakdown of attitudes toward inoculation:

10 May 2021:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?

(Yes - No - Unsure - Already vaccinated)

All subgroups 09-25-05-63 

Age

18-34  11-22-05-61
35-49  08-29-06-57
50-64  08-24-05-62
65++  07-15-04-74

Education

non-college   09-26-05-59
college grad  09-19-05-67 
masters/prof 06-13-03-78   

Gender

M 08-24-04-63
F  09-21-05-64

Political party

Dem  12-04-03-81
Rep   05-43-06-45 
Ind    08-24-06-62 

Ethnicity

white  07-26-05-63
black  16-11-07-66
Hisp   13-16-04-66
other  11-20-05-64

https://civiqs.com/results/coronavirus_v...e&net=true

(05-11-2021, 08:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Age, education, gender,  breakdown of attitudes toward inoculation:

10 May 2021:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?

(Yes - No - Unsure - Already vaccinated)

All subgroups 09-25-05-63 

Age

18-34  11-22-05-61
35-49  08-29-06-57
50-64  08-24-05-62
65++  07-15-04-74

Education

non-college   09-26-05-59
college grad  09-19-05-67 
masters/prof 06-13-03-78   

Gender

M 08-24-04-63
F  09-21-05-64

Political party

Dem  12-04-03-81
Rep   05-43-06-45 
Ind    08-24-06-62 

Ethnicity

white  07-26-05-63
black  16-11-07-66
Hisp   13-16-04-66
other  11-20-05-64

https://civiqs.com/results/coronavirus_v...e&net=true

So we have roughly 30% of the adult population either not getting it or unsure if they are getting it. The 'Yes' numbers look so low until I remember we really are in mid-May & the vaccines have been out for all adults for almost a month. It will be interesting to see how these numbers change next month and beyond. Maybe some of the Unsures and Nos will switch to Yes. I also wonder if there is any tracking on how many people have missed their 2nd doses yet.

(05-12-2021, 07:46 PM)nguyenivy Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-11-2021, 08:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Age, education, gender,  breakdown of attitudes toward inoculation:

10 May 2021:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?

(Yes - No - Unsure - Already vaccinated)

All subgroups 09-25-05-63 

Age

18-34  11-22-05-61
35-49  08-29-06-57
50-64  08-24-05-62
65++  07-15-04-74

Education

non-college   09-26-05-59
college grad  09-19-05-67 
masters/prof 06-13-03-78   

Gender

M 08-24-04-63
F  09-21-05-64

Political party

Dem  12-04-03-81
Rep   05-43-06-45 
Ind    08-24-06-62 

Ethnicity

white  07-26-05-63
black  16-11-07-66%  
Hisp   13-16-04-66
other  11-20-05-64

https://civiqs.com/results/coronavirus_v...e&net=true

So we have roughly 30% of the adult population either not getting it or unsure if they are getting it. The 'Yes' numbers look so low until I remember we really are in mid-May & the vaccines have been out for all adults for almost a month. It will be interesting to see how these numbers change next month and beyond. Maybe some of the Unsures and Nos will switch to Yes. I also wonder if there is any tracking on how many people have missed their 2nd doses yet.

Most significantly, look at the numbers in bold face. 43% of Republicans say that they are not going to get the inoculation. The "white" contingent at 26%, which is higher than the "black", "Hispanic", and "other" likely corresponds to the fact that the Republican Party is heavily white. I would figure that white Democrats have largely gotten inoculated. The Republican Party as it now exists would not exist were it still be true that America is still majority-white and often proud to be white.

Getting or not getting the inoculation is heavily a political statement. Although nearly half of Republicans have gotten inoculated and another 5% intend to, that suggests that fully one half of Republicans have decided not or have not yet decided to get inoculated.  Republicans are more likely to dismiss rational science that in any way contradicts their world-view or to accept pseudoscience that somehow aligns with their world-view. It would be tempting to state what science many Republicans accept and what many reject. It would also be inflammatory.  

Getting inoculated also connects strongly to formal education which itself correlates with access to high-quality information. I may be 'only' in the college-graduate category, but I followed the lethal progress of COVID-19, and when I saw that COVID-19 was killing high-ranking officials in the Iranian military, people about as pampered as any in the First World even if Iran is a hell-hole, I realized that COVID-19 was dangerous. It was killing retired judges in Italy and aristocrats in Spain; ordinarily, respiratory diseases do not kill in prosperous countries except among people with very bad habits, destitute, or with other large medical problems. (Pneumonia is often the ultimate killer of people with organ failure, cancer, or late-stage dementia).  I took the danger seriously and started wearing a mask in public, washing my hands often, staying away from crowds, and keeping informed. Yes, I got inoculated at the first opportunity. I have no desire to die on a respirator and miss perhaps a couple decades of a good life just to deny and defy science.

COVID-19 causes erectile dysfunction:

Quote:In a new study, researchers demonstrated that COVID-19 can lead to long-term erectile dysfunction, yet another sign that victims of the deadly virus often suffer from lasting symptoms even long after they recovered from the viral infection itself.

The study, published in the World Journal of Men’s Health last week, found that COVID-19 can result in endothelial dysfunction, in which large blood vessels on the heart’s surface constrict instead of dilate. This blood vessel dysfunction can then contribute to erectile dysfunction, according to the researchers.


The results only examined tissues from only four men — two with a history of COVID infection, and two without — who underwent penile prosthesis surgery to treat erectile dysfunction. That’s a very small sample size and may or may not be generalizable to the greater population, but the work builds on separate research, published earlier this year in the journal Andrology, which found that men who had previously had COVID were six times as likely as other men to develop erectile dysfunction.

“Our research shows that COVID-19 can cause widespread endothelial dysfunction in organ systems beyond the lungs and kidneys,” said University of Miami Miller School of Medicine researcher and author Ranjith Ramasamy, in a statement. “The underlying endothelial dysfunction that happens because of COVID-19 can enter the endothelial cells and affect many organs, including the penis.”

COVID-19 infection proved devastating to many.

“In our pilot study, we found that men who previously did not complain of erectile dysfunction developed pretty severe erectile dysfunction after the onset of COVID-19 infection,” Ramasamy said.

Their conclusion comes after finding that two out of the four men who had previously caught COVID-19 had evidence of endothelial dysfunction. The other two who were free of the virus did not.

“These latest findings are yet another reason that we should all do our best to avoid COVID-19,” first author Elyahu Kresch, a medical student working with Ramasamy, said in the statement. “We recommend vaccination and to try to stay safe in general.”

https://futurism.com/neoscope/covid-link...ysfunction
If that doesn't convince people -- and for many people the sex drive is even stronger than the desire for credibility as a person and even of personal survival -- then what will?

(05-13-2021, 01:46 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-12-2021, 07:46 PM)nguyenivy Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-11-2021, 08:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Age, education, gender,  breakdown of attitudes toward inoculation:

10 May 2021:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?

(Yes - No - Unsure - Already vaccinated)

All subgroups 09-25-05-63 

Age

18-34  11-22-05-61
35-49  08-29-06-57
50-64  08-24-05-62
65++  07-15-04-74

Education

non-college   09-26-05-59
college grad  09-19-05-67 
masters/prof 06-13-03-78   

Gender

M 08-24-04-63
F  09-21-05-64

Political party

Dem  12-04-03-81
Rep   05-43-06-45 
Ind    08-24-06-62 

Ethnicity

white  07-26-05-63
black  16-11-07-66%  
Hisp   13-16-04-66
other  11-20-05-64

https://civiqs.com/results/coronavirus_v...e&net=true

So we have roughly 30% of the adult population either not getting it or unsure if they are getting it. The 'Yes' numbers look so low until I remember we really are in mid-May & the vaccines have been out for all adults for almost a month. It will be interesting to see how these numbers change next month and beyond. Maybe some of the Unsures and Nos will switch to Yes. I also wonder if there is any tracking on how many people have missed their 2nd doses yet.

Most significantly, look at the numbers in bold face. 43% of Republicans say that they are not going to get the inoculation. The "white" contingent at 26%, which is higher than the "black", "Hispanic", and "other" likely corresponds to the fact that the Republican Party is heavily white. I would figure that white Democrats have largely gotten inoculated. The Republican Party as it now exists would not exist were it still be true that America is still majority-white and often proud to be white.

Getting or not getting the inoculation is heavily a political statement. Although nearly half of Republicans have gotten inoculated and another 5% intend to, that suggests that fully one half of Republicans have decided not or have not yet decided to get inoculated.  Republicans are more likely to dismiss rational science that in any way contradicts their world-view or to accept pseudoscience that somehow aligns with their world-view. It would be tempting to state what science many Republicans accept and what many reject. It would also be inflammatory.  

Getting inoculated also connects strongly to formal education which itself correlates with access to high-quality information. I may be 'only' in the college-graduate category, but I followed the lethal progress of COVID-19, and when I saw that COVID-19 was killing high-ranking officials in the Iranian military, people about as pampered as any in the First World even if Iran is a hell-hole, I realized that COVID-19 was dangerous. It was killing retired judges in Italy and aristocrats in Spain; ordinarily, respiratory diseases do not kill in prosperous countries except among people with very bad habits, destitute, or with other large medical problems. (Pneumonia is often the ultimate killer of people with organ failure, cancer, or late-stage dementia).  I took the danger seriously and started wearing a mask in public, washing my hands often, staying away from crowds, and keeping informed. Yes, I got inoculated at the first opportunity. I have no desire to die on a respirator and miss perhaps a couple decades of a good life just to deny and defy science.

White Republicans, non-college, and younger Xers/Xennials. Shameful.

Educated Democrats and core-boomers/silents, bravo!

#.....Country........Total Cases.....New Cases...Total Deaths...New Deaths
.......World...........161,076,761.....+750,247....3,344,809........+13,880
1.....USA...............33,586,136.......+35,816.......597,785.............+841
2.....India..............23,702,832.....+362,406.......258,351..........+4,126
3.....Brazil..............15,361,686......+76,638.......428,256..........+2,545
4.....France..............5,821,668......+21,498.......107,119............+184
5.....Turkey..............5,072,462......+13,029.........43,821............+232
6.....Russia..............4,905,059........+8,217.......114,331............+355
7.....UK...................4,441,974........+2,283.......127,640..............+11
8.....Italy.................4,131,075........+7,849.......123,544............+262
9.....Spain................3,592,751.......+6,418.........79,208.............+108
10...Germany...........3,558,148.....+13,833.........86,009.............+252
11...Argentina..........3,215,572.....+24,475.........68,807.............+496
12...Colombia...........3,048,719.....+16,993.........79,261.............+490
13...Poland..............2,842,032.......+3,948.........70,679.............+343
14...Iran..................2,707,761.....+16,409.........75,934.............+366
15...Mexico..............2,368,393.......+1,897.......219,323.............+234
May 12, 2021
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

#.....State..................Total Cases.....New Cases...Total Deaths....New Deaths
........USA..................33,586,136......+35,816.......597,785..........+841
1......California............3,763,777........+1,465.........62,470..........+109
2......Texas.................2,927,710........+2,466.........51,014............+70
3......Florida................2,278,549........+3,184........35,897............+48
4......New York............2,126,667........+1,989........53,122............+54
5......Illinois................1,359,748........+1,795........24,640.............+23
6......Pennsylvania.......1,183,747........+1,882........26,771............+64
7......Georgia...............1,112,297..........+921........20,432.............+41
8......Ohio...................1,087,182........+1,449........19,441
9......New Jersey.........1,009,093...........+486........25,882.............+41
10....North Carolina........986,443........+1,493........12,830.............+29
11....Michigan................970,376........+2,765........19,528.............+15
12....Arizona..................870,624...........+469........17,430...............+2
13....Tennessee.............855,587...........+669........12,296...............+4
14....Indiana..................731,810..........+841........13,445..............+11
15....Massachusetts........699,187..........+760........17,712..............+14

(05-13-2021, 02:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021, 01:46 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-12-2021, 07:46 PM)nguyenivy Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-11-2021, 08:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Age, education, gender,  breakdown of attitudes toward inoculation:

10 May 2021:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?

(Yes - No - Unsure - Already vaccinated)

All subgroups 09-25-05-63 

Age

18-34  11-22-05-61
35-49  08-29-06-57
50-64  08-24-05-62
65++  07-15-04-74

Education

non-college   09-26-05-59
college grad  09-19-05-67 
masters/prof 06-13-03-78   

Gender

M 08-24-04-63
F  09-21-05-64

Political party

Dem  12-04-03-81
Rep   05-43-06-45 
Ind    08-24-06-62 

Ethnicity

white  07-26-05-63
black  16-11-07-66  
Hisp   13-16-04-66
other  11-20-05-64

https://civiqs.com/results/coronavirus_v...e&net=true

So we have roughly 30% of the adult population either not getting it or unsure if they are getting it. The 'Yes' numbers look so low until I remember we really are in mid-May & the vaccines have been out for all adults for almost a month. It will be interesting to see how these numbers change next month and beyond. Maybe some of the Unsures and Nos will switch to Yes. I also wonder if there is any tracking on how many people have missed their 2nd doses yet.

Most significantly, look at the numbers in bold face. 43% of Republicans say that they are not going to get the inoculation. The "white" contingent at 26%, which is higher than the "black", "Hispanic", and "other" likely corresponds to the fact that the Republican Party is heavily white. I would figure that white Democrats have largely gotten inoculated. The Republican Party as it now exists would not exist were it still be true that America is still majority-white and often proud to be white.

Getting or not getting the inoculation is heavily a political statement. Although nearly half of Republicans have gotten inoculated and another 5% intend to, that suggests that fully one half of Republicans have decided not or have not yet decided to get inoculated.  Republicans are more likely to dismiss rational science that in any way contradicts their world-view or to accept pseudoscience that somehow aligns with their world-view. It would be tempting to state what science many Republicans accept and what many reject. It would also be inflammatory.  

Getting inoculated also connects strongly to formal education which itself correlates with access to high-quality information. I may be 'only' in the college-graduate category, but I followed the lethal progress of COVID-19, and when I saw that COVID-19 was killing high-ranking officials in the Iranian military, people about as pampered as any in the First World even if Iran is a hell-hole, I realized that COVID-19 was dangerous. It was killing retired judges in Italy and aristocrats in Spain; ordinarily, respiratory diseases do not kill in prosperous countries except among people with very bad habits, destitute, or with other large medical problems. (Pneumonia is often the ultimate killer of people with organ failure, cancer, or late-stage dementia).  I took the danger seriously and started wearing a mask in public, washing my hands often, staying away from crowds, and keeping informed. Yes, I got inoculated at the first opportunity. I have no desire to die on a respirator and miss perhaps a couple decades of a good life just to deny and defy science.

White Republicans, non-college, and younger Xers/Xennials. Shameful. Educated Democrats and core-boomers/silents, bravo!

Note well: as late as February, the people getting inoculated en masse were the elderly (I barely qualified at that) and people vulnerable to COVID-19 due to occupation or to medical conditions. So the people inoculated skew old. Younger adults have been slower to get inoculated because younger adults (let alone near-adults aged 16 to 18) have only recently become eligible.   

 The difference in getting inoculated looks to have no significant difference in gender and ethnicity.  Of course, white people who want to get inoculated have largely gotten inoculated while blacks and Hispanics may have been more likely to not have had as easy access to inoculation. 

What gets me is the 26% of white people and 43% of Republicans, especially of low educational levels, who say that they will not get inoculated. 600K dead Americans is enough to convince me to get the inoculation.

Younger people are now eligible, but innoculations have declined, even though access is now easy. So those vast younger cohorts (especially the younger Xers) are getting it done too slowly, even despite not being eligible until recently, whereas the older Xers and young boomers (the 50-64 group) got out there and got it done quickly, even though they still had to get appointments. As my local stats prove, 2nd doses (now being received by the 50-64 age group) are still happening fast, while 1st doses lag.

(05-14-2021, 02:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Younger people are now eligible, but innoculations have declined, even though access is now easy. So those vast younger cohorts (especially the younger Xers) are getting it done too slowly, even despite not being eligible until recently, whereas the older Xers and young boomers (the 50-64 group) got out there and got it done quickly, even though they still had to get appointments. As my local stats prove, 2nd doses (now being received by the 50-64 age group) are still happening fast, while 1st doses lag.

A lot of that is the political effect.  Once Trump couldn't claim credit for creating the vaccines, Republican interest in getting vaccinated dropped like a brick.  General interest dropped when the CDC made no differentiation between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, so why get the vaccine, said far too many.  It's hard to know how long it will be before the Federal government mandates vaccine passports for certain activities, and the howling begins in earnest.  Right now, we're still trying carrots alone.  I don't see that being enough.

Has anyone noticed the mask mandates going away for the fully vaccinated in the US everywhere except public transport?

(05-16-2021, 03:14 AM)nguyenivy Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone noticed the mask mandates going away for the fully vaccinated in the US everywhere except public transport?

I was at the Toledo (Ohio) Museum of Art yesterday (excellent museum! If you are ever within a reasonable distance of it it is a great place to visit!), and my mask slipped below my nose a couple times. Staff told me to put my mask over my nose. I complied. I would guess that art museums, if this one is indicative, might be another such place. 

My guess is that it is likely not a favorite place for people who fit the Trump profile (undereducated, white Republicans) which is also the group least willing to get vaccinated. The only complaint that I might have of the museum is that it has relatively little to catch the artistic achievement and experience of African-Americans... there is much artistic creativity among them, and they actually visit that museum (Toledo and relatively nearby Greater Detroit have large numbers of African-Americans). Such art would be largely modern (Harlem Renaissance and later)... I might be white, but I appreciate powerful and competent expression when I experience it. 

Well, back from the sidetrack. I expect another wave of COVID-19 among Trump-like Republicans who think that having to wear a mask or something so simple as getting a pair of inoculations is as much an impingement upon human rights as is censorship, harassment of journalists or labor organizers, politicization of the educational syllabus to fit an ideology, or forced disappearance of political offenders. That many such people are in a totalitarian-style personality cult centered on you-know-who causes me to tremble. If Donald Trump were to die of natural causes, there would be all sorts of conspiracy theories of Democrats assassinating him... and the persons starting such theories might themselves contribute to a personality cult with someone else as a focus if not be the focus himself or herself.  

It is difficult to operate public transit efficiently without packing people like sardines, and even if cost of operation and fare revenue  were not a concern, having inadequate infrastructure (such as buses) for public transit that causes people to wait in longer queues than to which people are accustomed is another. People waiting for such transportation face long waits even in normal times. Mask mandates are appropriate because one never knows who might have never been inoculated. COVID-19 is still lethal, about on the scale of danger of death as a rattlesnake bite. At least a rattler is likely to move away from me. Before I got inoculated I had more fear of COVID-19 than of rattlesnakes. OK, most of the people who get envenomated are bitten on their hands or faces*, and they are not outdoor workers such as ranchers or utility linemen (cowboy boots exist to fend off rattler bites to the legs) or people sensibly hiking, camping, or fishing. Our tread even more lethal to a rattler than its bite is to us.   

About 26% of the white population and about 46% of Republicans (I'm guessing that those largely coincide) say that they plan to not get inoculated against COVID-19. They will have "mask-free" get-togethers of various kinds, and the Plague of the Donald Trump Presidency will sweep them again and cause further deaths. But people inoculated against COVID-19 will at most experience a resurgence of fear... unless COVID-19 evolves into something against which the current vaccines pose no defense. Maybe "COVID-22" (God help us should that happen!)

* The typical victim of a rattlesnake bite has provoked the snake into a defensive bite by teasing the snake. The one exception to this rule is rock climbers who might place a hand blindly into a position in which an unseen rattler lurks. I would not do rock climbing even if I were fit for it.

(05-16-2021, 07:55 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-16-2021, 03:14 AM)nguyenivy Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone noticed the mask mandates going away for the fully vaccinated in the US everywhere except public transport?

I was at the Toledo (Ohio) Museum of Art yesterday (excellent museum! If you are ever within a reasonable distance of it it is a great place to visit!), and my mask slipped below my nose a couple times. Staff told me to put my mask over my nose. I complied. I would guess that art museums, if this one is indicative, might be another such place. 

I would guess that just now the state mandates have not yet caught up with the CDC guidance.  Give them a few days.  I think there are a few more exceptions like jails and long term health facilities, but public transport is the one that more will encounter.