Neverending Covid-19 Coronavirus

Are you disagreeing on the principle that no, people just can't? Cause I'll agree that is fantasy. Or are you saying we were fucked no matter what fantastical behaviors people may have exhibited? I would argue that point.

This virus was always going to be with us forever once it became a thing in the human population. Just like the cold, flu, or any other illness spread through casual social contact that is prone to mutation. Believing anything else is simply trying to place blame on others to put a balm on your own helplessness.

I used to say that the only way out is through, but that wasn’t quite accurate. There’s no way out. There never was, never will be.

There has been a huge debate on how long Covid will stick around in the virology world. The most optimistic timeline I've heard from an actual virologist or epidemiologist is 7 years. But most believe that it will be with us now forever. Here's a really good paper on how they think it will switch from pandemic to endemic.

One year after its emergence, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become so widespread that there is little hope of elimination. There are, however, several other human coronaviruses that are endemic and cause multiple reinfections that engender sufficient immunity to protect against severe adult disease. By making assumptions about acquired immunity from its already endemic relatives, Lavine et al. developed a model with which to analyze the trajectory of SARS-CoV-2 into endemicity. The model accounts for SARS-CoV-2's age-structured disease profile and assesses the impact of vaccination. The transition from epidemic to endemic dynamics is associated with a shift in the age distribution of primary infections to younger age groups, which in turn depends on how fast the virus spreads. Longer-lasting sterilizing immunity will slow the transition to endemicity. Depending on the type of immune response it engenders, a vaccine could accelerate establishment of a state of mild disease endemicity.
 
So, Rational Fatalism is pretty interesting to me. I subscribed to it for a large portion of my younger life without knowing what it was. I thought to myself "both heart disease and cancer run in my family and have taken out all of my grandparents, so it doesn't really matter what I do it will end the same for me". I ate terrible foods and I drank to excess and did all sorts of other self-destructive things because of that fatalistic attitude. I started turning that around when I was in my 30's and realized that just because the probability of something is high, I do not have to help it along. It's the old self-fulfilling prophecy phenomenon.

If I say "I work around asbestos so much that I am going to get asbestosis when I am older, so I might as well not inconvenience myself by wearing a mask and Tyvek suit, now", then I am contributing to the risky behavior that causes the bad outcome. Even though I've rationalized it and prevention seems useless, I am still an integral part of the problem behaviour and am selfishly making sure that what I believe comes to fruition.

The interesting part to me is what is the intention of it? I attribute my own fatalism to ignorance and selfishness. I wanted to rationalize my bad bahaviour, so much so that I almost felt good about continuing it. So, the intention of mine was making me feel good about self-destructive behaviour. There is also a little bit of truth to rational fatalism and it can be very freeing. It can be euphoric in a way to say, "I know all things end, so what I do now only changes the speed that it happens". The whole 'is it better to burn out or fade away' argument. I think that can be really helpful in certain situations for certain people. For instance this quote from a buddhist teacher that has always stuck with me:

“You see this goblet?” asks Achaan Chaa, the Thai meditation master. “For me this glass is already broken. I enjoy it; I drink out of it. It holds my water admirably, sometimes even reflecting the sun in beautiful patterns. If I should tap it, it has a lovely ring to it. But when I put this glass on the shelf and the wind knocks it over or my elbow brushes it off the table and it falls to the ground and shatters, I say, ‘Of course.’ When I understand that the glass is already broken, every moment with it is precious.”

So, with that mindset you can see the impermanence in things as beautiful. It comes from the same type of rational fatalism as encouraging bad behaviour, yet it adds so much good to the way I think about the world. The intention of the fatalism there is to be at peace with the things we can't control and accepting them.

The really funny part of the whole thing to me is that both sides actually seem to spring from the hopelessness or helplessness that the final result cannot be changed.

I'm not sure I've ever read anything more relatable than this post.
 
Just heard a report that we are 2 to 4 weeks depending on your state for when vaccine supply outstripes demand.

Once we hit this point, we have a long and hard road ahead to get vaccinations to the level needed for herd immunity. The people remaining to be vaccinated will be very difficult to convince to get vaccinated. For example, every Republican I know from my own family will absolutely not get the shot. There is no reasoning with them.
 
Just heard a report that we are 2 to 4 weeks depending on your state for when vaccine supply outstripes demand.

Once we hit this point, we have a long and hard road ahead to get vaccinations to the level needed for herd immunity. The people remaining to be vaccinated will be very difficult to convince to get vaccinated. For example, every Republican I know from my own family will absolutely not get the shot. There is no reasoning with them.
I've asked a few young people in my office who I thought would be smarter than this, but they are saying they don't want to be guinea pigs for a new vaccine.

I don't know if I can waste my time and energy trying to convince them.
 
+4 on days since Pfizer 2.0. No issues. Was a bit weak and achy on Sunday but we still went out to look at bluebonnets with the kids. I'm ready for my kids to eventually get the vaccine as Disneyland said out of staters like us can come in the future if we have been vaccinated. So maybe we'll just ditch the kids and do a parents trip. That's not weird is it?
 
Just heard a report that we are 2 to 4 weeks depending on your state for when vaccine supply outstripes demand.

Once we hit this point, we have a long and hard road ahead to get vaccinations to the level needed for herd immunity. The people remaining to be vaccinated will be very difficult to convince to get vaccinated. For example, every Republican I know from my own family will absolutely not get the shot. There is no reasoning with them.

Like more supply than demand? Damn... wish we were in that boat!

The authorities here just approved the Astra Zeneca to over 45's (that one is available separately from the others because they want to give people the opportunity to make an informed choice). Basically, that's the least desirable vaccine right now. But that also means I'm finally eligible and I want one (because I can do math). Anyway, I tried to get an appointment but the slots flew away before I got up (and I get up early).... hopefully more space opens up in a few days.

Currently, Pfizer and Moderna is restricted to people above 60, health care, essential workers and people with serious aggravating factors.

And we're all on a 16 week schedule for 2 doses, because why the fuck not (though that may pay off in the long run in terms of longer lasting immunity, but that is theoretical).
 
Last edited:
@Turbo you don't see patients do you?
I was talking to one of my coworkers on the phone yesterday. She usually takes a couple shifts a month to keep her license. She said that over the past year, she mainly worked with COVID patients. She said that the one trend she noticed in all of them was that the D-Dimer was elevated. I looked into the biological mechanism behind this and found this:

Furthermore, it seems likely that extravascular pulmonary fibrinolysis may be important in the etiology of elevated D-dimers during COVID-19 recovery. Given emerging data regarding post-infection long COVID-19 syndrome, as well as ongoing discussions regarding optimal duration of thromboprophylaxis in [patients with COVID-19] following discharge, defining these mechanisms may be of direct clinical relevance.”

This is interesting because they've found elevated D-Dimer levels in about 40% of covid long haulers which makes me wonder about all of this. Eventually, once I stop with customer meetings, I would like to look a little more into these tests and understand a bit more about the whole clotting process.
 
I can partly understand the vaccine hesitancy, I just wish people that are hesitant had someone they trust to talk to them and maybe shed some light on it.
I read some interesting comparisons in the NYT morning newsletter a couple mornings ago....I'll paste parts below.

Guido Calabresi, a federal judge and Yale law professor, invented a little fable that he has been telling law students for more than three decades.​
He tells the students to imagine a god coming forth to offer society a wondrous invention that would improve everyday life in almost every way. It would allow people to spend more time with friends and family, see new places and do jobs they otherwise could not do. But it would also come with a high cost. In exchange for bestowing this invention on society, the god would choose 1,000 young men and women and strike them dead.​
Calabresi then asks: Would you take the deal? Almost invariably, the students say no. The professor then delivers the fable’s lesson: “What’s the difference between this and the automobile?”​
In truth, automobiles kill many more than 1,000 young Americans each year; the total U.S. death toll hovers at about 40,000 annually. We accept this toll, almost unthinkingly, because vehicle crashes have always been part of our lives. We can’t fathom a world without them.​
It’s a classic example of human irrationality about risk. We often underestimate large, chronic dangers, like car crashes or chemical pollution, and fixate on tiny but salient risks, like plane crashes or shark attacks.​
One way for a risk to become salient is for it to be new. That’s a core idea behind Calabresi’s fable. He asks students to consider whether they would accept the cost of vehicle travel if it did not already exist. That they say no underscores the very different ways we treat new risks and enduring ones.​
I have been thinking about the fable recently because of Covid-19. Covid certainly presents a salient risk: It’s a global pandemic that has upended daily life for more than a year. It has changed how we live, where we work, even what we wear on our faces. Covid feels ubiquitous.​
Fortunately, it is also curable. The vaccines have nearly eliminated death, hospitalization and other serious Covid illness among people who have received shots. The vaccines have also radically reduced the chances that people contract even a mild version of Covid or can pass it on to others.​
Yet many vaccinated people continue to obsess over the risks from Covid — because they are so new and salient.​
 
@Turbo you don't see patients do you?
I was talking to one of my coworkers on the phone yesterday. She usually takes a couple shifts a month to keep her license. She said that over the past year, she mainly worked with COVID patients. She said that the one trend she noticed in all of them was that the D-Dimer was elevated. I looked into the biological mechanism behind this and found this:

Furthermore, it seems likely that extravascular pulmonary fibrinolysis may be important in the etiology of elevated D-dimers during COVID-19 recovery. Given emerging data regarding post-infection long COVID-19 syndrome, as well as ongoing discussions regarding optimal duration of thromboprophylaxis in [patients with COVID-19] following discharge, defining these mechanisms may be of direct clinical relevance.”

This is interesting because they've found elevated D-Dimer levels in about 40% of covid long haulers which makes me wonder about all of this. Eventually, once I stop with customer meetings, I would like to look a little more into these tests and understand a bit more about the whole clotting process.

No, I'm a biotech patent examiner. I used to work in a university lab but now I read and evaluate new biological inventions. Wide range of things really, though my colleagues usually seek my advice on things related to diagnostic methods, screening libraries and stuff like that.

Thanks for the link... that seems super interesting. I'm really curious about the mechanisms that underlie why people get different severities beyond just each or our immune systems (or is it just the differences in immunity?).
 
Unrelated to the Covid thread...I'm just always so interested to hear what other forum folks do for a living. We should have a list somewhere. There has to be such a wide range of occupations in our little vinyl-world corner of the internet.
I recall a long-dead thread in the old forum called "Buddy System" that had a list of peoples more personal side that included occupation so people could see who was into what.
 
Unrelated to the Covid thread...I'm just always so interested to hear what other forum folks do for a living. We should have a list somewhere. There has to be such a wide range of occupations in our little vinyl-world corner of the internet.
I don't specifically work on COVID nor am an immunologist but I am a biologist and currently doing a post doc at NIH. I do basic cell biology research.
 
Last edited:
I can partly understand the vaccine hesitancy, I just wish people that are hesitant had someone they trust to talk to them and maybe shed some light on it.
I read some interesting comparisons in the NYT morning newsletter a couple mornings ago....I'll paste parts below.

Guido Calabresi, a federal judge and Yale law professor, invented a little fable that he has been telling law students for more than three decades.​
He tells the students to imagine a god coming forth to offer society a wondrous invention that would improve everyday life in almost every way. It would allow people to spend more time with friends and family, see new places and do jobs they otherwise could not do. But it would also come with a high cost. In exchange for bestowing this invention on society, the god would choose 1,000 young men and women and strike them dead.​
Calabresi then asks: Would you take the deal? Almost invariably, the students say no. The professor then delivers the fable’s lesson: “What’s the difference between this and the automobile?”​
In truth, automobiles kill many more than 1,000 young Americans each year; the total U.S. death toll hovers at about 40,000 annually. We accept this toll, almost unthinkingly, because vehicle crashes have always been part of our lives. We can’t fathom a world without them.​
It’s a classic example of human irrationality about risk. We often underestimate large, chronic dangers, like car crashes or chemical pollution, and fixate on tiny but salient risks, like plane crashes or shark attacks.​
One way for a risk to become salient is for it to be new. That’s a core idea behind Calabresi’s fable. He asks students to consider whether they would accept the cost of vehicle travel if it did not already exist. That they say no underscores the very different ways we treat new risks and enduring ones.​
I have been thinking about the fable recently because of Covid-19. Covid certainly presents a salient risk: It’s a global pandemic that has upended daily life for more than a year. It has changed how we live, where we work, even what we wear on our faces. Covid feels ubiquitous.​
Fortunately, it is also curable. The vaccines have nearly eliminated death, hospitalization and other serious Covid illness among people who have received shots. The vaccines have also radically reduced the chances that people contract even a mild version of Covid or can pass it on to others.​
Yet many vaccinated people continue to obsess over the risks from Covid — because they are so new and salient.​
When getting my public health masters, I had to take a class on how behaviors affect health--and dug into the science behind behavioral change. What I learned is that humans have a really big problem with new things. We tend to act extremely illogical, especially when we talk about health behaviors, because we are ultimately a species that loves comfort zones and instant reward.
No, I'm a biotech patent examiner. I used to work in a university lab but now I read and evaluate new biological inventions. Wide range of things really, though my colleagues usually seek my advice on things related to diagnostic methods, screening libraries and stuff like that.

Thanks for the link... that seems super interesting. I'm really curious about the mechanisms that underlie why people get different severities beyond just each or our immune systems (or is it just the differences in immunity?).
And why is it that these long term symptoms seem to abate when a long hauler gets a Covid vaccine. How does the biology of this work? I would love to know.

@ranbalam I'm a health data analyst. I used to work in public health, but now I work in the private sector.
 
I just saw this post on a forum about Boston Public Transportation.

Speaking as someone who has been using the T on a regular basis (bus and light rail) for the past 6 months, is not “vaccinated” and will not be getting the “vaccine” (its not a vaccine it’s a gene therapy shot but regardless), YES IT IS SAFE TO GO BACK TO THE OFFICE AND YES IT IS SAFE TO RIDE THE T.

I’ll go one further... I am 100% willing to ride a jam packed standing room only train or bus without having to wear a stupid pointless face mask. They only make your breath exit the top, bottom, and sides of the mask. Oh not to mention that your breath will go RIGHT THROUGH THE MASK. COVID-19 particles are small enough to fit through microscopic openings in the mask. Those disposable blue ones you buy at CVS even say “do not protect against COVID-19”

My point? Employers and employees in Greater Boston -many if not most are left-leaning big government fawning Democrat sheeple- will “go back to normal” when they stop consuming so much “fear porn” from CNN, NBC, etc.

Look at TX. Look at FL. Now look at NY, CA, and MA. The only thing that spared us from more draconian measures is because we have a somewhat Republican governor.

The baseless fear is the only thing keeping life from going on as it used to. And that includes business as usual at and on the MBTA.


Um, what? The covid vaccine is not a vaccine, it's a gene therapy!?

Also, everything else in that message pretty much sums how my republican leaning family members feel about COVID.
 
No one ever said face masks stop particles. The whole idea was to reduce aerolization of droplets. Masks work amazingly well at that.

They also help at reducing "dosage" that anyone is exposed to - either the wearer or another person - and even better if both wear it.

One way I like to talk about infection with people around me is to say that it boils down to:

(1) Amount of virus you're exposed to VS. (2) how well your immune system can fight it

Basically, the higher the dose you're exposed to, the more equipped your immune system needs to be to fight it.

There's not much you can do about your immune system except getting vaccinated or maybe you're lucky because you have a cross-immunity from another coronavirus.

But you can totally control dosage. With masks and distancing.

 
Back
Top