SirBillybob

CoronaVac has been deemed to have 78% efficacy within the Brazilian research cohort and will likely be approved soon and even manufactured there. A good record, as well, in terms of severity where breakthrough infections occurred in the vaccine arm of the study. São Paulo state will possibly see the CoronaVac implementation ramped up there faster than in the country overall. Brazil is at the same time seeking the AstraZeneca vaccine from that product’s manufacturing hub in India.

There is debate woven within many topics within many of the board’s categories. That is human nature and the original poster tends not to be clairvoyant about the thrills chills and spills of where the road will lead. I’ll put in my 2 cents here and there but I am not one to rigidly assess what theme fits into how sections are stratified. Otherwise, I agree it is reasonable to start a thread within a category that seems most appropriate for the topic. I think elections are political. Much of everything else is educational and/or entertainment. If all debate is political then I don’t see the point of carving out a specific political category. Directives are generally grounded in education. Negative reactivity is intrapsychic and interpersonal. I would label much of what people call ‘political’ the term dynamics. Besides, it’s back on a non-politicized track, that is, distorted views of science. Misrepresentations of research are not political. They relate to degree of education and preferred lenses for interpreting objective reality. That is only political at the ballot box. Debate about reality is interpersonal. If disagreement is political then agreement is political. If somebody agrees with our point of view about infection control we usually don’t say they have political sympatico with us unless there is a more overriding political alignment. Pre-pandemic sneezing into your inside elbow or not would not typically have been a phenomenon we deem to be politicized.

Trouble is, too many folks interpret this as a slogan for washing one’s hands of ownership for avoidable consequences.

This would be a sad parody of The Darkest Hour’s pivotal radio-broadcasted speech (Oldman as Churchill). If I interpret your 2 sides of the coin correctly ... ‘tails’ personal choice is individualistic and equates to assuming risk on personal health and life for the sake of self-perceived quality of life, where the assumed risk level is directly proportional to CoV transmission potential beyond self, of a domino effect nature, as average case reproduction is no less than 1.0 and every 38th American domino is removed from the chain and headed to the graveyard; ‘heads’ personal choice is collectivistic and trades off personal quality of life for greater probability of skirting unsolicited undesirable personal morbidity and/or mortality as well as certain death (odds 97.2% death avoidance your favour) within 38 transmission cycles as spearheaded by ‘tails’ orientation preference. In an expanding pandemic reality where mortality is a minority outcome, every preventable infection nevertheless kills somewhere down the transmission line. Thing is, the liberty of pursuit of happiness viz life worth living cannot be separated from the life/death binary of others. We do not live in a vacuum. The nature of CoV is such that the most stalwart of those with ‘heads’ orientation cannot totally prophylax against exposure to folks aligned with the other side of the coin. Sacrifice for survival is zero-sum. The less one side of the coin sacrifices the more the other must sacrificially compensate. That’s the dance. Sure, it’s a long and winding link from your risk tolerance autonomy to somebody’s death. However, if the future we actually now know could be imposed on the present, would it be so outrageous for the dead to importune quality of life sacrifice? Why is others’ desire for the means to survival, whether or not they grasp those means and apply them, so rapidly conflated with a direct challenge to liberty?

I am not impressed by Raoult. Shrewd, yes; genius no. Contrarian, yes; defends against attributions of narcissism, no. Ubiquitous presence in Science Citations Index, yes; contributes meaningfully to a majority of publications that come out of the 800-person institute and include his name based on publication-padding, no. Attention-seeking, yes; critical self-appraisal, no. Research scofflaw, yes; research trustworthy, no. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/magazine/didier-raoult-hydroxychloroquine.amp.html

Hahahahahahahah .... With only the big head they are advantageously ahead.

Update on the Chinese-Brazilian CoronaVac vaccine collaboration and São Paulo state’s advocacy for this product ... my take on what is occurring: The efficacy in Brazil is at least 50%. It is not 90%. The exact figure, somewhere between 50 and 90%, is known but not yet released. Evidently, the China-based company is enforcing the contractual obligation to allow the company to collate results from the various study locations before specific regional results are presented. The Turkey study location results suggest 91% efficacy. Because it is not in the inside lane of the race and the company would likely not delay sharing really positive results, it may be that discrepancies among the study locations’ trial results will need to be reconciled. Another optical tactic could be to now suggest the possibility of the minimally acceptable low end of the range (50%), alerting the Anvisa or judicial authorities to be on notice for approval, followed by a higher actual result that falls considerably short of the optimal 90% but is more decent than 50%.

—— 90% effective with initial half dose and follow up full dose. Note that there was a lot of controversy because the optimal dose was ascertained serendipitously, essentially through dosage error throughout the trial.

That was a freaky slashed Air Canada fare, about $750 as I checked again ... though I have in the past obtained Copa thru Panama for similar or less than that. The AC fare was obtained 4 months ahead of departure, the first year YUL-GRU seasonal was offered. It is currently about $880. I think that is very good for a Dreamliner. It was well over $1,000 most of last winter but reduced for March, for dates just after 2020 Carnival closing. Copa is usually about $1,400; deals are flukes. [shutting down my part in being off-topic]

Agree. Time against price. My latest Über receipt downtown to airport in Feb was $85, about 24% that day’s direct one-way plane fare portion to Brazil.

What is the win? REM will be 25 minutes. I don’t recall ever making it by car in that time. Even if ordering a ride were to get me there faster than half an hour I don’t live the kind of life that means getting out of shape over a few extra minutes spent here or there. I also never cut time short at the airport. Granted, REM might not be the best option depending on how rushed you are and what your starting point is, what you are willing to pay out, etc, but I cannot imagine a life that pressured. Maybe if you are regular crew or frequent flight commuter? This reminds me of the kind of discussion I have had with Barcelona locals. I take a relatively new subway route to and from the airport that involves one elevator transfer between two lines but is longer by 4 kms / 5 minutes (OMG!), as opposed to a shorter route (as the crow flies) with two rather extensive tunnel-walk transfers. Some think it’s dumb and they stick to the route that is geographically shorter, but others chatting with me while also taking my preferred method agree that you don’t have to break as much a sweat hauling luggage, the extra few minutes offset by the time it takes for the alternative additional line transfer.

From a true-north map perspective the REM route is close to a mirror image of the Hwy 20 route because the latter arcs southwest prior to going more due west to Dorval. For me, the REM will be much more convenient. However, I am close enough to McGill Stn to walk without a winter coat, less than 3 minutes if the Union entrance is open. For the 747 I must walk 15 minutes south and east (these are described directions contrary to true magnetic north) if I want a chance to get a seat before it fills up along René-Levesque. And time it for its schedule. For that reason, I have often called an Über to get to the airport. At the airport I have frozen my ass off waiting in line for the 747 if I have not hauled a parka to a sun destination in winter. ———- Speaking of Mirabel, I am in a SARS-CoV-2 research trial in Mirabel municipality. What a hassle to get there via public transit! And a new EXO commuter train station near the clinic has a delayed opening, surprise surprise.

Once the REM train route to the airport commences, the 747 express bus will only run 01:00-05:00, the 4 hours REM does not operate. Assuming most members here stay in The Village, you would take the Metro subway a few stops to McGill and transfer to the airport train there. About 25 minutes from McGill to airport, even though the route semi-circle arc is quite a bit to the north part of Montreal Island, but very frequent service. A lot of people are unhappy about it. About 50% percent of current users want the bus option maintained. The many travellers that like the Lionel-Groulx Metro Stn 747 departure, feeding from the 3 Metro subway lines, will have to add a subway ride a few stops to the east, McGill or Bonaventure. At Bonaventure it is an additional indoor walk of at least 5 minutes to the REM departure at Central Station. There are other Metro subway options feeding into a third REM station intersecting the two networks but they are not relevant to most readers here.

On the accompanying message card: “For all your sticky body parts.”

He’s in love with you. Having his body oil at yours and your body wash at his is like a mutual transitional object agenda. He probably imagines you doing wicked things with his dildo after it has been deep inside him but left in your care. In future, watch out for your panties as they can be easily bundled up and spirited off as the next trophy level.

Today’s cloud cover in Montreal area will obscure it. I will be no wiser a man.

In the meantime, while Brazil is mired in political and legal wrangling regarding vaccine purchase contracts and medical clearance for vaccine candidates, as of Dec 30th a negative COVID PCR test is required for anyone entering the country.

There is a dizzying array of factors that influence transmission potential within outdoor dining. I think it is reasonable to say that indoor dining poses greater risk. If the difference could be quantified by relative risk, the background infection incidence rate could drive the guidance around thresholds of incidence that support restriction levels. When you have a confidence interval, for example the Japanese study that attempted to compare the two, of 6-fold to 60-fold risk of indoor vs outdoor dining, erring on the side of caution suggests that you restrict outdoor dining at the point in time background case incidence has multiplied by a factor of 5 or so compared to the highest incidence rate at which outdoor dining was allowed while indoor dining not permitted. However, there are environmental and structural variables that influence risk beyond that (see attachment). And arguing about what edge of the confidence interval to lean towards if the calculated indoor risk is 19-fold the outdoor, as in the same study. And disagreement about how much mitigation and associated disruption sacrifice is legitimate to prevent one death ... similar to the general Number Needed to Treat construct. And so on. https://ncceh.ca/documents/field-inquiry/outdoor-winter-dining-during-covid-19-pandemic

Growing out my ear hair and not caring. Making sure that every pair of socks has one with the manufacturing label tuck-folded with one from the half of them that are not labelled.

Every single material thing that we let or put into our bodies has the potential for landing somewhere on a continuum that ranges from benefit to harm in terms of physical wellness. Complicating matters is that the effects of behaviour aimed at enhancing emotional wellness, itself on its own continuum, intersect on one or the other side of a theoretical neutral point on the physical one, and there are endless factors that influence that singly or cumulatively. Think the colloquialism “guilty pleasure” as one small example of the general intrinsic paradox. Throwing shade intended to land outside of one’s perceived reference group and to mediate the soup of physical-mental biochemistry is just that. Doing it on a public domain forum is conveniently gluttonous. Really, how much of an audience is needed to throw down a gauntlet?

Blanche: “Yippie Aye Yay ... K-Y!”

I think the answer requires some extensive Seoul-searching.

Now I am really confused. Polatsk is the geographical centre of the European continent and the middle of the pandemic in Europe.

Not to mention sensible Brussels sprouts and less sensible Belgian chocolate.

I stand corrected ... I have dug deeper and discovered that there are huge discrepancies in poll results depending on who is conducting them, the nuances of the questions being asked, and whether sampling has regional exclusivity versus comparative cross-nationality. There are some poll data that actually show that Québecois (Franco and Anglo alike) may have the most favourable attitudes and intentionality in Canada related to COVID vaccination. In some ways, we may have a paradox of too many fingers in the pie to get reasonably accurate and representative results.