Jump to content

Menu

At what point would you lock down again?


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

OK, I just looked him up, and he does have a doctorate in epidemiology. Are you saying he didn't specialize in infectious disease? 

He is a nutrition epidemiologist.

https://dossier.substack.com/p/the-impersonator-eric-feigl-ding

Quote

At the beginning of 2020, Feigl-Ding was an unpaid, visiting scientist in Harvard’s nutrition department. His academic research centered entirely around nutrition, diet, and exercise. If Eric Feigl-Ding was interested in pandemics and the study of viruses, his research and academic credentials did not reflect that.

When the coronavirus pandemic began to make waves in the media, everything changed. Feigl-Ding, an aspiring politician, appeared to see an opening to influence the masses and build up his brand. 

Feigl-Ding’s rise to coronavirus stardom began with this since-deleted tweet falsely describing the coronavirus as “the most virulent virus epidemic the world has ever seen.”

But not everyone associated with Feigl-Ding was thrilled with the early panic promotion act. Feigl-Ding’s frequent use of Harvard-associated credentials to elevate his baseless COVID-19 proclamations greatly upset some of his colleagues (despite many of them advocating for the same draconian measures proposed by Feigl-Ding to “combat” the virus), and landed him in hot water with the academic institution.

Twitter, for reasons unknown, decided to credential him as a “COVID-19 health expert,” which further elevates his supposed legitimacy as an “expert” on the pandemic.

In mid March, Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at Harvard, describedhim as a “charlatan exploiting a tenuous connection for self-promotion.” 

The Association of Health Care Journalists also took notice, reporting that he has “precisely zero experience in infectious diseases.” 

An unnamed source at Harvard told The Chronicle on Higher Education in April that Feigl-Ding has “been asked many times to stop promoting himself as having specialized knowledge.” 

In recent months, Feigl-Ding updated his profile to show that he is no longer associated with Harvard. The reasons for his departure have not been made public.

The article goes on to talk about a lot of political ties which may or may not be less relevant, depending on your POV.


 

https://undark.org/2020/11/25/complicated-rise-of-eric-feigl-ding/

This is a long article that leaves all political stuff out. There is a lot more but here are some excerpts.
 

Quote

But as Feigl-Ding’s influence has grown, so have the voices of his critics, many of them fellow scientists who have expressed ongoing concern over his tweets, which they say are often unnecessarily alarmist, misleading, or sometimes just plain wrong. “Science misinformation is a huge problem right now — I think we can all appreciate it — [and] he’s a constant source of it,” said Saskia Popescu, an infectious disease epidemiologist at George Mason University and the University of Arizona who serves on FAS’ Covid-19 Rapid Response Taskforce, a separate arm of the organization from Feigl-Ding’s work. Tara Smith, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Kent State University, suggested that Feigl-Ding’s reach means his tweets have the power to be hugely influential. “With as large of a following as he has, when he says something that’s really wrong or misleading, it reverberates throughout the Twittersphere,” she said. 

Critics point to numerous problems. Not too long after his “holy mother of God” tweet, for example, Feigl-Ding took to Twitter to discuss a titillating but non-peer-reviewed paper that some readers interpreted as evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in a lab; once the authors retracted the pre-print, he deleted a series of tweets from the middle of the thread. In March, Feigl-Ding  tweeted a CDC graph as evidence that young people were “just as likely to be hospitalized as older generations,” but failed to mention an important detail about the age ranges represented in the graph’s bars, which didn’t actually support that claim. In August, he tweeted his supportfor a proposition to allow people early access to a vaccine. After criticism from epidemiologists, bioethicists, doctors, and health policy experts, Feigl-Ding deleted a few tweets at the beginning of his thread, saying they were “confusing” and “murky.” (He also argued that his critics were “spreading misinformation about what they think I said.”)

More recently, Feigl-Ding wrote a thread about coronavirus particles in flatulence, which drew criticism from researchers.

 

 

Quote

Even when his public exclamations are technically accurate, Feigl-Ding’s critics suggest that they too often invite misinterpretations. In a thread about the first study of a Covid-19 outbreak on an airplane, for example, Feigl-Ding failed to mention the important caveat that researchers suspected all but one case occurred before people got on the airplane. In another, Feigl-Ding appeared to summarize a Washington Post piece on a coronavirus mutation, but omitted crucial phrases — including the fact that just one of the five mentioned studies was peer-reviewed. It wasn’t until the sixth tweet in the thread that Feigl-Ding mentioned the important detail that the “worrisome” mutation doesn’t appear to make people sicker, though it could make the virus more contagious.

To Angela Rasmussen, a Columbia University virologist, this represents a pattern. “[T]his is his MO,” she wrote in an email. “He tweets something sensational and out of context, buries any caveats further down-thread, and watches the clicks and [retweets] roll in.”

Such critiques of Feigl-Ding’s particular brand of Covid-19 commentary are by no means new, and previous articles — in The Atlantic as far back as January, for example, New York Magazine’s Intelligencer in March, the Chronicle of Higher Education in April, and in The Daily Beast in May — have explored questions about his expertise in epidemiology (his focus prior to Covid-19 was on nutrition) and whether his approach to public health communication is appropriate or alarmist. But as his influence has grown, and as the pandemic enters a much more worrying phase, critics have continued to debate whether Feigl-Ding, for all his enthusiasms, is doing more harm than good. Some complain that Feigl-Ding’s army of followers can be hateful when other scientists publicly disagree with his tweets. Others say that Feigl-Ding himself has been known to privately message his critics — a tack that some found unwelcome.

Quote

But epidemiology is a big field, and Feigl-Ding’s previous research focuses mostly on nutrition and cancer, different sub-areas of the field than infectious disease. Popescu, the infectious disease epidemiologist, likens this distinction to different specialties in medicine. “I’m not going to go to a cardiologist to have brain surgery,” she said. “Many of us have called attention to his lack of experience or training” in infectious disease epidemiology, she said of Feigl-Ding.

“It’s really challenging to communicate when someone really can sell themselves, like, ‘I’m a Harvard scientist, I’m an epidemiologist,’” she added.

Quote

Finding experts publicly correcting or critiquing Feigl-Ding’s tweets is not hard. More recently, infectious disease experts refuted his claims that the suggestion of White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci that eyewear could improve Covid-19 protection meant that things were “getting serious,” and a slew of scientists — including Popescu, University of Florida biostatistician Natalie Dean, and University of California, San Francisco physician Vinay Prasad, among others — expressed concern about Feigl-Ding’s take on releasing vaccines early to certain populations.

But others suggested that the blowback from Feigl-Ding’s Twitter supporters has deterred them from raising more concerns about his missteps. “He has a couple hundred thousand followers,” said Michael Bazaco, an epidemiologist at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland. “They’re very assertive and aggressive, and I don’t want to deal with that.”

Rasmussen, the Columbia virologist, said she was initially reluctant to comment for this piece because she similarly feared online criticism from his fans. Feigl-Ding’s followers “have ganged up on anyone who criticizes him publicly,” she said, adding that her own Twitter feed has been “clogged with Feigl-Ding’s fans calling me stupid, petty, inept, gatekeeping, etc., along with the usual gendered slurs and insults.” (A search for specific instances of these terms being directed at Rasmussen on Twitter turned up few results, though evidence of Feigl-Ding defenders offering sometimes arch disagreement — and even some vulgar commentary — is easy to find.)

Dueling with strangers, Popescu said, is “emotionally draining.”

 

 

Edited by Penelope
Fixed duplicate quote
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Penelope said:

He is a nutrition epidemiologist.

https://dossier.substack.com/p/the-impersonator-eric-feigl-ding

The article goes on to talk about a lot of political ties which may or may not be less relevant, depending on your POV.


 

https://undark.org/2020/11/25/complicated-rise-of-eric-feigl-ding/

This is a long article that leaves all political stuff out. There is a lot more but here are some excerpts.
 

 

 

Thanks!! 

You're right, he does sound unreliable. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Florida managed to nearly double the weekly number of cases. State positivity is up over 11%. 

More specifically, my count is at 12.8% and the neighboring county (I'm right on the border) where I shop, have doctor's offices, etc is at 14.5% positivity!

UGH!

And still, masks mandates are now illegal per governor. And schools say they are optional. And my church says they are optional, even in elementary Sunday School where no one is vaccinated. 

And yes, hospitalizations are up as well, not quite as fast as cases, thankfully. 

Edited by ktgrok
  • Sad 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I may be weird, but I really hate finger pricks! I far prefer normal blood draws.

Me too.  I opted out of two labs in high school bio that required finger pricks to do them.  I couldn't even manage having other people give them to me.  I don't seem to have any problem with a needle prick in the arm.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matryoshka said:

Me too.  I opted out of two labs in high school bio that required finger pricks to do them.  I couldn't even manage having other people give them to me.  I don't seem to have any problem with a needle prick in the arm.  

Huh. Maybe I'm less weird than I thought... 

I don't even mind WATCHING needles. I really don't have needle issues. But finger pricks, ugh. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this had been mentioned before, but if not: just saw on German news that 60% of hospitalized Covid patients in the UK have been fully vaccinated. 

Now, granted , they have a very large percentage of population vaxxed, but still, quite concerning.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, regentrude said:

Maybe this had been mentioned before, but if not: just saw on German news that 60% of hospitalized Covid patients in the UK have been fully vaccinated. 

Now, granted , they have a very large percentage of population vaxxed, but still, quite concerning.

well, I mean, if you have 100 % vaccination, then 100% of those hospitalized will be vaccinated. IT will just be a much lower number of people. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

well, I mean, if you have 100 % vaccination, then 100% of those hospitalized will be vaccinated. IT will just be a much lower number of people. 

Sure. But the general perception among many people seems to be that vaccination protects against hospitalization ( and death), and that seems clearly too simplistic.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

Maybe this had been mentioned before, but if not: just saw on German news that 60% of hospitalized Covid patients in the UK have been fully vaccinated. 

Now, granted , they have a very large percentage of population vaxxed, but still, quite concerning.

It certainly sounds high. Did it say fully vaccinated,  because there are a lot of young people waiting for their second? Close to 90 percent of adults have had one jab.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

It certainly sounds high. Did it say fully vaccinated,  because there are a lot of young people waiting for their second? Close to 90 percent of adults have had one jab.

It said double-jabbed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

It certainly sounds high. Did it say fully vaccinated,  because there are a lot of young people waiting for their second? Close to 90 percent of adults have had one jab.

it specifically said fully vaccinated. "Two jabs".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

well, I mean, if you have 100 % vaccination, then 100% of those hospitalized will be vaccinated. IT will just be a much lower number of people. 

The total number hospitalised in the last 7 days is 4317 (acrosss the UK), and last I checked (a fortnight ago, because that's the frequency of my local area dashboard), that number was just over 400. (Graph of hospitalisations in the UK up to 1 week ago is here. Note that the last time the UK averaged that many COVID hospitalisations in a week, was January 15, a week after the peak of the UK's third wave - and a point where hardly anyone in hospital had had any doses of vaccine.

 

4094 people currently in hospital in the UK, 573 of whom are on ventilators. Last time it was this bad was 29 March, which is bad but nowhere near as bad. (This is because more people are spending less time in hospital).

We have a problem.

  • Sad 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

Maybe this had been mentioned before, but if not: just saw on German news that 60% of hospitalized Covid patients in the UK have been fully vaccinated. 

Now, granted , they have a very large percentage of population vaxxed, but still, quite concerning.

The UK science officer who gave the speech just apologized on Twitter saying that he meant to say 60% are UNvaccinated.

Pretty consequential misstatement there.

  • Like 8
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Danae said:

The UK science officer who gave the speech just apologized on Twitter saying that he meant to say 60% are UNvaccinated.

Pretty consequential misstatement there.

yikes, this kind of misspeak isn't supposed to happen.
Still, 40% is also not "just a few".

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

Sure. But the general perception among many people seems to be that vaccination protects against hospitalization ( and death), and that seems clearly too simplistic.

Well, it does protect - just not 100%. Same as seatbelts, etc. 

But yeah, the more spread, the more people will pay the price, including vaccinated people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, regentrude said:
13 minutes ago, regentrude said:

yikes, this kind of misspeak isn't supposed to happen.
Still, 40% is also not "just a few".

I haven’t found clarification yet if “unvaccinated” means no shots or not fully (2 shots+2 weeks) vaccinated.  If partially vaccinated people are in with unvaccinated then that’s 40% of the population and the hospitalization rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated would be 2.5 : 1

If first-shot folks are not counted as unvaccinated then only 10% of the population are unvaccinated and the rates are 13.63 : 1

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, regentrude said:

yikes, this kind of misspeak isn't supposed to happen.
Still, 40% is also not "just a few".

It would be helpful to know also hospital vs ICU. I don't want to end up in either, but I've heard hospital officials most places saying that while they have vaccinated Covid patients, they have none or almost none in the ICU. Which in a place with a high vaccination rate makes it even more clear how well they are preventing the most serious of outcomes. I do wish we weren't seeing this much breakthrough though. It was much better with alpha, when breakthrough was much more rare. I still feel confident I'm protected from hospitalization or death, but not as protected from contracting a case that I could potentially pass on to my younger kids or my elderly parents. I don't like that.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

I would assume (just based on other things I've read) that the Delta variant is more easily transmissible and so that changes things up.  Or perhaps the vaccination of older people stopped spread earlier but now that it's spreading among a younger population that is no longer the case? 

It does make sense that this is just greater transmissability, but....... it just seems like there should be some extra-special explanation.  It really does.  

But this does seem like it is probably the case! 

I can't believe this is where we are at right now, sigh.  Sigh.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

yikes, this kind of misspeak isn't supposed to happen.
Still, 40% is also not "just a few".

It's not just a few, but in the older age groups, something like 93% have been vaccinated. That means that there's about 40% of hospitalized patients coming from about 7% of total patients. As you can see, your chance of being hospitalized with the vaccine is something like 6 times less than without the vaccine.... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

yikes, this kind of misspeak isn't supposed to happen.
Still, 40% is also not "just a few".

But with a large % of the population vaccinated that means 40% from that large group and 60% from the very much smaller non-vaccinated group.

I can tell you, from my experience, an absolute minimal amount, extremely close to zero, vaccinated patients are being admitted to ICU, and they are certainly not getting intubated. Of course, that may change if in fact we don’t have delta here already, but it seems extremely likely that we do.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TCB said:

But with a large % of the population vaccinated that means 40% from that large group and 60% from the very much smaller non-vaccinated group.

I can tell you, from my experience, an absolute minimal amount, extremely close to zero, vaccinated patients are being admitted to ICU, and they are certainly not getting intubated. Of course, that may change if in fact we don’t have delta here already, but it seems extremely likely that we do.

To be fair, the UK has mostly used AZ, right? So the efficacy is lower, anyway. I expect that's why. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

To be fair, the UK has mostly used AZ, right? So the efficacy is lower, anyway. I expect that's why. 

The vaccine usage makes the figures difficult to interpret.  Very elderly or vulnerable people had  Pfizer because it was available first. Most people 40-70 or so got AZ. People 18-40 got Pfizer or Moderna  because of the issue with rare blood clots.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TCB said:

But with a large % of the population vaccinated that means 40% from that large group and 60% from the very much smaller non-vaccinated group.

Yes.  If  60% of those in hospital are unvaccinated, then those cases come from just 11% of the adult population (excluding children for the moment, who very rarely end up in hospital).

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, KSera said:

It would be helpful to know also hospital vs ICU. I don't want to end up in either, but I've heard hospital officials most places saying that while they have vaccinated Covid patients, they have none or almost none in the ICU. Which in a place with a high vaccination rate makes it even more clear how well they are preventing the most serious of outcomes. I do wish we weren't seeing this much breakthrough though. It was much better with alpha, when breakthrough was much more rare. I still feel confident I'm protected from hospitalization or death, but not as protected from contracting a case that I could potentially pass on to my younger kids or my elderly parents. I don't like that.

UK statistics don't include ICU bed occupancy as a separate measure. However, the number on ventilators or ventilator-capable beds (only mechanical ventilation counted in the UK stats, not halfway-house solutions like CPAP devices which can be delivered in regular COVID wards) is a decent proxy for the numbers in ICU. Some people in these statistics may be just weaned off the ventilator, or showing signs they're about to need one, but otherwise everyone counted will be ventilated because it is deliberate policy to keep ventilator beds clear as far as possible.

Last figure I saw for COVID patients on mechanical ventilation beds was 573 (across the UK),  The last time it was that high was March 29 (same as the number of people in total in hospital is at the March 29 level), so it seems people going into hospital are having the same proportions as back then (i.e. just over 1 in 8 hospitalised patients end up ventilated at some point during their stay).

So far, deaths have barely started increasing, so the link between ventilation and death may be weakened by the vaccination (as well as a significant weakening of the link between infection and hospitalisation that still applies).

 

 

5 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

The vaccine usage makes the figures difficult to interpret.  Very elderly or vulnerable people had  Pfizer because it was available first. Most people 40-70 or so got AZ. People 18-40 got Pfizer or Moderna  because of the issue with rare blood clots.

Also, there's a bunch of 18-40 who got Pfizer because they were medical staff in hospital hubs for vaccination... ...and another bunch of 18-40 who got OxfordAstrazeneca because they were nursing home/community healthcare staff who got vaccinated along with their elderly patients.

People in some relatively inaccessible parts of the UK (like the Outer Hebrides islands) got OxfordAstrazeneca unless contraindicated, due to relative ease of transportation. We also have about 50,000 people who have been involved in various vaccine trials, two of which resulted in failure (people in failed trials will be vulnerable to COVID unless re-vaccinated with something effective).

Unfortunately there are no statistics at present about cases/hospitalisations/ventilations/deaths by vaccine type, only vaccinated/unvaccinated.

In more positive news, Scotland's figures for today have slightly improved - 7 more people left hospital than entered it for COVID reasons, and 2 more people were weaned off ventilators than put on them for COVID reasons. Let's hope that's the start of a happier trend.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We may be locking back down sooner than I thought  possible.   Their were 200 new cases over the weekend.   Putting our case rate back in the 200's, positivity hasn't been updated but will definitely be over 15%.  More disturbing we had 10 more admitted to the hospital 46 people which is 12% of all beds.  This weekend they are holding the boat races.  This is a huge event thousands of people over the 4 days will attend.  I wasn't to worried because it's outdoors but now with delta.  Outdoors in a crowd all day under tents etc seems not that safe.  We aren't going but I think  this could be really  bad for our area.

  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

We may be locking back down sooner than I thought  possible.   Their were 200 new cases over the weekend.   Putting our case rate back in the 200's, positivity hasn't been updated but will definitely be over 15%.  More disturbing we had 10 more admitted to the hospital 46 people which is 12% of all beds.  This weekend they are holding the boat races.  This is a huge event thousands of people over the 4 days will attend.  I wasn't to worried because it's outdoors but now with delta.  Outdoors in a crowd all day under tents etc seems not that safe.  We aren't going but I think  this could be really  bad for our area.

Is that your state or county?

Yeah I hear you on the crowded events.  Ugh.  We have another NBA finals game tonight.  17k in the arena inside and room for 65k in the streets right outside.  Plus all the bars!  I bet the surge from the last game hasn't even hit yet.

  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

Is that your state or county?

Yeah I hear you on the crowded events.  Ugh.  We have another NBA finals game tonight.  17k in the arena inside and room for 65k in the streets right outside.  Plus all the bars!  I bet the surge from the last game hasn't even hit yet.

The counties it's two counties but one metro area.  It's been pretty  consistently bad here holding back the rest of the state.  The state  dropped  restrictions because of the Vax rate but our area is way behind the rest.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

We may be locking back down sooner than I thought  possible.   Their were 200 new cases over the weekend.   Putting our case rate back in the 200's, positivity hasn't been updated but will definitely be over 15%.  More disturbing we had 10 more admitted to the hospital 46 people which is 12% of all beds.  This weekend they are holding the boat races.  This is a huge event thousands of people over the 4 days will attend.  I wasn't to worried because it's outdoors but now with delta.  Outdoors in a crowd all day under tents etc seems not that safe.  We aren't going but I think  this could be really  bad for our area.

Locking down in just your county, you think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we personally  will be locked down.  Idk what will happen restrictions  wise.  Our county will definitely not doing anything on its own.  When the state had levels and our counties were the only ones locked down for not meeting metrics everyone just drove to other parts of the state.   Prompting the governor to loosen our restrictions to save the rest.  

 

 

Edited by rebcoola
  • Like 2
  • Sad 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My husband’s employer is following Apple’s lead to delay the back to office.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-20/apple-will-postpone-return-to-office-after-covid-19-persists

”Apple Inc., responding to a surge in Covid variants, is pushing back its office re-opening by at least a month to October at the earliest and recommending that workers at its retail stores wear masks, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

The iPhone maker is one of the first U.S. tech giants to delay plans for a return to normality as Covid-19 and highly transmissible variants persist around the world. Apple will give employees at least a month’s warning before mandating a return to offices, the people said, asking for anonymity to discuss internal policy.

Store workers, vaccinated or not, are being urged to start wearing masks again, other people familiar with the matter said. In regions where local authorities have reinstated mask mandates, retail workers must comply, the company told employees. Apple had dropped its internal mask mandate in June.

Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook told employees in June that they should begin returning to offices by early September for at least three days a week. In an internal memo at the time, Cook cited the availability of vaccinations and declining infection rates. Some employees of the Cupertino, California-based technology giant have worked from Apple offices on certain days throughout the Covid-19 pandemic.”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arcadia said:

My husband’s employer is following Apple’s lead to delay the back to office.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-20/apple-will-postpone-return-to-office-after-covid-19-persists

”Apple Inc., responding to a surge in Covid variants, is pushing back its office re-opening by at least a month to October at the earliest and recommending that workers at its retail stores wear masks, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

The iPhone maker is one of the first U.S. tech giants to delay plans for a return to normality as Covid-19 and highly transmissible variants persist around the world. Apple will give employees at least a month’s warning before mandating a return to offices, the people said, asking for anonymity to discuss internal policy.

Store workers, vaccinated or not, are being urged to start wearing masks again, other people familiar with the matter said. In regions where local authorities have reinstated mask mandates, retail workers must comply, the company told employees. Apple had dropped its internal mask mandate in June.

Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook told employees in June that they should begin returning to offices by early September for at least three days a week. In an internal memo at the time, Cook cited the availability of vaccinations and declining infection rates. Some employees of the Cupertino, California-based technology giant have worked from Apple offices on certain days throughout the Covid-19 pandemic.”

I hope my dh's company does this too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rebcoola said:

I think we personally  will be locked down.  Idk what will happen restrictions  wise.  Our county will definitely not doing anything on its own.  When the state had levels and our counties were the only ones locked down for not meeting metrics everyone just drove to other parts of the state.   Prompting the governor to loosen our restrictions to save the rest.  

I am still trying to figure out if we'll thoroughly lock down. I'm not going to take public transit anymore, DH isn't going to go to the office or the gym (but he DOES have to teach a class, sigh), and we aren't going to do indoor activities. 

I still can't figure out what to do about our playground playdates, though. And I'm really bummed it looks like the kid vaccine won't be out anytime soon. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idk what it will look like for us we only have 2.5 yr old unvaxxed.  But we were doing pretty  much anything outdoors carefree. Just  avoiding crowds and wearing masks for indoors but now it seems we might have to pull back.  My parents live here and are 70+I wish we knew for sure the Vax took for them especially  since my dad works at the library. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

Idk what it will look like for us we only have 2.5 yr old unvaxxed.  But we were doing pretty  much anything outdoors carefree. Just  avoiding crowds and wearing masks for indoors but now it seems we might have to pull back.  My parents live here and are 70+I wish we knew for sure the Vax took for them especially  since my dad works at the library. 

I worry about DH's parents, too. But I definitely can't ask them to lock down again... they've lost enough time to this thing, plus I'm sure they won't. So hopefully the vax produced a good immune response for them. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2021 at 1:12 PM, Not_a_Number said:

The most annoying thing for me when I wear the Happy Masks is that they do irritate my ears. I should make some more ear savers... right now, I just tie them behind my head sometimes. 

get the lanyard they have...I just got them. So convenient to be hands free 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Not_a_Number

I'm losing track of threads. I think this is the one where you asked about when vax for youngers will be availabe. 

Fauci is quoted as saying late fall or early winter would be the earliest.

Also, the data about pediatric cases doubling makes sense why AAP came out with their recommendation. I also didn't know that there have been 400 pediatric deaths. This makes sense why they would start messaging with some areas going back to school in just a couple of weeks.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/20/health/covid-children-cases-schools-reopening/index.html

Edited by calbear
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

That comes out very similar to a more in depth calculation I posted in the Vaccine thread this morning. They used a similar method, and had 89% as an underestimate counting all people old enough to be vaccinated, or 93(?)% if they assume most of the vaccinated in the hospital are older (which appears accurate). 

1 hour ago, lewelma said:

What are you guys' impressions of how many restrictions universities will have on campus if they require all students to be vaccinated?

I’ve been expecting there weren’t going to be restrictions on a fully vaccinated campus (students and staff), but now I’m wondering if Delta will change that. Especially for things like large indoor gatherings—basketball games and things like that. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2021 at 11:33 PM, lewelma said:

What are you guys' impressions of how many restrictions universities will have on campus if they require all students to be vaccinated?

Probably none, seeing that my university system which will not require vaccinations is planning to go ahead with full capacity in-person instruction (i.e. no distancing) without any masks. They hope for students voluntary vaccinating.

UPDATE: mask mandate temporarily instated until mid-September. Yay!!!

Edited by regentrude
  • Sad 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Probably none, seeing that my university system which will not require vaccinations is planning to go ahead with full capacity in-person instruction (i.e. no distancing) without any masks. They hope for students voluntary vaccinating.

The one where I work is scheduling rooms so that people who want to socially distance can, but there's no compulsion.  No masks mentioned and vaccination is encouraged but not required.  Large lectures will be online, because there are no rooms big enough to allow for voluntary spacing.  Students can study online instead if they prefer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lewelma said:

What are you guys' impressions of how many restrictions universities will have on campus if they require all students to be vaccinated?

Those with which I am most familiar will still require masks and testing, though the testing will be less often than last year. Most classes will be in-person, but I imagine there will be an online option since a number of students (and even hires) haven’t been able to get visas because of the backlog. The online option will doubtless prove useful for the inevitable quarantines. 😣

Most schools have posted their fall Covid plans. It’s interesting to see the different approaches.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you think colleges will be in a year?   I realize that is a question no one can really answer, but do think things will ever be "normal" again?

My son is a senior this year and looking forward to going away to college.  I want that for him, but not if it means Covid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The college where I teach had hoped to be back to normal with required vaccinations.  Nothing has been announced yet, but I’m sure the leadership is going crazy trying to figure out what Delta is going to do to that plan.  
 

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

Probably none, seeing that my university system which will not require vaccinations is planning to go ahead with full capacity in-person instruction (i.e. no distancing) without any masks. They hope for students voluntary vaccinating.

I think schools in states where the local government has not lost its collective mind on this issue are more likely to both require vaccines and add other measures.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling increasingly nervous now that I have accepted an in-person teaching job. I was so excited to go back in person, but now cases are going up again.... I think the deal in Maine is that each school district can choose their mask policy. Mine is choosing masks for all, thankfully.

My mom will not lock down again. She lives alone and was pretty depressed during lockdown. All I can do is hope that if we do get covid, it will be manageable because we are vaccinated.

  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My state was in the 40s for new cases and even hit a day in the 30s.   7-6 we were at 45 new cases for the day.   Yesterday (7-20) 499.    And it wasn't just a dump of cases as 7-19 was 451 cases.  

Shit.  I am freaking out on trying to make choices on things.  

My older 2 were supposed to go to a in-person dance intensive in August.  We have doc and ortho apts for next week. 

All my kids were supposed to be auditioning for a ballet.  And they were supposed to be going back to in-person ballet.  And I wanted my 3 littles to do 2 weeks of gymnastics camp.  

I feel so down and how the heck are we supposed to avoid Covid this time?  Seems like everyone is just going to get it.  At least being vaccinated it will be mild?  So then don't lock down again and just be cautious?  

Edited by mommyoffive
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...