Rhymes with…as Limbaugh loved to say when referencing George Lackoff.
Immunity acquired from a Covid infection provides strong, lasting protection against the most severe outcomes of the illness, according to research published Thursday in The Lancet — protection, experts say, that’s on par with what’s provided through two doses of an mRNA vaccine.
Notably, the immunity acquired from infection did appear to wane more slowly than the immunity from two doses of an mRNA vaccine.
I think people learn even more about driving from a car crash than from a driving school. Immune system similarly ‘learns’ a lot from a sickness - but the whole point of vaccines is to have the learning without the damage, both acute as well as Long Covid.
Well, it is the Harvard Medical School. They are not so good at telling a male from a female, and not good at all about arithmetic.
For ease of calculation, lets assume that one in five US adults translates to approximately 20 Million people (a bit low, I know – but I am excluding undocumented migrants). Divide $20 Trillion by a mere 20 Million people => each adult with “long covid” has cost $1,000,000 in health expense, lost productivity, and lost well being? Not particularly credible!
But maybe I am wrong. Maybe those barista jobs that graduates of feminist angst degrees get are paid much better than I thought – and generate more revenue too.
Actually it’s not so far off the official Value of Life estimates used to calibrate economic costs of engineering risks:
The value of life is an economic value used to quantify the benefit of avoiding a fatality. It is also referred to as the cost of life, value of preventing a fatality (VPF), implied cost of averting a fatality (ICAF), and value of a statistical life (VSL). In social and political sciences, it is the marginal cost of death prevention in a certain class of circumstances. In many studies the value also includes the quality of life, the expected life time remaining, as well as the earning potential of a given person especially for an after-the-fact payment in a wrongful death claim lawsuit.
In Western countries and other liberal democracies, estimates for the value of a statistical life typically range from US$1 million—US$10 million; for example, the United States FEMA estimated the value of a statistical life at US$7.5 million in 2020.
I like to flip these calculations and show the human lives lost for funding silly government projects.
The COVID scare seems to be deflating faster than a shot-down Chinese balloon. It’s becoming increasingly obvious that the ridiculous masking and lockdown measures are now quietly being called out for what they really were: a massive own-goal we chose to score for no particular upside.
Alas, there remains a “long tail” of hard core belief in the magical amulet protection capabilities of the interventions, similar to fully masked drivers you can see driving alone in many US metropolitan areas. But hey, we can hope they’ll come to their senses eventually, right?
Now, some believe that once lockdowns at scale for imaginary reasons were accepted, they became a tool available for all sorts of future purposes. Like “climate change,” for example. But personally, I think that’s just a bunch of hogwash. Unless, of course, you count the “climate” inside my ex-wife’s car!
I’m one of the people who believes the lockdowns and our satisfactory docility were just a rehearsal……but I’m glad to see your opposing POV, and golly, do I ever hope you’re right.
This is what I call the concept of “Slave Lives”. That calculation also comes out with the lifetime earnings of a median income worker in the U.S. on the order of US$ 1 million.
Very interesting! It looks like a case of consilience of inductions:
The mark of a good theory lies not in the relationship between the theory and its data in a single narrow application, but in the way it succeeds in ‘tying together’ separate inductions. A good theory is like a tree that puts out runners that grow into new trees, until there is a huge forest of mutually sustaining trees. The ‘tying together’ can be achieved in either of two ways: (a) The theory accommodates one set of data, and then predicts data of a different kind. (b) The theory accommodates two kinds of data separately, and then finds that the magnitudes in the separate inductions agree, or that the laws that hold in each case ‘jump together’. Whewell describes both kinds of cases as leading to a consilience of inductions.