Spekulatius Posted January 24, 2021 Posted January 24, 2021 I am sure it all gets figured out, but time is of essence. For example just glimpsing to the data, it seems like a there is a huge gap between the doses supplied to the states to those administered. the does supplied seem tos Cale with population (which makes sense), but doses administered / does supplied go from ~36% ( California) to almost 80% (the Dakotas). My own state (MA) is at the bottom to with ~43%. It seems to that the states at the bottom are messing around too much with complex rules and not enough to actually get the vaccine in the people. In my opinion, the overarching principle should be to “KEEP THE LINE MOVING”. So if one county, hospital or state can’t administer the doses they have on hand, then send it to the next county, hospital or state who can, to make sure no time is wasted.
Investor20 Posted January 24, 2021 Posted January 24, 2021 https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/biden-says-nothing-can-change-the-trajectory-of-covid-pandemic-over-the-next-several-months.html
Spekulatius Posted January 24, 2021 Posted January 24, 2021 https://www.ft.com/content/2b0dbba3-6fe8-4c2d-8cca-90e87261d436 One mans experience is not the majority’s. This is a bit fear “mongerish” and covertly political. My uncle a 65 year old brick layer who has had two back surgeries, one knee replacement, a heart stent and Rheumatoid Arthritis for the past 10 years has covid last month. Kicked it in 6 days with no lasting effects (known to him). Lost his taste and smell and had a migraine most of the time. He was a checkbox for many co-morbidities but seemingly wasn’t phased. I guess the scariest part is there is no way to know how it will affect you personally. If you like anectodes, my wife’s friend in law family of 7 (multi generation Chinese) got Covid. All seven tested positive, the mother (in her 70‘s) is in ICU and daughter ( late 30‘s) was found dead in her bed in the morning. She was seemingly fine the day before and never showed any serious symptoms or was admitted to the hospital. She had no known risk factors. These things happen - not that frequently, but they do. It‘s a bit like Russian roulette - most of the time nothing happens, but when it does, it can kill you.
Cigarbutt Posted January 24, 2021 Posted January 24, 2021 I am sure it all gets figured out, but time is of essence. For example just glimpsing to the data, it seems like a there is a huge gap between the doses supplied to the states to those administered. the does supplied seem tos Cale with population (which makes sense), but doses administered / does supplied go from ~36% ( California) to almost 80% (the Dakotas). My own state (MA) is at the bottom to with ~43%. It seems to that the states at the bottom are messing around too much with complex rules and not enough to actually get the vaccine in the people. In my opinion, the overarching principle should be to “KEEP THE LINE MOVING”. So if one county, hospital or state can’t administer the doses they have on hand, then send it to the next county, hospital or state who can, to make sure no time is wasted. Yes time is of the essence but this is an unusual challenge (size, relative novelty, bureaucratic inertia and resistance. others...). Most people have forgotten now (let's call this the extreme brevity of vaccine memory) but, during (and after the peak of...) SARS, from October 2009 through May 2010, 27 percent of the U.S. population over the age of 6 months (about 81 million people) was vaccinated against H1N1 influenza, including about 34 percent of individuals in the initial target groups. Interestingly, during that process, there was significant questioning (supply-demand mismatch) during the initial phase and reverse supply-demand mismatch issues when maximum vaccine availability was reached and vaccine candidates started to show growing lack of interest. So yes, whatever works and let's get moving even if not ideal. An interesting aspect is that vaccination rates in general (like the flu) vary widely among states with Rhode Island being first and Florida last both for the total population and at-risk subgroups. You can't win them all. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/biden-says-nothing-can-change-the-trajectory-of-covid-pandemic-over-the-next-several-months.html Hi Investor20, You may want to take a look at the CDC hospitalization statistics again at this point. They are lagging the real world by a few weeks but are now correctly showing that trends are down. I'd appreciate if you could supply data on K2 (the vitamin not the mountain): https://www.msn.com/en-ca/health/nutrition/this-underrated-vitamin-may-help-weaken-covid-symptoms-says-expert/ar-BB1cYnm5?ocid=msedgntp#image=1 An expert source, who declined to supply a disclosure of potential and real conflicts of interest, mentioned that "vitamin K2 intake might be the most important thing you can do to extend your life."
maplevalue Posted January 25, 2021 Posted January 25, 2021 FT - Moderna develops new vaccine to tackle mutant Covid strain: US drugmaker warns current jab is less effective against South African variant https://www.ft.com/content/c0c8f72c-e58e-4319-80c4-0db153ad85db?emailId=600ec795865ece0004bf08b2&segmentId=3d08be62-315f-7330-5bbd-af33dc531acb Moderna is launching a trial of a new Covid-19 vaccine as the US biotech group warned that its current shot was less effective in tackling the strain that emerged in South Africa. Laboratory tests show Moderna’s Covid-19 jab still works against the variant named 501. V2, which emerged in South Africa, and B.1.1.7, which was first discovered in the UK, the company said. But it warned that the neutralising antibody response to 501. V2 was sixfold lower than to the original variant, raising concerns that immunity to it may wane significantly, particularly in older people. Stéphane Bancel, Moderna chief executive, said the company was preparing for a “worst-case scenario”, even though he had “zero concerns” about the vaccine’s efficacy in the coming months.
Gregmal Posted January 25, 2021 Posted January 25, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? 5 days later than I expected and a week after Cuomo, but interesting timing nonetheless. Here's your booming recovery Joe! Primed and ready. Almost like we manipulated the figures for you!
ERICOPOLY Posted January 25, 2021 Posted January 25, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? It is because pressure on hospitals has eased: [/img]
cubsfan Posted January 25, 2021 Posted January 25, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? 5 days later than I expected and a week after Cuomo, but interesting timing nonetheless. Don't believe your intuition Greg. It's not that the Governor is in grave danger of being recalled and is shitting bricks, since he's absolutely wrecked the California economy. That has nothing to do with it.
adesigar Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? It is because pressure on hospitals has eased: [/img] How dare you use science and data to make decisions.
Gregmal Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? It is because pressure on hospitals has eased: [/img] How dare you use science and data to make decisions. LOL the same "science and data" Cuomo used when NYC hospitals were overcapacity and needed 30,000 ventilators in April but then in August when launching his book, all of a sudden they had more ventilators than they needed and the hospitals were apparently never even close to capacity? Or the science where men can become women overnight due to a "change of mind"? You tell me bud...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? It is because pressure on hospitals has eased: [/img] How dare you use science and data to make decisions. LOL the same "science and data" Cuomo used when NYC hospitals were overcapacity and needed 30,000 ventilators in April but then in August when launching his book, all of a sudden they had more ventilators than they needed and the hospitals were apparently never even close to capacity? Or the science where men can become women overnight due to a "change of mind"? You tell me bud... Well, the only way the difference between April and August could be true is if....lockdowns worked? ::Audible gasps::
Gregmal Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 Dickbag Newsome lifts covid restrictions in CA now. Even oh so dangerous indoor dinning! I wonder why? It is because pressure on hospitals has eased: [/img] How dare you use science and data to make decisions. LOL the same "science and data" Cuomo used when NYC hospitals were overcapacity and needed 30,000 ventilators in April but then in August when launching his book, all of a sudden they had more ventilators than they needed and the hospitals were apparently never even close to capacity? Or the science where men can become women overnight due to a "change of mind"? You tell me bud... Well, the only way the difference between April and August could be true is if....lockdowns worked? ::Audible gasps:: I think you misinterpreted it. Cuomo, in April, was talking about hospitals being maxed out. Then in August during his book tour, claimed he did a great job and that hospitals were never close to being over capacity(back in April). He either lied in April or lied in August. But thats the data and science they use so...
cubsfan Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it.
ERICOPOLY Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it. Another garbage political posting.
Parsad Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it. Cubs, Greg is gone now. You're next if you don't stop the political posts. Zero tolerance going forward for board members, so everyone else, pay attention! Cheers!
Castanza Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it. Cubs, Greg is gone now. You're next if you don't stop the political posts. Zero tolerance going forward for board members, so everyone else, pay attention! Cheers! I would argue to simply remove or archive the whole Coronavirus thread. Nobody on here is a virologist (that I’m aware of). There are a handful of doctors. Beyond that it’s mostly just political commentary regarding lockdowns, govt decisions, etc. If all that’s desired is some type of fact sheet for Covid-19; then people should go to their respective government website (CDC.gov). Zero tolerance is open to much subjectivity in my opinion. The above exchange amount between four users is completely political. However, Greg at least provides solid content on a lot of different threads. I would argue there needs to be some gray areas. Are we allowed to discuss policies regarding taxes if it’s based around investments? KMI and the O&G stocks will certainly have policy come into play, but what’s the acceptable level of discussion? The whole Fannie thread hinges on politics while walking that fine line. Can we discuss Fed decisions? I’m not sure if it’s possible for this website, but a tool which allows users to flag a post as political would be useful. And perhaps if say 5+ users flag it as political it’s removed automatically with automation. This would help filter out noise and keep conversations of value on track.
Parsad Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it. Cubs, Greg is gone now. You're next if you don't stop the political posts. Zero tolerance going forward for board members, so everyone else, pay attention! Cheers! I would argue to simply remove or archive the whole Coronavirus thread. Nobody on here is a virologist (that I’m aware of). There are a handful of doctors. Beyond that it’s mostly just political commentary regarding lockdowns, govt decisions, etc. If all that’s desired is some type of fact sheet for Covid-19; then people should go to their respective government website (CDC.gov). Zero tolerance is open to much subjectivity in my opinion. The above exchange amount between four users is completely political. However, Greg at least provides solid content on a lot of different threads. I would argue there needs to be some gray areas. Are we allowed to discuss policies regarding taxes if it’s based around investments? KMI and the O&G stocks will certainly have policy come into play, but what’s the acceptable level of discussion? The whole Fannie thread hinges on politics while walking that fine line. Can we discuss Fed decisions? I’m not sure if it’s possible for this website, but a tool which allows users to flag a post as political would be useful. And perhaps if say 5+ users flag it as political it’s removed automatically with automation. This would help filter out noise and keep conversations of value on track. Hi Castanza, If the thread's discussion diverts into some public policy, that is fine. But if it reverts to essentially child-like name-calling, offensive remarks, you shit on me so I shit on you, type of discussions...yeah, you're gone. I had the Politics board on at the time, because I felt that there was a need to understand what was going on and for people to vent somewhere other than on threads. Contrary to popular opinion, I felt it was a necessary evil at the time...the world was in a weird place. You can have your opinion on Trump, but the undisputable fact was he was a very divisive President whose actions could have been positive, but ended up being dramatically negative. Now that he is gone, and there seems to be some semblance of law and order again, I think the experiment is over and so is COBF's involvement. It's time for a fresh start, after a nice clean shower to wash the filth off of ourselves, and focus on investing. And shortly we will get a new website, where if you want to set up a ZOOM town hall meeting for those that do want to talk politics on occasion, you can, but it will not be on the investment message board portion. Cheers!
Castanza Posted January 26, 2021 Posted January 26, 2021 Careful, don’t break your own rules :P Jk jk, but I would suggest considering my idea! Would help everyone hold each other accountable and reinforce behavior if you continually get posts removed by an algo. You could even make it so the site has two “lenses”. One which filters politically flagged posts, and another that doesn’t. This could prevent or help mitigate some troll farm accounts from shadow banning tons of posts. I think the main benefits would be, not stifling content and allowing people to take it to their end. If it crosses a line then it’s gone by unanimous consent. And it helps mitigate the ban hammer for individuals who do contribute a lot of good ideas to the board, but decided to hit the whiskey early and post a night of political banter. Plenty of individuals on here have said their peace. But there is always the case for repeat offenders who get banned permanently. Anyways...fwiw ;)
Liberty Posted January 27, 2021 Posted January 27, 2021 Feds order 100m extra doses of Pfizer, 100m doses of Moderna. Good move. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/26/biden-administration-orders-additional-200-million-doses-of-vaccine.html
StubbleJumper Posted January 27, 2021 Posted January 27, 2021 Feds order 100m extra doses of Pfizer, 100m doses of Moderna. Good move. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/26/biden-administration-orders-additional-200-million-doses-of-vaccine.html It's a good move out of precaution, but my guess is that many of those doses will end up being donated to Nicaragua, Venezuela, or some place like that. In total, the new order of 100m + 100m doses will take the United States up to a total of 600m doses for a country of 330m people. That would be a ~90% vaccination rate, which would be outstanding (and implausible). My guess is that, in our wildest dreams, only 70% get vaccinated which would require about 460m doses. Time will tell, and it is better to have too much rather than not enough. SJ
Liberty Posted January 27, 2021 Posted January 27, 2021 Feds order 100m extra doses of Pfizer, 100m doses of Moderna. Good move. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/26/biden-administration-orders-additional-200-million-doses-of-vaccine.html It's a good move out of precaution, but my guess is that many of those doses will end up being donated to Nicaragua, Venezuela, or some place like that. In total, the new order of 100m + 100m doses will take the United States up to a total of 600m doses for a country of 330m people. That would be a ~90% vaccination rate, which would be outstanding (and implausible). My guess is that, in our wildest dreams, only 70% get vaccinated which would require about 460m doses. Time will tell, and it is better to have too much rather than not enough. SJ There's wastage, and the cost is minimal vs the cost of even just 1 extra day of the pandemic, so it's totally rational to over-order a bunch of doses, especially since you can be sure that one of the suppliers won't have a manufacturing SNAFU or whatever. Great if they end up helping poorer countries, foreign aid is great too, but from a humanitarian point of view, and as a way to build soft power in the world. Meanwhile: "Oklahoma trying to return its $2m stockpile of hydroxychloroquine" https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/oklahoma-trying-to-return-its-2m-stockpile-of-hydroxychloroquine/
Investor20 Posted January 27, 2021 Posted January 27, 2021 Hi Investor20, You may want to take a look at the CDC hospitalization statistics again at this point. They are lagging the real world by a few weeks but are now correctly showing that trends are down. I'd appreciate if you could supply data on K2 (the vitamin not the mountain): https://www.msn.com/en-ca/health/nutrition/this-underrated-vitamin-may-help-weaken-covid-symptoms-says-expert/ar-BB1cYnm5?ocid=msedgntp#image=1 An expert source, who declined to supply a disclosure of potential and real conflicts of interest, mentioned that "vitamin K2 intake might be the most important thing you can do to extend your life." Doesnt matter who said it...the question is what the data says. Did that person provide any data? Remdesivir had been recommended by NIH and Fauci. But the data says the following and thats what matters: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2049080120305689 "Remdesivir does not lower the odds for mortality." https://www.indemic.org/perspectives-on-whos-solidarity-trial/ Regarding discussion on politics...I think we are all adults who can read data and make up our own minds. After all value investing or science many times is disagreeing with the majority. However, to say politics has no role in investing is absurd. “Be Fearful When Others Are Greedy and Greedy When Others Are Fearful” - Warren Buffet You can only do that if one can read their own data and make up their minds and politics is real part of investing.
LC Posted January 27, 2021 Posted January 27, 2021 ^ Damn, sounds suspiciously like the Global Warming advocates - fake it, till you make it. Cubs, Greg is gone now. You're next if you don't stop the political posts. Zero tolerance going forward for board members, so everyone else, pay attention! Cheers! Greg is banned? The worst the guy ever did was call me a silver spooned baby. I took it as a compliment in fact ::) Meanwhile we've got YOLO threads and such. What times we are living in...
Spekulatius Posted January 28, 2021 Posted January 28, 2021 Gregmal banned? Timeout maybe, but the board is poorer without him. He needs to come back!
Cigarbutt Posted January 28, 2021 Posted January 28, 2021 ... Regarding discussion on politics...I think we are all adults who can read data and make up our own minds. After all value investing or science many times is disagreeing with the majority. However, to say politics has no role in investing is absurd. You can only do that if one can read their own data and make up their minds and politics is real part of investing. i think it's not the 'political' part which is the problem per se, it's the correlated tribal thinking which may contaminate underlying thought processes and ruin the quality of exchanges. Will you take the vaccine? Based on data and logical conclusions from data, vaccines have been, overall, a significant benefit. i think it's quite sad that polio has not been eradicated in many countries because of false beliefs and unsubstantiated pre-conceived ideas. FWIW, in my province, there is almost a natural experiment going on. An absolute sequential priority rule has been used to inoculate vaccines in older people's homes. The most at-risk homes are essentially 100% covered. This is relatively anecdotal but outcomes appear incredibly strong. The vaccines are well tolerated (did you notice that investigations about the Norway worry that you posted has been mostly put to rest) and the new cases are going towards zero very rapidly. To compare, the next 'intermediate' homes which are next in line for vaccines, still report truly awful numbers. Also, have you noticed that the Chicago vaccination numbers are showing a gradually shifting age composition now skewing to the older cohorts? This is developing (like in many places) and there is some delay with reporting (like the CDC discussion we had before) which means that the true picture (older age profile showing later) shows with some delay.
Recommended Posts