Coronavirus (Los Angeles: volcano, hotels, living in)

[goodheathen]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-tri...103229134.html

The outcome usually is similar here.

Major limits on international travel, first and foremost. It's time to admit no vaccine is likely to do enough good for at least another year. Even if the coming Omicron-targeting vaccine is effective, it will be outdated within months.

If the USA and Canada jointly agree to stop most travel to/from other countries, then the realistic way for variants to arrive is through the Southern border, which can be policed more. Most Americans don't travel internationally, and most people want less border crossing. An end to most international air travel didn't bankrupt airlines before and would not cause the economic harm that the ongoing pandemic does. What's already here will fade to low levels eventually (to that end, testing and other measures should continue).

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

I don't see a broader mission statement in the link to the 17-page study I posted on reinfection outcomes.

No? It's the same excerpt I already pulled from it:



"Given the likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 will remain a threat for years if not decades, we urgently need to develop public health measures that would be embraced by the public and could be sustainably implemented in the long-term to protect people from re-infection."

And fwiw, that 17 page summary doesn't scratch the surface of the data. It's actually thousands of pages long which is why I hinted that nobody in their right mind is going to read it all. The note in red print at the top is important too. Especially since it was the basis for that LAT article in spite of the fact it explicitly warns against using it as reference to the media as validated information.


But whatever. *My* point is, let's just assume it's all true for the sake of discussion. Then what?

[blameyourself]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Leaky is the wrong adjective because it implies that they were created to be airtight in the first place. They weren't and breakthrough infections were predicted before the vaccines were even rolled out. And the fact of the matter is, the vaccines are still effective for what counts most.

I personally hate the term "breakthrough infections". That implies people that contract the virus after vaccination are a rarity and that's clearly not the case. I think the fairest description is simply that the virus lessens the severity of those infected, which is a fair statement.

[njbiodude]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

https://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-tri...103229134.html

The outcome usually is similar here.

Major limits on international travel, first and foremost. It's time to admit no vaccine is likely to do enough good for at least another year. Even if the coming Omicron-targeting vaccine is effective, it will be outdated within months.

If the USA and Canada jointly agree to stop most travel to/from other countries, then the realistic way for variants to arrive is through the Southern border, which can be policed more. Most Americans don't travel internationally, and most people want less border crossing.

What makes international travel inherently riskier than national travel really? I'm serious.

If someone travels to Peru where over 80% of people are vaccinated how is that any worse than say flying to Atlanta where less than 60% of people are vaccinated and mask usage is much, much lower.

I was in Mexico last month. Voluntary mask usage was higher (not really mandated anywhere but airports but more people wore them than in much of the US), most resturaunts and hotel lobbies were outdoors and stores generally left their front doors open for air circulation.

A significant amount of international travel is still for business and goods shipping anyway. Even if noone travels to Switzerland to ski their variants will eventually make it here with shipments of cars and other goods anyway. And most of the things you order on Amazon still are made and shipped from Asia. Of course manufacturing and other business facilities need to be inspected etc by international business owners to make sure things run smoothly.

[goodheathen]

Simple, and I question whether you're just testing me by asking: new variants come from overseas (and long flights also incubate spread). Latin America doesn't seem to have produced anything so far, but of course leaving that border open would make people go south as an overseas detour.

Surely any variant eventually will bypass defenses, but that's much more likely in passenger air travel than in goods transported. By delaying that for months and in trickles, possibly vaccines can be updated and distributed before nationwide socioeconomic damage happens.

That's the only realistic hope I see for the near future. It did work in Oceania.

[njbiodude]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Simple, and I question whether you're just testing me by asking: new variants come from overseas (and long flights also incubate spread). Latin America doesn't seem to have produced anything so far, but of course leaving that border open would make people go south as an overseas detour.

Surely any variant eventually will bypass defenses, but that's much more likely in passenger air travel than in goods transported. By delaying that for months and in trickles, possibly vaccines can be updated and distributed before nationwide socioeconomic damage happens.

That's the only realistic hope I see for the near future. It did work in Oceania.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/binder/risk-...craft#_ednref5

Read some of the peer reviewed studies at the bottom. Including the CDC one that attributed the lack of transmission on an international flight from a symptomatic Covid patient on air circulation systems. Transmission on planes is quite low. Airports seem to be the main driver of disease during travel, and many international airports require masks.

My flight to Southern Mexico was about 4 hours from LAX which is less flying time than many parts of thr US. I can be in Costa Rica in 6 hours which is still closer than a lot of US destinations. And their vaccination rate is over 80%.

A lot of shipping is done on cargo ships with hundreds of employees that stop at ports all around the world. And business travellers still go all over the world to inspect manufacturing facilities and cut deals and no amount of wishful thinking will change that.

Even ignoring that with NAFTA the Southern border is wide open with trucks rolling in from Mexico 24/7. The idea that many of these people won't have Covid is absurd.

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

What makes international travel inherently riskier than national travel really? I'm serious.

If someone travels to Peru where over 80% of people are vaccinated how is that any worse than say flying to Atlanta where less than 60% of people are vaccinated and mask usage is much, much lower.

I was in Mexico last month. Voluntary mask usage was higher (not really mandated anywhere but airports but more people wore them than in much of the US), most resturaunts and hotel lobbies were outdoors and stores generally left their front doors open for air circulation.

A significant amount of international travel is still for business and goods shipping anyway. Even if noone travels to Switzerland to ski their variants will eventually make it here with shipments of cars and other goods anyway. And most of the things you order on Amazon still are made and shipped from Asia. Of course manufacturing and other business facilities need to be inspected etc by international business owners to make sure things run smoothly.

The first thing that the statist types (I won't call them socialists) turn to with any "crisis", whether it be energy (1973-4 and 1979), Covid or "climate change" is to restrict mobility. See Liberal Fascination With Restricting Mobility.

The Covid "Pandemic" showed this tendency at its finest. If you wanted to drive from Virginia to New York you needed to quarantine, because one county had a terrible spread rate. A close friend of mine needed to travel back and forth to assist his 96 year old (at the time) mother. He had to try to rent cars that had an adjacent-state license plate, or pray he wasn't caught by the Covid police. For a while some localities even imposed a geographical restriction for exercise jogs, if I remember correctly.

When I mentioned, on another thread, that outdoor tennis and basketball courts, and playgrounds were being locked in spite of the obvious fact that those activities posed almost no risk of spread, an answer that I lot was that the tennis game wasn't the point; it was the need to get to the court. During the gasoline shortages many liberals wanted coupon rationing, even though unavailability was holding down demand. Frankly, what should have happened was decontrol of prices. Prices actually dropped shortly after Reagan decontrolled prices.

The obvious reason was to restrict driving to the mileage of your car multiplied by the number of gallons some bureaucrat in DC determined that you should have.

[goodheathen]

None of that airplane research is recent. We're in crazy times without flight testing requirements, with an extremely contagious variant that is very common in most parts of the USA. That doesn't mean infection is guaranteed to spread on a plane, but there is a strong chance it will, even when the probably good filtration is on.

Shipping barely spreads the virus. Don't even bother to suggest otherwise.

Business travellers won't have a choice. Unless they have to fly for something necessary, in which case they'll need to quarantine.

Only the Southern border is an issue - and about that, when there's a will, there's a way. "It's too hard," rooted in "But I want to travel internationally!" is not a real argument.

Anyone who wants to live close to normal in the USA with little to fear (even a "bad cold") - call for halting most international travel.

[njbiodude]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Shipping barely spreads the virus. Don't even bother to suggest otherwise.

Business travellers won't have a choice. Unless they have to fly for something necessary, in which case they'll need to quarantine.

Only the Southern border is an issue - and about that, when there's a will, there's a way. "It's too hard," rooted in "But I want to travel internationally!" is not a real argument.

Anyone who wants to live close to normal in the USA with little to fear (even a "bad cold") - call for halting most international travel.

Personnel flying or boating goods spread virus. Eventually even Australia or New Zealand couldn't keep it out due to shipping. At a very large level these people spread virus globally. They have to stay in hotels. How do you think your amazon orders show up from Vietnam? All that stuff is flown or boated on Maersk container ships. And executives for Apple etc aren't going to quarantine period. They'll bribe their way out of it or move manufacturing to a place that doesn't require it.

Why is the Southern border such a fascination when they wear masks at higher rates and have vaccination rates similar to here? There were variants from CA and Florida too.

I dare you to prove that new variants are more likely to form abroad. You can't. Some of those studies were from 2022 by the way.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

The biggest problem with the current Covid virus is the inconvenience.
There is nothing fun about getting sick but the inconvenience has been worse for my group of people.

For any group of people. It's definitely an inconvenience, especially for those who keep getting it.

BA.5 doesn’t care that you just had Covid-19:
https://www.vox.com/23200811/covid-1...ccine-paxlovid