5) There are some internally consistent strategies for COVID.
For instance, "the whole world locks down super hard until it's gone", or "don't bother ever locking down", or "soft lockdown until there's a vaccine".
We didn't take any of those.
Conversation
12) (And, before you point out not everyone is vaccinated: at least in the states, most people who are planning to get vaccinated have already: twitter.com/NateSilver538/)
Quote Tweet
Somewhat worrying numbers on vaccine hesitancy from the new Axios/Ipsos poll.
56% of US adults say they've gotten at least one vaccine dose already—great!
But there aren't many Americans left who *haven't* gotten vaccinated but plan to do so. Just 14% fall into that category.
Show this thread
4
1
153
15) Seriously, fuck whatever systems decided that was a good tradeoff.
We could have had it out in March; a simple trial on 1,000 participants would have been plenty to prove it was safe and effective.
Replying to
16) (People will decry the unprecedented money printing this year.
It had bad effects!
But also the economy would have been shit otherwise. We shut down the world for a year.
IDK whether the monetary response was good or bad.
Needing to do it in the first place was bad.)
2
1
210
Yet as you said in 6) it has nontrivial side effects after 9 months of trials
1
thread of bad takes, but this is the worst. the passport thing is unfortunate, result of a system thrown together as quickly as possible, but a vaccine trial on only 1000 ppl is just not enough, no matter what, considering only a portion of them would even encounter covid.
1
23
hbr.org/2020/12/covid- gives a decent explanation of why. If you divide your group size by 40, youd be comparing something like 0 or 1 vaccinated cases to 2-3 unvaccinated cases. How could you make any kind of confident conclusion off such granular data?
8




