I realize it’s tough. Everyone is suddenly writing about the pandemic, no matter what their topic. And vaccine efficacy is a relative measure, so those are always pesky. But we’ve had the vaccines for many months now, and by now one would hope for a slightly better understanding.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Yeah. That’s why it isn’t a good way to represent the risk of flying even if you could concoct a scenario under which you can imagine that number.https://twitter.com/AstorAaron/status/1381225496067899392 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Clicks clicks clicks, all I care about is clicks.
-
That’s the game, baby. Until this glorious ad based media ecosystem is taken out of commission.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
What happened to a couple of months ago, before the vaccine, when all the news outlets were saying it was perfectly fine to fly? Seems like an odd time for them to reverse that position.
-
Exactly. They act like people haven't been traveling for a year.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“...*could* still become infected...” meaning that proportion of passengers hasn’t achieved immunity. Is that not accurate?
-
The "could" does a lot of work here because it assumes the other 900,000 are actually infected.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That'd technically be true if we had, like, cans of compressed coronavirus that we pumped through the cockpit in every flight, right?
-
Only gonna get the pilots that way

- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
for every million who fly, we could have 100,000 infections. NO NO NO. That’s not what that number means. Also, this didn’t even happen when millions flew unvaccinated. So how could it make sense now?