No wonder the COVID message is muddled

[madville]

I open my news feed and there on the first page:

Booster protection wanes against Omicrom within 10 weeks, data suggests -NYT

Boosters are the best protection against Omicron - ABCNews

Omicron driven push for boosters could prolong pandemic, WHO says - NYT

AstraZeneca booster works against Omicron, Oxford lab study finds - Reuters

Most of the world’s vaccines likely won’t prevent infection from Omicron - NYT


Merry Christmas!!!

[NewHendoLib]

1. Complex scientific research can't move at the speed the media or

We the people want.

We are in highly uncharted territory.

[Diamond_Dog]

2. Ain't it the truth!!

[Freddie]

3. Get vaxxed, get boostered, wear a mask, try to avoid crowds

All we can do right now. That’s a lot more than a year ago.

[Hugin]

5. Precisely.

+1

[uponit7771]

10. +1,

[Arkansas Granny]

11. Exactly. I feel like those of us who are vaxxed and boosted are in

a much better place than we were last year. We still can't let our guard down.

[Hugin]

4. It is the same as it always was...

Preventing infection requires masking and distancing. Vaccination will keep the infection from killing you.

I don't know where this belief that vaccination, is a force field, came from.

[madville]

7. Because that's how they originally presented it

Go back a year ago, it was “Pfizer and Moderna are 90-something percent effective at preventing COVID infection”, then it morphed to preventing symptomatic infection, then prevents hospitalization.

“Prevents infection” may very well have been true against Alpha, Beta or Gamma variants, of course Delta and Omicron have made that goal obsolete with the current version of vaccine.

[Hugin]

12. There was also an unhealthy dose of politization involved.

The machinations of a flailing presidential campaign.

Offering up a silver bullet to curry favor. Without an iota of evidence to back up the claims.

Yes, mass vaccinations have a history of eradicating some horrible diseases. But, anyone who was paying attention understood that the 'rona was a different and unknown disease. Vaccination is an extremely important component of control. One of several factors, though.

More than anything, consistency, is the road out of COVID. Consistently wearing masks, distancing, and getting vaccinations/boosters as they become available.

I was recently talking with a few people who are vastly more knowledgeable on these things than I am, and they were forecasting that 1) if current efforts remain consistent, 2) no drastically different variants emerge (or even a mutation different enough to be considered a separate disease) We're about halfway through this thing.

Food for thought.

[Ms. Toad]

22. It does prevent infection (at least prior to Omicron) - and may still.

That's where mathematical literacy comes in.

Yesterday's cases were 197,856 - just to have a size to talk about.

The US vaccination rate is 61.7%.

So even if the vaccination is 95% effective (assuming all Moderna or Pfizer).

That means, statistically, there were 14,592 breakthrough cases yesterday (and 183,254 in unvaccinated people).

A very small number multiplied by a very large number is still going to be a very large number.

It may feel, especially right now, like the vaccination is not preventing disease. But as to COVID prior to Omicron, it was - at about the same rate it was preventing complicaitons. The reason it feels different from vaccines for measles (for example) is that there were a grand total of 13 cases in 2020. Of those, statistically, it is likely that 8 will be in unvaccinated people (9% of the population) and 5 will be in breakthrough cases (91% of the populatation vaccinated; 93% effective vaccine). In such a small cohort, statistics aren't likely to hold out - since other factors come into play - like larger families who have not vaccinated any of their children so the cluster effect will overwhelm the likelihood of random encounter.

But the point is that we think measles is effective in preventing disease - and COVID is not - BECAUSE we don't have measles outbreaks which generate hundreds of thousands of cases a day. So the number of breakthrough measles cases a year can be counted on one hand.

Omicron may well change things - but the perception that the vaccine prevents disease at least prior to Omicron is accurate. But infection is dependent on exposure to infected people - and the exposure to COVID is overwhelming. So what is a magic bullet for measles would not be one if there were as many random encounters with infected people as there are with COVID. It's not the new nature of the disease - simply the prevalence of daily infectious contacts which shifts the focus to preventing serious infections or death.

[Crunchy Frog]

16. It came from the CDC back in May. nt

[Walleye]

6. The weather forecast can be kind of muddled, too but we manage to work it out

[Kali]

8. being able to process grey areas is a skill more people need

simplistic black and white thinking is what leads to authoritarianism.

all those headlines are correct. no ACTUAL contradictions.

[The Magistrate]

9. Press Presentation Of Scientific Work Is Generally Worthless, Sir

There really isn't much contradiction between any of these headlines.

Vaccine effectiveness may wane, which does not challenge a statement that vaccines are the best preventive available.

I have not seen the WHO statement referenced, but would wager it is rooted in the calculation that giving many people a third or fourth shot soaks up supply that might see better use by giving more people their initial dose.

That vaccines do not completely protect from infection is widely known, probably even by the hack who wrote the headline in such alarmist tones. Vaccines continue to greatly reduce severity of an infection once contracted.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. My thoughts as well on all four points. . . . nt

[stopdiggin]

24. +1. I'll go with this one as well

And may I also add, as a moderately intelligent individual, and a moderate consumer of news and information - I do not find the current state of affairs so hopelessly muddled as the OP suggests. Concern, yes. Caution? Most certainly! Dithering about in a hand-wringing quandary? Frankly I don't have the time.
----- -----

[NQAS]

14. Education

These headlines are frustrating enough for educated, more or less intelligent people. People who understand science and conflicting analysis, etc. Those people - which includes folks here - take all this in and make a decision that we believe to be in our best interests. IOW, the vaccines and boosters may not be perfect, but they provide more protection than nothing at all. And we’ll continue to follow the science and read these articles and then make new decisions as new information becomes available.

OTOH, there are those people who don’t understand how to read and analyze and think. And they interact with others who fall into those same categories. And they see everything on nksck and white. No greys. No nuance. No understanding that we almost never have complete, certain information before we make important decisions. Those people just shut down. No vax. No booster. No mask. No distancing. Add in general distrust of government, to say nothing of liberals, and you have a perfect storm.

[Ms. Toad]

15. Emerging medical/scientific information is nearly always muddled.

Especially when it is moving at the speed of light by necessity.

People need basic math literacy, and need to go to the source of the message rather than relying on media digested crap - which takes nuanced data and makes gross generalizations from it.

That said - there is little reason for muddling messaging. We know the basics of what work to stop speed-of-light transmission:

The administration needs to clearly and persistently state/push for:

1. Vaccination
2. Consistent masking indoors using a mask which fits well and covers the nose and the mouth - and, with Omicron - preferably one which meets the NIOSH standards
3. Clear, well-publicized recitations (repeated frequently) about what COVID symptoms - especially post-vaccination - look like
4. Access to (and use of) testing so those who think they have "just" a cold, allergies, headache can check it out before venturing out into general public
5. The will and the means for people who have symptoms to stay home and stop contaminating others

The rest is just nuance, being blown up into big headlines since that's what the public consumes best.

[cadoman]

18. the problem here is that we have scientific consensus on the safety and efficacy of vaccines

So why is the message muddled?

"The vaccines are safe and effective."

"Masking and social distancing work."

"My mask protects you and your mask protects me."

We see this every day on DU. Everyone here is getting it right. Why is the press struggling with these basic, well-established facts?

And you are wrong that people should go to the source. That is extremely dangerous. We count on accredited journalists to summarize the work of reputable scientists. Few, if any of us here, are fit to analyze raw source material and come to accurate conclusions.

[Ms. Toad]

26. As to your last point - nonsense.

The journalists have consistently gotten it wrong on COVID. When I trace what they are saying back to the source, they have been wrong more than half of the time on critical emerging information because they are mathematically illiterate - and/or ignored the nuances. A prime example is the reporting on breakthrough cases as rare. They treated the early numbers as if ultimate outcomes could be determined instantaneously. Breakthrough cases occur over time and under specific circumstances. At least 75% of the reports I saw on the early LA data completely ignored both. And, over time, my head-banging here on DU has proven to be far more accurate than the news reports.

A critical step in learning to sort out when information is believable is to go to the source, compare what the source says that is the same, or different, than the media reports. Notice what the source says that appears nowhere in the reports about the source, etc. Virtually nothing I have done throughout the pandemic requires more than high school math (mostly middle school math) and an ability to read critically and ask questions. If we don't push ourselves to that level of critical reading, we are doomed. Pure and simple. We'll pick the media that matches our bias, accept it without questioning, and then we wonder why we can't have fact-based conversations. Neither "side" is diving down to the level of facts.

As to DU - No. Everyone on DU is not getting it right. There are far too many insisting they do not need to wear masks or social distance because (1) if they are infected they will not get sick - as an absolute statement it is flat out wrong and (2) the only ones they are hurting are themselves.

You are alsowron g on, "My mask protects you and your mask protects me." That is old messaging that was incorrrect at the time it was created. Your mask ALSO protects you. A well-fitted, multi-layered mask, worn consistently (at least pre-omicron) provides the wearer with about as much protection as the J&J vaccine. That was bungled messaging - designed to appeal to the altruism of people who didn't believe COVID was real - but might have enough empathy to try to protect others. (Listen to Ohio Governor DeWine's pronouncements on the matter - the propaganda comes thorugh very clearly.) The messaging not only failed as to its target audience, it is now repeated as gospel truth when it is not and discourages vaccinated individuals from taking additional steps to protect themselves because - frankly - they are tired of inconvenience if it is only effective to protect those who aren't taking steps to protect themselves.

[Chellee]

17. It's interesting that all the negativity is coming from the New York Times. nt

[stopdiggin]

25. nonsense. read virtually any other collection of

news sources. Nobody is doing either substantively better - or worse. (with the exception, perhaps, of some scientific publications - and that's a qualified 'perhaps.')

[Chellee]

29. Of the examples listed, the NYT is consistently negative.

All I'm saying is that, perhaps, we should ignore reporting from the Times, as they seem to have an agenda that they're pushing.

[stopdiggin]

30. I know what you're saying

and my response is, "nonsense."

(People on the right are equally convinced that the Times has an 'agenda' too. I'm not buying it.)

[elias7]

31. I've posted something similar in recent days

the NYT has been consistently negative re Covid and re Biden. I guess they forgot what it was like the last 4 years with the orange one tearing them a new one every two days

[Stuart G]

19. Do What is Right, Even if the "Right" keeps on doing it ..."WORNG"

... ... .... ......... .................

[DallasNE]

20. Then There Is This

Coronaviruses is a disease class that includes colds, flu and Covid-19. Neither colds nor flu can reach herd immunity. Does that mean that Covid-19 can never reach herd immumity either?

[hay rick]

21. All these things can be true.

In complex situations, news reporting always faces the dilemma of what part of a story is "newsworthy" given the limitations of space, time, and attention. Sadly, most of our news organizations are commercial operations that survive by attracting eyeballs for advertising and err on the side of clickbait.

[Silent3]

23. I thought it likely that the booster effect wouldn't be long-lasting

I'd also say the odds are good of a variant coming along that blasts right through all of the current vaccines, requiring a totally new reformulation.

This is simply a virus acting like a virus.

But idiots, of course, will take this completely predictable course of events as "proof" that it's all a hoax, or vaccines "don't work", that it's all about Big Pharma profits or some even more dastardly scheme, etc.

[stopdiggin]

27. +1. on all accounts -(nt)-

[madville]

28. There also is vaccine resistance

With antibiotics, the more they are used, the more likely the microbial/bacteria can develop resistance to those same antibiotics.

Viruses can also develop “resistance” when there are breakthrough infections in vaccinated people. They basically can mutate specifically to evade the vaccinated immune response, using it like a roadmap.