A number of you had wondered if the commenter known as “I am Spartacus” was all right. I decided to try to get in touch with him, and fortunately I heard back. I’m pleased to repeat that everything’s fine. He’s just been mega-busy, and appreciates everyone’s concern.
Open thread 9/15/21
I simply cannot believe that September is half over.
What does the Israel COVID data indicate about vaccines and Delta?
I keep reading ominous reports about the Delta variant of COVID and other potential variants and their effect on the vaccinated. To me the most important metric is not the number of cases, it’s the percentage of serious cases and deaths in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated.
However, the statistics, even when available, are flawed and/or incomplete for several reasons. We would need to have reliable statistics on how many people (vaccinated and unvaccinated) who become seriously ill and are hospitalized with COVID are hospitalized because of COVID, and how many are primarily sick with other things and are going in “with COVID” in terms of a test or diagnosis but not because of it. We also would need to know how many have strong co-morbidities such obesity or diabetes. And yet I don’t seen many – or actually any, so far – statistics that indicate this in terms of variants such as Delta and vaccinated versus unvaccinated.
Israel is one of those countries which apparently keeps good statistics. But I have yet to see any reports – even from Israel – that include what I’d like to know. The best I could find was this:
The third wave of infections in the country has been bigger than the first two. In the first week of September, Israel recorded the highest number of cases per million in the world.
The Delta variant of the virus fuelled this surge. The share of Delta-positive sequences in Israel increased from 13% in the first week of June to 87% in mid-August indicating that the surge in cases was driven by the variant.
Data show that the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing infections against the Delta variant reduced, which led Israel to administer a third dose to fully vaccinated people. However, the share of severely ill patients and fatalities due the virus was low among the fully vaccinated, indicating that the vaccine continued to protect people against critical infection and death.
So it was Delta that was causing the increase in cases, and vaccination protected against serious illness for the most part. I also recall that until recently – until Delta hit, that is – Israel had had a relatively low number of COVID cases and COVID deaths per million, compared to other Western nations. And even now their figure for COVID deaths – 798 per million – is on the low side, although cases per million is high. So it is very possible that the Israeli population may have had little or only a moderate amount of naturally-acquired immunity to the disease prior to Delta, and that its unvaccinated people were especially at risk for that reason.
Continued [comments in brackets and emphasis added]:
The rise in cases came despite the fact that nearly 60% of the country had received both doses of the vaccine as on September 8. From mid-July, Israel started administering a third dose to people aged over 60 who had received their second shot at least five months before. Over time, the eligibility was relaxed and as on Sept. 8, 28.9% of the population had received the booster shot.
The booster shot was introduced because the efficacy of Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine (which is Israel’s main vaccine) in preventing infection reduced, particularly against the Delta variant. However, its efficacy in preventing hospitalisation and severe illness remained high [even without the booster]. The table shows the results of efficacy studies of the vaccine over several time periods [the table can be found at the link].
As daily cases in the country started increasing in the second half of June, the number of patients hospitalised with severe illness also rose. However, the number of severely ill patients who are fully vaccinated fell over time, while the number of unvaccinated severely ill patients continued to increase. This indicates that the vaccine provides protection against severe illness.
Following a surge in cases, Israel saw a spike in deaths, particularly among the 60+ population, due to the virus in August. However, the majority of deaths occurred among patients who were unvaccinated while fatalities among those who were fully vaccinated remained relatively low. This points to the vaccine’s efficacy in preventing COVID-19 deaths too.
Unvaccinated Israelis represent only about 20 percent of the population eligible for a vaccine, but they now constitute half of all serious COVID-19 cases in the country.
According to the latest figures from the Health Ministry, serious cases among unvaccinated Israelis keep on rising, and are on track to surpass those among the inoculated…
As of Tuesday afternoon, 330 out of 679 seriously ill patients were unvaccinated, while 16 were partially vaccinated and 333 were fully vaccinated. There are 168 patients currently in critical condition and 123 are on ventilators. Even so, the number of seriously ill vaccinated patients appears to have plateaued.
There are no serious cases in children under twelve, although that group remains unvaccinated.
As of August 21, the Health Ministry recorded 215.9 severe COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people among the unvaccinated over the age of 60, compared to 21 per 100,000 people among those who had received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine. This makes unvaccinated older people more than 10 times as likely to experience a severe case as their immunized counterparts.
And that is true despite the fact that the oldest and more vulnerable are far more likely to be fully vaccinated.
NOTE: As I’ve said many times, I am vaccinated but I support anyone’s right to remain unvaccinated.
Irony of ironies: General Milley did to Trump what he should have done to Biden
The feckless General Milley, who did Joe Biden’s bidding in Afghanistan even though he knew it would be epically disastrous or who was so stupid himself that he didn’t even realize the consequences, did the following after January 6th:
Two days after the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, President Donald Trump’s top military adviser, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, single-handedly took secret action to limit Trump from potentially ordering a dangerous military strike or launching nuclear weapons, according to “Peril,” a new book by legendary journalist Bob Woodward and veteran Washington Post reporter Robert Costa. Woodward and Costa write that Milley, deeply shaken by the assault, ‘was certain that Trump had gone into a serious mental decline in the aftermath of the election, with Trump now all but manic, screaming at officials and constructing his own alternate reality about endless election conspiracies.’ Milley worried that Trump could ‘go rogue,’ the authors write.
“You never know what a president’s trigger point is,” Milley told his senior staff, according to the book.
In response, Milley took extraordinary action, and called a secret meeting in his Pentagon office on January 8 to review the process for military action, including launching nuclear weapons. Speaking to senior military officials in charge of the National Military Command Center, the Pentagon’s war room, Milley instructed them not to take orders from anyone unless he was involved.
I think I had read about this quite some time ago, but it takes on even more significance now that we have seen Milley’s opposite behavior with Biden. Sounds like a potential coup to me. Among other things, though, what should have happened instead is that Milley should have resigned if he thought such a thing was probable, and go public with his concerns, rather than taking matters into his own hands to contravene a Trump order that existed only in Milley’s fevered imagination.
Was this general really that shaken by the events of January 6th, which were relatively mild even compared to the year-long Antifa/BLM riots? And who knows whether this is even what happened – Trump “screaming at officials and constructing his own alternate reality” – or whether it was Milley’s alternate reality that’s being described. Although I have little doubt that Trump was screaming at people, surely this was not all that unusual not only for Trump but for other presidents, and not a sign of mental breakdown.
Not only that, but shouldn’t there be some protocol in place for the possibility of a POTUS mental breakdown no matter who might be the president? Should it really be up to a possibly partisan (actually, increasingly partisan) general going rogue himself?
It’s no stretch of the imagination at all to imagine Joe Biden “screaming at officials and constructing his own alternate reality.” In fact, it doesn’t take imagination at all, because we have seen Joe doing both in public. He screams at the American people or really anyone who criticizes him. He constructs an alternate reality – one that Milley may actually share – in which the Taliban weren’t obviously going to take over, leaving Bagram was of no special strategic importance, and our allies think what we did is just peachy keen.
Trump’s case for a fraud-driven election loss is rock-solid compared to that.
And yet Milley seems to have had no trouble carrying out Biden’s disastrous orders – or the orders of whoever was in charge. I happen to believe it was Biden plus unspecified others (Blinken, etc.), but I don’t know. If ever insubordination was called for or justified, it would have been then, and certainly resignation was called for and would have been the right thing to do. But I doubt it was even contemplated, either because Milley’s judgment was so abominable that he actually concurred with Biden’s decision, or because Milley was just too intent on clinging to his own position of power in government.
[NOTE: Of course, I need to issue a caveat because the whole thing is based on Woodward’s book. Woodward is partisan himself, so who knows what is true and what isn’t, what is exaggerated and what is as reported – in other words, about any of it, in particular about Trump’s behavior at the time. Trump seems quite well-balanced to me these days – as opposed to Joe Biden.]
Today is the California recall vote…
…and I see no reason to be optimistic.
The polls indicate Newsom is not seriously threatened, and whether or not you believe polls are accurate, the truth is that California is a bluer-than-blue state. Yes, there are pockets of conservatives, and yes, Newsom has been an abominable governor, but if Californians don’t see it that way then it doesn’t matter.
What’s more, who has been leaving California lately? I’ve not seen any statistics on the politics of the leave-takers, but it stands to reason they would be predominantly the more conservative voters. Therefore California should become more blue, not less, as people leave. This just seems logical to me.
I don’t even think the issue of whether or not there is voting fraud needs to come into play. It’s certainly possible, and there are some reports indicating it may be happening. But I don’t think it’s necessary in order for Newsom to win.
Sorry to be such a downer, but that’s the way I see it.
ADDENDUM: By the way, I predict that if/when Newsom is retained, the vote will be framed by the left, the Democrats, and the MSM (but I repeat myself) as a great victory that represents a huge mandate for everything the Democrats want to do, rather than just California being predictably California.
Open thread 9/14/21
This really demonstrates how much thought and skill went into the making of the song:
The movement to withhold treatment from the unvaccinated
It is pernicious, and some are shocked and fighting back:
A growing number of doctors have threatened to withhold treatment from the unvaccinated, sparking backlash from doctors and bioethicists who say such sentiments violate the Hippocratic Oath. Those critics are even more troubled by the silence from professional organizations tasked with upholding medical ethics.
Doctors in Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama have announced they will refuse to treat unvaccinated patients, while Dallas hospital workers reportedly discussed considering vaccinated status when delegating ICU beds. Such comments have infuriated top medical professionals. Dr. Brian Callister, governor of the Nevada chapter of the American College for Physicians, said doctors should never blatantly refuse to treat unvaccinated patients who are otherwise willing to comply with the rules set out by the practice.
“It is absolutely unethical, period, end of story, to not treat a patient in need,” Callister told the Washington Free Beacon. “It is absurd and amoral for any physician to say they will not treat unvaccinated patients.”
Yes, but it is not surprising. The left has taken over the thought processes of a lot of Americans in the last few years. I wonder what the age range tends to be of those who are in the anti-anti-vaxxer movement versus those who, like Dr. Callister, are objecting strenuously to that movement. My guess is that the latter group is considerably older than the former.
Ah, but Sarah Palin was crazy for talking about the possibility of death panels.
Arizona door-to-door canvassing of 2020 voters…
…has uncovered evidence either of massive fraud or massive error that could have affected the results.
Not that anything will be done about it after the fact. These things must be prevented before the fact. Will they be? Your guess is as good as mine. I tend to doubt it, alas.
Here’s an article about it, and here’s the report.
The Biden administration, the Arizona election authorities, and the left in general will all say the people being canvassed are lying, of course.
[NOTE: And please see this, about the California recall.]
What was George W. Bush referring to on the 9/11 anniversary?
George W. Bush made these questionable remarks when speaking at the 20th anniversary of 9/11:
There is little cultural overlap between violent extremists abroad and those at home. But in their disdain for pluralism, in their disregard for human life, in their determination to defile national symbols, they are children of the same foul spirit and it is our duty to confront them.
The left and much of the right has assumed he was talking about January 6th, which is understandable on the part of the left but somewhat less so from the right, who should at least have also included the Antifa and BLM riots. But now a spokesman for Bush has issued a clarification, and I’ll assume it’s an official one approved by Bush himself:
“Those comments were certainly inclusive of but definitely not exclusive to January 6; rather all forms of extremism — attacks on schools and synagogues, on Blacks and Asians, etc,” the spokesperson said. “All forms of domestic extremism.”
It’s a fascinating glimpse into the mind of Bush that says a lot. This attitude is part and parcel of his tendency – and the tendency of many non-conservative Republicans – to do a sort of balancing act of condemnation. We hear: “on the one hand this, and on the other hand, that.” It is my opinion that such an equation is often not only stupid, but dangerous. It equates things that should not be equated.
To take Bush’s specific example, fanatic Islamic terrorism that kills 3,000 innocent people, most of them civilians, not as collateral damage but as the main event and in a vindictive spirit that seeks to conquer and subdue, is not the same as or even similar to either Antifa riots in the US or January 6th, both of which are also quite different from each other. Moral equivalence of these three things is absurd, and in particular 9/11 stands quite apart from the others.
The other two were essentially demonstrations. January 6th was not even especially violent or destructive, although there was some violence and some destruction. Antifa and company were more violent and more destructive, to be sure, but nothing in the realm of 9/11.
The January 6th demonstrators were protesting what they thought was a violation of democracy, and they wanted the official stamp on the results halted through the legal means of Congressional action. That was their aim, and the few who turned destructive and violent were the exceptions.
Antifa has a different aim. They are more akin to the self-styled revolutionaries of the 1960s. But in their demonstrations during 2020, the violence in which they engaged was for the most part to property, and although it sometimes was violent against people – especially the police – there was no widespread killing of civilians, much less thousands of them. On the scale of evil, 9/11 wins, hands down.
And what does “all forms of extremism” mean? Weren’t the heroes of the American Revolution “extremists”? Same for the abolitionists? It’s a weasel word that is purposely vague enough to allow nearly any interpretation, and plays right into the hands of the left.
But unfortunately, that’s an old habit of Bush’s.
NOTE: It’s also quite galling that Bush managed to emerge from his long Obama-era slumber to diss Trump for the last few years, but here’s my earlier explanation for Bush’s extra-special Trump-hatred. It has a long provenance, and Trump is by no means innocent, particularly many years ago, before he became president himself.
Victor Davis Hanson speaking on Biden, Afghanistan, and America’s decline
I haven’t yet watched the whole of this video – it’s long. But what I’ve seen seems excellent, if depressing. I suggest you watch (or just listen to, if you’re double-tasking) at least part of it. Sometimes, to save time with videos, I watch at faster speed – you can adjust the speed in the YouTube settings for each video.
In case you’re unaware of Hanson’s specialty, he’s a military historian:
Open thread 9/13/21
Good CATch
I don’t usually post on Sundays, but I couldn’t resist putting these up. We can use some feel-good stories, right?: