The Delta variant: as contagious as chicken pox?
No, not really. And strangely enough, it’s NPR that’s reporting this:
In a leaked report, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention made a surprising claim about the delta variant of the coronavirus: It “is as transmissible as: – Chicken Pox,” the agency wrote in a slideshow presentation leaked to The Washington Post on July 26.
Chickenpox is one of the most contagious viruses known. Each individual can spread the virus to as many as “90% of the people close to that person,” the CDC reports.
Is the delta variant that contagious as well?
The short answer is no, says evolutionary biologist and biostatistician Tom Wenseleers at the University of Leuven in Belgium…
…[T]he leaked document underestimated the R0 for chickenpox and overestimated the R0 for the delta variant. “The R0 values for delta were preliminary and calculated from data taken from a rather small sample size,” a federal official told NPR. The value for the chickenpox (and other R0s in the slideshow) came from a graphic from The New York Times, which wasn’t completely accurate…
I seem to recall that ROs often get changed over time as more data becomes available, as well.
The NPR article also says that as the COVID virus has mutated over time the new strains have become more easily transmitted. What the article leaves out, however, is that this is not unusual for viruses causing disease. It also fails to mention that as a new virus mutates over time and become more easy to transmit it doesn’t necessarily become more virulent as well.
Here’s an attempt to explain, which was written very early in the pandemic (February of 2020):
…[T]he role of natural selection in virus evolution is not easily predicted, rendering rampant speculation around the evolutionary trajectory of a virus during a nascent outbreak investigation especially problematic. The pervasive claim that a virus will mutate to become more virulent during an outbreak is particularly illustrative of this phenomenon, even though this spectre of a ‘super killer’ virus is baseless. In reality, the evolution of virulence is a highly complex topic that has inspired extensive research on evolutionary theory and debate6. Mutations can also make a virus either more or less virulent. A common idea is that virulence will only change — either upwards or downwards — if it increases the transmission rate of the virus, which effectively means an increase in the number of virus ‘offspring’. However, high virulence may (although by no means always) reduce transmissibility if the host is too sick to expose others. Without information on the precise evolutionary forces and selection pressures in operation, predicting how virulence might evolve is an extremely difficult and perhaps futile task.
This is not to say that mutations and natural selection don’t occur during disease outbreaks, but rather that their epidemiological relevance is often hard to quantify….While there are many examples of mutations that alter virulence or cause drug resistance and hence impact human health, speculating about the phenotype of any new mutation can be dangerous during fast-moving outbreaks. It takes a non-trivial amount of effort to experimentally and epidemiologically verify these phenotypes.
These warnings will probably not halt the question as to whether mutations will arise in SARS-CoV-2, enabling it to spread more efficiently between humans or generate a higher case fatality rate. In response, we can look to the 2002–2003 SARS-CoV epidemic. Large deletions in the open reading frame 8 (ORF8) region and mutations in the spike (S) protein were discovered during the early stages of the outbreak and eventually dominated the epidemic, suggesting that these were adaptations to humans. Based on this observation, some hypothesized that virus genetic changes in part drove the SARS epidemic, but this claim is unsubstantiated. So, could SARS-CoV-2 adapt in the same way? Yes. Will adaptation precipitate more deaths? Unlikely.
It is time to reshape our conception of mutations. Mutations are not indicative of outlandish and devastating new viral characteristics. Instead, they can inform our understanding of emerging outbreaks. Any claims over the consequences of mutation demand careful experimental and epidemiological evidence. Mutation is an inevitable consequence of being a virus.
The warning that care and caution must be taken in evaluating new variants has certainly not been honored, because politics took over long ago.
Oregon and the measurement of merit in education
Oregon has quietly enacted some legislation on education in the state:
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown privately signed a bill last month ending the requirement for high school students to prove proficiency in reading, writing, and arithmetic before graduation…
The bill, which suspends the proficiency requirements for students for three years, has attracted controversy for at least temporarily suspending academic standards amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Backers argued the existing proficiency levels for math and reading presented an unfair challenge for students who do not test well, and Boyle said the new standards for graduation would aid Oregon’s “Black, Latino, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color.”
That sounds like a straight-up racist statement to me – but hey, what do I know?
However, the bill doesn’t actually suspend all proficiency standards or testing – just certain ones. But it’s not clear what they might be:
“The testing that we’ve been doing in the past doesn’t tell us what we want to know,” Democratic Sen. Lew Frederick told a local ABC affiliate in June. “We have been relying on tests that have been, frankly, very flawed and relying too much on them so that we aren’t really helping the students or the teachers or the community.”
Supporters of the measure said the state needed to pause the academic requirements, which had been in place since 2009, so lawmakers could reevaluate which standards should be updated, and recommendations for new graduation standards are due to the Legislature and Oregon Board of Education by September 2022, the Oregonian added in its report.
Republicans criticized the proposal for lowering academic standards.
“I worry that by adopting this bill, we’re giving up on our kids,” House Republican Leader Christine Drazan said on June 14.
But it turns out that there wasn’t one standardized test recommended statewide in Oregon prior to this law. There was nothing like, for example, the NY Regents tests that were required to obtain an academic high school diploma in NY when I was growing up, which placed a pretty high bar on advancing to the next level. I recall them as being quite rigorous, and if a student failed he or she failed the course and had to repeat it.
No, Oregon had nothing like that:
While some lawmakers argued against standardized testing for skill evaluation, the state of Oregon does not list any particular test as a requirement for earning a diploma, with the Department of Education saying only that “students will need to successfully complete the credit requirements, demonstrate proficiency in the Essential Skills, and meet the personalized learning requirements.”
That’s rather poorly written in terms of the time frame, but I believe it is describing the standards that were in place post-2009 but prior to this new law’s passage.
A little more information can be found here, and it’s about what you’d expect, with the word “equitable” being the key (as well as “a more just Oregon”):
Education non-profit Foundations for a Better Oregon says the law opens the door for more ‘equitable’ graduation requirements.
‘With SB 744, Oregon can ensure high school diplomas are rigorous, relevant, and truly reflect what every student needs to thrive in the 21st century,’ the group said in a statement.
Sure thing. And I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you if you buy that.
In addition:
According to the bill’s language, the state’s Department of Education is directed to develop its new graduation standards with input from representatives for ‘historically underserved students,’ such as those with disabilities, those who are from immigrant or refugee populations or ‘racial or ethnic groups that have historically experienced academic disparities.’
And the following is relevant to my memories of the Regents in NY:
But passing a test has not been a requirement to graduate in the state since 2009, when its essential skills standards were initially put in place.
Students could demonstrate their abilities in math, reading and writing through five separate tests, or complete a classroom project judged by their individual teachers to prove their proficiency, the Oregonian reported.
In fact, only 11 states in the country require passing a test for high school students to graduate, according to Education Week.
And some states that do, such as New York states have proposed removing testing requirements for graduation…
Of course.
Note, also, that the clearest and most informative article I could find about the Oregon law was in a British newspaper. That has become rather commonplace these days – the British papers often (actually, usually) cover our own news better than our own papers do.
Open thread 8/11/21
He said; she said.
He said:
She said:
290 million views and counting:
Biden channels George W. Bush
Because it went so well for Bush:
President George W. Bush seemed to get nothing right when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans on Monday, Aug. 29, 2005.
First, rather than visiting the scene of the disaster, he made a flyover in Air Force One a couple of days later, as he returned from a vacation in Texas. Worse, he was photographed staring at the stricken city from his giant jet, thus appearing, as he said in an interview, “detached and uncaring.”
Then, on September 2, he made another blunder…
“Brownie,” he said, “you’re doing a heckuva job.”
“Brownie” was Michael D. Brown, Bush’s 2003 appointee as the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)…
“Brownie,” critics claimed, had not done a “heckuva job” at all. He and his agency were roundly condemned as executing a slow, uncoordinated and ineffective response.
And now we have Joe Biden with this:
President Biden on Tuesday gave a stunning appraisal of Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s performance, saying that he did “a hell of a job” immediately following his resignation for sexually harassing subordinates.
Biden lauded Cuomo, who leaves office in 14 days, despite the fact that Cuomo is under investigation by at least four New York district attorneys for assault and the fact that he’s under federal investigation for an admitted coverup of COVID-19 death data at New York nursing homes.
“Well, he’s done a hell of a job. He’s done a hell of a job. And I mean, both on — everything from access to voting to infrastructure to a whole range of things. That’s why it’s so sad,” Biden said.
The president did not express sympathy for Cuomo’s victims, but said that “I respect the decision he made” to resign.
In a tense exchange with CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins about how he could praise Cuomo’s job performance when “he’s accused of sexually harassing,” Biden said he was referring to Cuomo’s work as governor “outside of his personal behavior.”
Cuomo’s “work as governor,” however, also includes his nursing home COVID policy, for which he was starting to be in hot water – and in fact the sexual allegations were probably aired in part in order to take attention from the nursing homes.
Biden also, of course, has his own groping allegations, but they have been effectively covered up by the press and the Democrats, because they needed genial old Joe as their candidate in order to win the all-important 2020 election (or, if voting fraud occurred, at least to get enough votes to make the election close enough so that cheating could put him over the top).
They still need Joe, or he would be out of there. But he certainly doesn’t make the task of his minders and handlers and briefers any easier, does he?
Back when Obama chose Biden as his Vice President, I was stunned. As far as I was concerned, Biden had previously distinguished himself mostly by his mental mediocrity, mendaciousness, and maliciousness in certain battles. But after a short reflection I realized that Biden was a perfect choice for Obama. His age gave the administration a facade of experience – especially foreign policy experience – while at the same time Biden would willingly do whatever Obama told him. And since he had very little following of his own, he wouldn’t be a threat of any kind.
Since then, Biden’s acuity and instincts have faded. A remark such as this one about Cuomo is politically tone-deaf under the circumstances, likely to appeal to neither party. It won’t matter, though. The Democrats and the press will cover for Biden just as long as they feel they need to, and before they ditch him (if they ever do) they will have made sure they have a replacement lined up.
They’re in a quandary now, though, regarding a replacement, because Kamala Harris has turned out to be even more of a dud than was apparent when Biden (or the group) chose her as his running mate. She was chosen for her demographics rather than the extent of her political appeal, which was always weak. Those demographics haven’t changed, but as the public has gotten to know her better, her appeal has lessened even further, if such a thing be possible.
Recalling Newsom
Here’s a piece on the entire California recall situation: what Newsom’s chances are, and how the recall system works there.
For what it’s worth, my prediction is that he will not be recalled but the vote will be close. And since I have only modest confidence in that prediction I’ll add that, if he is recalled, I think that a Democrat will win. The Democratic Party of California is very strong, the GOP very weak, and the Democrats cannot afford to lose this one so they will use every method at their disposal (and they have many, as the article describes) to make sure the party keeps the governorship.
The recall vote is in a special election on September 14th, which is only about a month away.
Andrew Cuomo resigns, effective in 14 days
The question, of course, is why now? I have little doubt that Cuomo’s touchy-feely tendencies have been known for ages, and the problems with his COVID policies for nursing homes have also been known for well over a year.
Someone or more likely some group of people decided that Cuomo was no longer worth protecting, because if they had wanted to protect him they would have continued to do so.
I’ve never crossed the line with anyone. But, I didn’t realize the extent to which the line has been redrawn. There are generational and cultural shifts that I just didn’t fully appreciate.
I hate to give Cuomo any credit at all. But since I’m of a generation which knows about that shift, I know that such creepy behavior (which is what it was) used to be winked at, and if it wasn’t exactly standard it wasn’t all that unusual in politics and even in business. But a lot has indeed “shifted” since then, and these allegations are not from forty years ago. Cuomo either is incredibly clueless or thought he could continue on his merry way with no consequences because he was so powerful, or both.
Cuomo also said:
This situation and moment is not about the facts. It’s not about the truth. it’s not about thoughtful analysis. It’s not about how do we make the system better. This is about politics.
And I agree. It is about politics – as I discussed at the very beginning of this post. Cuomo was raised in a political family and was always aware of the political world and how it operates, so he knows whereof he speaks. He also knows the Democratic Party, and he knows they protect those who are useful to it and throws away those who have lost their usefulness.
Andrew Cuomo lost his usefulness somewhere along the way.
And so they were probably going to impeach him:
“The governor has clearly lost the confidence of the majority members,” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie said Monday, reiterating what he said last week in the wake of the state attorney general’s report being released.
“Our goal is to bring the matter to a close with all haste,” Heastie added.
It would have been nasty, messy, and probably counterproductive for the party. And Andrew Cuomo was correct when he said:
This situation, by its current trajectory, will generate months of political and legal controversy. That is what is going to happen. That is how the political wind is blowing. It will consume government. it will cost taxpayers millions of dollars. It will brutalize people…
…[T]he best way I can help now is if I step aside…
One of those people “brutalized” would have been Andrew Cuomo. And he knew the outcome would be bad for him – he would be removed.
I think that the sexual allegations were allowed to be aired because the nursing home allegations were actually getting too hot to handle, and if Cuomo was removed because of the former then the latter could be swept under the rug more successfully. Here’s one quote that might bear on that:
“Just on the nursing home question alone there are a half million pages of documentation,” Lavine said in noting the volume of evidence.
The Lieutenant Governor of New York is Kathy Hochul, who will take office. A Democrat, obviously, and a woman so she will be New York’s first female governor. How apropos. She will be filling out the remainder of his term, which was set to expire in 2022.
Open thread 8/10/21
A Chicago police officer has been killed in the line of duty
A police officer has been killed in Chicago and another officer is fighting for his life:
One Chicago police officer was killed and another was critically wounded during an exchange of gunfire with at least one suspect during a traffic stop Saturday night in the West Englewood neighborhood on the South Side.
Police, family and the Cook County medical examiner’s office identified the officer who died as Ella French, a 29-year-old who had worked as a Chicago cop since April 2018. She was the first Chicago police officer to be shot and killed in the line of duty since Mayor Lori Lightfoot took office in 2019.
As I read the story, certain elements stood out [emphasis mine]:
The shooting happened just after 9 p.m. Saturday near West 63rd Street and South Bell Avenue when the officers conducted a traffic stop on three people in a vehicle, First Deputy police Superintendent Eric Carter said at a Sunday morning news conference.
During the stop, someone opened fire on the officers and at least one officer returned fire, Carter said…
Both French and the officer who was critically wounded were members of the community safety team, a citywide unit formed last summer under police Superintendent David Brown to respond to crime hot spots.
Was this “community safety team” tasked with using different methods of policing than what is customary? Here’s an article from last September about such teams:
The Community Safety Team was unveiled in July. It is tasked with supplementing efforts by district commanders, while also reaching out to community leaders in an attempt to forge stronger relationships between police and residents on the South and West sides…
“While we will continue fighting violent crime with every resource at our disposal, it’s also important to note that [the] Community Safety Team’s core aspect is community service,” [Team leader] Barz said at a Monday press conference…
That’s very vague. I can’t find much more detail than that, so it’s hard to know whether team protocol had anything to do with what happened or not.
More:
Lightfoot, meanwhile, lamented the pro-law enforcement world’s complaints that society doesn’t do enough for cops, who feel there are roadblocks to doing their jobs effectively. She also lamented critics of the police who have long denounced officers’ treatment of neighborhoods of color.
“Stop. Just stop,” Lightfoot said at the news conference at police headquarters in a stern message to the opposing voices on policing issues. “This constant strife is not what we need in this moment.”
“The police are not our enemies,” she said. “They’re human, just as we are.”
But hasn’t Lightfoot herself fed at least some of this enmity?
More [emphasis mine]:
But the alleged shooter, who was believed by police to be a passenger in the vehicle, has a robbery conviction for a case from around 2019. Brown said that case was adjudicated through the court system, and he may have been sentenced to a probationary-type term, but he provided no further details.
And this is how one of the suspects was caught [emphasis mine]:
One of those neighbors told his wife and two kids to get into their home when they heard gunshots, according to a relative of that neighbor who was acting as his Spanish-language interpreter. They told the Tribune they did not want to be identified due to the sensitivity of the investigation.
Moments later, one of the suspects scaled that neighbor’s fence not far from the site of the shooting in an apparent effort to get away from the police.
That’s when the neighbor and two of his other relatives confronted the suspect in the backyard near a swing set, the neighbor’s relative said, translating for him. The suspect struck one of the three people trying to stop him, and the trio forced the suspect to the ground shortly before police arrived and took over, the neighbor said through his relative.
“He wants to protect the family,” the neighbor’s relative said.
“I’m happy because they (the police) were quickly here,” the neighbor said through his relative.
Chicago police said 73 people were shot, 11 fatally, across the city over the weekend, more than half during a 10-hour span that saw a police officer killed and three mass shootings that wounded 16 people.
That article makes for depressing reading. Chicago is out of control, something we already knew – but reading the lengthy list of violent incidents, injuries, and deaths brings it home even more clearly.
Obama’s birthday party
It was big, and probably mostly maskless.
In the scheme of things, though, I find I don’t care. That Obama is a narcissistic hypocrite who likes to hobnob with adoring celebrities certainly isn’t what I’d call news. We absorbed that fact a long long time ago.
What actually does amaze me – although I shouldn’t be amazed – is that Obama’s sixty years old. Now, that is surprising. It seems like only yesterday he was a young guy, and although sixty is young to me (boy, is it weird typing that), I’m well aware that it’s not young in any objective sense.
But at my back I always hear. Time’s wingèd chariot hurrying near…
John McWhorter: “Kendi and DiAngelo don’t debate people like me”
If social media is any indication, many people seem to be of the opinion that people like Ibram Kendi and Robin DiAngelo should want to “debate” people like me and Glenn Loury. These people are roasted endlessly on social media for not engaging in “debate.”
It isn’t fair. I completely understand why they don’t…
…[G]iven the way people like me or Glenn Loury have discussed people like Kendi and DiAngelo on line and in print, how reasonable is it to expect them to “debate” us? I wasn’t nice to White Fragility last year and meant it, as that review needed to be written – but fully get why DiAngelo thereafter did not want to appear with me on Morning Joe. I didn’t write that review expecting DiAngelo to put on the gloves and “debate” me – I knew full well it meant that sometime in the future we’d be in a talk show green room carefully avoiding eye contact. Glenn has called Kendi an “empty suit” in our conversations and it has gotten around; I guarantee that I would never appear on the show of someone who called me that.
Some may be thinking that people like that are responsible for defending themselves in public competition, that this is the burden of the public intellectual. But the question is why they are supposed to do this in a live, back-and-forth sparring match.
Life is short. Why should someone spend even an hour or two of their time engaging with someone who has given all indication that they heartily disapprove of their work and even find them off-putting personally? Whether it was about winning or losing, who does this?
It seems to me I’ve indeed seen people do that, although it doesn’t tend to end well. So yes, sometimes it happens, but since I don’t usually watch that sort of thing I can’t name anyone except perhaps William Buckley vs. Gore Vidal long ago.
But far more importantly, do Kendi and DiAngelo debate anyone who disagrees with them? If so, I’m not aware of it.
And it makes sense that they wouldn’t be willing to do so, but not for the reason that McWhorter gives. As post-modernists, isn’t it the case that they don’t really believe in debate? They don’t believe in meritocracy, they don’t think traditional logic and argument prove anything – and in fact they believe those things are examples of the systemic racism embedded in our entire society. So why would they subject themselves to being judged by rules and standards they reject as not just wrong, but racist? If they can get away it – and apparently they can, at least so far – they will continue to refuse.