CodyyyGardner Categories For later read

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
My thoughts on 1-dose vs 2-dose approach.

TL; DR

Wrong questions give you wrong answers.

We assuredly should want 2 doses, the only issue is the timing of 2nd dose. And a brief delay is a risk worth taking.

But let's prioritize >65 year old 2nd doses at same time.

1/9


First, let's start with @VirusesImmunity brilliant thread:

We know enough to know that there is vast benefit from giving substantial immunity to as many as possible as quickly as possible.


We also know that the timing of second dose was never set in stone. Pfizer chose to give second dose at 19-23 days; Moderna chose at 28-31 days. They tested at these levels and proved safety and efficacy. Safety is not at issue with delayed dosing. Efficacy probably is.

3/9

Most of medicine, as practiced, has not been subjected to rigorous clinical trials for various reasons. We weigh available evidence & act accordingly. We pivot when new evidence is available. We should want more RCTs, but they are often unethical or impossible to perform. 4/9

Ideally, Pfizer &/or Moderna would have already done a single dose arm. JNJ is testing both a single-dose & 2-dose regimen. We will have some data in a few weeks on the 1-dose regimen.

But we don't live in an ideal world. We live in the real world.
No


No

https://t.co/9MgwobVvYS


Incitement is speech that is:

1️⃣ intended to cause, and
2️⃣ reasonably likely to cause
3️⃣ imminent
4️⃣ lawless action

It needs all 4 elements

If any of those 4 are missing, it's First-Amendment protected speech

And constitutionally protected speech is never sedition

No


Immediate is imminent
4 minutes from now is imminent
4 hours from now might be imminent but probably is not
4 days from now definitely is not
Maximum of 2 hours of floor debate per objection

No requirement to use the whole 2 hours


Doubt it. I think you'll get maybe an hour with Arizona so Congresscritters can get their viral C-SPAN clips, then they'll get bored with it and move on


Correct


The Speaker and the Vice President preside over their respective chambers like normal, then decide who talks


I'd need to go through whatever rules the House adopts tomorrow, they're not my forte
i’ll keep saying this but for example look no further than the ku klux klan, theatrical and silly and also deadly serious


we often talk about the overthrow of reconstruction as a singular organized effort, but it should be understood as something more disparate and fractured, with success tied less to martial superiority than the indifference of authorities to intimidation and violence.

a group of guys — maybe the owner of the general store, and the sheriff and some farmers who fought in the war — gets together to gripe and complain and plot a little mischief. they put on masks and grab guns and go beat up a black sharecropper or local clerk or whatever...

everyone knows who did it. but there’s no one to stop them. the army, if it’s even in the state, is tens or hundreds of miles away. and mustering a militia may risk open conflict. the guys realize they can do this and getaway with it. so they do it again.

maybe they have a few more people with them this time. maybe they escalate, not just beating up local blacks and their white allies but killing a few.
IMO, it is sky palace bad. This will do lasting damage to the UCP, perhaps more than the party’s performance on real issues that matter. Because it affects the perception of the UCP.

1/


It used to be a gotcha question to ask politicians how much they spent on milk. The point of the question was to finger those politicians who didn’t do their own shopping or otherwise were rich enough to not have to worry about how much it cost to feed their families.

2/

Today, people rail against the ‘Laurentian Elites’ who are out of touch with people. The complaint is that these politicians aren’t affected by their policies the same way ‘severely normal’ people are, and hence come up with ideas that are bad for the non-elite.

3/

The sky palace wasn’t necessarily a bad idea — the premier does need accommodations in Edmonton — but it created the image of an entitled premier, freed from the ordinary day-to-day struggles by virtue of the tax dollars from hardworking Albertans. The rhetoric writes itself.

4/

Bill Morneau’s ultimate sin was to not notice that he hadn’t paid for tens of thousands of dollars in travel expenses. That he could just write a cheque to fix that problem didn’t help. It showed he lived in a world completely different than ours.

5/
So a few people have asked why I have this snarky response. What is my problem with this service? Well, to be clear, it’s not an issue with GraphQL, it’s an issue with direct coupling with underlying datasources #thread


The service as advertised makes it simple to map a GraphQL definition against a database. Now, what’s the problem with this? Well, the devil here is in the detail. But fundamentally it comes down to how important information hiding is to you.

Information hiding is the concept whereby you expose as little information as possible to external parties. Anything you expose over a boundary becomes part of the contract between provider and consumer.

Anything I hide inside a boundary can be changed freely. Anything I expose must be maintained if I want to maintain backwards compatibility.

Why is backwards compatibility important? If I break compatibility with external consumers of an interface, then such a change can lead to the need to lock step releases of consumer and producer, or even worse accidental breakages in prod.