Les gens qui nous gouvernent n'ont pas la moindre idée de ce qu'ils feront dans 15 jours, encore moins dans un an, mais il y a tout un tas de gens qui s'imaginent que tout cela fait partie d'un plan mûrement réfléchi dont on se demande bien d'ailleurs quel pourrait être le but...
C'est absolument sidérant que les gens trouvent ce scénario absurde, mais que par contre ils trouvent l'idée que ce qui se passe est le fruit d'un complot visant à "contrôler les populations" (peu importe que ça ne veuille à peu près rien dire) pour servir "Big Pharma", qui
apparemment peut contrôler la plupart des gouvernements de la terre pour servir ses intérêts alors qu'on ne parle que de quelques dizaines de milliards d'euros et que des industries autrement plus puissantes sont affectées négativement par ces mesures mais n'ont aucun pouvoir 🙃
Ça me rappelle vraiment Russiagate ce délire : des gens absolument convaincus d'une vague théorie qu'il est impossible de rendre précise sans que son absurdité ne devienne manifeste (on ne nous explique jamais *concrètement* quel bénéfice vont tirer nos dirigeants de forcer les
gens à se faire vacciner pour aller boire un coup, sinon en disant des trucs vagues comme cette histoire de "contrôle des populations"), tout ça pour expliquer des choses censées être mystérieuses alors qu'elles s'expliquent très bien par des mécanismes tristement banals...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Even if Delta had a R0 of ~6, and the estimate of Omicron's transmission advantage in that study were correct, you could *not* infer that it has a R0 of ~18 because this advantage is likely due mostly or perhaps even entirely to Omicron's better ability to evade prior immunity!
This inference is based on a confusion between a *transmission* advantage and a *transmissibility* advantage, but as I explained before those are distinct concepts and it's important to distinguish them, otherwise you end up making this kind of mistake. cspicenter.org/blog/waronscie…
Moreover, as I explained in this article, we don't really have very good reasons to think that Delta has a R0 of 6, precisely because it's very difficult to estimate a variant's *transmissibility* advantage from its *transmission* advantage in a particular context.
If antibodies from vaccination or prior infection can't neutralize Omicron well, but vaccinated and previously infected people are still protected against severe disease, then it should obviously *increase* your credence that T-cells play a role in protecting against disease...
Of course, it also shows that T-cells won't prevent you from testing positive or even having symptoms, but nobody expected them to do that 🤷♂️It's amazing the nonsense "zero COVID" folks will peddle to support this policy even when they should know better.
The most amazing part is that he probably believes that nonsense at this point. It’s the same as with virtue signaling and more generally any case where someone says something because it’s in their interest: it actually produces genuine belief pretty quickly.
It’s very difficult psychologically to spend your life going around saying things you know to be false, so pretty soon you start believing your own nonsense. This is also why politicians are not nearly as cynical as people generally assume.
C'est étrange mais je n'ai pas le souvenir que, quand Fillon avait fait une visite très médiatique à Niamey en décembre 2016, votre ministère s'était fendu d'un communiqué pour dire que c'était contraire aux règles 🤔 Vous ne nous prendriez pas un peu pour des cons par hasard ?
Fillon avait carrément débarqué avec Jeudy dans ses bagages pour qu'il couvre sa visite dans Paris Match, mais les mecs veulent nous faire croire que Zemmour a violé une règle dont tout le monde ignorait l'existence jusqu'à aujourd'hui (parce qu'elle n'a jamais existé), mdr.
Ce qui s'est passé c'est que Macron avait tranquillement commencé à s'empiffrer de foie gras quand il s'est aperçu que Zemmour était en train de faire une opération de com à Abidjan et qu'il a passé un savon à Parly qui a envoyé Grandjean inventer cette histoire de toute pièce 🤷♂️
If you're interested in European politics, you should check my post on Zemmour, who has shaken things up in the French presidential election and made it a lot more interesting. I summarize below some of the points I make, but you should read the whole thing, it's not very long ⬇️
After explaining who Zemmour is and how he ended up running for president after a career in journalism, I briefly describe his platform. Zemmour's main focus is immigration, which he strongly opposes, but he also has unorthodox views on foreign policy.
Many people in both France and the US have compared him to Trump. As I explain in the post, this comparison is correct in some respects, but misleading in others. Zemmour is also politically incorrect and abrasive, but unlike Trump, he is well-read and knows the issues.
This is from the latest Imperial College report. They project that, even in the best case scenario, the daily number of deaths at the peak would be ~3 times as high as before vaccination in the absence of new restrictions or behavioral changes 🙃 imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-inf…
It's the same thing every time: take the VOC's initial growth advantage, turn that into a *transmissibility* advantage, plug that into a model that assumes quasi-homogeneous mixing with no behavioral changes and, congratulations, you got yourself a nice apocalyptic prediction!
My bad, you must insist that it's not a prediction but a *projection* (as if the reason why it has zero chance of coming true were because of scenario uncertainty and not model misspecification 🤪), so that when it doesn't happen you can say that your *projection* wasn't wrong...