Smallpox is a disease where vaccination once protects you for life.
The current round of vaccines for COVID protect you for several months.
There’s a difference in outcomes because of that. I’ll also note that a big chunk of China didn’t get vaccinated either, and that we have a really active anti-vax contingent in the US with the support of Trump and the other Republicans.
It’s not the end; it’s not something that ever ends, in the same way that influenza still kills people.
But vaccines got us from a disease that was killing an awful lot more people to one where it’s one that kills a few.
That’s the idea: extract the oil, pay out everything as dividends or share buybacks, and then sell the well to a doomed-to-fail company which can declare bankruptcy and leave the public responsible for cleaning up the mess. The oil industry has a long history of taking advantage of inadequate bond requirements for oil wells to do exactly that.
If you’re in the US, the basic answer looks like this:
Which is why I’m going to do what I can to prevent that: I care about policy, not about how the candidates look or anything.
It means his team arranged for actual delivery, federal payments, and not just dumping it on the system, which weren’t prepared
What he did do was get vaccine distribution working. That made a world of difference in fatality rates
It’s about the voters’ views, not the elected officials.
Yeah, disruptive can be completely acceptable. The problem is that it takes more than just disruptive to be effective — not just avoiding a negative impact, but having a positive one.
Yes, they’ve been updating the vaccine every year to match currently-circulating virus strains. This is about an additional update coming out this fall.
Pretty much the same thing is done with flu vaccines, where you need a periodic update for it to be effective.
No, not yet. There will probably be one in September or October.
Not sure anything like that is put together, but a good start is to call your rep and senators and ask them to close the various loopholes that the courts have put in US bribery law, both the after-the-fact-gratuity one and the explicit (instead of implicit) quid-pro-quo one.
I don’t think the current round of art protests turn people away — but they also don’t really help much. There’s actually a body of research about what works: large groups, acting nonviolently, with coherent coordinated demands that can be acted upon.
Historically, the answer on this has involved charging very different amounts in different countries. This both enables some level of access by the poor and maximizes profits.
Wages weren’t stagnant though.
The key thing is that right now, wages are rising at about 4% per year, while prices are rising at about 3% per year. That’s a good place to be.
I wonder how much of a gratuity the Republican justices are going to get for this ruling.
Inflation of 3% per year is lower than median wage growth; it’s generally considered somewhat desirable because it transfers wealth from lenders (who tend to be well-off) to borrowers (who are less so)
Basically: the US isn’t the only country in the world, the things he’s doing are going to cut emissions in the long run, but only making a modest difference as yet, and CO2 accumulates over time
Sorry, but the judge is hoping for a gratuity