Posted On: Monday - August 30th 2021 8:31PM MST
In Topics:   Websites  Pundits  Kung Flu Stupidity
First, just a note here to say that Peak Stupidity will be including quite a bit more of the Kung Flu stupidity now that Season 3 is in full swing. I have so much other stuff backed up, but maybe, on the COVID-one-niner, a Peak Stupidity post a day keeps Doctor Fauci away... far, far away, I hope! I believe our readers want to read this stuff because it's happening now. We like to write about it too, because, though many flavors of stupidity abound, the Kung Flu PanicFest is a novel form of stupidity. We are both the Woodward & the Bernstein of the Kung Flu PanicFest story. Where are our Pulitzers?
I noticed just today that Ron Unz has a 3rd in a series of posts of his under his "Announcements" section specifically set up for commenter to debate the Kung Flu vaccination controversy. I had not gotten into the 1st two, mostly due to my disagreement, or so I thought, with Mr. Unz's stance on the Kung Flu in general*. I have neither the heart nor time to go through the previous comment threads as Are the Opponents of the Covid Injections “Anti-Vaxx Crackpots”? (Mr. Unz is interviewed by Mike Whitney, who has been on the anti-panic side of this thing.) and The Covid Debate: To Vaxx or Not to Vaxx have 1,681 and 1,589 comments in them, respectively! (The commenters are nothing if not consistent in output.). Good on The Unz Review for this, but a 3rd drawback of getting into them is who in hell would read a comment that old and that is one in 1,500?!
The 3rd post is simply called A Continuation of the Covid Vaxxing Debate. I have read through just over 300 of the comments in about 2 hours. (I was traveling.)
I know this is a digression, but just to back up my claim of 2 hours, let me put it this way. I don't think I read nearly as fast as Ron Unz claims to (and very likely does!) I can move along like most of the best of them, though, as I know when to skip the last part of an occasional uninteresting one, and I usually recognize the ones I've already read via clicking around on replies to others. I'll say this specifically for this thread. Corvinus wasn't on there, or it'd have been even faster - I skip not only his comments but almost all replies to his. There was a guy named "Rasche" who wrote some amazingly long-winded comments, and was as full of himself as I could even imagine someone being**. Mr. Unz seems to really like the guy.
Commenter Adam Smith wrote in a quick good one. (Let me know if/when you've read that whole thing, Adam. Or, are you not as obsessive as me about it?) The thread is up to well over 400 posts now.
Again, this one is specifically about the jab. I read a good debate there. I don't mean any of the not just pro-vax but mandatory-vaxxers*** had any points that changed my mind. The guy "That Would be Telling" had his usual bit, but IMO got reamed pretty badly to the point that he was just putting Troll tags on comments as his argument. Maybe "debate" isn't the best term, but the anti-mandatory-vax commenters really did well. Any point I would have made was already made well, including my question about Mr. Unz himself.
Last winter, in Where have you gone, Ronald Unzio, ... we wondered how an extremely intelligent guy like that could write about all kinds of big lies in history (not that I agree with every single one of his revisions), yet fail to see the big lie going on all around us "right here, right now"? Here's an excerpt from that long post:
If ever there were a big story that could rival that of WWI and WWII being instigated by certain people or the people behind the implementation of Communism in Russia, who shot JFK (or JR, for that matter) or. any one of Ron’s areas of historical research that many appreciate, woudn’t this Kung Flu PanicFest be it? Yet, Mr. Unz is so into his “who started it?” conspiracy theory instead. I’m just wondering if that’s just an anti-Americans and pro-Chinese attitude coming though. Be that as it may, this is the biggest story of the century, with huge amounts of political implications. Wake up, Ron Unz! This is happening NOW, Ron, Right Here, Right Now (Unfortunately, it's not as bright a happening as the fall of the Commies in Europe, the subject of that Jesus Jones' song.)Now, of all things, among a few other comments of his on this Vax thread Part 3, Mr. Unz has a really common-sensical comment that could have written by one of us Peakers... only, yeah, we'd have written it about a year and a half earlier, but who's counting? Here you go - the whole thing:
@nicelandI would not have expected this common sense comment out of the man, but I feel bad writing that now. Bravo, Ron Unz!With vaccine protection falling with time, perhaps recently vaccinated should seek infection as “booster” against future variants? I have seen this speculation floating around and for lower risk groups this might make sense.As everyone here knows, I’m absolutely no Covid expert so take this with a huge grain of salt, but I’ve been wondering the same thing for the last few weeks. Consider:
(1) From what I’ve read, getting infected gives you very long-term, perhaps almost permanent near-immunity. There seem to be extremely few second infections that are at all serious.
(2) Covid vaccines don’t seem to provide long-term immunity, though they greatly reduce the seriousness of the infection, perhaps by 95% or more. For vaccinated people, Covid really is “just the flu.”
(3) Since vaxxed people can still get infected and infect others, and the Delta strain is so extremely contagious, I’d think that sooner or later, almost everyone will get infected. Based upon excess deaths, probably something like 1/3 to 1/2 of all American adults have already been infected.
(4) Wouldn’t it make sense for vaxxed people to deliberately get infected while their vaccine-protection is still relatively strong? That way we essentially get herd immunity, but with minimal severe illnesses, loss of life, or overwhelmed ICUs. The exceptions might be those people who are so vulnerable due to age or other factors that even the vaccine might not be enough to protect them.
(5) The big unknown in this analysis is whether vaxxed people who get infected develop “infection immunity” or not, or at least what the percentages would be.
(6) Similarly, since children seem almost invulnerable to Covid, wouldn’t it make sense for them to get infected and develop permanent immunity against later reinfection? Obviously, a year or two doesn’t make any difference, so there’s no rush and probably Covid should be better understood before this decision is made. But offhand, I think it probably makes more sense to deliberately infect children than to vaxx them.
PS: I took slight issue with Mr. Unz's point (6). I'm fine with the health aspect of it, but asking even the least hysterical of parents to purposefully infect their child is a non-starter. OTOH, if you tell them it's a vaccine, ... and it IS nearly the same as using an old-fashioned vaccine!
* He seems much too involved in his pet theory about the origins of the Kung Flu (not much of a spoiler, but "it's the Americans!"), a year ago was predicting millions of deaths FROM this virus, and lastly, used to denigrate as a "hoaxer" anyone who didn't sound hysterical enough about it. Maybe the last two opinions may have changed ...?
** It's almost to where it reads like satire, as far as his "full-of-himselfness".
*** They are the real problem. If you want to promote the vaccine and get more people to take it, fine. Our problem is those who want to force it. They are trying hard, a subject for numerous posts to come.