COVID, immunity and vaccines (no politics, science question)

The average Joe does not think nor reason quantitatively. They have a hard time with things that have to be thought about it quantitative terms, like reducing your odds of infection by a given percentage. They like to think qualitatively, like “If I get vaccinated I can’t catch Covid-19”.
We here have all gotten past the "If I get in a small plane I will die" thinking so that makes us more qualified than the average joe. :)
 
Lots more talk about opening up soon, NY & IL for starters. I think the ‘cost / benefit’ analysis is tipping towards opening.
 
Mathematicians and others with quantitative training are usually more comfortable with thinking in terms of odds.
True, but it's also a case of "a little learning" (is a dangerous thing). They know just enough to be overconfident, but not enough really to know what they're talking about when they set up those YouTube channels.
 
True, but it's also a case of "a little learning" (is a dangerous thing). They know just enough to be overconfident, but not enough really to know what they're talking about when they set up those YouTube channels.

Have you heard the joke about the dairy company that hired a physicist which ends with “consider a spherical cow?”
 
Looks like there aren’t actually any vaccine doses held back in the Federal stockpile of “second” doses that were supposed to be there.

So what is already distributed is all there is until more are manufactured.
Well yes and no. Your statement assumes that everything that has already been manufactured has already been distributed. I do not believe this is the case. The Pfizer vaccine is manufactured in a plant that's about 12 miles from my house. They built super cold freezer buildings at that facility months ago to store the vaccine doses they were already manufacturing in anticipation of the emergency approval. They've got tons of it already manufactured.

My wife works in pharma research and because of that and because we live so close, she's been inundated with recruiters reaching out to her about positions in pharma manufacturing i.e Pfizer vaccine lines. She's worked in pharma for almost 30 years but she does not now nor has she ever worked in pharma manufacturing. They're hiring like there's no tomorrow and likely parking/slowing their other lines to help meet demand.

That's not to say the whole releasing all the doses now thing isn't a gamble, because it is. But it's probably not nearly as much of a gamble as you might have thought.
 
Lots more talk about opening up soon, NY & IL for starters. I think the ‘cost / benefit’ analysis is tipping towards opening.

That’ll be very hard without accidentally saying something political, but will try with a couple of math comments...

Firstly, they don’t have near enough people vaccinated yet anywhere but even locally. Numbers are not great for that. Especially not tourism.

Which... leads to what they need to do to fiscally save places like Manhattan tourista districts.

And wildly, real estate prices in those places still essentially closed for business haven’t fallen yet, they rose. Which is a sign of a whole lot of wishful thinking, numbers wise.

Been following Louis Rossman’s videos about commercial real estate around his computer repair store. This one I just shook my head slowly the whole time.


I have no idea how normal service / food / whatever low-paid job people afford to live there in normal times.

He had some interesting previous videos on how building owners were “negotiating” rents this year. Short summary was they’d give a discount in 2020 per month and you have to pay it back in a lump sum sometime in 2021.

That’s a recipe for multiple business failures when the Piper comes piping.

Staying out of politics, they may have made it better or worse, kinda doesn’t matter. $30K a month for a restaurant space selling food socially distanced or extended outdoors even... at about maybe $20/plate... well the basic division doesn’t look good no matter what they did.

Most of those places don’t operate with any more than a month of capitalization and it’s constantly tied up in food/inventory. Not much left after COGS.

Uggggly numbers.
 
Right now, caseloads and deaths are setting new records in most countries (especially the US), so sadly, a full reopening won't be any time soon.

I'm hopeful, though, that we're just about at the peak. By late spring/early summer we might be starting to see real improvement and partial reopening thanks to the vaccination drive, and by the end of the year, we might even be fully back to normal and be able to hold large public events again safely. Fingers crossed.
 
That’ll be very hard without accidentally saying something political, but will try with a couple of math comments...

Firstly, they don’t have near enough people vaccinated yet anywhere but even locally. Numbers are not great for that. Especially not tourism.

Which... leads to what they need to do to fiscally save places like Manhattan tourista districts.

And wildly, real estate prices in those places still essentially closed for business haven’t fallen yet, they rose. Which is a sign of a whole lot of wishful thinking, numbers wise.

Been following Louis Rossman’s videos about commercial real estate around his computer repair store. This one I just shook my head slowly the whole time.


I have no idea how normal service / food / whatever low-paid job people afford to live there in normal times.

He had some interesting previous videos on how building owners were “negotiating” rents this year. Short summary was they’d give a discount in 2020 per month and you have to pay it back in a lump sum sometime in 2021.

That’s a recipe for multiple business failures when the Piper comes piping.

Staying out of politics, they may have made it better or worse, kinda doesn’t matter. $30K a month for a restaurant space selling food socially distanced or extended outdoors even... at about maybe $20/plate... well the basic division doesn’t look good no matter what they did.

Most of those places don’t operate with any more than a month of capitalization and it’s constantly tied up in food/inventory. Not much left after COGS.

Uggggly numbers.
Storefront has always been tough with high rents. Location, location, location. = money, money, money.
 
We here have all gotten past the "If I get in a small plane I will die" thinking so that makes us more qualified than the average joe. :)
Some on this board have fallen for the idea that the airlines' admirable safety record means that "flying is safer than driving" applies to general aviation.
 
Some on this board have fallen for the idea that the airlines' admirable safety record means that "flying is safer than driving" applies to general aviation.

I've never seen that sentiment expressed. I think most here (maybe everyone here) realizes the relative risk of climbing into a light aircraft.
 
I've never seen that sentiment expressed. I think most here (maybe everyone here) realizes the relative risk of climbing into a light aircraft.
It's been quite a while since the last time I saw a thread like that, so it may have been before you joined the forum.
 
Some on this board have fallen for the idea that the airlines' admirable safety record means that "flying is safer than driving" applies to general aviation.
I've seen that on other boards. The arithmetic is pretty simple:

Cars: ~1 fatal accident per 100 million vehicle miles

Light piston aircraft: ~1 fatal accident per 100,000 air hours.

For our piston planes to be safer than cars per mile traveled, we'd have to have an average ground speed faster than 1,000 miles per hour.

For our piston planes to be safer than cars per hour traveled, the cars would have to be averaging over 1,000 mph.

If you're a safer-than average pilot, there's a good chance you're a safer-than-average driver as well, so the same ratio likely applies.

There's no rational way to spin these numbers to make piston planes safer than cars (by time or distance), but that doesn't stop people from trying.
 
Lots more talk about opening up soon, NY & IL for starters. I think the ‘cost / benefit’ analysis is tipping towards opening.

Saw a link to this (apparently peer reviewed paper) elsewhere :https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484

"
Background and Aims

The most restrictive non‐pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for controlling the spread of COVID‐19 are mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closures. Given the consequences of these policies, it is important to assess their effects. We evaluate the effects on epidemic case growth of more restrictive NPIs (mrNPIs), above and beyond those of less restrictive NPIs (lrNPIs).


Conclusions

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions."
 
There's no rational way to spin these numbers to make piston planes safer than cars...
Sure there is:
C172 fatals are around half the average GA rate (0.56/100khrs). Car fatals in 1921 were ~23x today (24.09/100mVMT). So if the C172 averages 100kts (115mph), piston planes are safer than cars. :)
 
Sure there is:
C172 fatals are around half the average GA rate (0.56/100khrs). Car fatals in 1921 were ~23x today (24.09/100mVMT). So if the C172 averages 100kts (115mph), piston planes are safer than cars. :)
OK, you win. A Cessna 172 in 2021 is safer than a car was in 1921. :) I'll be more careful about clarifying the rules next time.
 
Saw a link to this (apparently peer reviewed paper) elsewhere :https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484

"
Background and Aims

The most restrictive non‐pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for controlling the spread of COVID‐19 are mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closures. Given the consequences of these policies, it is important to assess their effects. We evaluate the effects on epidemic case growth of more restrictive NPIs (mrNPIs), above and beyond those of less restrictive NPIs (lrNPIs).


Conclusions

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions."
Thanks for sharing that. Do bear in mind that it will be one among dozens (or hundreds) of similar studies, so we'll have to wait and see if the scientific consensus shifts, or it's just an outlier.

(Updated per https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...s-science-question.130085/page-5#post-3033265)
 
Last edited:
Ah irony.

People complain about members expressing their views on vaccines etc without much background/education in the domain...

and then go on making proclaimations about safety without much background/education in the domain.
 
One of the problems with arguing from authority here on the forum is that most of us don't put our professional qualifications in our sig lines, or even in our forum profiles.
 
Ah irony.

People complain about members expressing their views on vaccines etc without much background/education in the domain...

and then go on making proclaimations about safety without much background/education in the domain.
That's a fair cop.
 
Last edited:
Some on this board have fallen for the idea that the airlines' admirable safety record means that "flying is safer than driving" applies to general aviation.

I've never seen that sentiment expressed. I think most here (maybe everyone here) realizes the relative risk of climbing into a light aircraft.

It's been quite a while since the last time I saw a thread like that, so it may have been before you joined the forum.

It turns out it hasn't been that long ago. I counted at least three posts on the first page of the following thread from three years ago:

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/how-safe-is-flying.110095/
 
Back
Top