The Lancet article www.thelancet.com/journals/lan... referenced by the above cover (I'm a bit of a fiend for T in SIFT hapgood.us/2019/06/19/s... of "Tracing to original context" & your posts are rich with specific info to track down to source so if a lot of these 'links as replies' that's reason)
Underlying paper I think (has Woodrow and Alwan as authors) onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
🚨 MILLIONS at higher risk will lose NHS Covid vaccines this autumn. Lives will be at risk. The NHS will face more pressure. Covid is as serious as 'flu and also requires updated seasonal vaccines. We can stop this! Sign + share our petition (on next post) 1/ #KeepCovidBoosters
I.e. the pandemic Panic/Neglect cycle (as Ed Yong has put it) wants naming as the combination of vaccines, widespread infection with Omicron and folks pushing "back to the office" without significant non-vaccine mitigations seemed to mark the neglect part of the cycle - boosters aside.
It maybe be clear from context but if not it can likely be clear if it is 3 words e.g. "During COVID restrictions","Before COVID vaccines". If unclear worth checking what is meant as if "When COVID was a thing": COVID deaths post Biden autumn 2022 "pandemic is over" > NYT 100k "incalculable loss".
Yes, that was my thought of how a fascistic, visuals obsessed concept of health - rather than an "are people are dying of diseases" measure might line up with some data such as ourworldindata.org/grapher/shar...
I'd recommend both - the Girls That Create/Word of Mom Radio podcast perhaps having a more "parenting/whole society" perspective and the Crimes of Heart episode more "individual adults & systems" - both very good but different enough that they make sense as complementary pair - not minor variations.
For the small number of actual humans following me: this, Episode 88 of Crimes of the Heart podcast, podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/r... was a good recent listen - probably my no. 2 rec for a podcast with Nicole Bedera - different from the no. 1: still podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/g...
Images with alt text. The "Ouch SCOTUS" particularly applies to final sentence of the footnote (found in alt text of 2nd image).
![Screenshot of footnote 9 on page 27 of document 238 in the Harvard v HHS Case 1:25-cv-11048-ADB saying: The Court is mindful of Justice Gorsuch’s comments in his opinion in APHA and fully agrees that this Court is not free to “defy” Supreme Court decisions and is, in fact, “duty-bound to respect ‘the hierarchy of the federal court system.’” APHA, 2025 WL 2415669, at *3 (Gorsuch, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (citation omitted). Consistent with these obligations, this Court (and likely all district courts) endeavors to follow the Supreme Court’s rulings, “no matter how misguided [it] may think [them] to be.” Hutto v. Davis, 454 U.S. 370, 375 (1982) (per curiam). That said, the Supreme Court’s recent emergency docket rulings regarding grant terminations have not been models of clarity, and have left many issues unresolved. California was a four-paragraph per curiam decision issued in the context of a stay application. It cited Bowen as good law, stated that the Tucker Act gave the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction over contract claims against the federal government, and then stated that the district court likely (footnote and quote continues on next page - here as alt text of next image)](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6q3ohtkujupdevhjure5kc5w/bafkreifb3te7sdae326prlrm6u5dqz2cvvdp35kyzgul5f6ij3vqoyzsvu@jpeg "Click to view full size")
![Screenshot of footnote 9 of page 27 which is continuing on page 28 of document 238 in the Harvard v HHS Case 1:25-cv-11048-ADB saying:acked jurisdiction “to order the payment of money under the APA,” without purporting to explain how the case was distinguishable from Bowen or other related, longstanding precedents. California, 145 S. Ct. at 968. Then, in APHA, four justices thought grant-termination cases belong, in full, in the Court of Federal Claims, and four justices thought they belong, in full, in federal district court, and the decision was controlled by the vote of a single justice. 2025 WL 2415669, at *1–16. The outcome, which no party had requested, was, thus, inconsistent with the views of eight justices, id. at *16 (Jackson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), and, again, provided little explanation as to how Bowen, which the controlling concurrence again cited as good law, id. at *2, applied or was distinguishable. This Court understands, of course, that the Supreme Court, like the district courts, is trying to resolve these issues quickly, often on an emergency basis, and that the issues are complex and evolving. See Trump v. CASA, Inc., 145 S. Ct. 2540, 2567 (2025) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) (“In justiciable cases, this Court, not the district courts or courts of appeals, will often still be the ultimate decisionmaker as to the interim legal status of major new federal statutes and executive actions.”). Given this, however, the Court respectfully submits that it is unhelpful and unnecessary to criticize district courts for “defy[ing]” the Supreme Court when they are working to find the right answer in a rapidly evolving doctrinal landscape, where they must grapple with both existing precedent and interim guidance from the Supreme Court that appears to set that precedent aside without much explanation or consensus. End footnote. Final sentence of footnote starting](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6q3ohtkujupdevhjure5kc5w/bafkreihboyina7lwz5oisrh3mcsrm6a4kxssj5l76adrjg5a3axoab74pq@jpeg "Click to view full size")
UK both had poor early pandemic response (huge first wave and lost 27k in Jan 2021) - killing vulnerable folk early on - and good vaccine uptake (NHS & trust in it did good job in getting oldest folks vaccinated & then the more vulnerable - at least if white). Maybe relevant to 66% figure.
Hard to be definitive (as that requires understanding death data and testing regime & death certification in each country) but looks like UK saw most deaths before end of legal restrictions while AUS & USA saw more deaths after end of restrictions/vaccines available (respectively).
Whole thing suggests from context that "during COVID/pandemic" might mean "pre-vaccine", "to last lockdown", "to end of restrictions" (may be eased after final lockdown), "end of local/WHO public health emergency". Probably clear from context - but plenty of possible meanings along with commonest.
Translating "during COVID" as "pandemic legal restrictions" has colloquial sense but can differ by nearly a year (Aussies: early-mid 2022, see Prof Fuhrer up 🧵, while UK removed most by July 2021) and with different % of total recorded COVID deaths covered by period (sub 40% for AUS, ~66% in UK).
cont.... those periods cover is 66% (UK) and 37% (AUS) of COVID deaths in Our World In Data data. So AUS a bit like US in sense that more recorded deaths in post vaccine, Biden era (1.2m deaths to Jan 20 2021 reaching 2.5m a year later). Similar concept, different times & deaths involved.
Right - so it is accurate that translating that concept (pandemic domestic legal restrictions) to the UK (were most restrictions where removed in July 2021) would mean date range in Australia with almost no COVID deaths. With 19 July 2021 (UK) and start of June 2022 (AUS) as local end dates.....
Realising you're writing from Australia; beyond contexts where WHO PHE (ending May 2023) is meaning to infer, the end date might have it mean very different things. WHO PHE period does encompass most AUS Covid deaths but a UK "During COVID" meaning 2020 + 2021 it would = "Almost no COVID" in AUS!
An implicit stance - in absence of better masking, visible ventilation improvements, normalised "Is there a wave on?" monitoring - seems to be "Get the vaccine, get the disease and die if you are going to". I once had a relative explicitly advocating me to go get COVID (when Omicron was new).
Not arguing that inference is wrong. "During pandemic emergency phase"/"In pre-vaccine pandemic" are slightly different but seem short. The lack of broadly adopted & visible post-vaccine mitigation is probably why emphasising "COVID still here" feels right to more COVID cautious folk.
"Plenty of studies" = true from the earliest days. While I think common approach is trust (or distrust) of establishment I looked at original trial papers + follow-up efficacy paper based on Scottish NHS records in informing me taking 2021 vaccines i.e. triangulated on multiple studies of efficacy.
Rare moment when a Trump action did get actual laugh from me was in context of bsky.app/profile/jere... - mostly as I read outline of that paper to relative on phone on basis of "If they die unvaxxed at least I said how vax was demonstrated effective &, in short-term, safe" & to them: NEJM = hidden!
Given how few governments acted like NZ: betrayal blindness is part of it. Care not callousness might look like: making COVID wastewater figures & flu indicators something delivered with TV weather forecast & urging folks to mask up to when data shows signs of spike, & improving indoor air quality.
At the policy making level New Zealand stands out as counterexample showing era IS marked by policy making callousness. I agree a lot of different beliefs & circumstances go into average folks being in neglect part of pandemic "panic/neglect" cycle - despite continued prevalence.
"During emergency phase"/"pre-vaccine"/"pre-Omicron infection" point to same general period in different ways. "During COVID" is implicitly biased to "everyone should have got the disease back then so the survivors can then stop acknowledging it as present as they survived it once" (annoys holdouts)
Implicit problem of "during COVID": erasing it in present. Problem can show up as doctor in ER/A&E unconcerned about COVID (data backed as emergency admissions way down) - but not understanding why someone would mask (also data backed as COVID as prevalent as 1 in 20 infected in prior fortnight).
It's a "2 things are true" situation:- 1) Pre-vaccine and Omicron the death rate was much worse 2) COVID can still be very prevalent after that period - on this: www.gov.uk/government/s... has prevalence estimates for England in winter 2023-2024 & scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-respirat... (pictured)
academic.oup.com/cid/advance-...
Alaska vowed to resolve the murders of Indigenous people. But when one nonprofit asked state law enforcement officials for a fundamental piece of data — a list of Indigenous murders they’d investigated — the state said no. By @kylehopkinsak.bsky.social, w/ @adn.com
Behaviour seen at scale in online pile-ons & abuse is seen at smaller scale offline (hopefully not from adult bullies) seems sense to keep kids away from it until at least teenagers - at which point hopefully offline responses to offline examples sees them with OK support system & internal compass.
Also seems an approach that would scale for Wikipedia & news - per country age-ratings could be done for each page with a default rating as a fallback. Younger sibling used World Book Encyclopedias pre-broadband but we only got those in a library sale. When kids need research from home: enter WWW.
Device based verification (e.g. www.newsweek.com/device-level... ) seems the best idea - either via parental controls (per account) or one "youngest user age" in device firmware (e.g. a tablet that only accesses content suitable for 9yr old would work for a 14yr old too).
🚨 Important to be aware that Government are testing the emergency alert system on 7th September. If you are a victim of domestic abuse with a hidden device, follow the steps to keep yourself safe: www.gov.uk/alerts/optin...
Earlier and I think clearer argument that AI should not provide a human like experience - i.e. a design choice to be explicitly made at the societal level. defector.com/butlerian-ji...
Interesting thread. Aside: on first reading of main post my brain was careless and read this as "Normal People" & went "So...Sally Rooney wrote an unreliable narrator - I should bear that in mind if I read the book - but I'm puzzled by the Zuckerberg reference". Much more sense as a thread!
If what Paris lost cannot be found preserved in the Louvre it is at least preserved in a GIF.
Gullies are incising into rapidly developing tropical cities. An analysis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo casts light on the extent and effect of this on city dwellers go.nature.com/4mBuHcS
Humanisation would be recognising the unscaleable humanity of a single OF creator. Dehumanisation can come by: ignoring that, having AI pander to misogynistic or demeaning behaviour unobserved, and by the "cog in reductionist money machine complete with auto personal pricing" status of subscribers.
This defector.com/butlerian-ji... - though written re: suicide lawsuit - had me think of above. ⬇️ points to AI simulation not serving those most needing humans - the lonely and misogynists need humans but to do different things for those aspects (connection / clearly reasoned censure)
ICE took 2 firefighters OFF THE FUCKING FIRE LINE!?
Herein lies the rub: “By inappropriately applying shared decision-making principles to a scenario where robust evidence strongly supports vaccination, the CDC abandons the clinician’s professional responsibility to offer clear, directive guidance when warranted.”
It matters that this gets drafted to apply just to synthetic copies (deepfakes) and that otherwise public filming is dealt with under nuisance, harassment or privacy legislation. Giving cops the ability to sue for copyright infringement re: smartphone recordings of misconduct would be a bad outcome.
After signing, don’t forget to confirm your email ...or your signature won’t count! Every signature matters. Please share widely. Lives depend on it. The next step is equally important - see below petition.parliament.uk/petitions/73... 2/ #KeepCovidBoosters
In short: stories about Taylor Lorenz maskless seem to be unreliable sources focusing on a single pic without considering measures taken to reduce infection risk - which one can learn about from Taylor's thread; folks can reduce infection risk & those same sources don't generally seem keen on that!
And if the odds of infection are not in your favour one is only relying on the odds of it giving you long term health issues - and those odds are not ones a person can alter as much as the odds of infections. So principle of "work on what you can control" points to avoiding infection.
Folks don't seem to distinguish between: "load dice in your favour as far as possible then risk couple of rolls" and "roll the dice repeating after taking no precautions". With low prevalence any individual encounter may not give you COVID - but no precautions again & again = eventual inevitability.
This sounds like what I'd expect. A bit of Lateral Reading - in form of searching "Taylor Lorenz" "unmasked" quickly told me results seemed to all centre on 1 photo & stories on Fox/a Fox outlet (www.foxcorporation.com/businesses/o...). Taylor's thread details solid risk reduction (sub 500ppm, UV)
🚨😷🚨😷🚨😷🚨😷 BREAKING NEWS At last, in the UK, we now have official guidance on the use of respirators (FFP3) vs Fluid Resistant Surgical Masks (FRSM) which has been prepared SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR. 🚨😷🚨😷🚨😷🚨😷
Said cat 😻😻😻
Courtesy of a Chelsea Troy tweet I know the techbro version of this is a future of transport hackathon that keeps reinventing buses as solution.
Not sure if I'm missing context but the 3 posts that you quoted start of seem focused on "online" being an activity with defined limits - rather than any mention of cruelty specifically. I think unpicking what people dislike about "online" involves multiple factors (i.e. at least three to six).
Every now and then, I'm reminded that most white Americans have no Black friends. 🤷🏿♂️ And that many of them don't consider how Black people talk to be normal. Incarcerated person, unhoused person, and centering, are how Black people talk. Out of touch *with who*? Black people *are* the Dem base.
Really: that's the dream for Mamdani's NYC- get a free bus to Central Park & just hang out. A walkable city where you can travel for free underlies making this a reality. If you're not a "gets on with everyone" type in a rural area that can translate into: need a car or to cycle 20 mile round trip.
The 我要你的爱 to 我不要你的AI pipeline.
Covid vaccination rate for those over 65 was notably worse for US than UK - e.g. for those aged 65+ the 2nd dose update was over 90% in UK (page 11 assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60e6e9... ) while 65+ fully vaccinated in US only 78% vaccinated web.archive.org/web/20210704... . Also: sick pay
I quote posted your prior post as distinguishing type of AI seems worthwhile bsky.app/profile/rain... & for those who aware of the distinctions it is still worth being critical of much AI as "automated exercise of power in a harmful way" is a prevalent use of it e.g. www.nature.com/articles/s41...
your honor in my culture it’s actually very common to rob the Bellagio
Discworld QOTD, from Going Postal
Disappointing if Lorenz really went down an alt-right pipeline (in which context: yes, "nice" is a red flag for recruitment) but I'd argue the appearance of "nice" is not just a recruiting tactic - it is about more durable ingroup treatment bsky.app/profile/rain....
Sathnam Sanghera's book Empireland has a line on the British Colonial Office "The last thing anyone wanted was for men in the field to analyse what they were doing". Attacks on education can be seen from many angles but wanting folks with convenient indifference & lack of thought is an angle.
"Karl Boehm-Tettelbach and the charming Nazis" is chapter in www.google.co.uk/books/editio... & sees Himmler frying up some eggs for him (cold & hungry from courier duties). Indifference to outgroup seems key with Boehm-Tettelbach in 1930s - glamorous flyer during day & going to dances at night.
Unfortunately selective evil is a feature of Nazi regime - not a bug. In mind: a) www.google.co.uk/books/editio... showing the Gestapo could appear to Germans as fair police force (releasing 80% of some German detainees and only convicting quarter of remaining 20%) & b) Karl Boehm-Tettelbach
I think underlying journal article is in English and is open access here academic.oup.com/eurheartj/ad...
Have not personally checked the figures but it is clear on the working & figures are exact enough to search for and trace to original sources
In essence: buy something like Danica Roem's "I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now." & probably get something like Bob punishing himself as a freebie.
One can make a distinction between consequences (e.g bigot being unsuitable for position of power) & punishment (seeking to inflict suffering & hardship) yet for the entitled the consequences will feel like punishment. This creates a Buy One Get One Free (ignoring high cost to get accountability).
Studies that University of Minnesota www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.... and Oxford webpages www.thelancet.com/journals/lan... are referencing above.
Whereas if folks are asking an LLM about a mushroom's edibility they are usually not experts on the mushroom - and becoming experts on the edibility question via the lived experience of being poisoned by the mushroom after relying on a faulty LLM output is not a good result!
But the LLMs themselves have no sense of reality which results in things like github.com/anthropics/c... . A machine learning model classifying your incoming email as spam or not might get branded AI - but usually lets you check if an email is spam & you are expert on reality here.
LLMs can sort of work if you have someone capable of reality checking on output. So for computer programming the resulting code can be run at minimum and read by a programmer perhaps. For languages if the user has some ability in both languages they can check if the input & output are sensible.
For genAI there are plenty of study results where the demonstrated weakness is that the model does not really function beyond the training data or with adversarial data: machinelearning.apple.com/research/ill..., arxiv.org/pdf/2508.01191 , aclanthology.org/P19-1459/
bookshop.org/p/books/ai-s... makes the point that, while predictive AI is less flashy & headline grabbing than generative AI (genAI) currently, predictive AI has a lot of potential to be harmful. Sounds great saving lives - but think of AI as reason for arrests or denial of social security.
An example of why it is good to specify what is meant by "AI" - genAI & LLMs will refer specifically to the large language models making lots of headlines - while Chartwatch is en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiva... judging by appendix of www.cmaj.ca/content/196/... & would be predictive AI not genAI.
The particular study mentioned by the Mirror in 2023 is this one I think ashpublications.org/bloodadvance... from 2020.
Given how common endometriosis is - and how difficult treatments can be - this is an advance www.theguardian.com/society/2025...
“men can’t express their feelings because they get taught as boys to toughen up if they cry” *stares in Was In Ballet For Her Entire Childhood*
funny story, I signed up for personal training at a local gym and was assigned a former NFL linebacker as a trainer giant man, covered in tattoos, big muscles, loud voice I am someone who just… doesn’t have a particularly well-assembled body
Ability to export bookmarks from app to a text file (such as CSV - comma separated values - file) would be great.
And here's my longer piece on what makes a 'winter virus' a winter virus: kucharski.substack.com/p/is-covid-n...
I also suspect the reason UK COVID variant waves were so clockwork-like in frequency during 2022-23 was that – mutation aside – it was very hard for a new variant to take off while another was causing a wave, due to short-term immunity effects. So had to effectively 'wait' until wave over.
To be clear: their clutter is only about 2 or 3 on Frost Hoarding/Clutter Scale so issue isn't clinically terrible - more they will persistently spend time & money on fun stuff for themselves & lament folks not visiting them - rather than deal with "Folks may not visit to avoid being unpaid maid".
And if "love" is not merely "I feel entitled to be associated with positive words like love - regardless of my actions" then don't be like a relative who will proclaim love for their kids but not believe the kids worth a house with rooms one can walk across unobstructed & non-disgusting kitchen.
If you turn your attention to who might not be coupled up at the end of the day and read some literature journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.... and not be terribly entitled then you might "Ah; of course some people will need to pass".
And what's more in that context: neither of you owes the other person such that change is owed to make things work! I think there's stuff one can do at the societal level that would be helpful to relationships bsky.app/profile/rain... But at the end it is: 2 people deciding if they are a match.
Love - like art appreciation - is rather personal and not something to be demanded of another person! It also strikes you might never had had to look hard at who you are and who someone else is in the context of "Should we embark on this relationship?" and conclude that neither of you will change.
"Straight men are not owed romantic love" - try A) "Artists are not owed appreciative audiences" & B) "Artists should have a community exhibition space available" - if you see A touches on different stuff to B there's hope. But you seem to implicitly blame women for having standards.
Quick: everyone tell a friend about jury nullification.
i would appreciate it if you would sign this petition they claim a medicine with a safety and effectiveness record over 130 years long is not safe or effective they want to stop compounding within a year! and i can’t take the ONE med they “allow” til 2029
Note I said "apparent" when reality is probably a combination of victim blaming beliefs, prior health related mis-info they're attached to and along with buying into the vested interest of so many in a 2019 lifestyle. And folks followed on here more likely to buck the trend than most.
With climate change to a certain point one could say it is indifference to someone's grandchild on Tuvalu in an uncertain future. With the pandemic it is clearer "panic-neglect" cycle - where one's relatives, neighbours, and modern science seem to get "literally don't care" as apparent response.
The frustration of the pandemic perhaps is seeing "literally don't care" when there is a body of science that means "can't be my concern - but will get informed from time to time" would seem the healthy response.
Big world means you can't be both fully informed and fully active so "oversubscribed - seems low priority", & "can't be my concern - but will get informed from time to time" are better for protecting day to day concerns than "will look into now" as the go-to response.
At one end there is utter indifference of "literally don't care", "oversubscribed - can't listen", "oversubscribed - seems low priority", "can't be my concern - but will get informed from time to time", "will look into now" "this will become a day to day concern". Those last 2 are in competition.
Related wording I'd use is distinguish between "care" vs "concern"(as in "day to day concern") and being effective will involve being concerned with only a couple of things unless you're "foundation with a staff" rich. Care isn't without its gradations: between "don't care" & "will be my concern".
HUGE. The first major court victory involving conditions of confinement at ICE field offices. The judge bars detention in any cell which isn't: - Restricted by capacity - Has mats for people to sleep on overnight - Is cleaned 3 times a day - Provides hygiene supplies - Offers free legal calls
Underlying study for those wanting to go straight there journals.aps.org/pre/abstract...
Would 100% watch a sitcom in which Cuomo and Dershowitz end up roommates, Dershowitz is denied a pierogi every episode in exactly the same way, and Cuomo runs for successively lower-stakes office each week, only to lose again.
Searches for "Taylor Lorenz" "unmasked" seem to bring up one 8 person dinner as a Fox News story and lots of random right wing sites. So see what Uckema says but I note the search results re: Lorenz and maybe weird definition of "anti" used.
Was replying here mostly for single thread (without too many branches) & was going to say similar (noting shift from CC folk generally to Lorenz specifically). Beyond whether CC folk can be called anti-vax my reply at start was: is correct description of thing's merits + limitations = "anti-thing"?
i.e. Lorenz not really relevant to: are folks pointing out that the vaccine is great at some things (like reducing deaths and hospitalisation within a few months of being administered) - yet no so good at others really anti-vax? I'm interpreting it more as a dig at the folks asking people to do more
A quick search and I'm seeing Diedrich Baker, Kathy Griffin gathering of eight people as a Fox News story on this. If that's it then at 1% prevalence level one can get to 10 (random) people and still have 90% chance of nobody infected. Another event? But topic = "whether CC folks are anti-vax"
Colin Elves 
