Coronavirus week 92: When do we get to endemic? What's that mean? And, why won't Fauci and Walensky listen to Tufekci?

Wired has a good story about that issue, starting with the fact that there's no epidemiological definition of what "endemic" means. It notes that it can take years before an infection truly becomes endemic, and that, even being endemic, today's common flu can still kill as many as 50,000 Americans a year. My off the top of my head guess is that spring, generally avoiding running heaters or AC too much, will give a semi-endemic break. Summer? Depends on whether something Delta-like emerges or not. If we get through summer OK, we'll get past fall. After that, winter 2022-23? We may be at endemic then, but still with a higher death rate than "just the flu," perhaps twice as high.

The AP has a related article, mainly about how severe, on average, COVID will be when we at least start to enter endemic territory.

==

Zeynep Tufekci continues to show why she's go-to on COVID issues with her latest, which also links to her most recent NYT column. Two key points:

1. Omicron is less infectious in the lower lungs than other variants, a biggie;
2. She totally calls out Rochelle Walensky, private sector medical expert from 2020, vs. Walensky, the Biden Admin CDC head (and St. Anthony of Fauci with her). Why? Over dissing antigen tests. 
3. She calls out both for, in various ways now, almost two years of trying to outpsyche the public.

Bottom line? This.

Treat the public like adults and partners, and work to empower them—even if some portion isn’t listening to the advice, or even if some are actively hostile. Seems straightforward enough, and yet we still struggle with it. 

If anything, the existence of that hostile portion makes it even more important to empower and respect those of us looking to public health authorities for guidance, tools and infrastructure.

And, that's so true.

==

Other COVID news for the week:

Strangeabbott has joined the fray of wingnut governors' lawsuits against Status Quo Joe's vaccine mandate for military personnel, which includes National Guardsmen. Problem? As Team Biden has noted, the feds already require nine other vaccinations of Guard members, so Biden, Kevin Stitt, Kristi Noem and whoever else are suing appear to be up a creek without a legal paddle, and also, just plain pandering. Indeed, last month, a federal judge ruling against Stitt noted just that. Both R.F. O'Rourke and West/Huffines, from different sides, are attacking Strangeabbott. 

That's even as Omicron hospitalizations are likely to set a new record.

Are COVID long-haulers being ripped off by medical scammers? Very arguably yes.

Steve Vladeck observes that the vaccine mandate cases before SCOTUS are really about the future power of federal administrative agencies to regulate anything.

Shohei Ohtani in post-2000 context

Now that we know Shohei Ohtani, with his two-way heroics, produced "exactly" 9.0 WAR this year, let's look at this in terms of not the best pitching ever, or the best batting ever, but by recent performances. And, by recent, I mean, the start of this century. I've already looked at just the VERY best post-WWII modern era performances and found him ... kind of wanting.

Who, in recent years, has done as well as him or better? And Baseball Reference is making it easy. Using its page for top single-season WAR, then hitting the "by year" column to put newest up top? BUT WAIT THAT'S NOT ALL as of Dec. 9, 2023.

To update info on Ohtani, he was at 9.6 in 2022 and 10.0 this last season, and he is now playing with Mookie Betts, who (see below) still has his top single season better than Ohtani's and in a virtual tie for second-best. And? He's stuck in a no opt-out contract that runs through his age 39 season, and that doesn't hit $35M, half of Ohtani's new deal, until 2028.

Oh, and contra somebody on Reddit who doesn't identify as a Yankees fan by flair but comes off as one? No, Betts' 2018 is not an extreme outlier, and no, not due to Alex Cora and possible cheating. His 9.5 WAR shows it wasn't an extreme outlier, as does his 8.3 here in 2023. That 9.5 was in 2016, before Cora got to Boston. Oh, not every Sox player had a career year in 2018. Jackie Bradley Jr. was much better in 2016, for example.

Alex Bregman, 9.0, 2019.

Mookie Betts, 10.7, 2018, and 104th best all time. That, of course, means that while Ohtani gave us the fun of two-way play, and had a very good year, well, it wasn't THAT good. Also 9.5, 2016.

Jacob deGrom 10.4, 2018.

Mike Trout, 10.5, 2012 and 2016, and above 9.0 other times.

Aaron Nola, 9.7, 2018.

Max Scherzer, 9.2, 2018.

Zack Greinke, 9.5, 2015, and 10.4, 2009.

Cliff Lee, 9.0, 2011.

Albert Pujols, 9.7, 2009, 9.2, 2008.

Adrian Beltre, 9.6, 2004.

Ichiro Suzuki, 9.2, 2004.

Randy Johnson, 10.7, 2002, 10.1, 2001.

Pedro Martinez, 11.7, 2000, and above 9.0 pre-2000.

I've omitted a big-headed Giants outfielder, a former Yankee, Ranger and Mariner friend of J-Lo, a bleached brunette Cub, and an A's first baseman who might be less obvious, for an obvious reason.

OK, so, even without them? Without known chemical enhancements?

Just since 2000, we've had 13 players with as good or better seasons than Ohtani. Six of them did it twice.

Update, Dec. 9, 2023: Even looking at his 10 WAR this year? Six have done better. And Johnson bested even that twice, as did Trout. Greinke's two best are also still equal or better to Ohtani's two best, like Betts.

This is part of why, on my previous post about Ohtani, I said, "let's see him do it again," before we put his name in too bright of lights.

Update, Dec. 9: 2023: And, yes, he did do it again, for a select pantheon. But, we know he won't do that in 2024, and I'm not holding my breath over 2025 or beyond.

Ergo, contra Ben Lindbergh at The Ringer, he's not totally a singular talent.

Or, to put it another way? His year may have been emotionally special. Sabermetrically special it was not, at least not THAT special. And, David Schoenfield, Bradford Doolittle and the other largely Dum Fuq types at ESPN baseball (largely excepting Jeff Passan) can shut up otherwise.

This will also partially address a commenter on my previous "You're No Babe Ruth" post. That's true even with him winning the MVP. As Red Satan's story notes, nothing in 2020 indicated something like this would happen. And, even his combined 2018-19 didn't show this much on the batting side, while also having his TJ surgery on the pitching side. Call me back in 9 months, midseason 2022 or so. Until then, let's not be Liberty Valance and printing the legends.

Some of these people turned out to not be THAT good. Cliff Lee, once seen as having a shot at the Hall, kind of hit a wall of nagging injuries his last year and semi-voluntarily retired. I think we know that that was a clear one-off by Nola. DeGrom may wind up permanently injury-wracked; also, not entering MLB until age 26, he's behind the curve on total WAR and counting stats. 

But, of those doing it twice? Martinez and Johnson are in the Hall. Pujols and Trout will be. Greinke already has a puncher's shot, and if he doesn't retire, and picks up two or three 1.5 WAR years, will complete his shot. Betts is on the way.

Sidebar: Doesn't this also show that a lot of people still underrate Zack Greinke? Sidebar 2: Had you forgotten about Cliff Lee? (That said, there's a kind of asterisk on him. His pitching WAR was 8.5 that year, but he raked enough for an extra 0.5 WAR at the plate.)

Did Karl Rove help steal an election in 2002? Probably not

The original Turd Blossom, Karl Rove, actually talked some sense when discussing GOP responsibility for Jan. 6. OTOH, since his actions way back in 2002, or actions of those connected to him, may have led to an actual #StartTheSteal, he's a fucking hypocrite. 

But, did he actually help challenger Bob Riley steal the 2002 Alabama gubernatorial race from incumbent Don Siegelman?

First, contra the end of the piece at the second link, I've seen no evidence that Ohio 2004 was hacked, and have written about this and more here, and above all here, where I linked to Mark Hertsgaard CRUSHING "Chemtrails Bob" Fitrakis' BS claims on Ohio 2004. This includes arguing with Brains, and behind him, his co-conspirator Brad Friedman, or I should say, conspiracy theorist Brad Friedman, over this. And, contra the middle of the piece, per Wiki, there's controversy over whether a #StartTheSteal even happened in Alabama 2002. Per one claim, the explanation of how the original reported vote total in Baldwin County became the final number is convoluted at scale fully matching conspiratorial thought. Supposably, whoever was genyus enough to hack into Baldwin County's system was at the same time initially stupid enough to give votes to both Riley AND Siegelman, and then had to rehack to fix that!

The AP story, linked off Wiki, notes that, if it were a glitch, it was a big one, BUT, that Siegelman's original vote total was way overblown vs Alabama state average. Occam's Razor, per which had historic background, and is simpler, per the end of the paragraph above.

Beyond that, the author of the second link, Jennifer Cohn, seems somewhat given to conspiracy theorizing. Take Georgia's 2002 Senate race. Max Cleland got hardballed and smeared, but no hacking of anything happened.

The real issue that Cohn gets right is Rove and BushCo later prosecuting Siegelman for allegedly taking a bribe. The biggest subissue on that is that "look forward" Dear Leader Obama and his AG Eric Holder refused to look at the case again and Obama refused to give clemency, let alone a pardon.

CRT and GCRF as essentialist theories

CRT, as many people know, is Critical Race Theory. GCRF? Gender Critical Radical Feminism.

They're both essentialist theories in the roots of their identity. I believe that this is in part due to their roots in critical theory, which itself has roots in Marxism, an absolutist Continental European philosophy, and beyond general absolutism, the dialectical materialism that makes Marxism a pseudoscience. Beyond misapplication of what was already crappy philosophy, some of Marx's own definitions also make Marxism as economics pseudoscientific.

But, there, the parallels end, because the essentialism has different bases.

I don't fully reject either one. Between reading Derrick Bell's "Silent Covenents" and being involved with the Dialogue not Expulsion group of Georgia ex-Green Party leadership and allies, I have familiarity with CRT on the former and GCRF on the latter.

But, I believe both go overboard, and I think it's the absolutism from Marxism, and the essentialism related to that, that is a key issue.

With GCRF,  it's genomic, two sex chromosomes, to be precise. Another word for it, besides an acronym I won't use, is Sex Essential Radical Feminism. And, this essentialism is purely genomic. No room is allowed for inadequate or mistimed maternal sex-related developmental hormones, or fetal insensitivity or oversensitivity to those hormones, even though we know this can cause tendencies to homosexuality on the issue of sexual attachment orientation, or intersexuality, or sexual "misidenfication," etc. Nor is any room allowed for "XO" fetuses who may be intersex because of that.

CRT has the opposite issue. None of its espousers hold to a genetics-based theory of race, at least as far as I know in modern America. (I'm setting aside people like Marcus Garvey, who flourished before CRT developed, if he or his likes DID have such holdings.)

So, especially if CRT theorists recognize that skin color is only skin color, and controlled by many genes, and ditto for hair curliness etc., they have to become, in essence, phenotypic essentialists. Of course, the likes of Blake Griffin and his twin brother show the folly of that in action, while adopting one's racist adversaries' definition of race comes off as Br'er Rabbit and Tar Baby.

Texas Progressives take first look at 2022

Welcome to the first Roundup of this year by Texas Progressives, with a mix of members' blogging from last week and the best of news from around the state and beyond.

Texas school districts are rethinking dress codes as gender issues lead to discrimination questions. And, note to some gender-critical radical feminists and fellow travelers, as I also distinguish gender and sex but don't go down your road? This is an issue where "gender" not "sex" is the appropriate discussion.

The Monthly has a roundup of Texas stories it didn't run last year but wish it had written itself.

At the Observer, Justin Miller talks about how retirements in the Lege will likely push it even redder, especially in the House. Unanswered: How will Rethugs that are wingnuts, but not Dan Patrick or even further right wingnuts squared, lament the loss of a state House quasi-cushion?

The first phase of Secretary of State John Scott's much-hyped election audit in four urban counties has found few problems and none even close to serious. Now, let's see if he, Strangeabbott et al, in the next round of audits, do as promised and look at other counties, including smaller red ones.

Off the Kuff looked at the motion filed by Harris County to stop the part of the voter suppression law that criminalizes the encouragement of voting by mail.

Well, the lights have "stayed on," it seems, through the first really big norther; will they do so again after today's Round 2? We'll see how Abbott's boast, and yes, it's election-driven, play out. (We'll also see how much, in addition to his "Abbott tax," Beto says that the only reason ERCOT and PUC pushed for weatherization is that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission dropped hints of banhammers if the state didn't adopt policies FERC suggested after a 2009 storm.)

SocraticGadfly had a three-parter on coronavirus issues last week. First was that some people's claims that autoimmune disorders preclude vaccination are largely BS. Second was whether Fauci's words about COVID moving from pandemic to endemic will come back to haunt him with wingnuts, and if Biden will face some problems with words and non-actions. Third, he took a nuanced look at vax mandates in the bigger picture of a spectrum of COVID public health actions.

John Coby summarizes 2021.

Juanita scoffs at Alex Jones' latest ravings.

The Dallas Observer introduces us to Ted Cruz's very online daughter

The Current notes that Texas doesn't score all that well on some metrics for personal liberties.

Jef Rouner tells you why you're just wrong.

The year in blogging 2021

Here's the 10 most read posts from the past year. Not all are from 2021, just the 10 most read. The biggest from this year were primarily baseball-related.

No. 1? My old 2014 post about the "debate" between Ken Ham and Bill Nye the Science Guy, aka Bill Nye the Attention Whore, took off midsummer last year and has trended since. With the photoshopping by moi, but of course!

No. 2 is my story about St. Louis Cardinals vice president John Mozeliak rat-fucking manager Mike Schildt for opening his mouth too much.

No. 3 is even older than No. 1. It's about a Google dustup with China, coming even before the rise of Xi Jinping Thought, which makes Google's "do no evil except capitalism" even more relevant today.

No. 4? Shohei Ohtani, indeed I said, until he has a second year of this, is no Babe Ruth.

No. 5? My COVID-related wondering, along with many other skeptical minds, of just what did happen to John Ionannidis.

No. 6? Me calling out the Cooperstown veterans committees for choosing the likes of Jim Kaat, Tony Oliva and Gil Hodges for the Hall.

No. 7? From 2019, how the Genetic Literacy Project doesn't always get it right, like with the relative UN-healthiness of the Impossible Burger.

No. 8? My thoughts on the retirement of Buster Posey and his shot (and that of Yadier Molina) at the Hall.

No. 9 is also an old one from 2010 — can a college discriminate against a religious group?

No. 10 is from 2018. It's my callout of Marcy Wheeler, aka Emptywheel, for drinking 190 proof Putingate and narcking on someone still unnamed.