Wisconsin

[Marquette Fan]

I don’t personally know any anti-vac wes, at least not among the people I am in regular contact with, but how do they think we get out of this otherwise, or do they also not believe Covid is real?
Pritzker is allowing any Illinois counties with low rates to vaccinate anyone who wants it , these are so far mainly in central to southern Illinois. This has caused mass hysteria in the Vaccine Hunters group as no one actually apparently reads news articles and they have decided this means the entire is open now. Yesterday was like watching a really bad game of mass telephone, I now know how exhausting it must have been to be a CNN fact checker

The anti-vax people I know either are the Covid is no big deal crowd (they think it's like the flu and they'll survive if they get) or those that worry about Covid but are hesitant to get the vaccine because they think it was developed too quickly and not studied enough.

[reinko]

I’m a bit fascinated by the anti-vax crowd, as they are certainly not a monolith. My thinking it is an amalgam of:

-Those who were always anti-vaccine (probably the smallest group)
-The COVID is not as bad as everyone says group, which I also think overlaps with people who already had COVID (knowingly or unknowingly) so why get this
-The sizeable group who have been convinced that this thing is dangerous...now this is where it may get political, but all the data suggests this group is largely right of center and libertarian, they despise “elites of their choosing” (the media for example but not the media they listen/watch)
-Then I think most moveable group are folks who are hesitant (for variety of reasons), this group goes across party lines, is certainly racially and ethnically diverse, people in cities and rural areas, who I think genuinely want to be educated by people THEY trust (Their family doctors, perhaps clergy, other family members), not the Dr. Fauci’s, not former presidents (even DTJ), they don’t want to be disparaged or made fun of.  Let’s focus on this group.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I know a number of very smart people, who I have known for years, who are insistent than they won’t get the shot.  These are people who aren’t anti-vaccine by any means. They aren’t anti-science. And many aren’t Covid deniers. They are all pro Trump Republicans, but other pro Trump Republicans I know are just as insistent on getting vaccinated.

I just can’t figure out their motivation, and I really don’t want to ask.

[Warriors4ever]

I have a friend who insisted all last year that while he would get the vaccine at some point he would wait to see what happened to other  people fir a bit first. Guess who’s already been vaccinated....😁

[wadesworld]

I have a friend who insisted all last year that while he would get the vaccine at some point he would wait to see what happened to other  people fir a bit first. Guess who’s already been vaccinated....😁

I think there are a lot of people like that. An effective vaccine had never been developed this quickly before. But the science behind it all has shown to be safe.

[Jockey]

I’m a bit fascinated by the anti-vax crowd, as they are certainly not a monolith. My thinking it is an amalgam of:

-Those who were always anti-vaccine (probably the smallest group)
-The COVID is not as bad as everyone says group, which I also think overlaps with people who already had COVID (knowingly or unknowingly) so why get this
-The sizeable group who have been convinced that this thing is dangerous...now this is where it may get political, but all the data suggests this group is largely right of center and libertarian, they despise “elites of their choosing” (the media for example but not the media they listen/watch)
-Then I think most moveable group are folks who are hesitant (for variety of reasons), this group goes across party lines, is certainly racially and ethnically diverse, people in cities and rural areas, who I think genuinely want to be educated by people THEY trust (Their family doctors, perhaps clergy, other family members), not the Dr. Fauci’s, not former presidents (even DTJ), they don’t want to be disparaged or made fun of.  Let’s focus on this group.

Don't forget the fearful group.

[MUfan12]

I'm guessing Evers gives it til the end of next week, just to see how supply is keeping up now that 70+ percent of the state is eligible.

WI is wide open as of 4/5. Great news. I just hope there's enough demand.

[GooooMarquette]

I have a friend who insisted all last year that while he would get the vaccine at some point he would wait to see what happened to other  people fir a bit first. Guess who’s already been vaccinated....😁

I hope a lot of the reluctant people fall into that camp, and get it within the next couple of months.

[#UnleashSean]

Both of my company's have been offering the vaccine to most employees since mid January. An absolute ton of people have not taken the vaccine.

And unfortunately these people definitely do not fit on the Trump train.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

One of the reasons I think states are removing all barriers is because it is causing more confusion than it is doing a good job of prioritization at this point.

Case in point is the pre-existing health conditions that Wisconsin put together.  Too long and not publicized well enough.  So after less than two weeks, the state just said screw it....everyone just get your shot.

Smart move.

I think you will see quite a bit of movement between now and Memorial Day.

[jsglow]

WI State Supreme Court strikes down the Governor's rolling 60 day emergency declaration in the absence of legislative action.  Here is an operative section of the Court's ruling:

'¶39 We recognize that determining when a set of facts gives rise to a unique enabling condition may not always be easy. But here, COVID-19 has been a consistent threat, and no one can suggest this threat has gone away and then reemerged. The threat has ebbed and flowed, but this does not negate the basic reality that COVID-19 has been a significant and constant danger for a year, with no letup. In the words of the statute, the occurrence of an "illness or health condition" caused by a "novel . . . biological agent" has remained, unabated. ¶40 In this case, we conclude that Governor Evers relied on the same enabling condition for the states of emergency announced in Executive Orders #72, #82, and #90...'

As expected, news headlines speak to the actions that the Governor took based on his rolling emergency.  But the Court ruled that the real issue in play was his presumed ability to act unilaterally in the face of clear language in the Statutes.  Note that the Court acknowledged the potential merit of the various policies, just not the lawfulness of them in the absence of legislative action.   

[MUfan12]

I've already seen the wailing about this but in all honesty I don't see much changing. Municipalities and private business who want to require masks still will. Those who won't probably didn't enforce it anyway.

[jsglow]

I've already seen the wailing about this but in all honesty I don't see much changing. Municipalities and private business who want to require masks still will. Those who won't probably didn't enforce it anyway.

Agreed.  I guess the only thing that disturbs me is the misreporting that routinely takes place. Case in point is JS's own splashy headline.  The Supreme Court actually acknowledges the potential merits of various enacted policies.  But that simply wasn't the issue being adjudicated.

[cheebs09]

I've already seen the wailing about this but in all honesty I don't see much changing. Municipalities and private business who want to require masks still will. Those who won't probably didn't enforce it anyway.

Yeah, I think counties have already said they weren’t enforcing over the last week or two. However, I went to a grocery store and they still required masks.

Isn’t the spread mostly within people gathering with their friends anyways? I’m guessing/hoping it doesn’t change things too much.

[jficke13]

Agreed.  I guess the only thing that disturbs me is the misreporting that routinely takes place. Case in point is JS's own splashy headline.  The Supreme Court actually acknowledges the potential merits of various enacted policies.  But that simply wasn't the issue being adjudicated.

It's never going to stop being funny to me that in effect the Wisconsin Supreme Court has repeatedly had to say "well Executive and Legislative branches, this set of actions really do fall under the purview of the legislature, so we're going to strike down the executive action and have faith that the legislature will take the actions necessary in light of this historic pandemic." and the legislature has responded: "lol, no, we don't actually *do* anything here."

[Coleman]

I have a coworker who has told me he will not get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines, because the mRNA technology is too new. But he said he would get the J&J vaccine, which is a more traditional vaccine.

Interesting in that J&J has a lower efficacy rate. But I guess his logic at least makes some sense.

I got my first shot of Moderna yesterday with zero worry.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I have a coworker who has told me he will not get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines, because the mRNA technology is too new. But he said he would get the J&J vaccine, which is a more traditional vaccine.

That's the same reason I still have a car without power windows.

[jsglow]

It's never going to stop being funny to me that in effect the Wisconsin Supreme Court has repeatedly had to say "well Executive and Legislative branches, this set of actions really do fall under the purview of the legislature, so we're going to strike down the executive action and have faith that the legislature will take the actions necessary in light of this historic pandemic." and the legislature has responded: "lol, no, we don't actually *do* anything here."

Yeah, it would be nice if we could get some actual 'government' out of the warring factions.  Alas, not the world we live in today.

[jsglow]

That's the same reason I still have a car without power windows.

Ha! I remember 'electric windows' back in the 60s and that they would routinely break.  I'm pretty sure they've got the bugs worked out Sultan. 

[#UnleashSean]

Ha! I remember 'electric windows' back in the 60s and that they would routinely break.  I'm pretty sure they've got the bugs worked out Sultan. 

Tell that to my 2000 f350

[mu_hilltopper]

Interesting in that J&J has a lower efficacy rate. But I guess his logic at least makes some sense.

I saw a video on "efficacy" and comparisons of the big 3. 

The TLDR was .. During phase 3, tested on 20,000 people .. Moderna and Pfizer were tested (circa) August-October, when the US case rate was in the 40,000/day range.   Then J&J's Phase 3 was October-January when the case rate was 200,000+/day.

J&J was tested during a time when the country was on fire with cases, so there was WAY more chances to get infected.  It's zero wonder why J&J had a "lower" efficacy percentage.

It's likely they are all in the same ballpark and none of them are substantially inferior.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

But he said he would get the J&J vaccine, which is a more traditional vaccine.

Is your friend Chico's?

[Coleman]

I saw a video on "efficacy" and comparisons of the big 3. 

The TLDR was .. During phase 3, tested on 20,000 people .. Moderna and Pfizer were tested (circa) August-October, when the US case rate was in the 40,000/day range.   Then J&J's Phase 3 was October-January when the case rate was 200,000+/day.

J&J was tested during a time when the country was on fire with cases, so there was WAY more chances to get infected.  It's zero wonder why J&J had a "lower" efficacy percentage.

It's likely they are all in the same ballpark and none of them are substantially inferior.

Yeah, more variants floating around then too. I totally agree. All are good. I have zero qualms about J&J, Moderna or Pfizer, as I mentioned. Would have happily accepted any of them.  Just thought I'd pass along that coworker's perspective.

I think when we get down to the stragglers (i.e. everyone who really wanted one has gotten one) it will be important to offer choices. A one-shot traditional vaccine might be more attractive to some. Even if their reasoning is flawed. If it gets them to take it, fine with me. Any vaccine is better than no vaccines.

[pbiflyer]

I got the J&J one. My careful consideration and evaluation consisted of “Which one can I get soonest? J&J? Done!”

[jsglow]

I think when we get down to the stragglers (i.e. everyone who really wanted one has gotten one) it will be important to offer choices. A one-shot traditional vaccine might be more attractive to some. Even if their reasoning is flawed. If it gets them to take it, fine with me. Any vaccine is better than no vaccines.

I think that's completely fair.