Super Bowl celebrations and a social conscience

     The question of why some people develop a social conscience and others don't has always fascinated me.  In college, I did an independent research project as part of my psychology degree that examined the factors that determined the development of a social conscience.  The project examined why some people are considerate of the needs of others and some people are narcissists.  I looked at a number of factors that may be involved in the formation of social conscience but the one that stood out from the other explanations was how secure you were in your own identity.  Speaking in broad terms insecure people tended to be more narcissistic and secure people with their identity tended to be more charitable to others.  It is important to also recognize that personal identity and security with your own identity is on a spectrum and not black and white.  Narcissistic people are on a range from mildly selfish to the extreme of a sadist narcissist.

    So bringing this issue to our current time we see this being played out with our pandemic.  The resistance to wearing a mask and respecting the social distancing guidelines are a good test of your level of narcissism.  In its most extreme form attending a large Super Bowl party this year to yell and drink with a crowd is the most extreme form of narcissism I can think of.  Coming after the surge of deaths with the Christmas and New Years' celebrations attending a Super Bowl party today outside your own home with your household members is a form of narcissism getting too close to the sadist level. 

P.S.

    It is always interesting that advertisers have to refer to the Super Bowl as "the Big Game" in their ads. The name Super Bowl is a trademark owned by the NFL and you can be sued by the NFL for using the name as a trademark infringement unless you pay them for the right to use the name.  The Olympics have also jealously guarded its trademark of their name and have only allowed the Special Olympics to use the word.

Time for Democrat revenge

     I know that talk of revenge can be destructive.   Today mutual respect in a bipartisan manner seems to be that talking point of Republicans but I am not there yet.  The memory of Republicans not even considering Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court and their ramming through their own nominee right before the election is too fresh in my memory.  Unbelievably the Republicans did it to Merrick Garland a second time recently when Sen. Graham, who was still chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, refused to schedule a confirmation hearing on Garland's nomination for Attorney General.   Almost all the Republican House members wouldn't vote to recognize an election won by Biden by over 7 million votes as being legitimate. Finally, we are going to see most Republican members of the Senate vote not to convict Trump in the trial this week for inciting a mob to attack the Capitol with some of them wanting to kill members of Congress.  It is time for Democrats to use whatever power they have to restore democracy to our country and not be concerned about getting Republicans on board.   The Senatorial elections in Georgia have given the power to the Democrats to play the game that the Republicans have been unafraid to play the past few years.  Maybe my desire for revenge will lessen and I know that the situation may change in 2 years with the 2022 election but now it is time to make the most of the power the Democrats have in the next 2 years.  Getting things done for people might be a better strategy now than bipartisanship. 

P.S.

     I know the Bible says "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth" but after the past year I would add "and lose their democracy."

P.S.

     I know the Democrats have worried about the midterm elections in 2022 but watching the Republican Party fragmenting and becoming the "crazy" party gives me hope that the Democrats can expand their numbers in the next election.

Vaccine shell game, the question of one shot or two and the changing priority system: What gets a population protected best?

     The vaccine rollout has had many questionable techniques.  We now see the effort to provide more locations to get one of the hypothetical shots.  This approach with a large supply of vaccine might make sense in getting the vaccine to more people but with a very limited supply, it more resembles a shell game.  Moving the same number of shots to more locations requires people to register at more locations and making the system possibly more frustrating than a more centralized system.  Compounding the confusion is trying to determine how each sign-up system works. Most sign-ups right now led to a place where you learn that there are no appointments or lead to an error message.

     A call to our Howard County Health Department this week gave me this information.  The supply to the Health Department was reduced by 66% because more vaccine from the state was now going to pharmacies, more health providers and the state plan to open a hybrid school plan in March has placed a priority on vaccinating school personnel.  After the effort last week to get as many people in the 1B group vaccinated this week the supply has been directed to the school effort.  This effort will probably impact supply in a few weeks also as the school personnel comes back for their second shot.  The effort to get school personnel vaccinated will delay resuming vaccinating the remaining 1B group and will push back the beginning of the 1C group to an unknown date in the future.  The opening of mass vaccination sites next week in a couple of locations will only add a new element into the shell game.  Until there are new vaccines approved and other measures developed to increase the supply of existing approved vaccines the frustration with getting a shot will only increase.

      The United States has been slower to approve new vaccines than Great Britain.  The Astra Zenica vaccine was approved in Great Britain in December and has increased its ability to vaccinate 50% more of its population than the United States.  While other factors may be involved in this difference such as a national health insurance system the availability of more vaccines plays a role.  I would expect that the United States will eventually approve the Astra Zenica vaccine months after it has been used in Great Britain.

    Another difference with Great Britain is its priority in getting more people with one shot than the United States priority of getting a second shot to everyone who has received the first shot.  Since the approved vaccines all presently require two shots this limits the population that can be vaccinated with one shot.  The question is it better to get one shot into as many people as possible and be satisfied with the 60-70% immunity in more people or have half the number of people vaccinated with 90% immunity? Great Britain is looking at delaying the second shots out to 6 weeks to get more people the first shot.  There is some preliminary data that indicates that with just the first shot people are protected from any serious illness from COVID. Given the limited supply of vaccines and 3,000 Americans still dying every day an emphasis on getting as many first shots as possible is not an unreasonable question.

Having an uncoordinated vaccine distribution system is where we are at

      When I hear about the problems with the distribution of the COVID vaccine it reminds me of the old pictures of the rush to get those hot items on Black Friday at Walmart.  Remember how Walmart and other retailers would put a few of the new big-screen TVs on sale on Black Friday?  People would line up all night to be one of the few people to get one of those TVs.  Being too late to get a TV left a lot of angry and disappointed shoppers.  I feel like that now with the limited supply of the vaccine.  Getting the shot depends on being in one of the selected groups and that pits one group of people against another.  Should teachers be given priority before seniors to get schools open?  Should front line grocery workers be ahead of younger people with certain health conditions?

      We now have the federal government starting to distribute the vaccine to pharmacies.  So now you have to figure out how you get in another line for a possible shot.  Will the pharmacies place their regular customers ahead of non-customers?   Will pharmacies all have different ways to access the appointments? Our decentralized system may leave many people out in the cold as they don't know how the systems work or how to even get in line.  We can have a discussion about whether a centralized or decentralized system is the best what to distribute the vaccine but it seems we have the worst of both systems.  The brainpower used to develop the vaccines in record time seems to be missing in developing the best distribution system.  The collaborative efforts of many different companies in the vaccine development was missing in how the Trump administration wanted to leave it up to the states and localities to determine how they would distribute the vaccine.  Having an administration that was anti-government contributed to the delayed planning for distribution.

    The limited supply of two-shot vaccines has resulted in questions of how much to hold back the supply for second shots.  We have some beginning information that people who have had COVID may only need one shot.  Soon the one-shot vaccines may contribute to an expanded supply for distribution.  It is interesting that Johnson and Johnson is testing the value of giving their vaccine a second time to raise the level of immunity of their vaccine.

    Finally, the distribution system also reminds me of an old Candid Camera episode with the frustration of a bank customer always picking the slow line at the bank.  Banks finally realized this and set up their systems to filter people waiting for a teller through a single queue. Maybe there is a lesson in there for the vaccine distribution system.  Here is the video of that episode of the frustrated customer. 

P.S.

   Bonus Candid Camera episode

It couldn't happen here---could it?

 

    As we see the Russian people fighting corruption of a dictatorial regime and think "I am glad we don't live in that type of country" I get a flashback to a few months ago when we had our "Putin wannabe" in the White House and he used somewhat similar methods to clear a peaceful crowd to stage his ridiculous bible holding event.

P.S.

      The most telling comment on that bible holding scene was when a reporter asked Trump if that was his bible he replied, "It is 'a' bible."  Trump hasn't owned or read a bible since when he mentioned "Two Corinthians."

P.S.1

    Trump may be gone but his "fellow travelers" are hard at work to make sure that voting in our democracy doesn't become too easy