- Joined
- Aug 8, 2021
They're not appealing because they want mask mandates back on planes right this instant, they're appealing so that they can keep the authority to do so again whenever they want (like shortly after the election) and have a precedent that allows them to completely sidestep limits on power so they can implement other mandates via the same (non)process they did for mask mandates.
Yup, but they've picked a weak case with which to try to pursue this goal. Right now, this ruling's precedential value is likely pretty limited with regards to matters beyond Covid in its current state, despite how aggressive it reads. But if they drag this out all the way to the top, they potentially open a can of worms about the extent of the CDC's hard power, and they do so after racking up a string of losses in court and at a time when judicial and public opinion are increasingly hostile. Even administration-friendly outlets like NPR are sounding a note of caution on pursuing this further. (Archive) But the Biden admin is positively fucking allergic to passing actual laws to grant its agencies power, rather than just trying to asspull it via executive branch orders, so they're probably going to run straight off the cliff after the Roadrunner. Again.
News snippet from Moderna. They're hyping some hawt new
The pharmaceutical company Moderna announced Tuesday that a new version of the company's COVID-19 vaccine appears to provide stronger, longer-lasting protection against variants of the virus than the original vaccine.
Preliminary results from a study testing a vaccine that targets both the original strain of the virus and the beta variant — a so-called "bivalent" vaccine — appears to produce high levels of antibodies for months that can neutralize the virus.
Bancel added that another bivalent vaccine that combines the original strain with the omicron strain "remains our lead candidate" for a fall vaccination campaign aimed at protecting people against a winter surge. Results from the testing of that version are expect later this spring, according to Moderna.
"We believe that a bivalent booster vaccine, if authorized, would create a new tool as we continue to respond to emerging variants," Bancel said.
The study has not yet been reviewed by independent scientists and produced mixed reactions from outside experts.
What's interesting about this, beyond the research paper about a brand new permutation of mRNA tech that some here might enjoy (paging @Drain Todger and @Lichen Bark ), is the reactions from other, non-affiliated researchers included in the article. They're actually covering hype-busters this time.
John Moore, an immunologist at Weil Cornell Medicine, called the results "unimpressive" in an email to NPR. "What's here is unlikely to support the rollout of this type of bivalent vaccine — the benefits would not justify the expense and hassle."
Dr. Celine Gounder, an infectious disease expert at Kaiser Health News, said the company's announcement "seems misleading" because it compared the antibodies from just two doses of the original vaccine with a third dose of the new vaccine.