New COVID variant FL.1.5.1 doubles: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-covid-2023-variant-eg5-strain-what-to-know/ . PAY ATTENTION, NEWS MEDIA!!! As readers know, I am increasingly concerned about the poor reporting around COVID. The detail provided here over the last few days allows us to understand what is going on with this new variant that nearly doubled over the past week as a percentage of total cases, to become the second-most prevalent subvariant in the US.
The speed of this rise suggests FL.1.5.1 could easily become the dominant US variant next week, and more dominant with each passing week. However, as we have reported over the past several days, the fall vaccine set for distribution at the end of September is based on Omicron XBB, which is also a predecessor of FL.1.5.1. One can reasonably expect that the new vaccine will be effective against FL.1.5.1. Thus, other variants not from the XBB line (such as EG.5) could surpass FL.1.5 fairly quickly, assuming a significant percentage of the population obtains the new booster.
Why isn’t some expert epidemiologist coming forward in the media with this type of analysis? Plenty of them seek media attention. Do any of them understand the facts?
US COVID hospitalizations up 22% for week ending August 12: https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-08-22/u-s-covid-19-hospitalizations-see-a-nearly-22-increase . Because of reduced data reporting, we now use hospitalizations as a proxy for severe cases. Since the new vaccines won’t roll out until the end of September, this is cause for concern. Also, as we have said so often, there is much evidence countering the idea that COVID is seasonal.
US funding COVID therapy development: https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2023-08-22/us-govt-awards-1-4-billion-for-development-of-new-covid-therapies-vaccines . This is a wise precaution, particularly as the virus continues to mutate.
COVID misinformation remains widespread: https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4162874-a-third-of-adults-believe-covid-19-vaccines-caused-thousands-of-sudden-deaths-poll/ . Sigh. For many of these people, the misinformation is not innocent. Others have misled them, or they have misled themselves.
WSJ: Fall vaccination update: https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/covid-vaccine-shot-booster-fall-86549e1b .
Splenda can permanently damage your DNA: https://www.thehealthy.com/food/news-sucralose-dna-genotoxic-study/ . Shouldn’t this stuff be taken off the market yesterday?
Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) appears in two Alabama patients, kills one: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/2-cases-rare-mosquito-borne-disease-eee-detected/story?id=102461943 . Many patients show few or no symptoms, likely meaning significant underreporting of this disease in humans.
WSJ: US home sales continue to slump: https://www.wsj.com/economy/housing/u-s-home-sales-fell-in-july-extending-prolonged-slump-2895209 .
WSJ: Office tenants shrink their square footage: https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/commercial/office-tenants-are-renewing-leasesbut-for-far-less-space-b27d5b7e .
Paul Krugman backs idea of raising inflation target to 3% and declaring victory: https://www.benzinga.com/news/23/08/33977290/paul-krugman-backs-call-to-raise-fed-inflation-target-to-3-and-declare-victory-how-many-people-shoul . As readers know, I have great respect for Krugman and almost always agree with his analysis. However, not this time. Altering the target has at least two appalling negatives: (1) It severely damages the Fed’s credibility, because this is just moving the goalposts to declare victory; and (2) moving the inflation goalpost institutionalizes the higher inflation rate and will increase rather than decrease economic stability.
A higher target inflation rate devalues current assets unless their earning power can be raised, and it increases the size of wage increase demand. For example, suppose with a 2% inflation target, worker’s average annual wage increase demand is 1% to 1.5% over inflation. But if the target is 3%, the wage increase demand will become 1.5% to 2.5% over inflation. That is, the inflation goal increase is not additive to other economic elements, it is multiplicative, and that is destabilizing to the economy.
As Krugman cited an opinion article from Jason Furman (Council of Economic Advisers chair in Obama’s second term) in WSJ, here it is: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fed-should-carefully-aim-for-a-higher-inflation-target-reserve-powell-greenspan-5fef5051 . I read Furman’s piece after writing the above comments. Let me quote Furman’s piece: “Shifting to a higher inflation target in a manner that wasn’t credible could disrupt these expectations, leading to soaring inflation premiums for borrowers, driving up government’s deficits, and reducing private investment.” Making this change at this time is absolutely not credible; it is moving the goalposts.
Also, Furman says the Fed formalized the 2% inflation target in 2012. That may be true, but I can affirm that the 2% inflation target as a long-term average goal has been around much longer. It was almost universally used in the actuarial profession when I learned pension assumption-setting in the early 1970’s, and pension actuaries were certainly not the only group with this view.
Altering the inflation expectation is a really dangerous idea, and the Fed should dismiss it.
Jack Smith amended documents indictment after key witness changed testimony: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/witness-in-trump-documents-case-changed-lawyers-and-then-testimony/ar-AA1fDI6G?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=e008b26c833b4f7db20fd1d09e1d2320&ei=10 . We need more facts, but these facts suggest lawyer Woodward not only had a conflict of interest, but failed to advise this witness properly. As Woodward represents two other witnesses as well as an OJ co-defendant, those other witnesses should seek a second opinion from other counsel.
UPDATE: This excellent reporting from The Washington Post demonstrates that Woodward is indeed in trouble: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/special-counsel-says-d-c-grand-jury-on-trump-documents-case-has-ended/ar-AA1fDALO?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=c5aeba0da9eb4463887e0f7588a50ba8&ei=11 . WSJ: More: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/mar-a-lago-it-director-flipped-on-trump-after-switching-lawyers-prosecutors-say-649b49c2 .
First two OJ co-defendants surrender in Georgia: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bail-bondsman-1st-surrender-georgia-election-interference-case/story?id=102449200 . Rudy Giuliani scheduled his surrender for Wednesday, with Orange Julius surrendering Thursday. All 19 defendants were asked to surrender by Friday noon, or warrants would issue.
WSJ: Texas keeps fighting for its Rio Grande buoy barrier: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/challenge-to-texas-border-buoy-barrier-to-be-argued-tuesday-db0ad6a6 . As previously discussed here, Texas’ legal position does not stand a chance. We will see.