Scott Alexander examines the current research on Long COVID, analyzing its prevalence, symptoms, and potential impacts to assess personal risk and societal implications. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews the current research on Long COVID, examining its prevalence, symptoms, duration, and impact on different groups. He explores various studies, discusses potential mechanisms, and evaluates the psychosomatic argument. The post concludes with an assessment of personal risk and comparisons to other post-viral syndromes, emphasizing the uncertainties still surrounding Long COVID. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander introduces 'Metaculus Monday', a series focusing on prediction markets, and discusses several Metaculus predictions about COVID-19. Longer summary

Scott Alexander introduces 'Metaculus Monday', a new series focusing on prediction markets, particularly Metaculus. He explains the current state of prediction markets, their limitations due to regulatory issues, and why he's chosen to focus on Metaculus. The post then delves into several Metaculus predictions about COVID-19, including total US deaths by the end of 2021, vaccine availability, vaccination rates, and potential new variants. Scott offers his own thoughts on these predictions and highlights the potential of prediction markets for informing policy decisions. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander announces winners of the adversarial collaboration contest and shares participant feedback, while reflecting on potential issues with the format. Longer summary

Scott Alexander announces the winners of the adversarial collaboration contest, with prizes awarded for collaborations on education, transgender children, vaccination, and Islam's compatibility with democracy. He shares detailed feedback from the collaborators on their experiences, including initial positions, how much their views shifted, and advice for future participants. Scott then reflects on some concerns raised by the process, such as collaborators avoiding core disagreements or inadvertently legitimizing fringe views. Despite these issues, he expresses interest in continuing to promote the format and calls for ideas to improve it. Shorter summary

This collaboration examines mandatory vaccination policies and potential vaccine harms, concluding mandates are likely unnecessary and vaccines remain important for public health despite some ongoing safety concerns. Longer summary

This adversarial collaboration examines two questions regarding childhood vaccination policies in economically developed nations: whether vaccination should be mandatory, and whether health authorities should normalize parental decisions not to vaccinate. The authors conclude that mandatory vaccination is likely not necessary to achieve public health objectives, and that while vaccines are an important element of disease control, there is not sufficient evidence that they cause significant harm to justify discouraging vaccination as a matter of public policy. They suggest studying alternative approaches to increasing vaccination rates without mandates. Shorter summary

A satirical future op-ed argues that not giving children 'super-enhancement gene therapy' is child abuse, mirroring current pro-vaccination arguments. Longer summary

This satirical post, written as if from the future year 2065, critiques current anti-vaccination arguments by applying them to a hypothetical future technology: super-enhancement designer baby gene therapy. The author, posing as a bioethicist, argues that not giving children this therapy is child abuse and a public health issue. The post mimics common pro-vaccination arguments, citing increased crime rates, car accidents, and disease outbreaks as consequences of not enhancing children. It concludes by calling for severe restrictions on unenhanced children and punishment for parents who refuse the therapy. The satire aims to highlight the absurdity of current anti-vaccination arguments by applying similar logic to a more extreme scenario. Shorter summary