Coronavirus

[Joe Fan]

 

[horninchicago]

Please show me where they fought him on getting testing out. They maybe weren't on board like Fauci but they also didn't call it a hoax.

J.R., is this what you're talking about?
Did President Trump Refer to the Coronavirus as a 'Hoax'?

 

[mchammer]

The scientists said that if we would have acted 2 weeks quicker we would have eliminated 90% of the casualties.

Same logic says Trump saved 2 million lives by canceling flights from China.

 

[iatrogenic]

The scientists said that if we would have acted 2 weeks quicker we would have eliminated 90% of the casualties.

Those "scientists" are always right, and fantastic with their estimates concerning the coronavirus. I tend to think comparing retrospective decision making to decisions made prospectively is fraught with fraud and political gamesmanship. Your statement is an excellent example.

By the way, where were those tests? You know, the ones that hadn't been developed for a new virus? You are in the medical field, so how many tests did your company order and have on hand two weeks before everyone else?

 

[Phil Elliott]

Most people (apparently, @Phil Elliott excepted) agree that with lesser or no precautions, these rates would've been higher and the disease would've reached further geographically.

To be clear, I am not saying that no shelter-in-place would have led to the same amount of infection/death. I don't know one way or the other, and nobody else does, either. There is no way to know what the path not taken would have led to.

 

[NJlonghorn]

What we don't know is if lockdowns reduce the overall number of deaths or just lengthen the time of the spread.

In many ways, these are the same thing. As doctors learn more about how to treat the virus, death rates drop. If social distancing causes the wave to hit Texas later, lives will be saved even if the overall number of cases ends up being the same.

 

[Garmel]

Fantastic news. Coronavirus: Scientists conclude people cannot be infected twice

 

[NJlonghorn]

Same logic says Trump saved 2 million lives by canceling flights from China.

The ultimate number of infections is a function of the number of seeds that are planted and the growth rate from each seed. Cancelling flights from China undoubtedly reduced the number of seeds that were planted in the U.S., and thus undoubtedly reduced the number of deaths in the U.S. The more credible Democrats (I particularly remember Governor Cuomo, but there were others) have admitted this in no uncertain terns. The less credible Democrats (of which there are too many to list) have not.

On the other hand, cancelling flights from China did nothing to slow the growth rate from each seed. And that's where my complaint against President Trump comes in. The big danger of an epidemic is that growth is exponential (actually, it's logistic, but that barely matters in the initial phases). Thus, if you fail to control growth, that quickly overwhelms any reduction in the number of seeds.

From my perspective, the bottom line is this:

• In the early phases, the Republicans (most notably, Trump) did a little and the Democrats did nothing.
• Once it because clear that the virus was spreading, the Democrats were quicker to jump on the "we need to control this" bandwagon but Republicans weren't far behind.
• Since then, politicians on both sides have cared more about grandstanding and mudslinging than about the need to strike a careful balance between economic impact and health impact. As with most issues, it's pretty much all about the next election.

 

[OUBubba]

Those "scientists" are always right, and fantastic with their estimates concerning the coronavirus. I tend to think comparing retrospective decision making to decisions made prospectively is fraught with fraud and political gamesmanship. Your statement is an excellent example.

By the way, where were those tests? You know, the ones that hadn't been developed for a new virus? You are in the medical field, so how many tests did your company order and have on hand two weeks before everyone else?

We were sitting around pounding our pud like the rest of the world. We had 10 for the longest time. Then we had 18. Now we have plenty of testing capability but not enough PPE to really get after it.

Compare that too H1N1. 16 days from the first case identified to the CDC sending out testing. Hell, we had over a month from the senators dumping their stock to your president call it their new hoax.

 

[NJlonghorn]

To be clear, I am not saying that no shelter-in-place would have led to the same amount of infection/death. I don't know one way or the other, and nobody else does, either. There is no way to know what the path not taken would have led to.

True, there is no way to know for sure that social distancing reduced the mortality rate. But it seems like a conclusion that is both logically sound and supported by the weight of scientific authority. For me, that's enough to justify reliance, even if it may not be true.

 

[iatrogenic]

We were sitting around pounding our pud like the rest of the world. We had 10 for the longest time. Then we had 18. Now we have plenty of testing capability but not enough PPE to really get after it.

Compare that too H1N1. 16 days from the first case identified to the CDC sending out testing. Hell, we had over a month from the senators dumping their stock to your president call it their new hoax.

Wrong, little pud pounder. The early tests were for prior strains of swine flu, and they were accurate 40-60% of the time. The test for the specific H1N1 that was first diagnosed in April 2009 was not shipped until Feb 2010, and only 2710 tests were available then.

It looks like the lib perpetrated hoax of Trump failing to prevent the death of unhealthy people in Democrat controlled cities is bolstered by your new, incorrect claim concerning H1N1. Sooie Sooner!

 

[AC]

You sure do! I can see it all the way from my home office.

I’m going for the Dave Grohl look! Remember, I once owned a lawn business called “you grow it, we mow it”. That was early 80’s. Now I just grow it and nobody mows it!

 

[Garmel]

Wrong, little pud pounder. The early tests were for prior strains of swine flu, and they were accurate 40-60% of the time. The test for the specific H1N1 that was first diagnosed in April 2009 was not shipped until Feb 2010, and only 2710 tests were available then.

You won't see that mentioned in the MSM.

Edit- The CDC was slower in 2009 than it was now.

 

[Garmel]

This is ****** up.

 

[mchammer]

Someone told me 20,000 tests today in Texas. Only 7% positive.

 

[OUBubba]

Wrong, little pud pounder. The early tests were for prior strains of swine flu, and they were accurate 40-60% of the time. The test for the specific H1N1 that was first diagnosed in April 2009 was not shipped until Feb 2010, and only 2710 tests were available then.

It looks like the lib perpetrated hoax of Trump failing to prevent the death of unhealthy people in Democrat controlled cities is bolstered by your new, incorrect claim concerning H1N1. Sooie Sooner!

So the CDC website is telling lies?

 

[OUBubba]

Someone told me 20,000 tests today in Texas. Only 7% positive.

They say we want to shoot for a 10% positive rate. That means we are testing the proper percentage of folks.

 

[iatrogenic]

So the CDC website is telling lies?

Check out the Infectious Disease Society of America for the detailed report on H1N1 testing development. The Truth Shall Set You Free.

 

[theiioftx]

Thank god I’m negative.

 

[iatrogenic]

Looks like you and LH took advantage of the 2 for 1 testing discount.

 

[Monahorns]

Someone told me 20,000 tests today in Texas. Only 7% positive.

I would believe it. US positive % is less than 10. Then I graphed Travis and Williamson Co. Despite testing increasing through the week, Travis confirmed count holding about the same. Wilco. Virtually nonexistent. Let's get this economy back to hummin'.

 

[Monahorns]

FYI, the graphs are since the starting taking data March 4 through today, May 1.

 

[Mr. Deez]

It looks like the lib perpetrated hoax of Trump failing to prevent the death of unhealthy people in Democrat controlled cities is bolstered by your new, incorrect claim concerning H1N1. Sooie Sooner!

And you're actually being a bit generous to the pud pounder. Always remember that though he's whining that we should have been testing people earlier, when that testing even allegedly should have been done, his political heroes were saying not to socially distance and to let thousands of infected Chinese people fly into the US everyday and cough and sneeze on people and that it was racist to disagree. This narrative that they were more cautious or ahead of there curve or even ahead of Trump on containing this is a pure fairytale.

 

[Joe Fan]

When the 1st Amendment collides with govt action in the name of public health
The Govt wins in the short run basically because they can
But what about the long run? How will the federal courts look back at this?

 

[UTChE96]

When the 1st Amendment collides with govt action in the name of public health
The Govt wins in the short run basically because they can
But what about the long run? How will the federal courts look back at this?

Have there been any lawsuits over these lockdowns? How can the State prevent people from peaceful assembly and from practicing their religion? I can understand Martial law for imminent threats to public safety. COVID19 is not even close to that threshold. Every individual is capable of taking necessary measures to protect themselves if they are worried about the virus.

I wonder if the same group of people so willing to trample our 1st Amendment rights would be so willing to have the Freedom of the Press infringed upon.

 

[horninchicago]

Have there been any lawsuits over these lockdowns? How can the State prevent people from peaceful assembly and from practicing their religion? I can understand Martial law for imminent threats to public safety. COVID19 is not even close to that threshold. Every individual is capable of taking necessary measures to protect themselves if they are worried about the virus.

I wonder if the same group of people so willing to trample our 1st Amendment rights would be so willing to have the Freedom of the Press infringed upon.

An IL downstate Rep has sued and won a stay of Gov. Pritzker's Stay At Home Order.

Coronavirus Lockdown -- Judge Rules in Favor of Illinois Lawmaker Who Sued to Be Exempt from Stay at Home Order | National Review

 

[Joe Fan]

Have there been any lawsuits over these lockdowns?

Not yet, but there will be. The factual baseis are being established now

How can the State prevent people from peaceful assembly and from practicing their religion?

Because they have all the power, so they can more or less do what they want

I can understand Martial law for imminent threats to public safety. COVID19 is not even close to that threshold. Every individual is capable of taking necessary measures to protect themselves if they are worried about the virus.

This is why it will be a good legal issue

I wonder if the same group of people so willing to trample our 1st Amendment rights would be so willing to have the Freedom of the Press infringed upon.

Unfortunately most of the media is corporate and they are on the govt's side now. This was not always the case in the US, but it is the case now. The only free media we have these days is small or even just individuals

 

[Garmel]

 

[LongestHorn]

 

[Garmel]

So calling someone a Nazi makes someone a Nazi? Makes sense in MSM land.